[Arthur Brain]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

While we're on the subject of (what you think is) "obsessive bias", (if you want to call the truth "biased", then so be it Arthur) here's an article by a former President of your beloved American Psychological Association, who happens to be like you, a homosexualist, talking about how the APA is "controlled by the gay rights movement". (What a shock!).
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/for...ights-movement

Here's another article on the same subject, talking about how homosexuals can change their sexual desires (i.e. reparative therapy) and that the same APA that allegedly threw Dr. Paul Cameron out of their organization, is now a laughing stock:

"In 2006, Cummings spoke at the APA convention. Cummings offered a long list of APA positions that show the APA is completely out of touch with normal Americans, and said the group has essentially become a laughingtock. APA even took a position on the name of mascots for athletic teams."
http://www.thenewamerican.com/cultur...als-can-change

Truth isn't biased, obsessive fixation and thinly veiled prejudice that the likes of your beloved Bryan Fischer, Scott Lively, Cameron et al is.

Whether or not the APA is currently a laughing stock is irrelevant. They were right to boot out Cameron for misusing research and dishonest practice at the time and this was further underlined in court.

Refute that.

Thank you for using the same old tired "consensual" argument that is used by those promoting the homosexual lifestyle. Of course you're not consistent in your "consenual" argument, as you've already pointed out a good reason why not all "consensual relationships" shouldn't be validated. Without going into a long list of "consensual relationships" or acts that you very well might disagree with (prostitution, murder...yes, a duel between two men or two groups where both parties knows that one will die, is consenting to murder) it's interesting to note that while you do care about the possibility of birth defects amongst those involved in consensual incestuous relationships, you don't seem to care that homosexuals are overwhelmingly afflicted with various STD's and HIV/AIDS. (Perhaps the incestuous community should learn from the homosexual movement and push the "Wear condoms!" slogan).

Maybe you'd be in a position to criticize any lack of consistency if you actually "cared" about the amount of sexually transmitted infections among heterosexuals, but you don't. If you were consistent you'd be as vociferous about irresponsible practice among straights yet nary a mention you make, presumably because it's not your 'pet subject'.

Being that perverts do have the same rights as others (due process of the law, the right to not be punished in a cruel and unusual manner, of course unless it done "consensually" in the confines of their own sodomy chamber), once again you don't know what you're talking about Arthur.

Rather they have the same rights to a private and sexual life which is none of the states - or your own business, along with the right not to be discriminated against. This is current law, as it should be. Coming from someone who seems to think there's a cat in hell's chance of such being recriminalized - your 'not knowing what your talking' about is once again as ironic as it is laughable.

Yes Arthur, there is perversion in what you refer to as the "heterosexual community". Many of those perverts are bisexual, and if not, they certainly don't care about others that are involved in perversion, as who are they to speak out against someone doing their own "thing", when they're doing theirs?

Er, no Connie, most of them are straight and indulge in that particular practice you're so obsessed with. You just don't want to recognize that.

Homosexuality/bisexuality are inherently immoral,i.e. perverse. While certain acts that heterosexual couples do are perverted, unlike homosexuality, their one man-one woman relationship isn't inherently perverse.

What's the difference if it's two men or a man and a woman engaging in it? Should sodomy be a criminal offence regardless, yes or no?

[Granite]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Obviously you didn't read Bryan Fischer's article that I posted earlier about "Why it's altogether right to discriminate against homosexual behavior".
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/120602



While we're on the subject of (what you think is) "obsessive bias", (if you want to call the truth "biased", then so be it Arthur) here's an article by a former President of your beloved American Psychological Association, who happens to be like you, a homosexualist, talking about how the APA is "controlled by the gay rights movement". (What a shock!).
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/for...ights-movement

Here's another article on the same subject, talking about how homosexuals can change their sexual desires (i.e. reparative therapy) and that the same APA that allegedly threw Dr. Paul Cameron out of their organization, is now a laughing stock:

"In 2006, Cummings spoke at the APA convention. Cummings offered a long list of APA positions that show the APA is completely out of touch with normal Americans, and said the group has essentially become a laughingtock. APA even took a position on the name of mascots for athletic teams."
http://www.thenewamerican.com/cultur...als-can-change

Refute it.


Quote:
As shown, other sexual deviancies are discriminated against, many if not most of them are unlawful even if they are "consensual".



Thank you for using the same old tired "consensual" argument that is used by those promoting the homosexual lifestyle. Of course you're not consistent in your "consenual" argument, as you've already pointed out a good reason why not all "consensual relationships" shouldn't be validated. Without going into a long list of "consensual relationships" or acts that you very well might disagree with (prostitution, murder...yes, a duel between two men or two groups where both parties knows that one will die, is consenting to murder) it's interesting to note that while you do care about the possibility of birth defects amongst those involved in consensual incestuous relationships, you don't seem to care that homosexuals are overwhelmingly afflicted with various STD's and HIV/AIDS. (Perhaps the incestuous community should learn from the homosexual movement and push the "Wear condoms!" slogan).

Quote:
Yet you think that your preferred perversion should have special rights.

Why is that Arthur?



Being that perverts do have the same rights as others (due process of the law, the right to not be punished in a cruel and unusual manner, of course unless it done "consensually" in the confines of their own sodomy chamber), once again you don't know what you're talking about Arthur.



Yes Arthur, there is perversion in what you refer to as the "heterosexual community". Many of those perverts are bisexual, and if not, they certainly don't care about others that are involved in perversion, as who are they to speak out against someone doing their own "thing", when they're doing theirs?

Homosexuality/bisexuality are inherently immoral,i.e. perverse. While certain acts that heterosexual couples do are perverted, unlike homosexuality, their one man-one woman relationship isn't inherently perverse.

So, when are you going to admit you're gay?

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by Granite

So, when are you going to admit you're gay?

[Angel4Truth]

Who is ralphie and connie and what does that mean?

[voltaire]

Originally Posted by Gerald

That's interesting.

Nobody of either sex has every said anything of the kind to me. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, though, as I have a face that not even a mother could love...

And you don't have a complex as a result?

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
While we're on the subject of (what you think is) "obsessive bias"...
Here's another article on the same subject, talking about how homosexuals can change their sexual desires.

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

Truth isn't biased,...

No it isn't Arthur. The truth, "a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like" is not biased, nor can it be refuted.

That's why I love God's word so much.

For instance: The same APA that says that homosexuals can't change (God gives us free will to change) has taken their findings to the California State Legislature and passed a bill stating that "free will" is illegal.

"May 11, 2012

A first-of-its-kind bill is being proposed in California that would ban teens and children from receiving reparative therapy for same-sex attractions, according to Dr. James Emery White's blog on Crosswalk.com. Opponents of the bill -- which would ban anyone under age 18 from receiving sexual-orientation change efforts and require adults seeking treatment to sign a release form stating that the therapy would be ineffective and "dangerous" -- are calling it a blatant denial of freedom and parental rights, but it has already made its way through the state Senate Judiciary Committee. Brad Dacus of the legal defense group Pacific Justice Institute said the measure was "one of the most outrageous, speech-chilling bills we have ever seen in California -- and that's saying a lot." White added: "This particular bill is one of the most egregious and frightening I've ever seen. It essentially prevents a parent from leading their child away from unwanted same-sex attractions and attempts to prevent adults from receiving help to leave the homosexual lifestyle. In effect, it is not simply attempting to gain acceptance for homosexuality, but make its opposition illegal."
http://www.religiontoday.com/blog/ca...tractions.html

It passed their Senate.
http://news.yahoo.com/californias-se...024616939.html

So in essence, parents in California will no longer have the right to help their children leave a life of perversion (by decree of the State of California, free will given to us by God is no longer legal there).

Quote:
Thank you for using the same old tired "consensual" argument that is used by those promoting the homosexual lifestyle. Of course you're not consistent in your "consenual" argument, as you've already pointed out a good reason why not all "consensual relationships" shouldn't be validated. Without going into a long list of "consensual relationships" or acts that you very well might disagree with (prostitution, murder...yes, a duel between two men or two groups where both parties knows that one will die, is consenting to murder) it's interesting to note that while you do care about the possibility of birth defects amongst those involved in consensual incestuous relationships, you don't seem to care that homosexuals are overwhelmingly afflicted with various STD's and HIV/AIDS. (Perhaps the incestuous community should learn from the homosexual movement and push the "Wear condoms!" slogan).

Maybe you'd be in a position to criticize any lack of consistency if you actually "cared" about the amount of sexually transmitted infections among heterosexuals, but you don't.

And be a "good little Christian" and ignore the homosexual agenda?

Sorry Arthur, as much as you and other homosexualists try, your ploy isn't going to work.

By ignoring the homosexual movement and it's well financed and politically backed agenda, Christian consersatives would only be hurting the movement to restore decency here in the United States, as homosexuality is just a part of "the sexual revolution" (abortion, glorifying out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, adultery and pornography are other elements of the sexual revolution).

Quote:
Being that perverts do have the same rights as others (due process of the law, the right to not be punished in a cruel and unusual manner, of course unless it done "consensually" in the confines of their own sodomy chamber), once again you don't know what you're talking about Arthur.

Rather they have the same rights to a private and sexual life which is none of the states - or your own business, along with the right not to be discriminated against.

I only ask that you're fair and substitute other sexual sins in place of homosexuality Arhtur.

Incest, bestiality, man/boy "love", necrophilia, etc. etc. etc.

The Bible speaks about all of those sins. You do still believe that God's word is the basis for all moral behavior don't you Arthur?

Quote:
Homosexuality/bisexuality are inherently immoral,i.e. perverse. While certain acts that heterosexual couples do are perverted, unlike homosexuality, their one man-one woman relationship isn't inherently perverse.

What's the difference if it's two men or a man and a woman engaging in it? Should sodomy be a criminal offence regardless, yes or no?

While it's obvious that you don't see any difference between a man and a woman having sex, and two males, there is.

One is inherently natural but can take on acts of perversion, one is inherently perverse and unnatural and can never be normal.

When it comes to married couples (of course I'm speaking of one man and one woman), "the marriage bed is undefiled".
http://www.christian-marriage-today....riage-bed.html

[Arthur Brain]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

No it isn't Arthur. The truth, "a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like" is not biased, nor can it be refuted.

That's why I love God's word so much.

For instance: The same APA that says that homosexuals can't change (God gives us free will to change) has taken their findings to the California State Legislature and passed a bill stating that "free will" is illegal.

"May 11, 2012

A first-of-its-kind bill is being proposed in California that would ban teens and children from receiving reparative therapy for same-sex attractions, according to Dr. James Emery White's blog on Crosswalk.com. Opponents of the bill -- which would ban anyone under age 18 from receiving sexual-orientation change efforts and require adults seeking treatment to sign a release form stating that the therapy would be ineffective and "dangerous" -- are calling it a blatant denial of freedom and parental rights, but it has already made its way through the state Senate Judiciary Committee. Brad Dacus of the legal defense group Pacific Justice Institute said the measure was "one of the most outrageous, speech-chilling bills we have ever seen in California -- and that's saying a lot." White added: "This particular bill is one of the most egregious and frightening I've ever seen. It essentially prevents a parent from leading their child away from unwanted same-sex attractions and attempts to prevent adults from receiving help to leave the homosexual lifestyle. In effect, it is not simply attempting to gain acceptance for homosexuality, but make its opposition illegal."
http://www.religiontoday.com/blog/ca...tractions.html

It passed their Senate.
http://news.yahoo.com/californias-se...024616939.html

So in essence, parents in California will no longer have the right to help their children leave a life of perversion (by decree of the State of California, free will given to us by God is no longer legal there).

Just what is it that goes on with this "reparative therapy" exactly? Care to provide the details of just what takes place? Frankly I don't like the idea of children/teens being forced into such against their will. If they're 18 and that desperate to try therapy for it then fair enough.

With regards to 'free will'. Using your "logic" everyone who's straight could choose to become gay. I'll tell you right now that I couldn't. I could chose to live a promiscuous lifestyle but it could only involve the opposite sex. So why on earth would I assume that everyone gay could 'chose' to become straight?

And be a "good little Christian" and ignore the homosexual agenda?

Sorry Arthur, as much as you and other homosexualists try, your ploy isn't going to work.

By ignoring the homosexual movement and it's well financed and politically backed agenda, Christian consersatives would only be hurting the movement to restore decency here in the United States, as homosexuality is just a part of "the sexual revolution" (abortion, glorifying out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, adultery and pornography are other elements of the sexual revolution).

'Try' what? You can carry on banging on about gays all you like doofus. I'm not calling for your censorship and you're completely ineffectual anyway. Furthermore you avoided the point. You devote practically all your 'efforts' on homosexuality while making the odd 'token' gesture towards straights. If you were so 'concerned' about peoples health you'd be consistent and you aren't.

I only ask that you're fair and substitute other sexual sins in place of homosexuality Arhtur.

Incest, bestiality, man/boy "love", necrophilia, etc. etc. etc.

The Bible speaks about all of those sins. You do still believe that God's word is the basis for all moral behavior don't you Arthur?

All of the above are either violation crimes or put offspring at risk, so I'm already being fair. In the same way rape and violent abuse shouldn't be tolerated. After that what two consenting adult individuals get up to in the privacy of their own homes is none of the states - or my or your own business.

While it's obvious that you don't see any difference between a man and a woman having sex, and two males, there is.

One is inherently natural but can take on acts of perversion, one is inherently perverse and unnatural and can never be normal.

When it comes to married couples (of course I'm speaking of one man and one woman), "the marriage bed is undefiled".
http://www.christian-marriage-today....riage-bed.html

As you're well aware I was referring to the specific act that you're fixated with. So I'll ask again in the vain hope of getting a straight answer for a change. What is the difference between straight couples engaging in the act and gays, and should they face criminal charges in the same manner?

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

So I'll ask again in the vain hope of getting a straight answer for a change.

I seriously doubt that aClosetCase is capable of giving a straight answer, if you get my meaning...

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

So in essence, parents in California will no longer have the right to help their children leave a life of perversion (by decree of the State of California, free will given to us by God is no longer legal there).

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

Just what is it that goes on with this "reparative therapy" exactly? Care to provide the details of just what takes place? Frankly I don't like the idea of children/teens being forced into such against their will. If they're 18 and that desperate to try therapy for it then fair enough.

So you don't like the idea of parents having control over their child's choice of sexual behavior?

As far as the details go, I would suspect that once the parents of a 12 year old boy who has been "mentored" by a homosexual pedophile in one of the many youth mentoring organizations that homosexuals have permeated, and the child thinks he too is a homosexual, the parents would take him to a therapist to help dissuade him from believing he's prone to living a life of perversion.

I would expect that Christian doctrine would play an important role in the reparative/conversion therapy as well, all the more reason for God-hating secular humanist perverts not to like it.

With regards to 'free will'. Using your "logic" everyone who's straight could choose to become gay. I'll tell you right now that I couldn't. I could chose to live a promiscuous lifestyle but it could only involve the opposite sex. So why on earth would I assume that everyone gay could 'chose' to become straight?

As I've shown in other threads Arthur, homosexuality is not genetic, it comes from environmental factors.

"If homosexual impulses are not inherited, what kinds of influences do cause strong homosexual desires? No one answer is acceptable to all researchers in the field. Important factors, however, seem to fall into four categories. As with so many other odd sexual proclivities, males appear especially susceptible:
1. Homosexual experience:
any homosexual experience in childhood, especially if it is a first sexual experience or with an adult
any homosexual contact with an adult, particularly with a relative or authority figure (in a random survey, 5% of adult homosexuals vs 0.8% of heterosexuals reported childhood sexual involvements with elementary or secondary school teachers (5).
2. Family abnormality, including the following:
a dominant, possessive, or rejecting mother
an absent, distant, or rejecting father
a parent with homosexual proclivities, particularly one who molests a child of the same sex
a sibling with homosexual tendencies, particularly one who molests a brother or sister
the lack of a religious home environment
divorce, which often leads to sexual problems for both the children and the adults
parents who model unconventional sex roles
condoning homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle– welcoming homosexuals (e.g., co-workers, friends) into the family circle
3. Unusual sexual experience, particularly in early childhood:
precocious or excessive masturbation
exposure to pornography in childhood
depersonalized sex (e.g., group sex, sex with animals)
or girls, sexual interaction with adult males
4. Cultural influences:
a visible and socially approved homosexual sub-culture that invites curiosity and encourages exploration
pro-homosexual sex education
openly homosexual authority figures, such as teachers (4% of Kinsey's and 4% of FRI's gays reported that their first homosexual experience was with a teacher)
societal and legal toleration of homosexual acts
depictions of homosexuality as normal and/or desirable behavior."
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron3.html


By ignoring the homosexual movement and it's well financed and politically backed agenda, Christian consersatives would only be hurting the movement to restore decency here in the United States, as homosexuality is just a part of "the sexual revolution" (abortion, glorifying out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, adultery and pornography are other elements of the sexual revolution).

'Try' what? You can carry on banging on about gays all you like doofus. I'm not calling for your censorship and you're completely ineffectual anyway. Furthermore you avoided the point. You devote practically all your 'efforts' on homosexuality while making the odd 'token' gesture towards straights. If you were so 'concerned' about peoples health you'd be consistent and you aren't.

If we who stand for God's word and decency lose this part of the culture war, i.e. the battle against the homosexual agenda, there will be no chance of retaking other lost battles, such as the battles against out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, abortion, adultery and pornography.


Quote:
I only ask that you're fair and substitute other sexual sins in place of homosexuality Arhtur.

Incest, bestiality, man/boy "love", necrophilia, etc. etc. etc.

The Bible speaks about all of those sins. You do still believe that God's word is the basis for all moral behavior don't you Arthur?

All of the above are either violation crimes or put offspring at risk, so I'm already being fair.

Homosexuality was a crime for close to 2,000 years. Why shouldn't those other sexual sins be decriminalized as well?

In the same way rape and violent abuse shouldn't be tolerated. After that what two consenting adult individuals get up to in the privacy of their own homes is none of the states - or my or your own business.

Back to your "consensual" attempt at an argument. If nothing is morally absolute, why would consent be? 1,200,000 are murdered in the womb each year with out consent; rapes, the spread of disease through sex is done without consent, etc. etc.; why is consent now the supposed basis for moral behavior?


Quote:
While it's obvious that you don't see any difference between a man and a woman having sex, and two males, there is.

One is inherently natural but can take on acts of perversion, one is inherently perverse and unnatural and can never be normal.

When it comes to married couples (of course I'm speaking of one man and one woman), "the marriage bed is undefiled".
http://www.christian-marriage-today....riage-bed.html

As you're well aware I was referring to the specific act that you're fixated with. So I'll ask again in the vain hope of getting a straight answer for a change. What is the difference between straight couples engaging in the act and gays, and should they face criminal charges in the same manner?

I noticed that you passed up my important question, so I'll ask it again:

"The Bible speaks about all of those sins. You do still believe that God's word is the basis for all moral behavior don't you Arthur?"

And now I'll answer your smokescreen of a question.

Of course all homosexualists like you want to give the impression that perversion is done solely in the confines of one's own sodomy chambers, and that if homosexuality was recriminalized Bruce and "what's his name?" would have their sodomy chambers door kicked in at their private residence.

Not the case. Homosexuality left the confines of private residences long ago and invaded institutions such as marriage, the traditional family through adoption, youth mentor groups, religion, education and the military.

If other groups organized and promoted their God-less agenda the way the homosexual movement has (let's say those whose "thing" is sex with animals), you can bet that we Christian conservatives would be fighting that battle as well.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by aClosetCase

And it looks like I was correct. Again.

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by Gerald

And it looks like I was correct. Again.

Since (as usual) you're not making any contributions to this thread Gerald, why don't you make yourself useful and read this article by Selwyn Duke, it has your name all over it:

"The immorality of liberals"

"In every civilization you have, to use psychological terminology, well-adjusted individuals and dysfunctional ones. Of course, dividing people into two groups in this area will always be problematic, as moral status is a continuum. As we walking, talking anachronisms like to say, we're all sinners; it's just a matter of degree. Nonetheless, some people do try to exercise virtue in their lives while others are so immersed in vice they could mistake it for virtue. However you characterize it, though, in our time the dysfunctional vice-lovers are described by what is another lacking term: liberals..."
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/duke/120610

(Do I make you feel bad about yourself Gerald?)

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by aClosetCase

Since (as usual) you're not making any contributions to this thread Gerald...

That is demonstrably untrue: folks find the barbs I throw at you uproariously funny.

...why don't you make yourself useful and read this article by Selwyn Duke, it has your name all over it:

"The immorality of liberals"

"In every civilization you have, to use psychological terminology, well-adjusted individuals and dysfunctional ones. Of course, dividing people into two groups in this area will always be problematic, as moral status is a continuum. As we walking, talking anachronisms like to say, we're all sinners; it's just a matter of degree. Nonetheless, some people do try to exercise virtue in their lives while others are so immersed in vice they could mistake it for virtue. However you characterize it, though, in our time the dysfunctional vice-lovers are described by what is another lacking term: liberals..."
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/duke/120610

I've read that article already. I suspect it will be just as boring on a second reading.

(Do I make you feel bad about yourself Gerald?)

You haven't managed to do so yet. Feel free to keep on trying, though.

[Arthur Brain]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

So you don't like the idea of parents having control over their child's choice of sexual behavior?

Behaviour? You mean like masturbation? Most parents don't manage to regulate that one....

As far as the details go, I would suspect that once the parents of a 12 year old boy who has been "mentored" by a homosexual pedophile in one of the many youth mentoring organizations that homosexuals have permeated, and the child thinks he too is a homosexual, the parents would take him to a therapist to help dissuade him from believing he's prone to living a life of perversion.

Ah, so you don't know what goes on then and are reduced to some loopy baseless assertion instead. Hardly surprising.

I would expect that Christian doctrine would play an important role in the reparative/conversion therapy as well, all the more reason for God-hating secular humanist perverts not to like it.

So again you don't know what goes on but just throw out assumptions. How come you don't know what happens with this "therapy"? Shouldn't you be acquainted with the procedures before blindly supporting such? maybe there's good reason why there's legislation to abolish forced "therapy" for minors.

As I've shown in other threads Arthur, homosexuality is not genetic, it comes from environmental factors.

You haven't shown a darn thing, apart from your obsessive fixation with male homosexuals.

"If homosexual impulses are not inherited, what kinds of influences do cause strong homosexual desires? No one answer is acceptable to all researchers in the field. Important factors, however, seem to fall into four categories. As with so many other odd sexual proclivities, males appear especially susceptible:
1. Homosexual experience:
any homosexual experience in childhood, especially if it is a first sexual experience or with an adult
any homosexual contact with an adult, particularly with a relative or authority figure (in a random survey, 5% of adult homosexuals vs 0.8% of heterosexuals reported childhood sexual involvements with elementary or secondary school teachers (5).
2. Family abnormality, including the following:
a dominant, possessive, or rejecting mother
an absent, distant, or rejecting father
a parent with homosexual proclivities, particularly one who molests a child of the same sex
a sibling with homosexual tendencies, particularly one who molests a brother or sister
the lack of a religious home environment
divorce, which often leads to sexual problems for both the children and the adults
parents who model unconventional sex roles
condoning homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle– welcoming homosexuals (e.g., co-workers, friends) into the family circle
3. Unusual sexual experience, particularly in early childhood:
precocious or excessive masturbation
exposure to pornography in childhood
depersonalized sex (e.g., group sex, sex with animals)
or girls, sexual interaction with adult males
4. Cultural influences:
a visible and socially approved homosexual sub-culture that invites curiosity and encourages exploration
pro-homosexual sex education
openly homosexual authority figures, such as teachers (4% of Kinsey's and 4% of FRI's gays reported that their first homosexual experience was with a teacher)
societal and legal toleration of homosexual acts
depictions of homosexuality as normal and/or desirable behavior."
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron3.html

How many adolescents don't indulge in regular masturbation Connie?! In 'Zealous Fundy' world, once a month would probably be excessive to you. As to the rest it's typical of such an 'objective' source....



Oh, and you "overlooked" my point regarding free will. Let me ask you a question on it. Could you choose to change your sexual orientation?

By ignoring the homosexual movement and it's well financed and politically backed agenda, Christian consersatives would only be hurting the movement to restore decency here in the United States, as homosexuality is just a part of "the sexual revolution" (abortion, glorifying out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, adultery and pornography are other elements of the sexual revolution).

So....."2.8%" of the population is "responsible" for all manner of any sexual immorality are they? Get a grip you naive loon. Pornography, illicit sex, adultery, cohabitation, promiscuity has been going on for aeons so wise up for once. Stop placing blame where it doesn't rest.

If we who stand for God's word and decency lose this part of the culture war, i.e. the battle against the homosexual agenda, there will be no chance of retaking other lost battles, such as the battles against out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, abortion, adultery and pornography.

How the heck are you going to stop people from having sex out of wedlock Connie? Make that a punishable crime as well? Why on earth would people stop cohabiting? Please explain how you would enforce all of this without a 'theocratic state'....

Homosexuality was a crime for close to 2,000 years. Why shouldn't those other sexual sins be decriminalized as well?

I don't classify rape as a "sexual sin". I classify it as one of the worst crimes of violent violation imaginable along with molestation and others which contravene the will of another. If you still can't see the difference (along with the prior) then you're either unutterably thick or you don't care, maybe both.

Back to your "consensual" attempt at an argument. If nothing is morally absolute, why would consent be? 1,200,000 are murdered in the womb each year with out consent; rapes, the spread of disease through sex is done without consent, etc. etc.; why is consent now the supposed basis for moral behavior?

Who said nothing was morally absolute?

I noticed that you passed up my important question, so I'll ask it again:

"The Bible speaks about all of those sins. You do still believe that God's word is the basis for all moral behavior don't you Arthur?"

You were answered on this weeks ago so if you're not happy about it then your problem dude. Do you think a theocratic state which applied to Israel should be applied in the present?

And now I'll answer your smokescreen of a question.

Um, you were asked a straightforward question which I'm now asking for the third time which simply requires a yes/no answer. Should any couple who engages in sodomy be charged with criminal offences be they gay or straight?

Of course all homosexualists like you want to give the impression that perversion is done solely in the confines of one's own sodomy chambers, and that if homosexuality was recriminalized Bruce and "what's his name?" would have their sodomy chambers door kicked in at their private residence.

Not the case. Homosexuality left the confines of private residences long ago and invaded institutions such as marriage, the traditional family through adoption, youth mentor groups, religion, education and the military.

If other groups organized and promoted their God-less agenda the way the homosexual movement has (let's say those whose "thing" is sex with animals), you can bet that we Christian conservatives would be fighting that battle as well.

"Nice" attempt at deflective bluster to avoid answering on point, but as transparent with you as per usual. Answer the above or look the hypocrite once again.

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by Angel4Truth

Who is ralphie and connie and what does that mean?

I have no idea and apparently I am Ralphie.

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So you don't like the idea of parents having control over their child's choice of sexual behavior?

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

Behaviour? You mean like masturbation? Most parents don't manage to regulate that one....

No, I was referring to a child that had been "mentored" by a homosexual pedophile like Jerry Sandusky. After months or years of abuse, they tell their parents that they have homosexual desires.


Quote:
As far as the details go, I would suspect that once the parents of a 12 year old boy who has been "mentored" by a homosexual pedophile in one of the many youth mentoring organizations that homosexuals have permeated, and the child thinks he too is a homosexual, the parents would take him to a therapist to help dissuade him from believing he's prone to living a life of perversion.

Ah, so you don't know what goes on then and are reduced to some loopy baseless assertion instead. Hardly surprising.

Based on what I've read through websites like Exodus International, that's what "goes on". If I'm wrong, do your own research Arthur and correct me.


Quote:
I would expect that Christian doctrine would play an important role in the reparative/conversion therapy as well, all the more reason for God-hating secular humanist perverts not to like it.

So again you don't know what goes on but just throw out assumptions. How come you don't know what happens with this "therapy"? Shouldn't you be acquainted with the procedures before blindly supporting such? maybe there's good reason why there's legislation to abolish forced "therapy" for minors.

Mission & Doctrine

Mission Statement

Mobilizing the body of Christ to minister grace and truth to a world impacted by homosexuality.
https://exodusinternational.org/



Quote:
As I've shown in other threads Arthur, homosexuality is not genetic, it comes from environmental factors.

You haven't shown a darn thing, apart from your obsessive fixation with male homosexuals.

Let me rephrase that Arthur: I've shown to those with an open mind that aren't hellbent on defending the homosexual lifestyle and agenda...


Quote:
"If homosexual impulses are not inherited, what kinds of influences do cause strong homosexual desires? No one answer is acceptable to all researchers in the field. Important factors, however, seem to fall into four categories. As with so many other odd sexual proclivities, males appear especially susceptible:
1. Homosexual experience:
any homosexual experience in childhood, especially if it is a first sexual experience or with an adult
any homosexual contact with an adult, particularly with a relative or authority figure (in a random survey, 5% of adult homosexuals vs 0.8% of heterosexuals reported childhood sexual involvements with elementary or secondary school teachers (5).
2. Family abnormality, including the following:
a dominant, possessive, or rejecting mother
an absent, distant, or rejecting father
a parent with homosexual proclivities, particularly one who molests a child of the same sex
a sibling with homosexual tendencies, particularly one who molests a brother or sister
the lack of a religious home environment
divorce, which often leads to sexual problems for both the children and the adults
parents who model unconventional sex roles
condoning homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle– welcoming homosexuals (e.g., co-workers, friends) into the family circle
3. Unusual sexual experience, particularly in early childhood:
precocious or excessive masturbation
exposure to pornography in childhood
depersonalized sex (e.g., group sex, sex with animals)
or girls, sexual interaction with adult males
4. Cultural influences:
a visible and socially approved homosexual sub-culture that invites curiosity and encourages exploration
pro-homosexual sex education
openly homosexual authority figures, such as teachers (4% of Kinsey's and 4% of FRI's gays reported that their first homosexual experience was with a teacher)
societal and legal toleration of homosexual acts
depictions of homosexuality as normal and/or desirable behavior."
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron3.html

How many adolescents don't indulge in regular masturbation Connie?! In 'Zealous Fundy' world, once a month would probably be excessive to you. As to the rest it's typical of such an 'objective' source....

Nice smokescreen Arthur. If you want to start a thread on youth masturbation, then please do, I'm sure you'll get a few homosexualists like yourself that would just love to talk about little boys doing that.

The subject here is homosexuality, the lifestyle of a homosexual, and it's well orchestrated agenda.

Oh, and you "overlooked" my point regarding free will. Let me ask you a question on it. Could you choose to change your sexual orientation?

Since many young boys that turn out to be homosexuals didn't have a choice whether or not they wanted to be molested by homosexual pedophiles, then "no", they didn't "choose" to become perverts.

But as shown through the Exodus International website, as well as other conversion therapy organizations, with the help of God, those that have been exposed to a sexually depraved lifestyle can change.



Quote:
By ignoring the homosexual movement and it's well financed and politically backed agenda, Christian consersatives would only be hurting the movement to restore decency here in the United States, as homosexuality is just a part of "the sexual revolution" (abortion, glorifying out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, adultery and pornography are other elements of the sexual revolution).

So....."2.8%" of the population is "responsible" for all manner of any sexual immorality are they? Get a grip you naive loon. Pornography, illicit sex, adultery, cohabitation, promiscuity has been going on for aeons so wise up for once. Stop placing blame where it doesn't rest.

You're ignoring the well financed, politicallly backed homosexual movement. Keep in mind Arthur, that the President of the United States recently had a group of moral degenerates at the White House:

"President Barack Obama is telling gay supporters that they will have a friend and "fellow advocate" in the White House as long as he is president.

Obama spoke to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender guests during a White House reception marking LGBT Pride Month. He touted his administration's work on gay rights issues, including repealing the military's ban on openly gay service members. He said even though it may have taken more time than they would like, gays and lesbians have seen progress and lasting change under his administration.

The president also referenced his recent public embrace of gay marriage. He said that while some Americans may still be evolving on same-sex marriage, he and wife, Michelle, "have made up our minds on this issue." The remark drew extended applause."
http://www.cortezjournal.com/article...at-White-House



Quote:
If we who stand for God's word and decency lose this part of the culture war, i.e. the battle against the homosexual agenda, there will be no chance of retaking other lost battles, such as the battles against out of wedlock sex, cohabitation, abortion, adultery and pornography.

How the heck are you going to stop people from having sex out of wedlock Connie? Make that a punishable crime as well? Why on earth would people stop cohabiting? Please explain how you would enforce all of this without a 'theocratic state'....

Yet another smokescreen attempt by Arthur.

Out of wedlock sex is a sin, not a perversion like homosexuality Arthur.

Obviously you're oblivious to the amount of abortions that come from cohabitation/out of wedlock sex. By changing cultural mores', including legislation against abortion, we as a nation can get the amount of abortions under control.


Quote:
Homosexuality was a crime for close to 2,000 years. Why shouldn't those other sexual sins be decriminalized as well?

I don't classify rape as a "sexual sin". I classify it as one of the worst crimes of violent violation imaginable along with molestation and others which contravene the will of another. If you still can't see the difference (along with the prior) then you're either unutterably thick or you don't care, maybe both.

You don't classify homosexuality as a sin Arthur. You're a moral relativist that likes to "pick and choose" which morally depraved lifestyles should be acceptable.


Quote:
Back to your "consensual" attempt at an argument. If nothing is morally absolute, why would consent be? 1,200,000 are murdered in the womb each year with out consent; rapes, the spread of disease through sex is done without consent, etc. etc.; why is consent now the supposed basis for moral behavior?

Who said nothing was morally absolute?

Obviously homosexuality isn't immoral in your eyes.

On that note, I've wasted enough of my time on your smokescreens, including your fantasy of little boys masturbating and such.

Time to move on (i.e. delouse).