Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Mentally Molested

"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" effectively have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.

Read full article HERE and follow-up articles HERE.

Read SB777 in detail HERE.

SEC. 4. Section 210.7 is added to the Education Code, to read: 210.7. "Gender" means sex, and includes a person's gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth.

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is the MOST disturbing story that I have EVER posted since I began my blog two years ago. If this does not make people say "I am sick and tired of being sick and tired" than I don't know what will.
I don't think I can write anymore. This whole militiant homosexual agenda is way out of control. (My index finger and thumb slightly squeezing the bridge of my nose with my head shaking back and forth in utter disgust).
Do we want this to happen in Massachusetts? Has anyone just woken up to the truth of what is REALLY going on? Good morning. Now, lets get busy in trying to protect our children shall we?

50 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lord, have mercy upon us.

Have mercy upon our children.

Christ, have mercy.

6:16 AM, October 20, 2007  
Anonymous omd said...

This is what happens when the churched refuse to be the salt & light they are commanded to be.

The church and our society will pay a huge price for not putting a stop to these types of things.

Isn't it interesting that in Amsterdam the populace has finally had enough of their liberal lifestyle of anything goes. Now the brothels and weed shops are starting to close as the people have had enough. BUT here in Amercia...

As it goes in Massachusetts... it goes in the rest if the country.

We need to fall on our faces, ask for forgiveness and pray for revival

9:47 PM, October 20, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“We need to fall on our faces, ask for forgiveness and pray for revival”

Sorry OMD but that’s really wussed out to say. Get up, stand on your own two feet and make it happen yourself! Don’t expect some supernatural being like Superman to swoop down from the clouds and change the world to how you want it to be! Do it yourself, and with people who agree with you. And what’s with this lord have mercy on us crap? What is it with Christians and Muslims and their inability to accept responsibilities for the world they helped to create? Do you think god has his finger in everything we do?

Ken Weaver

10:08 PM, October 20, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they say.

Forgive me for not standing in the gap for America like I should have been doing.


Ken,

I think this is what omd was referring to:
"If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." 2 Chronicles 7:14

9:28 AM, October 21, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

I have come to the conclusion that you are very disrespectful and only want to utter lazy opinions without any substance.

God bless you and yes, you should fall to your knees and ask for forgiveness because it is not all about changing the law and changing how people think of man made rules and regulations. It is about changing peoples views about Christ and then and ONLY then will people change their views of the world.

In Him,
Scia

8:29 AM, October 22, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not everyone is Christian. This fact seems to escape Christians. Ethnocentrism is unattractive no matter the source.

10:06 AM, October 22, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, the fact that not everyone is a Christian is one that is readily and sadly noted by Christians. And this is not because we want everyone to think like us politically, but because we want all to enjoy the eternal life that can only be gained through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

That being said, Jesus is a gentleman. He will not force himself on anyone to make them believe. As we should not either. BUT, when liberals are forcing their amoral and immoral agendas upon the children of this country, we have a right and a responsibility to speak out.

How many girls and/or boys are going to be hurt in some way by having to share a locker room with the other gender? I foresee lawsuits coming for CA schools in the near future.

12:51 PM, October 22, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCIA said...
Ken,

I have come to the conclusion that you are very disrespectful and only want to utter lazy opinions without any substance.

I wasn’t trying to be disrespectful; I was trying to light a fire in the man’s belly. I think it’s lazy to fall to your knees and ask god for a revival. Make it happen yourself! We are American’s are we not? Don’t we have a saying that goes “god helps those that help themselves?”

“God bless you and yes, you should fall to your knees and ask for forgiveness…”

What do I need to ask forgiveness for Scia? What did I do wrong?

“ …because it is not all about changing the law and changing how people think of man made rules and regulations. It is about changing peoples views about Christ and then and ONLY then will people change their views of the world.”

So you want to create a nation where every one is Christian? And have the government enforce Christian laws? That makes me nervous. Look at history and how no matter the religion, when one religion ruled the public with religious law religion became the criminal and the public became the victim.

Ken Weaver

Oh and Scia, demeaning other religious views because you believe in Christianity is “disrespectful” and you can offer no “substance” to prove your religion is true. So you might want to think about keeping your “lazy opinions” to yourself. I can back up what I say with logic; until you can make virgin births and dead people coming back to life logical, your faith doesn’t stand for much.

9:15 PM, October 22, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Hey, Scia, can we reproduce the virgin birth, the crucifixion, and resurrection in a court of law so that each can be tried and found to be true or untrue?

4:19 AM, October 23, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Ethnocentrism is unattractive no matter the source.

Given the choice between being right in your eyes for accepting whatever belief drifts by with the wind, or being right in God's eyes by choosing to believe that Jesus IS the way, the truth, and the life, I'll have to go with you.

Just kidding...

You can call the view whatever you want, but if you willingly sit outside of Christianity and refuse the offer that God has made to you, to have eternal life through Jesus Christ, then you are the one that bears the responsibility of choosing your own fate.

What is it about Christianity that makes it so hard to believe? Is it just too simple - that there is no effort required on your part to make you right with God, other than to accept that Jesus has paid the price for your sins and that you can be set free from guilt and eternal despair by accepting Christ as your substitute when it comes to God's wrath?

I really want to know why those who reject Christianity (as I did for years...) refuse to believe what Christ has done for them.

If someone had laid it out to me this clearly, and told me that it was available for everyone to accept it, I don't think I could have run from that. The choice must be made...

9:54 AM, October 23, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“What is it about Christianity that makes it so hard to believe?”

The hypocrisy of its members (some of them anyway,) and its tainted history filled with violence, injustice and an arrogant moral superiority.

“I really want to know why those who reject Christianity (as I did for years...) refuse to believe what Christ has done for them.”

Were you raised Christian Tyler or did religion come to your life fairly recently? I used to be the good little church boy. I paid tithing out of my lawn mowing money and my paper route, I read the New Testament like I was told, and prayed every night. I was the soon to be missionary. Little did anyone know at the time how my life would be suddenly changed. I don’t believe now because when I needed acknowledgement from god/Christ there was none. So I came to the conclusion that either faith is a lie or god/Christ doesn’t give a ****. Since everyone says “god loves you” it’s easier to believe that faith; mine, yours and everyone else’s is just a lie.

Ken Weaver

7:14 AM, October 24, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

The hypocrisy of its members (some of them anyway,) and its tainted history filled with violence, injustice and an arrogant moral superiority.

I asked you for evidence of this once, and I believe that your answer was that it was suppressed by the church. Is that fact, or just a theory?

Little did anyone know at the time how my life would be suddenly changed.

What happened?

Yes, Ken, I was raised in the Lutheran church, and I studied the Bible, went to AWANA, prayed, and thought I was a believer in Jesus Christ - and then I went on to live as if He never existed, doubting Him and rejecting Him from the time I was about 16 until I was around 25...and then I started going to church again, started regaining my belief, started regaining my faith, and finally committed my heart to Jesus in January of 2000.

So what tore you off the path? For me, it was all the priests in Massachusetts found molesting young boys and covering it up - not this most recent time, but way back in 1988 or so. I know that there are way too many Christians out there that don't live their life as if Christ has changed them. Even I have been accused, many times, of not being a true Christian because of my positional stance against SSM. What matters isn't who Christians are, because everyone is a sinner, Ken. What matters is who Christ is, and whether or not you believe that He is the messiah - the chosen one - the Lamb of God.

Do you have any faith at all that Jesus' claims are real?

10:03 AM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Closet Monster said...

It is not my faith in God that is rattled, but rather my faith in the goodness of my fellow man.

When did it become so difficult for people to see right from wrong?

Love God. Love your neighbor. Leave the rest to Him, He doesn't need your help.

Jesus would have wept if he saw what has been done in His name.

Christianity calls for peaceful co-existance with those who are different. Are gays the only exclusion?

1:17 PM, October 24, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Closet Monster (CM for short),

Thanks for stopping by.

You said:

"It is not my faith in God that is rattled, but rather my faith in the goodness of my fellow man."

That's the problem, man is sinful, not good.

You said:

"When did it become so difficult for people to see right from wrong?"

Are you quoting scripture here?

You said:

"Love God. Love your neighbor. Leave the rest to Him, He doesn't need your help."

We are to spread His word to all, and those who accept it are saved, and those that don't are to answer to Him. Yes, CM, He does need our help. Again, do you quote scripture when you say He doesn't need our help?

You said:

"Jesus would have wept if he saw what has been done in His name."

What has been done in His name?

You said:

"Christianity calls for peaceful co-existance with those who are different. Are gays the only exclusion?"

Were can you prove that Christians do not co-exist with homosexuals?

Peace,

Scia

3:37 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Closet Monster said...

http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm

4:28 PM, October 24, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Adolf Hitler - Millions
Josef Stalin - Millions
Pol Pot - Tens of Thousands
Mussolini - Tens of Thousands
Mao Tse Tung, etc., etc.

And this is just the 20th century...

Examine your facts, Atheists have done FAR more killing than anyone involved in a war on the side of the Christian faith - whether or not they were truly Christians.

Many claim His name, but few know Him personally.

6:03 PM, October 24, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Truth be known...

6:04 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Closet Monster said...

Nothing justifies Papal sanctioned genocide, yet we know it to have happened. Lots of terrible things have been done in the name of Christ, including the ostracization of gay people.

Let's try not to pretend that most conservative Christians don't hate gays. Instead of simply dismissing what I say, give people something to think about. Why do you believe what you doabout gay people?

8:13 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“I asked you for evidence of this once, and I believe that your answer was that it was suppressed by the church. Is that fact, or just a theory?”

What you had asked me for before was what documents were destroyed by the early Catholic church. A simple history book can show you the injustice and violence performed by Christians. King Charlemagne was one of the 1st Christian kings. After he gained power in France he traveled through his territory gathering all of his subjects. He told them all to profess their belief in the Christian god or prepare to meet that god now, much to the delight of the pope. I’m sure you already know of the inquisition. These are instances where violence and injustice were performed in the name of Christ.

“So what tore you off the path?”

My situation with the church you already know. However the pedophiles in churches had no real effect on my already weakened faith. I’ve known for years that these people (using term loosely) were everywhere. It was a lot of the little stuff that got to me, like people overusing the word “miracle.”

“Do you have any faith at all that Jesus' claims are real?”

Very little.

“We are to spread His word to all, and those who accept it are saved, and those that don't are to answer to Him. Yes, CM, He does need our help. Again, do you quote scripture when you say He doesn't need our help?”

What???? I thought god/Jesus was all powerful?

“Examine your facts, Atheists have done FAR more killing than anyone involved in a war on the side of the Christian faith - whether or not they were truly Christians.”

True but there is a difference; Atheists don’t follow people beyond the grave. If you die at the hands of an Atheist it’s over; you die at the hands of a Christian you’re afraid you will continue to be punished even after you die. And by the way, Adolf Hitler claimed himself to be a Christian, but I got your point nonetheless.

“Christianity calls for peaceful co-existance with those who are different. Are gays the only exclusion?”

Have you seen Tyler, Omd or Scia killing gays? I doubt you would so they are willing to co-exist, but in their world you would be unable to marry a partner of identical gender.

Ken Weaver

10:32 PM, October 24, 2007  
Anonymous Closet Monster said...

"Have you seen Tyler, Omd or Scia killing gays? I doubt you would so they are willing to co-exist, but in their world you would be unable to marry a partner of identical gender. "

Ken Weaver

Sorry Ken, just because you can say that these men hadn't killed gays does not equate to peaceful co-existance. What they want is the subjugation of gays, they way it once was. Good luck with that.

9:30 AM, October 25, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

You know, I never realized that I wanted subjugation of homosexuals until Closet Monster told me it was so.

It's a wonderful world where I can be told who I am and what I am about.

CM, I want marriage to be one man, and one woman, to the exclusion of all others. I want my rights as a citizen to be respected by my legislators. I want my daughter to be able to go to school without being told that she may be a lesbian, or that she may be better off if she associates herself with homosexuals. I want to be able to speak from God's word without being called a bigot.

Good luck with that...

2:35 PM, October 25, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It's a wonderful world where I can be told who I am and what I am about."

This is coming from someone who tells people he doesn't even know that being gay is a choice.

1:50 PM, October 28, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

It isn't?

Are you sure?

7:08 AM, October 29, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

It is?

Are you sure?
/sarcasm

If you can't be sure that it is a choice, you really need to stop persecuting us for it. Maybe nobody can be sure that it is an innate trait, but honestly, until there is definive proof either way, no one can be sure, so we should be left alone to live and love in peace. Personally, I can tell you for absolute sure, that my sexuality is NOT a choice.

11:02 AM, October 29, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Persecuting?

In what way?

Are you sure that your sexuality is not a choice? Not all choices are conscious. I didn't consciously choose to like hamburgers done medium well, you know?

12:00 PM, October 29, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

"I didn't consciously choose to like hamburgers done medium well, you know?"
That's not a choice, conscious or not. You just like what you like. Well, so do I, and I can tell you for certain that I did NOT choose my sexuality. The only thing I did choose was to accept it, and not try to be something I am not.

12:36 PM, October 29, 2007  
Anonymous Closet Monster said...

Tyler, the only reason anyone would think that being gay is a choice is if they had homosexual thoughts of their own.

All the straight people I know tell me that being straight was not a choice for them, they simply were. Why do you think this is different for gays?

Is there something about yourself you want to tell us?

6:09 AM, November 02, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

CM,

You said:

"Tyler, the only reason anyone would think that being gay is a choice is if they had homosexual thoughts of their own."

Well folks, there you have it. If you think being a homosexual is a choice, then you yourself are a homosexual because you THINK about homosexuality....Don't worry, I am confused too!!

CM: You win the prize in the "Blanket Statement of the Year" catagory. CONGRATS!!!

You said:

"All the straight people I know tell me that being straight was not a choice for them, they simply were."

So, you are saying that being heterosexual or homosexual is genetic? Can you back this up with any irrefutable and conclusive evidence or are you just surmising again and trying to pass your opinion off as fact?

6:29 AM, November 02, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

Scia, can you think back and remember the moment you chose to be heterosexual? My guess is, probably not. Why do you think it would be any different for someone who is homosexual? The word 'choice' indicates a conscious decision. I would venture to say that most people do not make a conscious effort to be one sexuality or the other, it just happens.
"So, you are saying that being heterosexual or homosexual is genetic?"
Everything is genetic. Just because there is no specific 'gene' found for a particular trait, does not mean that there is no biological basis for it. Technically, there is no 'gene' for skin color, but we know by using common sense that one does not 'choose' to be black, white or tan. There is, however, a genetic predisposition for the production of melanin, which determines our skin color. Why would you think there isn't a genetic predisposition for who you are attracted to/fall in love with?

10:22 AM, November 02, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

Did you actually read what you just typed?????

You said:

"Scia, can you think back and remember the moment you chose to be heterosexual?"

Again, as a result of not providing "irrefutable and conclusive evidence" to prove your point, I have to come to the conclusion that you DO think homosexuality IS a choice.

You followed up with:

"Everything is genetic. Just because there is no specific 'gene' found for a particular trait, does not mean that there is no biological basis for it."

Oh...then I should tell all scientists to pack it in, because Katie's "blanket opinion" covers all the bases. Again...."irrefutable and conclusive evidence" NOT opinion.

And you actually read your last statement????:

"Technically, there is no 'gene' for skin color, but we know by using common sense that one does not 'choose' to be black, white or tan. There is, however, a genetic predisposition for the production of melanin, which determines our skin color."

Just READ one...more...time, and then...again...do you see your vicious cycle/contradiction of your own words and then the week juxtaposition with sexual orientation????...wow!!!!

Here Katie, I will give you a chance to redeem yourself:

The relevant skin gene is called SLC24A5.

Now, do you know of a "gay" gene and what is it called?

8:14 PM, November 02, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Again, as a result of not providing "irrefutable and conclusive evidence" to prove your point, I have to come to the conclusion that you DO think homosexuality IS a choice.”

You shouldn’t be asking for evidence on common sense Scia. You should be concentrating on her question to refute her claims. Have there ever been any studies to prove that you yourself are heterosexual? No; of course not, because her question remains one of feeling. Of how you in particular feel. When did you make a conscious decision on your sexuality? Geneticists are still studying the human genome because it has not all been figured out. However if you want to get technical I’ll go right along with you. Has there been any irrefutable and conclusive evidence to prove a person could be born of a virgin? You still believe though right? Are her beliefs any less valid? Just as she can offer no proof that sexuality is inborn, you can offer no proof that Jesus was born of a virgin.

“Just READ one...more...time, and then...again...do you see your vicious cycle/contradiction of your own words and then the week juxtaposition with…” religion????...wow!!!!

This forum is yours Scia to do as you wish. If you only want irrefutable and conclusive evidence that’s up to you.. But I think you’ll miss out on the human element. So Scia if you wish to continue to ask for only evidence as part of your site, that’s ok. But people will get bored. And then this forum will die. But humanity is unpredictable which is interesting, so bring some humanity Scia, and when did you choose to be heterosexual?

Ken Weaver

11:17 PM, November 02, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

I would venture to say that most people do not make a conscious effort to be one sexuality or the other, it just happens.

So it's subconscious, then, and not genetic?

Katie, I respect you and you know that - I think. And I still need to find our second copy of the video I told you I would send to you, I've just been a little busy with a mayoral race in Brockton, among other things.

But I digress...

Closet Monster, is there something you want to tell US? As in, are you someone that we know who has been proven to have a very specific agenda, which is to prove that everyone that stands up for marriage as a man and a woman MUST be gay (homosexual) because otherwise, it wouldn't matter to them?

Just come out and tell us who you are, and we promise to play fair.

Everything you want to know about me you have apparently already read and interpreted in the way you choose to see it.

Yes, I believe that sexuality is a choice. Yes, I believe that most teens are confused. Yes, I believe that this is why GLSEN and GSA want "safe spaces" so they can convince the children in our high schools and junior high schools that they are "gay", which makes their own choice make sense to them. Yes, I believe that there is an agenda in America and it...is...evil!

8:12 AM, November 05, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

Scia said:
"The relevant skin gene is called SLC24A5."

And this is what I have read about this particular gene:
"SLC24A5 (solute carrier family 24, member 5) is a gene that is thought to be one of many genes that control skin pigmentation in humans"
Well, 'one of many genes' isn't really 'conclusive and irrefutable' evidence, now is it?
Ken has a good point when he said that you cannot provide 'conclusive and irrefutable' evidence of the virgin birth, why should I have to provide the same to prove to you that being gay is not a choice?
And I would still love an answer to my question, that is: When, exactly, did you 'choose' to become a heterosexual?
"Now, do you know of a "gay" gene and what is it called?"
No, I don't. But, then again, neither do those who actually work in the field of genetics. However, most scientists will agree that there is still so much to be learned about the human genome, and most will also agree that even though at present there is no 'gay gene' that they know of, that does not prove that there is no biological basis for sexual orientation. Just because there is no evidence that being gay is genetic, does not mean it is a choice. Common sense tells me that since I did not wake up one day and think, "Hey I think I'll be a lesbian now", that it is NOT, in fact, a choice.

Tyler, I do, in fact, know that I have your respect. I hope you know that the feeling is mutual.
However, I still don't think that my sexuality was a choice I made, and I'm not sure I'll ever change my mind about that. :) You're welcome to try, though.

11:06 AM, November 05, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

You said:

"Well, 'one of many genes' isn't really 'conclusive and irrefutable' evidence, now is it?"

Ah...yes it is Katie. One of MANY pretty much replicates conclusive and irrefutable time and time again.

You said:

"Ken has a good point when he said that you cannot provide 'conclusive and irrefutable' evidence of the virgin birth..."

Faith is not scientifically proven. Christ and his mirracles are. Look them up and ask Ken about all the cited sources of Christ's mirracles in the book he is reading titled "A Case for Christ" by Lee Strobell (sp?).

You ask:

"When, exactly, did you 'choose' to become a heterosexual?"

I did not have to make that decision, God already made it for me. You, on the other hand, went against his decision and condemned his wishes by making a choice to become a homosexual.

You said:

"Just because there is no evidence that being gay is genetic, does not mean it is a choice."

Exactly. More evidence needs to be found to make either case conclusive. On the other hand, the genetic basis for homosexuality has NEVER been replicated in ANY study on this planet. The choice factor has.

8:18 PM, November 05, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Look them up and ask Ken about all the cited sources of Christ's mirracles in the book he is reading titled "A Case for Christ" by Lee Strobell (sp?).”

The Case for Faith does not prove the miracles supposedly done by Christ as written in the bible are true.

“You, on the other hand, went against his decision and condemned his wishes by making a choice to become a homosexual.”

So.. Let me get this strait. People don’t choose their sexuality unless it goes against the norm.. Hmmmm. That’s like saying “people are Christian until they CHOOSE to be otherwise.” Interesting, but wildly inaccurate.

“On the other hand, the genetic basis for homosexuality has NEVER been replicated in ANY study on this planet.”

Has anyone been able to replicate a virgin birth? Yet you believe it. Why is it so difficult to take a gay person’s word for it?

Ken Weaver

6:29 AM, November 06, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

Scia said:
"I did not have to make that decision, God already made it for me. You, on the other hand, went against his decision and condemned his wishes by making a choice to become a homosexual."

You have GOT to be kidding me. I did not "go against" any "decision". I simply am what I am. I am a woman, who is attracted to and who loves another woman. I have always been attracted to women. As long as I can remember. Before I was ever exposed to anything 'gay'. My first crush was on a girl, and I was 6, for Christ's sake. You can call me a deviant, you can say that I "went against God's will" all you want, it doesn't change the fact that I never 'chose' to be queer, I just am. And, further, if I didn't 'choose' to be gay (and I did NOT), then your 'God' must have made me this way. If your heterosexuality is innate, then my homosexuality is also innate. You can't say one is 'chosen' simply because it is outside of what you consider to be 'normal'.

12:49 PM, November 06, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Katie, with all due respect, 6 is a little early to be deciding your sexuality, isn't it?

I mean, from a psychological perspective, most 3-5 year old boys are in love with their mothers.

Does that mean that they will grow up wanting to marry them when they are older?

A lot of little girls love their fathers intensely when they are young, too. Again, it doesn't prove anything.

If your experiences at 6 were a tell-tale sign of your sexuality, I think that would prove that most people are going to be homosexuals - because we all go through a phase where we have an affinity to our own sex.

It's a natural phase of development, and not a sign of a person's sexuality at maturity.

2:33 PM, November 06, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry Katiekat but I’ve got to side with Tyler on this part. I think 6 might be a little too young. I didn’t know I was heterosexual until I was around 8 or 9 when I found my older brother’s girly magazine collection. Before that point I don’t think I thought about sex.


Ken Weaver

3:34 PM, November 06, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

I'm not saying that I knew I was gay when I was that young. That's silly. I was just making the point that long before I had any ideas about the differences between gay and straight, I had crushes on girls, and they continued for the rest of my life. The only thing I ever 'chose' to do, was to suppress my natural instincts and try to be 'straight'. Needless to say, it didn't work, and only made me depressed and angry. Since I stopped doing that, I've been a much happier, healthier person, who is perfectly content with her life.

6:18 AM, November 07, 2007  
Blogger Action said...

Katiekat,

Are you really "happy?" Those who engage in unnatural lezbian relationships have significantly lower life expectancy rates, higher rates of alcoholism and drug abuse and mental and psychological problems. Come on, seriouly, you are not really "happy" are you? Deep down? i used to do drugs which always made me "happier." when I wasn't doing them I was "depressed." Didn't make it "right" or "normal" or "healthy" to do the drugs though. The only way I was liberated from that bondage was through Christ. He is the ONLY way. Ask Him to come into your life and show you true "happiness."
God bless.

9:48 PM, November 10, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe Katiekat would be happier if she didn’t have people judging her lifestyle and deeming it immoral. Could it be that the unhappiness that lesbian couples feel comes from that?

Ken Weaver

10:26 AM, November 11, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

Thanks, Ken. Well said.
Scia, to answer your question, Yes, I am TRULY happy. Happy with my life, happy with my fiance, and happy that we will be one family under one roof very soon. When I go to sleep at night, I think about what I could have possibly done to deserve all this happiness! What I could have done to deserve such a wonderful, supportive, loving person in my life. It must've been something really great, because I have never been happier, and it's only going to get better from here!
Everytime I lay eyes on my soon-to-be-wife, my heart swells and I almost tear up a little because I am so unbelievably content with my life. Happier than I ever was with any of the wonderful men I dated (and there were several VERY wonderful ones, they were just not for me). Sometimes I actually think I could just burst with the happiness. Do you need me to make it any clearer for you? As hard as it may be for you to believe, I am actually a happy lesbian. My life is SO good... :D

1:24 PM, November 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Katie,

How in the world can a lesbian be truly happy? I think it would be truly best if you broke up with your fiancée. Why follow your heart when you could follow an outdated and inaccurate interpretation of the Bible?

After you end this wonderful, loving relationship, you should then seek out man to have a real relationship with. It probably won't feel right to you and you certainly won't find him attractive or fall in love with him. And you'll always be thinking of your ex-fiancee. But anytime you have those doubts, just push those feelings away and deal with it. Eventually, you should get married to that man, even though the relationship will be unfulfilling for both of you. Don't you think that will be pure bliss?

Actually, Katie, it sounds like you and your fiancée have a wonderful relationship. Even though I don't know you, I wish you both much happiness now and in the years to come.

-Gary

6:49 PM, November 13, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

Thank you, Gary. I've really appreciated your comments and input. Love the sarcasm, by the way. ;) We do, in fact, have a wonderful relationship. We very rarely quarrel, and are very, very happy. And, *gasp!*, so is our daughter. Thank you for the well wishes. :)

6:45 AM, November 14, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Gary,

You said:

"Why follow your heart when you could follow an outdated and inaccurate interpretation of the Bible?"

Since you seem to know what your talking about in regards to translating God's word, can you explain to me what interpretation of the Bible is outdated and inaccurate?

Why do you assume that Katie will not fall in love with a man, as she has had some 'very wonderful ones' in her life? What makes you think Christ will not heal her sinning heart and guide Katie to a more healthy relationship with a man, one in Christ?

11:50 AM, November 14, 2007  
Anonymous KatieKat said...

"What makes you think Christ will not heal her sinning heart and guide Katie to a more healthy relationship with a man, one in Christ?"
I can't speak for Gary. However, I can tell you what makes me think I will not be guided to a "more healthy relationship with a man" - The fact that I am IN a healthy relationship, very much in love, and very, very happy. I shouldn't need anything else.

1:47 PM, November 14, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scia,

I would say that it's a pretty logical conclusion that Katie will not fall in love with a man. All you have to do is just read the comments on this one post. She makes it pretty clear that she dated some "wonderful" men when she tried to "suppress" her natural instincts. And this made her "depressed and angry." And when she describes her soon-to-be-wife, you can almost feel her depth of love for this woman.

It sounds like you're trying to fix something that's not broken. Her relationship with this woman sounds very healthy. Her previous relationships with men only resulted in negative feeling s for her. So, based on that evidence, it is totally illogical to think that a relationship with another man would be "healthy" for her. Also, it is only your interpretation that she has a "sinning heart." Not everyone (or even every Christian) believes the way that you do.

I'll be honest here--I'm not sure how you could not realize this from reading her posts. It almost sounds like you're unwilling to believe that she or anyone in a gay relationship could be happy. I hate to burst your bubble, but that is the case.

Also, I'm a bit confused here. You asked me what "interpretation of the Bible is outdated and inaccurate." I already have directed you to the soulforce website and given specific examples as well. I posted some of this in the " Americans Still Reject Same-Sex Marriage" post, but you never responded.

By the way, I could ask you the same thing about your own happiness and I'll just have to accept your answer. Are you truly happy having this blog and spending so much of your time and energy on this quest to condemn gays and lesbians. Does this really fulfill you? Of all the charitable good things that one could do in society (and/or as part of your church) is this the one that makes you feel the best and contributes the most positively toward others?

I can predict the answer to be something like, "Oh, well this is God's work and I want everyone to embrace Jesus Christ, etc." If that's true, do you think that Jesus (unconditional love) would truly look at this endeavor as one that is in alignment with ALL of His teachings? Again, I'm not someone who has studied the Bible extensively, but there seems to be an inconsistency with Jesus' teaching of unconditional love and your condemning of gays and lesbians.

-Gary

7:03 PM, November 14, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Gary,

How am I "condeming gays and lesbians"? I am simply pointing out the dangers of this lifestyle.

2:56 PM, November 20, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Gary,

You said:

"Also, I'm a bit confused here. You asked me what "interpretation of the Bible is outdated and inaccurate." I already have directed you to the soulforce website and given specific examples as well. I posted some of this in the " Americans Still Reject Same-Sex Marriage" post, but you never responded."

You need to read through the thread before making such a knee-jerk statement. My answer to your website was as follows (a copy of which is on the post " Americans Still Reject Same-Sex Marriage":

_________________________
"It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man."
Psalm 118:8

This especially goes true for "Rev." Mel White of Soulforce.org

Mr. White starts off his comments of biblical ignorance regarding the topic of homosexuality by saying on his website:

"Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior".

If Mr. White was a man of God, as he claims he is, then he would understand that Jesus, the son of God, and God Himself are of the same being. Jesus/God share the same spiritual being with the only difference between them being that Jesus presented this spiritual being in the flesh to mankind. So, another words, Jesus is God and God is Jesus, such that Jesus did say plenty about the sinful lifestyles of homosexuality and abhorred them.

As a result of not understanding this basic concept, Mr. White has therefore disenvowed whatever interpretations he has of scripture because the basic understanding of the being of Jesus and God is elementary to all men of God. Mr. White's interpretations are man-made and not interpretated the way God intended.

Also read 1 Timothy: 3-8

As for the Bible saying homosexuals should be put to death:

This is part of the Old Testament that is outside of the covenant of King Messiah (Yeshua ha Mashiach, Jesus the Messiah). The Old Testament is from the descendents of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who were under a covenant with God that is no longer in effect. As a result of the resurrection of Christ, the new covenant, the New Testament, is binding to all of those who believe that He is now reigning as KING Messiah – and that He LITERALLY has taken His seat at the Right Hand of God.

Excellent questions to bring up. I value your interest in the truth.

In Him,
Scia

_________________

3:00 PM, November 20, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scia,
I did read your response and it was incomplete and didn't address many of my points.

From what I'm reading you're basically dismissing all of Mel White's comments just because you intepret that he doesn't perceive Jesus and God as the same. I feel that that is a little too easy and convenient for you. You don't have to agree with everything that someone says to see the validity of at least some of their points. And how do you know that Mel White doesn't believe this without directly asking him. There's nothing in there that directly says this. You are assuming something without having the proof that you always seem to ask for.

Again if you want to respond to the individual points that I brought up before, feel free. For example (again), that documentary brings up the fact that the Bible calls eating shrimp AND homosexuality to be a sin (very near each other in the Bible). How would you rationally explain just this one point?

And I would wholeheartedly agree with this as well:
"It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man."
Psalm 118:8

The way this applies to me is this: I would trust God much more than I would trust your interpretation of God (the interpretation of a man).

And I read Timothy 3:8. Not much to argue there. It just seems to talk about a minister/person of God being a noble person, etc, etc. Regardless of how you feel about Mel White, if you're interested in the "truth" it would be worth objectively looking at what he and others have to say. Besides (and I don't want a big discussio about this) one can spend a long time pointing out the many terrible things that supposed men of God have done to unsuspecting and trusting people. I would hardly put Mel White in that category, just because of a POSSIBLE difference of interpretation that you disagree with (again, unless you ask him or find a direct quote, you can't assume one way or the other).

I obviously personally find it a million times more reasonable to assume that these interpretations that are NOT condemning to God's children (and he's not the only one who believes this way) make much more sense than a belief that paints God as a vengeful being. I feel that ministers who "use the Bible as a stick" are not truly getting what God is all about.

So, even if you don't like Mel White himself, you could actually respond to the info on the soulforce website as opposed to just finding a far too convenient reason to dismiss it all.

-Gary

7:23 AM, November 29, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Sign my Guestbook from Bravenet.com Get your Free Guestbook from Bravenet.com