Gays 'will never go to heaven'

Originally posted by Fromabove
The reason is because I always treat others like I want them to treat me, it's as simple as that.

Exactly, but why make a derogatory remark like the Cardinal? Do people think that this is not offensive in any way?

As for discrimination, it's only when you attempt to deprive another person of basic human respect and personal rights that it becomes bad. And there are laws to protect people from such actions, but a law protecting sexual desire is not one of them.

Depends on what definition of discrimination you are looking at. By claiming that a certain section of the public will not go to heaven because of sexual preference is a form of discrimination. I guess he just had to let people know that he hates homosexuals, just like that good old Fred Phelps a-hole

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

And Im so tired of christians thinking they are more higher and mighty then anyone else, wether it be Atheist, Muslim, Buddhist or any other religion. As I said, BS like this belongs in church where you christians can share your ignorant views, not in public. And it is discrimination, here's a definition

Definition:

1. treating people differently through prejudice: unfair treatment of one person or group, usually because of prejudice about race, ethnicity, age, religion, or gender


2. ability to notice and value quality: the ability to appreciate good quality or taste


3. awareness of subtle differentiation: the ability to notice subtle differences

Pay attention to definition number 3.....obviously he is concerned that people dont have the same belief as him, speaking out against them and speculating that these people (regardless of religion) arent "good" enough to get into heaven, is a form of discrimination.

And to your other comments, I bet you wouldnt let any openly gay person into your church, I also reckon you dont know any gay people and have never sat down and talked with the, and you also probably believe that being homosexual is a choice, not something that one has no control over....am I correct?

You just posted the definition of "discrimination" clearly validating my point about sexual orientation not being a protected class. And trust me, i know TONS of gay people. I live in freaking MIAMI dude! Let me tell you another thing, i know three gay people that are HIV+, a ton others that have Hepatitis C. That's only how many have ADMITTED it to me! You know how many straight people i know that are HIV+? ZERO!

One of them was a married man with 3 kids that left his wife for a guy! Your telling me it's not a choice? Seems to me like he just DECIDED one day that vagina wasn't for him anymore, along with his 3 kids. He left his family and moved in with his boyfriend.

I could care less who is gay or what sort of gay activities they do. Christianity doesn't allow homosexuality. Period. You wanna be gay? Ok well you can't be a gay Christian so choose. You can't root for the Red Sox AND the Yankees. Make a decision. I won't force you to be straight, so don't force me to think gays are "fabulous". I don't hate gay people, but i do hate the lifestyle.

[edit on 12/2/2009 by Mr Poopra]

Edit: Sorry dumb joke....

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Izarith]

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Quote from OzWeatherman :

" Depends on what definition of discrimination you are looking at. By claiming that a certain section of the public will not go to heaven because of sexual preference is a form of discrimination. I guess he just had to let people know that he hates homosexuals, just like that good old Fred Phelps a-hole. "




I didn't know that it would injure a person to tell them that the Bible says he can't go to heaven if he is sinning against God. What you would have a point if it was a matter of equality but it is not. Heaven is reserved by God for people who are holy and righteous and not for sinners.

The Cardinal didn't say he hated homosexuals, in fact he said it is wrong to discriminate against them, even though they will not get into heaven.

Very touchy subject.

On one hand, like it has been said, he is saying something that is mentioned in the Bible.

Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

I Corinthians 6:9-11

It's not PC and many find the above very offensive. And that's everyone's right. But according to the Bible, we all have a sinful nature and must turn that nature over to God to be saved, whatever that sinful nature may be.

I do see the cardinal also admitted it's not his place to judge and that discrimination is wrong. So in a way what he is saying is 'This is what the Bible says. Don't shoot the messenger.'

reply to post by tezzajw


I know many of you read my "used to be a preacher's wife" posts in the Fuming Mad Christian thread. So, I'll now add to the list of gripes...

During my years with the "holier than thou," murderers were welcomed into the church. Thieves were welcomed, as were rapists, drug addicts, alcoholics, etc. As long as they played the whole "I'm saved now" game, they were whole heartedly accepted into the church with open arms. That is until they "backslid" and were considered evil again. But all these people were supposedly forgiven of their sins and allowed to be a part of the church, but gay people? Forget it!!! They were just going to hell no matter what.

This is yet another reason that I don't attend church anymore. Even if homosexuality was a sin (and I said "IF," not that it is!), Jesus said, he who is without sin can cast the first stone. So, if this is the case, the homosexuals aren't any worse than the Bible thumpin, so called "man of God" preacher that is being so critical and judgmental.

I have plenty of gay friends and they are far more honest and sincere than the so called Christians that I used to know.

Right now, I know a preacher's son who is gay. His family pretty much shuns him. I think this is ridiculous, sad and just wrong.

I'll get off my soapbox now, but this is one of those things that just really makes me mad and sets me off.



[edit on 12/2/2009 by gemineye]

reply to post by OzWeatherman


If religious expression and teaching had to be limited to 'inside a church' the pope and most of the cardinals wouldn't be able to speak much at all.

Look, whatever definition of discrimination you choose to use, unless you believe this Cardinal holds the keys to heaven in his desk drawer, no harm done right?

People have a human right to speak their conscience in public no matter how disgusting we might find it. To try to trump that basic right with some fuzzy new right to not be offended is just absurd.

Like I said, the man doesn't hold keys to heaven. Let him think, feel and say whatever he wants. And behind the church doors? I guess if gays offend the cardinal they should all be made to go back into the closet

Tolerance of religious beliefs is central to anti-discrimination. That includes the cardinal here.

reply to post by Fromabove


Yeah and technically the women were supposed to be VIRGINS. In fact the marriage wasn't sanctified or recognized by God unless the woman was a Virgin. The wedding sheets were offered as proof to those who dared to question.

Seems like you and your Good Book readers have made a few concessions for convenience. Seems like you could easily make a concession here when Jesus Himself tells you THE ONLY commandment other than love God with all your heart IS love your brother as yourself. You cannot break this Supreme commandment in order to obey a lesser commandment you like better.

Originally posted by Mr Poopra
You just posted the definition of "discrimination" clearly validating my point about sexual orientation not being a protected class. And trust me, i know TONS of gay people. I live in freaking MIAMI dude! Let me tell you another thing, i know three gay people that are HIV+, a ton others that have Hepatitis C. That's only how many have ADMITTED it to me! You know how many straight people i know that are HIV+? ZERO!

Ok, here we go then, blaming HIV on gay people now? Anyone can get the frickin virus. Unlike you, virus' dont discriminate. Its not sexual orientation that creates virus' its unsafe sex.

And just for the record, I dont think homosexuals should be protected, but they should have the the same rights as everyone else.

One of them was a married man with 3 kids that left his wife for a guy! Your telling me it's not a choice? Seems to me like he just DECIDED one day that vagina wasn't for him anymore, along with his 3 kids. He left his family and moved in with his boyfriend.

How does that prove that its a chocie? What if he was conforming to the social stigma that you put on gay people? What if your kind of people pushed your hate for his type, forcing him to conform to traditional christian beliefs? Maybe he just figured out that he cant change who he is

I could care less who is gay or what sort of gay activities they do. Christianity doesn't allow homosexuality. Period. You wanna be gay? Ok well you can't be a gay Christian so choose. You can't root for the Red Sox AND the Yankees. Make a decision. I won't force you to be straight, so don't force me to think gays are "fabulous". I don't hate gay people, but i do hate the lifestyle.

How can you not hate gay people but hate their lifestyle....you hate one, you hate all

To those of you who quoted bible passages and stated that God thinks homosexuality is a sin based on those... maybe you should quote, or at least look up, the other passages, around those as well...

It seems, according to what you show of the bible, that homosexuality is a sin. But you could also quote in the same way that eating pork, having sex with a woman on her period, wearing two different types of material, divorce, sowing two different types of seed in your field, etc are sins... everyone sins, apparently. And one of these sins is no better or worse than another. I personally would think that these things are considered "sins" because they are unclean.

If you were to quote more of the passages of Sodom, you would see that his sins were not homosexuality, but homosexual offenses.

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

There are so many problems with that statement. Man does not lie with "mankind", he lies with man, if he is homosexual. Secondly, if man lies with mankind, as he does with a woman, then obviously what he does with the woman is a sin as well. To me the statement says it is a sin to sleep around. "They shall surely be put to death" means that somehow death will come of that, and it does, through STDs. It's not like only homosexuals get STDs. Usually only people who sleep around a lot do.

If the bible were trying to condemn homosexuality, it should just say "If a man lie with man and commit sexual acts, they have sinned". If it were as big and bad of a sin as is claimed by people, the bible would state the fact plain and clear and unmistakable like that. Only a few of the bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior. And there are actually bible passages in favour of homosexuality. The others, I believe, are mostly about homosexual offenses, which is not the same thing.

I would love to a hear a christian who condemns homosexuality's interpretation of Ruth and Naomi. Ruth 1:16-17 and 2:10-11 describe their close friendship.
"Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the Lord deal with me, be it ever so severely, if anything but death separates you and me."

Don't they use that at marriage ceremonies?

Ruth 1:14, referring to the relationship between Ruth and Naomi, mentions that "Ruth clave onto her." The Hebrew word translated here as "clave" is identical to that used in the description of a heterosexual marriage in Genesis 2:24: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

So God let them cleave. If it is described that way in the bible, to me, that says he let it happen.

There is also David and Jonathan. "...Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself."..."...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul".

My point is, you can use the bible to prove any point you want. I personally think that the bible or God does not condemn homosexuality, but sex without love. Even if God would deal with them ever so severely, they would not be hurting, or even effecting, anyone but themselves. Unless they go out and rape people as well, but that would be another thing entirely. I think that acting against homosexuality is more of a sin, since that hurts more people than being homosexual in itself does.

And this coming from the Vatican is very odd, because it's so easily contestable by any religious homosexual who cares to, and there are lots, I'm sure. I'm not one of them, by the way. I'm just trying to make a point.

I don't think this is what people should be focusing on.......

HOMOSEXUALS and transsexuals "will never enter the kingdom of heaven", a leading Roman Catholic cardinal said overnight.

I mean after all this has been being said for how many years now ? It's nothing new, we've been hearing priests, pastors, preachers, etc saying this forever, i mean it's not like it's a surprise now is it.

I think what should be focused on is the bolded part in this statement.....

Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan said that while the Church regarded homosexuality as an "insult to God", this did not justify discrimination against gay and transsexual people.

My perception of this is a priest publicly saying that gays, etc should not be treated any differently than anyone else, in other words love they neighbor as they self. Seems to me that it's just a case of someone taking what someone else said out of context to cause a stir, further their own agenda. I mean really would this even be news had he said murderers instead of gays ?


Edit because I forgot link

www.heraldsun.com.au...

[edit on 12/2/2009 by chise61]

I can't add anything to this topic that hasn't already been said. It would be nice to see him removed from the vatican and take his red cape back or whatever they get lol. Though I just came from the "Vatican accepts ET presence" thread and thought this said "Grays 'will never go to heaven'" lol

They can't even follow their own teachings, it's sad. This is what they say.

We all fall short of God, we fall short of perfection, we all sin. 1 sin is enough to be totally imperfect in the eyes of God. Jesus died to save us from sin. Homosexuality is a sin. So uh...what's the problem?

Also, I don't think homosexuality is a sin, but just saying even if it was...

[edit on 3-12-2009 by ghaleon12]

Gays will not go to heaven... nor will you or I , because heaven does not exist. When you expire , you will return to the source.

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

Originally posted by Mr Poopra
You just posted the definition of "discrimination" clearly validating my point about sexual orientation not being a protected class. And trust me, i know TONS of gay people. I live in freaking MIAMI dude! Let me tell you another thing, i know three gay people that are HIV+, a ton others that have Hepatitis C. That's only how many have ADMITTED it to me! You know how many straight people i know that are HIV+? ZERO!

Ok, here we go then, blaming HIV on gay people now? Anyone can get the frickin virus. Unlike you, virus' dont discriminate. Its not sexual orientation that creates virus' its unsafe sex.

And just for the record, I dont think homosexuals should be protected, but they should have the the same rights as everyone else.

One of them was a married man with 3 kids that left his wife for a guy! Your telling me it's not a choice? Seems to me like he just DECIDED one day that vagina wasn't for him anymore, along with his 3 kids. He left his family and moved in with his boyfriend.

How does that prove that its a chocie? What if he was conforming to the social stigma that you put on gay people? What if your kind of people pushed your hate for his type, forcing him to conform to traditional christian beliefs? Maybe he just figured out that he cant change who he is

I could care less who is gay or what sort of gay activities they do. Christianity doesn't allow homosexuality. Period. You wanna be gay? Ok well you can't be a gay Christian so choose. You can't root for the Red Sox AND the Yankees. Make a decision. I won't force you to be straight, so don't force me to think gays are "fabulous". I don't hate gay people, but i do hate the lifestyle.

How can you not hate gay people but hate their lifestyle....you hate one, you hate all

NEWSFLASH: Gays accounted for for 71% of new HIV infections in 2005. In the US, only 1.3% of people consider themselves homosexual. Let that sink in for one second. Despite what the media tells you, MUCH more gay men spread and have HIV than heterosexual men. Why? Because gay men are extremely promiscuous. The AVERAGE number of partners for a gay male is 41.9 according to a poll this year. You know what it is for a heterosexual male? SEVEN. You said "a virus doesn't discriminate", and you are correct...the problem is neither do gay men.

Like i said. It's the lifestyle that bothers me. Jesus said love your neighbor as yourself, and i do. I don't hate anyone. That doesn't mean i have to be happy about these statistics or the gay lifestyle. It's pointless arguing with you because you clearly have no clue what your talking about. I have a couple gay friends, even had Christmas dinner at a gay friend's house last year. They can be kind, loving people no question. So can a thief or killer or crook. That doesn't mean that you simply ignore the sin. The person deserves love and respect, it's the sinful lifestyle be it criminal activity or whatever that needs to be addressed and not festooned with more and more PC. That doesn't help anything.

[edit on 12/3/2009 by Mr Poopra]

[edit on 12/3/2009 by Mr Poopra]

hmmm... I disagree!

Considering all the "discos for gays", "parades for gays", "rights for gays", "manifs for gays", special places and everything the gay lobby provides, I'm pretty sure they have a "heaven for gays only" also... maybe they're the chosen people! Oh wait... some have already chosen that title, oh well, but still they have their own heaven I'm sure..

Originally posted by MOTT the HOOPLE
HOMOSEXUALS and transsexuals "will never enter the kingdom of heaven"Sounds about right to me!

I dont care where I go as long as you arnt there,you can hang out with your ped priest mates.

Originally posted by Mr Poopra
NEWSFLASH: Gays accounted for for 71% of new HIV infections in 2005. In the US, only 1.3% of people consider themselves homosexual. Let that sink in for one second. Despite what the media tells you, MUCH more gay men spread and have HIV than heterosexual men. Why? Because gay men are extremely promiscuous. The AVERAGE number of partners for a gay male is 41.9 according to a poll this year. You know what it is for a heterosexual male? SEVEN. You said "a virus doesn't discriminate", and you are correct...the problem is neither do gay men.

Thats a straight out lie...maybe I should report you for false or misleading info. Here are the real statistics

Around 48% of all people diagnosed with AIDS in America were probably infected with HIV through male-to-male sexual contact, while people exposed through heterosexual contact comprise around 17% total AIDS cases.

And the source for this:

www.avert.org...

Now where is your evidence? And where is your supporting claim for homosexual males being more promiscuos? Or did you just make that up like your statistics?

reply to post by OzWeatherman


And some more stats that you have obviously not researched

More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981.

Africa has over 14 million AIDS orphans.

At the end of 2008, women accounted for 50% of all adults living with HIV worldwide

In developing and transitional countries, 9.5 million people are in immediate need of life-saving AIDS drugs; of these, only 4 million (42%) are receiving the drugs.

So women account for 50% of HIV sufferers meaning your anti-gay stance has again clouded your judgement.....I dont normally say this, but I think I just proved that you were BS'ing

My source again:
www.avert.org...

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

Originally posted by Mr Poopra
NEWSFLASH: Gays accounted for for 71% of new HIV infections in 2005. In the US, only 1.3% of people consider themselves homosexual. Let that sink in for one second. Despite what the media tells you, MUCH more gay men spread and have HIV than heterosexual men. Why? Because gay men are extremely promiscuous. The AVERAGE number of partners for a gay male is 41.9 according to a poll this year. You know what it is for a heterosexual male? SEVEN. You said "a virus doesn't discriminate", and you are correct...the problem is neither do gay men.

Thats a straight out lie...maybe I should report you for false or misleading info. Here are the real statistics

Around 48% of all people diagnosed with AIDS in America were probably infected with HIV through male-to-male sexual contact, while people exposed through heterosexual contact comprise around 17% total AIDS cases.

And the source for this:

www.avert.org...

Now where is your evidence? And where is your supporting claim for homosexual males being more promiscuos? Or did you just make that up like your statistics?

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHHAAHHHAHA!!!!!

My source is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Basically the most trusted source possible. Please get a clue. Even if CDC is wrong, and your source is right...are you trying to say that 1.3% of the population getting 48% of all new HIV infections is GOOD?! I can't continue this battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent. Good luck to you.

www.cdc.gov...

Your world HIV numbers are skewed because of the absolute pandemic AIDS has become in Africa. I'm talking civilized world, not third world countries.



[edit on 12/3/2009 by Mr Poopra]

[edit on 12/3/2009 by Mr Poopra]