Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?

[NARTH SHISHKOFF]

Granpastur wrote:

Homosexual 'marriage' isn't what divides churches. It is the choice of whether to follow the Bible or not. Grantd, the Bible repeatedly condemns all homosexual behavior in the plainest of termns.

Who cares? The Bible is crap bro.

[Troth for Leogere]

Tims Shield wrote:

<quoted text>Here Troth. Your wife was gay.

Post the HOMOPHOBIA section.. c'mon you can do it!

LMAO pathetic idiocy on display here by you!

[Not Yet Equal]

NARTH is really a religious based group posing as a secular scientific organization. They promote harmful "conversion therapy" complete with electric shock and emetics. One of their top leaders was recently caught with a "rent boy" and resigned. Other past leaders of "conversion therapy" have later denounced it as abusive and harmful, often leading to self destructive behavior including suicide when the client realizes they cannot change their same sex attractions. "Conversion therapy" relies heavily on religious shame and guilt to suppress behavior.

“We, as citizens, need to articulate God’s intent for human sexuality,” Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, President of NARTH, said in CNN’ 360 Degrees with Anderson Cooper, April 14, 2007. At the Feb. 10, 2007 Love Won Out conference in Phoenix, the “secular” therapist told the audience,“When we live our God-given integrity and our human dignity, there is no space for sex with a guy.” http://www.truthwinsout.org/narth/

“For over three decades the consensus of the mental health community has been that homosexuality is not an illness and therefore not in need of a cure. The APA’s concern about the positions espoused by NARTH and so-called conversation therapy is that they are not supported by the science. There is simply no sufficiently scientifically sound evidence that sexual orientation can be changed. Our further concern is that the positions espoused by NARTH and Focus on the Family create an environment in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish.” 8-11-06 APA (from http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/2006/08/apa-rele... )

Insufficient evidence to support sexual orientation change efforts : Mental health professionals should avoid telling clients they can change their sexual orientation through therapy or other treatments, according to a resolution adopted by the APA's Council of Representatives on Aug. 5 during APA's 2009 Annual Convention.The resolution was based on the recommendation of the APA Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation, which reviewed decades of research and found insufficient evidence that such treatments work.(October 2009) http://search.apa.org/search...

The American Psychological Association and the Royal College of Psychiatrists expressed concerns that the positions espoused by NARTH are not supported by the science and create an environment in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish.[38][40](Wiki)

[WasteWater]

Tims Shield wrote:

<quoted text>Let me help you gay dad, who made his child gay. Yes, I read it in its entirety and I also know that they said that you made your daughter gay.
Look at you, you post gay boy, like it is bad. Well, it is bad and you are gay and made your daughter gay.
Why did her mom come out and be gay? Was it your girl size weenie, you know, no bigger than a clit. HAHA, no wonder your duaghter rejected it for lesbians. Now, you hate lesbians, your daughter and gays.
Now, go stalk a dead gay or transgender person, freak.

False stereotype. A certain number of people are homosexual regardless of the orientation of the parents.

False inferences. You have no knowledge of such things.

Ad hominem statements.

BIG FAIL

[WasteWater]

Tims Shield wrote:

<quoted text>Why don't you post the section. It will explain your self hatred and why you hate your daughter for being gay and her mom for leaving you for a gay. You don't want those abailable public bath house guys to get away. The smellier the better.
Poor Troth, he is freaking out again and you have no Native to attack. Whiny freak, now keep your butt away from your daughter. her mom hates you and prefers females.

ROTFLMAO..... another pack of trollish lies. GTFOH

[Not Yet Equal]

"George Rekers is a major anti-gay figure that has worked against equality and tried to "cure" LGBT people for more than thirty years. A former University of South Carolina professor, Rekers is a founder of the Family Research Council, a former board member of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), and he testified as an expert witness in favor of gay adoption bans in both Arkansas and Florida. In both states, the courts deemed Reker’s testimony biased and untrustworthy.

Rekers has also published several anti-gay books, including, "Shaping Your Child's Sexual Identity" and "Growing Up Straight: What Every Family Should Know About Homosexuality."

In May, reporters Penn Bullock and Brandon K. Thorp of the Miami New Times discovered that Rekers took a male escort that he met on Rentboy.com to Europe. According to the escort, Rekers "likes younger guys to hang out with."

At first, Rekers said he only hired the young man to "lift his luggage". However, after people doubted his story, Rekers changed his tune, claiming he was only trying to convert sinners to Christianity." http://liftmyluggage.org/about-reckers.html

[Virgin Firstfruit]

Granpastur wrote:

Homosexual 'marriage' isn't what divides churches. It is the choice of whether to follow the Bible or not. Grantd, the Bible repeatedly condemns all homosexual behavior in the plainest of termns.

Not mine

[Troth for Leogere]

Tims Shield wrote:

<quoted text>Why don't you post the section.

Because I want to show the entire site what ignorant dishonest scum you are.. I want YOU to post it so you can rub your OWN nose in it and wallow in the crap you so enjoy throwing around here at others.. I want YOU to SELF incriminate!

Its a cryin shame that you are such a big coward when the table gets turned and you get burned. But then again, that what liars and dishonest people eventually suffer.

I'm not about to incriminate or expose you! I already did.. YOU'LL have to do it all by yourself and the fear you've just displayed speaks VOLUMES!

Have fun! too bad, so sad you cannot make this post go away!

[Not Yet Equal]

The reality is, gay people continue to form families, as they have been doing across time and place, and some choose to raise children, either adopted or biologically related to one or both partners.

The question then becomes, are we going to accept reality and encourage strong, committed relationships around the shared values of family, fidelity, and responsibility, with the help of friends, family, and the government, or is it in the best interest of society to make laws that attack and demean such relationships, causing unjustified harm to those couples and their children.

There is no legitimate governmental interest served by denial of equal treatment under the laws currently in effect for straight couples. Straight couple families gain nothing, and same sex couple families are harmed needlessly.

[WasteWater]

Sir Doctor wrote:

<quoted text>Only luLu Ford, count your stars suicide is a gay thing and you survived a nothing night. Now, get off that puppies nuts. HAHAHAHA....the best thing about you gay is that you starve for attention, so you even come here to get smcked with truth.
All gays are pedophiles, some just try to hide it. Chickens and Chicken Hawks. Harry Hay and Harvey Milks. Pedos and mental illness.

Thanks. I was right.

Nice RANT bro.

Are you MAD?

[GodSmacked]

Not Yet Equal wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks. I have a couple of moderated sites I like where the irrational hate trolls are not allowed, and only civil discussions take place. Most reasonable people however, don't persist in promoting false and irrational excuses once the fallacy has been demonstrated. So, I'm back to toxic topix.

NYE I enjoy reading your posts and hope you will continue to post on topix.

[Neil Andblowme]

No Surprise wrote:

<quoted text>
It was a sacrifice of a specific persons life, that is true. He knew he had to sacrifice his life for others that is true. But the 'human sacrifice' angle comes from just one of two perspectives. And when it happened, most didn't see the death of a guy named Jesus from Nazareth as a human sacrifice any more than they viewed the deaths of the two other men as human sacrifices.
So the spin is on the few, not the most :)

Um.... excuse me.... Aren't you forgetting about sacrifices that God demanded of the Jews? Jesus was supposed to be the forever substitutue for those sacrifices. Don't you know anything about christianity? Christians worship this human sacrifice and even have rituals of drinking his blood and eating his body to remind them. They even have a holiday that celebrates his murder.

[Not Yet Equal]

"Every religion emphasizes human improvement, love, respect for others, sharing other people's suffering. On these lines every religion had more or less the same viewpoint and the same goal." The Dalai Lama

Yet treating others with respect and equality does not require any religious belief. Non-theistic ethical and philosophic systems, like Humanism and Ethical Culture, believe in equality, fairness, and respect for others. While all beliefs have differences, all major religions, ethical systems, and philosophies agree that each person should treat others as they would themselves. Almost all of these groups have passages in their holy texts, or writings of their leaders, which promote this Ethic of Reciprocity. The most commonly known version in North America is the Golden Rule of Christianity. It is often expressed as "Do onto others as you would wish them do onto you." Or in "natural law": that "no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest".

Not only is refusing to treat others as you would yourself a violation of every major ethical belief system, it is a violation of the promise of equality in the founding documents and required by the 5th and 14th amendments.

[LowellGuy]

Sir Doctor wrote:

<quoted text>It may have been his words, but it is you who are arguing against it. It is up to you to provide the links to the contrary. In fact, it appears that you do not know the meaning of the words and terms. In this case, the bilateral destruction of the amygdala is also the source and cause of many boundary issues. I see you here back pedaling and it is because you are way over your head.
You hver simply proven that you are foolish and despie what evidence you receive, you will go the route of gay suicie and AIDS and pretend that some bully in Saudi Arabia pushed you to it.

But, I'm not gay.:(

[No Surprise]

Granpastur wrote:

Homosexual 'marriage' isn't what divides churches. It is the choice of whether to follow the Bible or not. Grantd, the Bible repeatedly condemns all homosexual behavior in the plainest of termns.

The choice of whether to follow the Bible or not to is based on what that pastor and members accept/reject concerning social customs.
Slavery was the first social issue to divide Christian churches. The Bible supported it and Christians practised slavery but modern social customs were going against the practice. Church against church in the end.
The same thing happened when interracial marriage was fought for. The same thing happened when laws for discrimination/segregation were fought against.
Now rights for homosexuality is being fought for and it's church against church as some are relenting to agreeing to homosexuality and others don't.

[Quest]

GAY SHISHKOOF wrote:

<quoted text>The lesson learned from the book is that the homosexual demand for the "right" to adopt children or bring them into the same-sex relationship by way of medical technology on the basis that they are supposedly equally good parents as heterosexuals, is a fraud......

My kids disagree with you.

[Quest]

GAY SHISHKOOF wrote:

<quoted text>....... All of this, the Bolshevik Masonic globalists are out to sabotage. Society is in the grip of a long-term satanic conspiracy masquerading as "progressive " which is attempting to concentrate all wealth in the hands of the central bankers and their allies. They are re-engineering the human race to serve them in a neo feudal world order.

No, it's just about love, commitment, and family.

[GodSmacked]

Quest wrote:

<quoted text>
No, it's just about love, commitment, and family.

It is so very nice to see you Quest and I hope all is well with you.

[No Surprise]

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>
Um.... excuse me.... Aren't you forgetting about sacrifices that God demanded of the Jews? Jesus was supposed to be the forever substitutue for those sacrifices. Don't you know anything about christianity? Christians worship this human sacrifice and even have rituals of drinking his blood and eating his body to remind them. They even have a holiday that celebrates his murder.

No, I didn't forget about 'animal sacrifice' God commanded of the Israelites. He didn't command 'human sacrifices'. And if Israelites did do human sacrifices, it was of their own doing, not a commandment.
And Jesus was never literal about drinking his blood and eating his flesh. Because if he was literal about it, he couldn't have been resurrected because his disciples would have been drinking the blood they bled from his dead body and they would have been eating it's flesh for sacraments. And when they ran out of his blood and flesh they would have had no way to carry out the commandment to drink his blood and eat his flesh as a substitute would never replace the real thing.
Jesus sacrificed himself by being a martyr for his beliefs. So call it a human sacrifice or whatever tunes your motor. The NT states he sacrificed his life for those that would believe in him. His dying a martyr does nothing for those that don't believe.
So as I stated, calling his death a human sacrifice would be applicable if those killing him, were killing him to sacrifice him as a human sacrifice for some god or religious cause.
He was killed as a criminal, not as a human sacrifice. So spin it all you want :)

[LowellGuy]

Sir Doctor wrote:

<quoted text>So, you are a homophobe who denies that you are gay. Or, is it that you havejust night tried to anal plunge thing. I mean, you never know until you try it unless you are a homophobe or a moral person.

I'm a homophobe who supports same-sex marriage? Really? Do you hear yourself?