RE: Homosexuality in the News (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events



Message

xyno41 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/29/2006 5:51:48 PM)

[:)]

Well, since universities are based on tax dollars - has the American Center for Law and Justice stepped up to bat? I wouldn't pay that stupid payment they require and then call the ACLJ against the university if possible. I can't understand how that payment is legal because this antichristian organization doesn't represent everyone. I would contact the ACLJ asap!!

Some people would ignore it and just want to graduate. I would make a BIG deal about it and call the conservative media and get this exposed to the nation. Or after one graduates - you are an alumni. If christians don't stand up against it - then more and more universities that are antichristian will try this nonsense. There must be GREAT opposition against these type of universities.

The reality is 65-80% of each state in the U.S. is for the Federal Marriage Amendment- but many of the universities don't represent what the american people truly believe in.

*********Also, why not get a christian organization together - maybe a student bible study and paint a picture that will make them think twice and come to Christ in Oregon. Painting that signifies love. I was thinking a picture of Him hanging on the cross that says He loved you this much to this hostile organization. In love- not in judgement.

**The point is: this is also freedom of expression. Legally, a university can't support one group and not the other if its student organized. According to the ACLJ this is the law and can be challenged in court if they go against a christian student organization's expression.

If the universities were private organizations, then you couldn't do anything - but government type of organizations its not legal to show partiality.

[:)]



tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/29/2006 10:15:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petula4God

uhhhhhhhhhhh,

Actually, how would you explain a friend I had, the eldest brother saying he was gay, died at 27 from complications of AIDS; younger brothers definately NOT gay.


There's nothing surprising about that. Just because having an older brother makes it more likely for a male to be gay, doesn't mean that someone with an older brother will be gay. Nor does it mean that the younger brother of an older brother who is gay will be gay as well. (My younger brother isn't gay, but my brother's brother-in-law is, and he's the only male child in that family.)

Let's say, for example, that the odds of a single male child being gay are 1 in 25 or a 4% chance. (This is just for example, so please don't dispute this number).

Reseachers have found that if a male child has one older brother, then he is 33% more likely to be gay than the example above: 4% + 0.33 * 4% = 5.32%. Similarly, with two older brothers the chance a male child will be gay is 7.07%. Three olders brothers, 9.4%.

So, although each older brother a male has makes it more likely he will be gay, it's not a huge increase in that chance.

Therefore in the example of your friend, the younger brother would have had only a slightly increased chance of being gay because he had an older brother, and the fact that the older brother *was* gay doesn't make a difference either way.



henny -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/30/2006 3:56:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petula4God
Yes, that is what YOU'VE heard.

It sounds to me by all your posts henny you are an advocate of homosexual marriage.

Is this a correct assumption?


Thus far I haven't addressed the rightness or wrongness of gay marriage at all. My posts in this thread have dealt with whether or not legalizing polygamy has any legal basis analogous to legalizing gay marriage. You think it does, while I think it doesn't.

Should I take your attempt to change the subject as a sign that you give up arguing and agree with me completely on the matter?

I will assume your answer is "yes" untill you tell me otherwise. [;)]



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/30/2006 4:37:43 AM)

Catholics Fire Gay Music Director , see:

http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/state/14683632.htm



Petula4God -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/30/2006 7:44:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: henny

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petula4God
Yes, that is what YOU'VE heard.

It sounds to me by all your posts henny you are an advocate of homosexual marriage.

Is this a correct assumption?


Thus far I haven't addressed the rightness or wrongness of gay marriage at all. My posts in this thread have dealt with whether or not legalizing polygamy has any legal basis analogous to legalizing gay marriage. You think it does, while I think it doesn't.

Should I take your attempt to change the subject as a sign that you give up arguing and agree with me completely on the matter?

I will assume your answer is "yes" untill you tell me otherwise. [;)]


My answer is no, I don't agree with you.

Thought I made that pretty clear. [;)]



tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/30/2006 6:41:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brooklynsblessed1

Catholics Fire Gay Music Director , see:

http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/state/14683632.htm

I guess it was the right of the Catholic Church, but since he was completely honest about his sexual orientation when they hired him, it's kind of sad to see that happen. Certainly his choir was unhappy to see him go.



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/31/2006 4:59:04 PM)

Holy Cow ! Watch your teens comicbooks...Batwoman back as a lesbian ?????

SEE: http://www.knx1070.com/pages/41020.php



kapowski -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/31/2006 5:05:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brooklynsblessed1

Christians can not support that which is an abomination. And Satan is very real & doing everything to destroy families. Homosexuality is a sin, and no born again Christian, washed in the blood of Christ could ever support gay marriage.
Supporting gay marriage is not the same as supporting homosexuality. Supporting the legal right to get a divorce is not the same as supporting divorce. You are oversimplifying the issue by equating the right to make a choice with the choice itself. Do you also believe that we should outlaw divorce, lest we appear to be supporting it? Your argument is only feasible when applied to the Church (and I wouldn't disagree with you, if that were your only).

quote:

I wrote something similar to this in another thread regarding that if marriage is not defined, anyone could step up and say this IS WHAT I BELIEVE MARRIAGE IS; a person's "beliefs" regarding what marriage is could be endless (including polygamy and on and on and on).
That's not a realistic outcome for the mere fact that the government does have an interest in defining marriage. Polygamy will never be a legal form of marriage. It's existence would burden the legal system to such an extent that the government's involvement in marriage would be rendered irrelevant.

quote:

There is no assurance that the Defense of Marriage Act (adopted by 38 states in 1996 under Clinton) will not itself be struck down by activist courts.

In that event, every state would be FORCED to recognize ANY RELATIONSHIP that judges in Boston or officials in San Francisco CHOOSE to call a marriage".

I would think The President knows more about the constitution, etc, then we do.

And why and how do judges think they can over turn what voters have already voted upon?
There is a tendency for Christians to label every judge whose decisions they do not agree with as "activist." Nevermind the fact that traditionally conservative judges are actually more activist that traditionally liberal judges (they just happen to to be activists on matters that no one cares about....) Anyway, the court is in a difficult position here. It is charged with upholding the Constitution, protecting the minority, and carrying out the will of the majority. What does it do when those are at odds? Compare the current situation of homosexual couples to past situations involving interracial couples, as most notably addressed in Loving v. Virginia.



kapowski -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/31/2006 5:14:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petula4God

So, who's to say polygamist's can't win their case?
a little principle called strict scrutiny. The government would only have to prove that it has a compelling interest in blocking polygamy, which would be fairly easy, given the function of government involvement in marriage and the structure of the legal system. as for pedophilia, you must have the legal capacity to contract in order to be married...regardless of your religion. hence, the presence of a pedophile on the FBI's 10 most wanted list.



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/31/2006 5:16:53 PM)

Compare the current situation of homosexual couples to past situations involving interracial couples, as most notably addressed in Loving v. Virginia.

^^^The majority of blacks oppose gay marriage---many out & out resent any comparison to their civil rights struggles.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, with Dr. King when he was shot also has said homosexual rights are NOT the same as civil rights.
---"Gays were NEVER called three-fifths human in the Constitution....",the Rev. Jackson has said.



kapowski -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/31/2006 5:25:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brooklynsblessed1

Compare the current situation of homosexual couples to past situations involving interracial couples, as most notably addressed in Loving v. Virginia.

^^^The majority of blacks oppose gay marriage---many out & out resent any comparison to their civil rights struggles.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, with Dr. King when he was shot also has said homosexual rights are NOT the same as civil rights.
---"Gays were NEVER called three-fifths human in the Constitution....",the Rev. Jackson has said.
what in the world does that have to do with what I said...? I'm comparing the legal principles involved in potential court cases. I'm not going any broader than that.



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/31/2006 5:31:09 PM)

Black civil rights, traditional marriage between a man & a woman (only) are U.S. legal principles....



kapowski -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/31/2006 5:36:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brooklynsblessed1

Black civil rights, traditional marriage between a man & a woman (only) are U.S. legal principles....
my point was that, prior to 1953, that sentence would have read "...traditional marriage between a white man and a white woman or a black man and a black woman (etc.)...are U.S. legal principles...."



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/1/2006 3:23:04 PM)

Leading black Christian urges passage of MARRIAGE PROTECTION ACT, Senate discussions begin in few days. SEE:

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/6/afa/12006a.asp

Note: Majority of blacks, Christian & non-Christian oppose gay Marriage.



BlackAndy -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/1/2006 4:35:17 PM)

DC Comics is reviving Batwoman.... as a lesbian heroine.
[:'(]



tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/1/2006 5:49:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brooklynsblessed1

Leading black Christian urges passage of MARRIAGE PROTECTION ACT, Senate discussions begin in few days. SEE:

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/6/afa/12006a.asp

Note: Majority of blacks, Christian & non-Christian oppose gay Marriage.

It's not going to happen. The Senate will fall far short of the 67 votes it needs, and Bill Frist has known that from the beginning. This is being done to obscure the fact that next to nothing of the religious right's agenda has been dealt with in the six years GW Bush has been president. Here's hoping they don't fall for this pandering charade again.



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/1/2006 8:18:43 PM)

^^^If it goes down it's still to be voted on state-by-state, in every state voting so far traditional marriage has been supported by up to 76% of our fellow citizens. I predict it will be supported in NY state too; & everywhere so far where it's to come up for a vote.



tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/2/2006 12:05:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brooklynsblessed1
^^^If it goes down it's still to be voted on state-by-state, in every state voting so far traditional marriage has been supported by up to 76% of our fellow citizens. I predict it will be supported in NY state too; & everywhere so far where it's to come up for a vote.

Fine, but that's a different issue. When it comes to a Federal Marriage Amendment recent polls show only between 40% and 50% of the population would support it. (i.e. about a third of those against gay marriage believe it's a states' rights issue).

Either way the FMA is DOA and the vote is simply designed for Republican senators to be able to claim they did something for the religious right (when, in fact they did nothing).



p31woman -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/2/2006 12:30:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackAndy

DC Comics is reviving Batwoman.... as a lesbian heroine.
[:'(]


“Wouldn’t ugly people as heroes be more groundbreaking? You know, 200-pound woman, man with horseshoe hair loss pattern, people with cold sores, etc.?”



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/3/2006 2:58:42 PM)

Philly Police May Have Conspired With Gay Activists Against Pastors

SOURCE PERMISSION : http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/may/06053108.html

Court: Philly Police May have Conspired with Homosexual Activists Against Pastors

By Gudrun Schultz

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, May 31, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A U.S. district court judge has refused to release the homosexual activist group Philly Pride Presents from a lawsuit brought by members of the Christian group Repent America.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of eleven members of Repent America, claiming allegations of a conspiracy between Philly Pride and the Philadelphia police to deny the group free speech during the homosexual celebration of "OutFest" in October 2004.

The group was harassed and prevented from speaking by homosexual activists known as the "Pink Angels," and were arrested by the police and charged with multiple crimes under the Pennsylvania "hate crimes" law. The charges were later dismissed in court.

The eleven members brought a lawsuit against Philly Pride and the city on allegations of conspiracy between Philly Pride and the Philadelphia Police to prevent them from delivering their message.

Judge Lawrence F. Stengel said the allegations had merit and refused to comply with Philly Pride's request to be released from the lawsuit.

"In this case, Plaintiffs have pleaded sufficient facts to infer a conspiracy between the Philly Pride Defendants and the other defendants. The Complaint alleges a number of facts sufficient to support an inference of a conspiracy to deprive Plaintiffs of their constitutional rights."

The lawsuit pointed out that Chief Inspector James Tiano of the Philadelphia Police Department testified during the criminal proceedings that police met with "OutFest" organizers 3 or 4 times beforehand and discussed ways of preventing repent America from gaining access to the event.

"Chief Inspector Tiano's comments seem to make it clear that the City conspired with the organizers of 'OutFest' to ensure that Repent America would not have access to the event to exercise their protected rights under both our state and federal Constitutions," said attorney Ted Hoppe, representing the eleven plaintiffs, in a Repent America press release last week.

"We are most pleased with the [sic] Judge Stengel's decision to deny Philly Pride Presents' motion to dismiss, and look forward to the discovery phase of the case," Repent America director Michael Marcavage said.

"The discovery process will afford us the opportunity to conduct depositions in order to further investigate evidence and document the conspiratorial actions between Philly Pride and the Philadelphia Police to violate our civil rights."

"The City's action at the 'OutFest' event demonstrated a clear hostility toward Repent America and the content of their message," Ted Hoppe said. "Through this lawsuit, we hope to send a message to the City of Philadelphia, its police force, as well as Philly Pride Presents, that they do not have the right to interfere with Repent America's constitutionally protected rights to free speech and free exercise of religion simply because they do not agree with the content of their message."

See related LifeSiteNews coverage:

Prayer and Scripture Reading During Gay Celebration Could Cost Christians 47 Years in Prison
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/dec/04121704.html

Philadelphia Pride Parade Featured Simulated Sex Acts
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/jun/05061405.html

Freedom of Speech Rights for Christian Pastors Confronting Gay Pride Upheld in Pennsylvania
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/may/06052408.html


(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted




(with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).



Phillybeliever -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/3/2006 5:33:15 PM)

quote:

Philly Police May Have Conspired With Gay Activists Against Pastors


You're kidding me right?!?[sm=eek.gif] The group that got arrested did so because they refused to obey the police officers when they were told to move. Repent America no different than Westboro Baptist in my book. They have no desire to reach homosexuals with the message of the gospel. Their aim only to add to the hate rhetoric that is already prolific among single issue voters and those who believe that giving homosexuals the right to marry will tear the very fabric of society and destroy life as we know it.

If these groups had any real burden for homosexuals they would go to these gay pride events not with banners condeming them to the fires of hell but with a desire to get to know those who go to these events as individuals, invite them to their churches, or even <gasp> offer to study the bible with them.

For better or worse, homosexuality affects a large part of our culture. Most people, including church members, have either a family member, co-worker, or friend who is gay. Rather than dismiss this segment of society as unworthy of salvation or throw out empty and often insincere comments like "hate the sin, love the sinner" why not SHOW these people how God can change their lives like he changed ours?



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/4/2006 3:05:46 AM)

^^^Many churches in NY from The Brooklyn Tabernacle to Calvary Baptist have active ministries for gays trying to get out of the life. As I mentioned on another post Brooklyn Tabernacle on their popular taped concert @ Madison Square Garden shows how their street teams reached out to an HIV+ transvestite, took him in when he still identified as a "her") & discipled him & before he went on to eternity he even got married....other outreaches & Exodus carry out compassionate outreaches nation-wide.

However, Scholars Now Say Gay Marriage May Split Churches..

http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/bpnews.asp?ID=23383



Phillybeliever -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/4/2006 3:19:43 PM)

quote:

Many churches in NY from The Brooklyn Tabernacle to Calvary Baptist have active ministries for gays trying to get out of the life.


I grew up in NYC and am quite familiar with the work and ministry of Brooklyn Tab. Do you attend BT? I'm not as familiar with Calvary Baptist. Is that a Brooklyn church as well?

Are you personally involved in a ministry with your church that reaches out to homosexuals -- even those who don't believe their lifestyle is sinful? Does your church allow homosexuals to attend services and/or participate in church activities (Sunday school, bible studies, church picnics, etc.)? That's what I mean by reaching out to the gay community. There's a huge difference between treating homosexuals like "the enemy" and treating them like sinners in need of a savior just like we are.

Jesus was often looked down upon by those who considered themselves "religious" because of his association with those they considered unworthy of salvation -- tax collectors and sinners. Look at Jesus' response:

While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"

On hearing this, Jesus said, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." (Matthew 9:10-13)

Now the tax collectors and "sinners" were all gathering around to hear him. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, "This man welcomes sinners and eats with them."

Then Jesus told them this parable: "Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders 6and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.' I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent. (Luke 15:1-7)

How would Jesus respond to the homosexual?



BlackAndy -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/5/2006 10:51:46 AM)

How GAY is Superman?



brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (6/6/2006 4:59:59 PM)

Vatican call gay marriage an "eclipse of God", see:

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7003824383

SOURCE: All Headline News

What do you think an eclipse of God (in this case) is ?????



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI