Obama White House Fundraises For Anti-Christian Bully Savage

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by Annee

 

Why are you avoiding the questions I asked about the list I posted? Are you really going to "give up" that easily?

To help you out, here is a link to it.

See ya,
Milt

I'm nanny to a 4 year old.

Often depends on time and focus available. I'll get back to you - - - right now someone more important needs attention.

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by Annee

 

You also seem to feel LGBTs are above reproach, so I reckon it's only fair that I post the following list of famous LGBTs, and then ask you couple of questions about it.

I have answered this question before in other threads.

Pedophilia is an orientation on to itself. It is about attraction to children. The preference is children - - not gender.

Victims are often chosen by availability -- not gender. If a pedophile has sex with same gender - - it may be called a homosexual act - - - but that has nothing to do with a person who is a homosexual.

A homosexual would be the same as a heterosexual in how they approach "normal" sex.

There are links to back this up.

But Hey! Its bedtime for the little guy.

reply to post by Annee

Mention anything against Christianity - - - you are Condemning Christians - - anti-Christian - - bullying Christians - - - hating Christians - - - etc.

I did NOT accuse you of:
1) being "anti-Christian"
2) "bullying Christians"
3) "hating Christians"
4) "etc."

In my example, the applicable definition of "condemn" would be: to express an unfavorable or adverse judgment on; indicate strong disapproval of; censure.

AGAIN - - I was raised Christian.

It wouldn't matter if you were raised as a "hobbit", and never went on an adventure, the above definition would still apply, and still would, very accurately, discribe your previous attempts to discredit Christians.

I speak of what I know.

I disagree! I saw your comment about two wrongs making a right! That certainly doesn't weigh too heavily in your favor.

What are you trying to justify with the following?

Unlike many Christians slamming and saying hateful things about what they know nothing about - - such as homosexuality and Islam.

That certainly looks like an excuse for something!

There are many LGBTQ Christians.
There are many Christians in full support of LGBTQ rights.
There are several denominations that now have LGBTQ ministers.

None of that changes the definition of "condemn", does it?

And - - I will state I believe - - the majority of those that consider themselves Christian - - agree with Savage and the hypocrisy of "pick & choose" Leviticus.

Then why were you condemning Christianity as a whole? Why not just limit it to the "many Christians slamming and saying hateful things about what they know nothing about - - such as homosexuality and Islam." Those are the ones that Savage's comments should have been directed at. Instead he picked a bunch of innocent students, that were likely already aware that he was gay, and controversial, and were still willing to listen to what he had to say... until he started his hypocritical, "pick & choose", Bible bashing, rant.

It's as clear as night and day that Savage WAS JUST AS WRONG as those he condemns for "bullying" LGBTs. I don't understand how anyone can, in good conscience, justify such hostile actions by such an obvious "jack ass", or anyone else for that matter.

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by BenReclused

It wouldn't matter if you were raised as a "hobbit", and never went on an adventure, the above definition would still apply, and still would, very accurately, discribe your previous attempts to discredit Christians.

Your attempts at interpreting what I actually say - - is failing.

Originally posted by BenReclused

It's as clear as night and day that Savage WAS JUST AS WRONG as those he condemns for "bullying" LGBTs. I don't understand how anyone can, in good conscience, justify such hostile actions by such an obvious "jack ass", or anyone else for that matter.

Dear Dr. Laura

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that
knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend
the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that
Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
specific laws and how to follow them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual cleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is,
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can
you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don.t agree. Can you settle this?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I
have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room
here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.
19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn.t we just burn them to
death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident
you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is
eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan,
Jack

Originally posted by BenReclused

In my example, the applicable definition of "condemn" would be: to express an unfavorable or adverse judgment on; indicate strong disapproval of; censure.

Public school.

Separation of church and state.

Condemn is just another "technical" excuse for bullying. IMO

reply to post by Annee


I didn't even bring up Harry in that post. Yes, Harry the communist was involved in that assn.
You will likely flame on FRC but they did publish results of studies done.

Homosexual Pedophiles are Vastly Overrepresented in Child Sex Abuse Cases
Homosexual pedophiles sexually molest children at a far greater rate compared to the percentage of homosexuals in the general population. A study in the Journal of Sex Research found, as we have noted above, that "approximately one-third of [child sex offenders] had victimized boys and two-thirds had victimized girls." The authors then make a prescient observation: "Interestingly, this ratio differs substantially from the ratio of gynephiles (men who erotically prefer physically mature females) to androphiles (men who erotically prefer physically mature males), which is at least 20 to 1."[17]

In other words, although heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by a ratio of at least 20 to 1, homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses.

Similarly, the Archives of Sexual Behavior also noted that homosexual pedophiles are significantly overrepresented in child sex offence cases:
The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2 to 4 percent of men attracted to adults prefer men (ACSF Investigators, 1992; Billy et al.,1993; Fay et al.,1989; Johnson et al.,1992); in contrast, around 25 to 40 percent of men attracted to children prefer boys (Blanchard et al.,1999; Gebhard et al.,1965; Mohr et al.,1964). Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 6 to 20 times higher among pedophiles."[18]

The inaugural issue of the Gay Community News in 1979 published a "Statement to the Gay Liberation Movement on the Issue of Man/Boy Love," which challenged the movement to return to a vision of sexual liberation. It argued that "the ultimate goal of gay liberation is the achievement of sexual freedom for all--not just equal rights for 'lesbian and gay men,' but also freedom of sexual expression for young people and children."

Pedophile Themes Abound in Gay Literature
The late "beat" poet Allen Ginsberg illustrates the seamless connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. Many know Ginsberg as an illustrious "out" homosexual poet: fewer are aware that he was also a pedophile.

· The Archives of Sexual Behavior reports: "One of the most salient findings of this study is that 46 percent of homosexual men and 22 percent of homosexual women reported having been molested by a person of the same gender. This contrasts to only 7 percent of heterosexual men and 1 percent of heterosexual women reporting having been molested by a person of the same gender."[70]

a snapshot of just a few of the 76 footnotes and references from the article

38. Marshall, "Sexual Offenders against Male Children: Sexual Preferences," p. 383.
39. W. L. Marshall, et al., "Early Onset and Deviant Sexuality in Child Molesters," Journal of Interpersonal Violence 6 (1991): 323-336.

40. W. D. Erickson, "Behavior Patterns of Child Molesters," Archives of Sexual Behavior 17 (1988): 83.

41. John F. Harvey, O.S.F.S., The Homosexual Person: New Thinking in Pastoral Care (San Francisco: Ignatius Press:1987): 221

42. Ibid., p. 219.

43. Elliott, p. 581.

44. Marshall, "Sexual Offenders against Male Children: Sexual Preferences," p. 383.

45. Bradford, p. 219.

46. Bradford, p. 224.

47. "Understanding and Investigating Child Sexual Exploitation," p. 5.

48. Thorstad is co?'author, with John Lauritsen, of The early homosexual rights movement (1864?'1935) (New York: Times Change Press, 1974).

49. David Thorstad, "May/Boy Love and the American Gay Movement" Journal of Homosexuality 20 (1990): 252.

50. Ibid., p. 253.

51. Ibid., p. 258.

52. Ibid., p. 266.

53. George Archibald, "U.N. Group Keeps Ban on Gay Lobby," Washington Times (May 1, 2002).

54. Raymond-Jean Frontain, "The Works of Allen Ginsberg," Journal of Homosexuality 34 (1997): 109.

55. Mary Eberstadt, "'Pedophilia Chic' Reconsidered" The Weekly Standard 6 (January 8, 2001).

and website of the article

www.frc.org...

And aonother website citing the same studies by FRC

borngay.procon.org... although that site has both pro and con arguments and likely is biased toward gay, lest anyone should accuse me of not being fair.

reply to post by Annee


Annee....did you ever read Brave New World?


you really should......very disturbing book written as sci if in 1930ish......they encouraged little children to run around naked and have sex play....because its natural and fun.....the encouragement of free sex kept everyone happy doing what tptb wanted. Lots of other disturbing stuff that is now happening.

Just because someone is born a certain way or wants to be sexual at 4 doesn't mean it's good or right.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Annee

 

and website of the article

www.frc.org...

Oh yeah! They're unbiased without an agenda

SPLC Responds to Attack by Family Research Council

The Family Research Council (FRC) bills itself as “the leading voice for the family in our nation’s halls of power,” but its real specialty is defaming gays and lesbians. The FRC often makes false claims about the LGBT community based on discredited research and junk science. The intention is to denigrate LGBT people in its battles against same-sex marriage, hate crimes laws, anti-bullying programs and the repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

To make the case that the LGBT community is a threat to American society, FRC employs a number of “policy experts” whose “research” has allowed FRC to be extremely active politically in shaping public debate. Its research fellows and leaders often testify before Congress and appear in the mainstream media. It also works at the grassroots level, conducting outreach to pastors in an effort to “transform the culture.”

In Its Own Words “Gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement.” — Robert Knight, FRC director of cultural studies, and Frank York, 1999

“[Homosexuality] … embodies a deep-seated hatred against true religion.” — Steven Schwalm, FRC senior writer and analyst, in “Desecrating Corpus Christi,” 1999

“One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets of a new sexual order.’” --1999 FRC pamphlet, Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex with Boys.

www.splcenter.org...

reply to post by Annee


See, I knew you were going to flame FRC. I mean it is a FAMILY oriented organization. Again, I must say that the current administration is oriented toward Marxist/leninist communist and socialist hatred of the family.

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Annee

 

Annee....did you ever read Brave New World?


you really should......very disturbing book written as sci if in 1930ish......they encouraged little children to run around naked and have sex play....because its natural and fun.....the encouragement of free sex kept everyone happy doing what tptb wanted. Lots of other disturbing stuff that is now happening.

Just because someone is born a certain way or wants to be sexual at 4 doesn't mean it's good or right.

I have no idea what your point is in this thread.

Who is talking about children having sex?

Its like you're stating a child born Left Handed - - is sexual by age 4.

reply to post by BenReclused


I think she's under the impression you list were all pedophiles....

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Annee

 

See, I knew you were going to flame FRC. I mean it is a FAMILY oriented organization. Again, I must say that the current administration is oriented toward Marxist/leninist communist and socialist hatred of the family.

I do not have to flame FRC.

They do that perfectly all by themselves.

reply to post by Annee


Here we go with the irrational old testament crap again.....totally useless comparison.


And a useless, baseless, outdated and worn out tactic.


I think you should read this book also.

www.npr.org...

reply to post by Annee


Of course, to you all of the various studies they cited have to be wrong, and the one study that Journal suggesting homophones are secretly gay and made that way by authoritarian parents must be right....any fool can see the bias.

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Annee

 

Here we go with the irrational old testament crap again.....totally useless comparison.


And a useless, baseless, outdated and worn out tactic.


I think you should read this book also.

www.npr.org...

Again - - I have no idea what your point is in regard to this thread.

I do not discuss my politics on ATS. You have no idea what my political thinking is.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Annee

 

Of course, to you all of the various studies they cited have to be wrong, and the one study that Journal suggesting homophones are secretly gay and made that way by authoritarian parents must be right....any fool can see the bias.

Yes - - absolutely.

All the studies by FRC are crap!

Originally posted by Annee
The interesting thing about Sam Harris' tirade.

He is confirming children as young as 4 begin to understand their sexuality.

Do you have short term memory loss....and I am sorry my sentences are so complex.....I said being born a certain way like gay.....or sex crazed at 4.......2 separate examples there....see......or say with down syndrome or hair growing 5inches out your nose doesnt mean it's right......and no one has to accept someone else's bedroom habits.....or religion or anything.....just keep it to yourself. Everyone leave everyone the hell alone! Capich?

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Annee

 

Of course, to you all of the various studies they cited have to be wrong, and the one study that Journal suggesting homophones are secretly gay and made that way by authoritarian parents must be right....any fool can see the bias.

Yes - - absolutely.

All the studies by FRC are crap!

Oh of course they must be because you disagree with them.

Originally posted by timetothink

Originally posted by Annee
The interesting thing about Sam Harris' tirade.

He is confirming children as young as 4 begin to understand their sexuality.

Understanding your sexuality at age 4 - - - has nothing to do with being sexual.

Get a grip!