Thursday, April 17, 2008

Don't Silence the Truth

The Day of Truth was established by the Alliance Defense Fund, ADF, to counter the promotion of homosexuality from a Christian perspective, which will be done across the country next Tuesday, April 28th, 2008. The Day of Truth is three days after the Day of Silence, a day in which students remain silent in order to bring attention to the homosexual agenda, which I don't understand how that could happen if people remain silent.

Click HERE for a list of schools in Massachusetts that may participate in the Day of Silence. If your son or daughter goes to any one of the schools listed, Click HERE for a sample letter that you could send to their school administrator telling them you as a concerned parent would like to pull them from school on April 25 in protest of this classroom disrupting day.
The Day of Silence is nothing but a day to disrupt the regular flow of learning in the school house. To silence oneself is to say that the individual in question can not articulate him or herself and only wants to do away with tolerating anything other than what they believe in. If the Day of Silence involved students talking about homosexuality and coming up with any benefits of participating in this dangerous lifestyle then the event would be more worthwhile to hold.
The Day of Truth, on the other hand, advocates civil discourse on the subject of homosexuality in the hopes of helping those who are struggling with this lifestyle. So, don't silence the truth about the dangers of homosexuality, spread it to those who are struggling with the behavior!!!
For more information on how to participate in the Day of Truth please visit the website by going to DayOfTruth.org

51 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

To each their own I guess. I went through their hostile questions part and what they said about truth makes it seem as if they don’t have a clue, but they will be talking to other teenagers that won’t have much of a clue either. “Thou shalt not kill” is truth? I thought this was a rule or law not truth or lie. Truth: The Earth is older than 6000 years old. Lie: Humans and dinosaurs interacted with each other. The teller of the lie may not know that they are telling a lie, but it is still an untruth that they spread around hoping to get someone else to believe it.

Ken Weaver

7:57 AM, April 17, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

To each their own Ken, to each their own.

9:38 AM, April 17, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

The difference between the two events is abundantly clear:
The "Day of Truth" is specifically to try and indoctrinate (ooh, look I'm using one of your words) students into the Christian lifestyle. I have an issue with that. Since I'm not Christian, I really would not want my daughter being preached to at school.
On the other hand, the Day of Silence was started simply to bring attention to those who have been beaten, tortured and killed just for being homosexual. It's a protest, of sorts, against the majority belief that violence against gays is not a big problem when it clearly is. There is a huge difference between being silent for a day to mourn and support those who have been brutalized for being gay, and preaching about Christianity to anyone who will listen.
Really.

11:52 AM, April 17, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

You said:

"...the Day of Silence was started simply to bring attention to those who have been beaten, tortured and killed just for being homosexual."

Oh, so those who have been "beaten, tortured and killed just for being" Christians does not count? If you get my newsletter, please go to the new website section and click on the "Silencing Christians" link.

How can those who participate in the Day of Silence engage in civil discourse over their cause if they can't even speak? Yah, let's shut down our First Amendment rights for a day. Great idea!!

1:25 PM, April 17, 2008  
Anonymous Rufus said...

SCIA, the day of silence is a form of protest. Not speaking can sometimes send a better message than arguing and shouting. There are plenty of other days for discourse.

If you think christians are so bullied and tortured in this country set up your own day to protest. Don't be such a cry baby.

1:38 PM, April 17, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Rufus,

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!

1:42 PM, April 17, 2008  
Anonymous Rufus said...

Scia, I'm not going to play semantic games with you again. If Katie and/or Ken also does not understand what I am trying to get at, I'll elaborate.

1:50 PM, April 17, 2008  
Anonymous omd said...

This has gotten out of hand. Day of Silence is a political protest about alleged discrimination against homosexuals.

GLSEN's description:
On Friday, April 25, members of the Gay/Straight Alliance will join GSA¹s at more than 3,000 other high schools in the national GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network) Day of Silence (http://www.dayofsilence.org). This is our sixth year of participation.

Participants will be wearing rainbow ribbons. Staff who would like to participate - or just show support - are invited to pick up ribbons in Room 14.

Participants will be carrying "speaking cards" with this message:

CARD FRONT: Please understand my reasons for not speaking today. I am participating in the Day of Silence, a national youth calling attention to the silence faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their allies. My deliberate silence echoes that silence, which is caused by harassment, prejudice, and discrimination. I believe that ending the silence is the first step toward fighting these injustices. Think about the voices you are not hearing today. What are you going to do to end the silence?

CARD BACK: Take responsibility for what you say. Using words like faggot, dyke, queer and "that's so gay" is hurtful, cruel and creates an unsafe environment for everyone. Take responsibility for what you hear. Don¹t be afraid to stand up to hate and ignorance in your community. If you don¹t, who will? Take responsibility for what you think. Accurate information will only serve to make life more interesting and enriched.

School¹s name _____ Gay/Straight Alliance meets Thursdays at lunch in Room [14]. All students, gay, bi and straight, are invited.

Your support of Day of Silence is, of course, voluntary. Participants have agreed that, if they are called upon to speak in class, after presenting the "speaking card", they will respond if the teacher chooses not to allow them to remain silent."

Very passive aggressive & innocuous wording but... should a student hold a different or opposing viewpoint, the implication is the student is thinking improperly, hateful, ignorant, unaccepting, irresponsible, intolerant and has a life that is not more enriched or interesting etc.

Staff participation is an abuse of authority, imho, as they hold an influential & power role in students lives. Staff participation is a form of indoctrination as many students hold their teachers views almost sacred as they are the "teacher."

This is why these social engineering & political protest programs should not be engaged in during the school day. HOWEVER, if presented, should be done in a balanced approach allowing for discussion from both sides before and/or after school. During academic hours holds all as unwitting hostages.

A discussion of the inherent and G-d given rights of ALL to dignity and respectful treatment is a far more prudent and balanced approach of discourse, would you agree?

A one-sided presentation cannot be truly considered an accurate argument.

Now as it happens, many schools is MA are on school vacation on the 25th of April. Our town's school district held DoS on April 16th. While talks were underway with the superintendent about parental notification and presenting a balanced forum the school held the event and no one was notified, not even those of us in discussions with the administration. Shades of David Parker.

10:14 PM, April 17, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

OMD,

Right on!!

I love what is says on those cards the students will be handing out:

"...I believe that ending the silence is the first step toward fighting these injustices."

Why don't we do this with a discussion on the matter then?????

Just another reason why the Day of Silence is backwards and nothing but emotional bantering at its best.

6:27 AM, April 18, 2008  
Anonymous omd said...

UPDATE:

Parents in our town have been asking the school department why they were not notified. This has taken the administration by surprise.

Why is it that the public school personnel think the students become wards of the state when they walk through the doors? Do they really believe that parents are relinquishing their authority for their kid to the schools?

No word on whether they will balance it off with the "Day of Truth"

8:27 PM, April 18, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The "Day of Truth" has nothing to do with truth. It's backwards thinking christians pushing their anti-gay opinions because they can't mind their business,

Take your head out of your bible and think with the brain God gave you. You are giving christianity a bad name.

10:57 PM, April 18, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Anonymous, you are right on target. People like Scia are dishonest and give true Christians a bad name. They aren't really afraid of people silencing the truth because they have already abandoned it.

Scia says "Rufus,

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!

1:42 PM, April 17, 2008

Then Scia posts this (it was erased along with mine):

"John,

Smarten up. You only spread unrealistic and intellectually lazy, mute points.

Stay off of my blog you fool."

Scia, what could be any more intellectually lazy than "Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!"

I'll honor your request to stay off your blog since I could not possibly do a better job of discrediting you than you do yourself. That and the fact that clearly no one is reading it as measured by your own site meter.

It is obvious you can't handle the heat of debate, and you have no ability to defend points, and I see your need to erase my posts as the evidence thereof.

7:20 AM, April 19, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

oh, and for the record, it's moot not mute. I'm sure with your 4 degrees and two masters you knew that already. ;)

7:23 AM, April 19, 2008  
Anonymous omd said...

Are you homosexual John or a sympathizer.

As has been stated, it's not orientation that is the debate. It's acting on that orientation that is the issue. The sexual acts of homosexuals are dangerous. Sodomy is dangerous. fellatio male on male and female on female is not a natural act.

Now, whether you believe in God is moot. If you believe in nothing then you wil die with nothing. God does exist and He wants you to come to Him for redemption & healing

I say you can live your life anyway you want but... if you want to live a lifestyle outside the mainstream and natural boundries at least do it with some degree of discretion and not throw it in others faces and make demands for acceptance of an antisocial & repugnent behavior.

By the way, as you appear to have the answer based on your statement "People like Scia are dishonest and give true Christians a bad name." just what denotes a true Christian?

11:38 AM, April 19, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“The sexual acts of homosexuals are dangerous. Sodomy is dangerous.”

Are those acts any more dangerous than smoking a pack of cigarettes a day?

“fellatio male on male and female on female is not a natural act.”

If animals sometimes do it that same way without human intervention, how can nature do things unnaturally?

“…at least do it with some degree of discretion and not throw it in others faces and make demands for acceptance of an antisocial & repugnent behavior.”

Did you ever stop to think how a gay person might see heterosexuality as repugnant? I thought beauty was in the eye of the beholder? Maybe if the religious zealots in this country had minded their own business gays would not have needed to be so public. It was the zealots that started this fight; I just doubt they’re strong enough to finish it.

“…just what denotes a true Christian?”

You know I’ve asked that question of Christians many times, the only problem is once they give their definition and someone like myself calls them on that definition, they change it.

Ken Weaver

10:01 PM, April 19, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Scia asked by email for me to post an interpretation of 1 Corinthian 6:9 here, so here it is with a few extra points clarified:

First of all, it's useless to argue with anyone who is a biblical literalist, as he/she won't want to hear any other explanation that doesn't meet their preconceived prejudices. This is more an exercise in academics here.

no one can really be sure what the Apostle Paul was referring to when he wrote "arsenokoitai," as its literal translation means "male beds." (The Greek term, "malakoi," which means "soft," is unjustifiably translated in some Bible versions as "effeminate." However, it's doubtful that Paul would mean that word, as it is a pejorative word in the context of 1Corinthians 6, and contradicts Paul's assertion in Galatians 3:28; it more than likely refers to people of soft morals or people who
lack courage.) The New Oxford Annotated Bible, that uses the NRSV translation, reads the relevant part of 1Corinthians 6:9 as follows: "...Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites...none of these will inherit the kingdom of God." The note in that Bible regarding that verse is as follows: "The Greek terms translated 'male prostitutes" and 'sodomites' do not refer to 'homosexuals,' as in inappropriate older translations; 'masturbators' and 'male prostitutes' might be a better translation." Corinth was a desperately wicked city, with cult prostitution abounding, and Paul may well have been referring to such cult prostitution (as he undoubtedly also did in Romans 1, which he probably wrote from Corinth) in homage to assorted pagan deities. There is no reason to assume that he was talking about "homosexuals" as we currently understand the term; the word "homosexual" wasn't coined until the late 19th Century, and doesn't appear in any biblical manuscript, and
the first time it appeared in an English translation of the Bible was in the 1946 Revised Standard Version of the New Testament.

Scia, I'll look forward to your reply as always.

10:56 AM, April 21, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

Paul identifies three kinds of sexually immoral persons: adulterers, male prostitutes and males who practice homosexuality (sodomites). In Romans 1:26 Paul adds the category of females who practice homosexuality. People who engage in such practices, as well as the other offenders listed are explicitly excluded from God's kingdom.

You can try and justify your lifestyle by depending on deceiving translations of this verse all you want, but you can not hide from the truth that Christ does not accept your sin and will not grant you access to his kingdom based on your sinful lifestyle.

Good luck and God bless.

7:06 PM, April 21, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You said:

"Are those acts (homosexuality) any more dangerous than smoking a pack of cigarettes a day?"

Come on Ken. Homosexuals die much earlier than heterosexuals and have significantly higher rates of rectal cancer, liver cancer, HIV, and other infectious diseases than heterosexuals.

Are these consequences more or less dangerous than smoking a pack of cigs a day????

7:12 PM, April 21, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Are these consequences more or less dangerous than smoking a pack of cigs a day????”

Smokers have significantly higher rates of heart disease and failure, mouth, throat and lung cancer, obesity, emphysema and many other lung diseases. Also smoking doesn’t just affect the smoker; it can affect non-smokers who happen to be in proximity to smokers. I heard in New Jersey that a person might have to pay a fine if they’re caught smoking in a vehicle with a minor. Can anyone get “rectal cancer, liver cancer, HIV, and other infectious diseases” by being around a homosexual? I didn’t think male to male sodomy was contagious, although I’ve never been in that situation, I might just get so excited I wouldn’t know what to do.

So Scia, I definitely think smoking is much more dangerous to the smokers themselves and to people who just might be close to them than homosexuality.

Ken Weaver

8:29 PM, April 21, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Scia, I do not hope to reconcile myself with my neighbors. I hope only to show them that my sins are no greater than their own and to live in peace as Christ commands with them. My judgment will be from Him.

There is much in the Bible; you can find many items that go against each other. The principles Christ gave us should stand out above Leviticus, and those are of unconditional love.

12:46 PM, April 23, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

You said:

"I hope only to show them that my sins are no greater than their own..."

If your sin is no greater than others, including my own, and you KNOW that God hates your sin and my sin, then why do you continue to live out your sinful lifestyle?

Have you asked God for his forgiveness because of your homosexual lifestyle?

I have asked God to forgive me for the sins I commit on a daily basis, BUT that does not mean I automatically have a license to live in those sins after I am forgiven for them, because God has forgiven me from eternal death that would of come about to me if I continued to live in the sin in question.


You said:

"...you can find many items (in the Bible) that go against each other."

Please site examples.

You concluded with:

"The principles Christ gave us should stand out above Leviticus, and those are of unconditional love."

So, when Leviticus said a man shall not sleep with another man, the unconditional love that Christ shows will make him turn his cheak from your sinful lifestyle John????

10:24 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

I notice that every time I mention that in Leviticus it is a sin to touch the skin of a pig you just skirt around that point like it's never been said. Their are over 600laws in Leviticus, and some of them are no longer followed. To point to one and not the other is cherry picking.

As far as the Catholic religion is concerned homosexuality is a sin. That is not so in other denominations like Unitarian Universalists, which believe God made us who we are and we should embrace our uniqueness. I believe this true as well.

To be honest Scia sometimes I wonder why I try to get through to people like you. You have nothing I want. It's not like I am looking for your approval or something, I don't even know you.

Purhaps it is the simple fact that you are my brother and I want you to be as happy as I am. That starts with changing your focus from what's wrong with the world to the love Christ brought us.

Together we can learn how to live as respectful and co-operative neighbors, even in an ever changing world in which you find those changes unwelcome.

The other side of the coin is that you can continue to scorn everything I do and I will continue to enjoy my life unhindered by your opinions.

We all choose our own paths and answer to God in the end, not each other.

10:41 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

You said:

"Their are over 600laws in Leviticus, and some of them are no longer followed."

I have already explained to you why these laws are no longer followed. Once Jesus was resurected from the dead His rules and regulations under the New Covonent were law and not those under the Old Covonent, such as Leviticus is under. Make sense?

Does God love your sin with his unconditional love in the Unitarian Church John and please cite scripture in which would back up your belief structure.

You said:

"Purhaps it is the simple fact that you are my brother and I want you to be as happy as I am. That starts with changing your focus from what's wrong with the world to the love Christ brought us."

I am happy for who you are John, but I, and Christ, are not happy with your sin and my sin.

You concluded with:

"We all choose our own paths and answer to God in the end, not each other."

We sure do John, we sure do. Good luck.

10:53 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

For scripture let's start with 1 John 4:20 and go from there.

I find it encouraging that you say Christ is not happy with your sin too. Now all you need is to get over the idea that mine is worse and that you have the need and right to point a finger.

Christ indeed did wipe away the old laws and gave us ones founded on love to follow. I'm glad we can stop citing Leviticus now. ;)

11:10 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

You said with some confusion:

"I find it encouraging that you say Christ is not happy with your sin too. Now all you need is to get over the idea that mine is worse and that you have the need and right to point a finger."

If I said that Christ is not happy with my sin as well, how am I suggesting that your sin is worse than mine? I have stated in my comments that BOTH of our sin is bad. Not one is worse than the other John.

1 John 4:20 -

"If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen."

I said to back up this piece of scripture:

"I am happy for who you are John, but I, and Christ, are not happy with your sin and my sin."

Please answer a previous question that I proposed to you:

"Does God love your sin with his unconditional love in the Unitarian Church John and please cite scripture in which would back up your belief structure."

And if you are forgiven by God, do you have a license to continue to engage in your sinful lifestyle there after?

1:13 PM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Scia, you asked:

"how am I suggesting that your sin is worse than mine?"

Read your entire blog and see what the focus is. It's all about how evil you think GLBT people are. This is kind of a silly question.

You asked for scripture that cites unconditional love and I gave you something from one of the Apostles. Does this mean that we can look only at what Christ said in the Gospel? If so you are going to be hard pressed to find Him speaking ill against GLBT people. Since the sin of homosexuality is not addressed by Christ your first question is moot, but I'll give an answer on the assumption of sin.

Matthew 10:32

32"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven."

I acknowledge Christ, therefore I am welcome in heaven as is anyone else who sins yet loves God. We are all sinners and cannot enter heaven without the grace of His forgiveness, not each other's. We receive that grace through belief in Christ:

John 20:31

"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."

The second part of your question asks if we are worthy when we continue to sin. None of us are worthy, that's why we are saved through grace. I see no evidence that Jesus considers homosexuality a sin, could you cite me where it says so in the scriptures Scia? Quid pro quo.

9:54 AM, April 26, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

You cited Matthew 10:32 -

""Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven."

You actually think that just because you acknowledge Christ you are going to go to heaven? It takes more than acknowledgment John. It takes repentance and your willingness to drop ALL worldly beliefs in order to enter the kingdom of God. You really need to understand this if you are going to be at the right hand of God someday. I as well need to live an unworldly lifestyle if I am going to potentially be on the same boat. It is a narrow road that Christ wants us ALL on if we are to be with Him in the kingdom of Heaven.

You said:

"The second part of your question asks if we are worthy when we continue to sin. None of us are worthy, that's why we are saved through grace."

So, once He grants you grace you can go right back and CONTINUE to engage in the same sinful behavior that you were JUST forgiven for? What a postmodernism type of thought process. Truth is NOT relative, it is absolute.

You concluded with:

"I see no evidence that Jesus considers homosexuality a sin,..."

Are you saying that 1 Corinthians 6:9 is NOT the word of God then????

7:24 AM, April 30, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Let me clarify my position; homosexuality is not a sin, but it is perceived as one by the Catholic Church. For the sake of moving a conversation along I have often had to take the assumption of sin in order to get to some more important points about Christianity itself.

Whether you think I am a sinner or not has no impact on my life, you hold no control over me. I don't need to win your approval in order for God to love me.

By the way, citing 1 Corinthians 6:9 over and over after you have had a detailed explanation about it just makes your argument look desperate and you point weak.

He brought us a love so powerful it could heal all of us from all our pains, and He called us to be in His image that others might find Him through our goodness. Why are you so far from this path?

6:09 PM, April 30, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

You said:

"homosexuality is not a sin, but it is perceived as one by the Catholic Church."

As known to be stated in the Bible and therefore to be true John.

Good luck with your sinful lifestyle. I hope you have it in you to repent and ask God for his forgiveness.

I am no longer going to beat a dead horse on this matter with you.

Your life and my life are full of sin. I ask for His forgiveness for my sin on a daily basis. You ask for his forgiveness and continue to engage in the sin because you think you have a license to do so for reasons unbeknown to me or God.

Good luck my brother and may God show you the light someday.

Scia

6:41 AM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

"...for reasons unbeknown to me or God."
Scia, I've seen you do this more than once, and feel the need to call you on it. Why do you feel as though you have the right to speak for G-d? I'm pretty sure that while those reasons you refer to are unbeknown to you, they are certainly known to G-d, since S/He is omnipotent. You, on the other hand, are not, and have NO right to judge anyone on G-d's behalf. Seeing as I am an agnostic pagan, the 'absolute truths' that you spout may not be absolutes for me, or anyone else for that matter. You seem to speak as though you are the ultimate authority on the will and nature of G-d - Where on earth would you get such authority? Are you the second coming? If not, I think you should leave the speaking for G-d, to G-d.

11:15 AM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Is this where you start deleting my comments again because you lack the ability to argue my points away logically?

The Bible has been interpreted into more than 5,000 versions, and there are several well known religions that no longer view being gay as a sin. I cite Bishop Gene Robertson as a great example of both Christian leadership and being a responsible practicing homosexual.

What would be the harm in us walking a mile down the road together and talking more? I care not about your sins, for you are my brother/(sister?). What matters most to me is that I help you to be happy and change the focus of your life from how much God's gift sucks, to how wonderful it is.

It is what Christ intended us to do, help one another. That is never accomplished when one's back is turned.

12:15 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

I said:

"You ask for his forgiveness and continue to engage in the sin because you think you have a license to do so for reasons unbeknown to me or God."

Your right, I should not speak for God and I never will. I have absolutely no authority to do so. I am not speaking for God in the above comments, so I don't understand your logic.

My concern in the above comments is I do not know why John is asking God for forgiveness, if he is, for his sinful homosexual lifestyle and then engaging in the lifestyle after the forgiveness is granted, if it is.

If I were to yell at you, Katie, and then ask for your forgiveness for my foul mouth, I am not going to continue to yell at you 10 seconds later. Right? Am I making any sense here???

Do you have any insight on this Katie?

12:28 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

You said:

"I cite Bishop Gene Robertson as a great example of both Christian leadership and being a responsible practicing homosexual."

This is not possible.

Let's just agree to disagree because we are not going to see eye to eye here.

I am throwing in the towel until you can understand that Christ does NOT accept your homosexual lifestyle, which is documented time and time again in the CHRISTIAN Bible.

12:31 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

I was having some fun at your expense and misspelled Bishop Gene Robinson's name. Usually you delight in corecting people, I'm surprised you missed that.

Let's conclude our talks for the moment, but keep the door open on both sides like God would want us to do, agreed?

Let me leave with this quesion; if Christ was so against homosexuality, where does He actually come out and say it even once? I'll spare you the bother; He does not. That shows you how important He thought it to be. He did tell us to love one another though, didn't He? Did that command come with exceptions?

12:39 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John,

Your understanding of the Bible is very deceiving and was heavily deceived by the Unitarian Church, which is by no means Christian at all.

You concluded with:

"He (God) did tell us to love one another though, didn't He? Did that command come with exceptions?"

Yes, he did, but not sexual love of the same sexes.

1 Corinthians 6:9 has no exceptions. Homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of God. It is that plain and simple.

12:46 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

"1 Corinthians 6:9 has no exceptions. Homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of God."
Except for the fact that in every translation I've read that uses that word, it's not 'homosexuals', it's "homosexual offenders".
Which, as I understand it, refers to those who are 'abusers', or rapists. In other words, it doesn't refer to gay people in committed loving relationships (again with that qualifier, imagine that), it refers to men who force other men to have sex with them. Same goes for the Romans quote that refers to those who 'gave up their natural attractions to women', in other words, they were STRAIGHT men who 'unnaturally' had sex with men. Since all the gay men I've met are NATURALLY attracted to men, they aren't giving up their natural attractions. If they were, they'd sleep with women - Kinda like those 'ex-gays'.

12:53 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger John said...

I honestly don't understand why Paul is held as so authoritative.

He never met Jesus, he never read the gospels, and seems quite ignorant of the virgin birth. He think Jesus is coming back so soon as to make marriage necessary.

I don't get his appeal.

12:56 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Two quick clarifications then I'm gone:

I am a former Catholic, not a UU and have never even attended their services. I only mentioned them because they are Christian and see the Bible differently than the Church.

My other point was that I asked where Jesus said directly he was against homosexuality. You keep citing Paul which is not Jesus' words.

This website is called "Know Thy Facts..." is it not?

1:20 PM, May 01, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

Do you proof read what you post?

I am squeezing my nose with my thumb and for-finger and shaking my head and laughing histerically at what you just posted.

I don't know if you know this, but you just prooved my point by saying:

"..they were STRAIGHT men who 'unnaturally' had sex with men."

See, even the Romans knew being gay was not genetic and is unnatural. ;)

You even agree that "homosexual offenders" are straight men who CHOSE to engage in a homosexual lifestyle.

Your funny!! Thanks for the laughs.

6:46 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

John or John Hosty or whomever you are at the moment,

You said:

"(The Unitarian Universalists) I only mentioned them because they are Christian..."

Completely and uterly incorrect. The UU are not by any means Christian.

Next point you made:

"You keep citing Paul which is not Jesus' words."

God spoke to Paul, that's why the Bible is the word of God John or whomever your calling yourself for the next ten minutes.

6:51 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

""..they were STRAIGHT men who 'unnaturally' had sex with men."

See, even the Romans knew being gay was not genetic and is unnatural. ;)"
I know you're not slow, so try to follow me here: STRAIGHT men who act "unnaturally" for THEM - As in, it is perfectly natural for a GAY man to, duh, be GAY, but it's not natural for a STRAIGHT man to, get it? In other words, it would be extremely unnatural for you to have sex with a man (right?), just as it would be extremely unnatural for a gay man to have sex with a woman. Now do you understand? If I have to, I can use smaller words.

You even agree that "homosexual offenders" are straight men who CHOSE to engage in a homosexual lifestyle.
Correct. Because rape is not about sex, or attraction, it's about power. And anyone who forces someone to have sex against their will is a rapist - Doesn't matter if they are gay or straight - It's still wrong.

6:56 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

"Completely and uterly incorrect. The UU are not by any means Christian."
Depends on the church. Even though the UU church celebrates many religious traditions, it arose out of Christianity. Further, you will find that there are many UU congregations that are strictly Christian.
(I know this because I am a member of the UU church.)

7:01 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

Currently, only about 10% of UU members consider themselves to be Christians; many do not consider them a Christian group.

Most UUs readily adapt their beliefs to the findings of science and not Biblical scripture which makes this a non-Christian organization.

7:12 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

You said:

"..but it's not natural for a STRAIGHT man to (be gay)".

and

"...just as it would be extremely unnatural for a gay man to have sex with a woman."

Than what is a bi-sexual male then exactly?

I said:

"You even agree that "homosexual offenders" are straight men who CHOSE to engage in a homosexual lifestyle."

You responded with:

"Correct. Because rape is not about sex, or attraction, it's about power."

What does a homosexual have to do with being a rapists except that they are both dangerous lifestyles?

7:18 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

Scia,
You said:
"Than what is a bi-sexual male then exactly?"
He is bisexual, that is, neither straight nor gay. When I referred to a GAY man, I meant just that - GAY. Not bisexual, not transexual, not straight, G-A-Y. So, like I said, a GAY man having sex with a woman would be extremely unnatural for HIM.
"What does a homosexual have to do with being a rapists except that they are both dangerous lifestyles?"
Nothing, and that is my point exactly. If a man rapes another man, he doesn't do it because he is gay - He does it because it gives him a sense of power to dominate and humiliate another man. It has nothing to do with being gay.

7:34 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger SCIA said...

Katie,

Bisexual (adjective) - sexually attracted to BOTH sexes. (Webster Dictionary)

You said:

"So, like I said, a GAY man having sex with a woman would be extremely unnatural for HIM."

Who should I believe: Webster or Katie??

9:44 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

"Bisexual (adjective) - sexually attracted to BOTH sexes. (Webster Dictionary)"
Great, you can read a dictionary. So can I. I am not disputing the definition of 'bisexual'. What I am saying is, a GAY man is not bisexual, just as a bisexual man is not exclusively gay.
In the above posts, I was referring to men who are EXCLUSIVELY gay. Why are you arguing semantics?

10:04 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger KatieKat said...

To clarify even further, a gay man is not 'attracted to both sexes, he is attracted to just men. Therefore, (once again) a GAY man have sex with a WOMAN would be EXTREMELY UNNATURAL for HIM.

10:05 AM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

You know Scia, I keep trying to back away from this conversation like you implied I should, but you keep on bringing me back with your little quips.

"John or John Hosty or whomever you are at the moment"

Then you follow this up with yet another comment that implies I'm posting under different names. That's a lie and you know it as well as everybody else. There are two Johns, one posts only as John, and then I only post as John Hosty Grinnell. I'm proud of what I have to say, there is no reason for me to have to post under any other names. Check your IP addresses and you'll see if you sincerely question this.

Why do you have to be so dishonest about things? After all, it was your friends that posted under different names regularly. I can cite this if you care to take up the argument with me, just let me know.

This was nothing but a cheap shot and attempt to distract things. Shame on you.

6:57 PM, May 02, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Truth is NOT relative, it is absolute.”

“As known to be stated in the Bible and therefore to be true John.”

“…Christ does NOT accept your homosexual lifestyle, which is documented time and time again in the CHRISTIAN Bible.”

“God spoke to Paul, that's why the Bible is the word of God John or whomever your calling yourself for the next ten minutes.”

“What does a homosexual have to do with being a rapists except that they are both dangerous lifestyles?”

I’d be laughing on the floor if it wasn’t just so sad.

Ken Weaver

5:04 AM, May 03, 2008  
Blogger John Hosty-Grinnell said...

Ken, I commend your ability to come here day after day and put a little truth into the mix.

I find Scia too dishonest and condescending to dialog with often. Still, there is wisdom in finding the patience....somehow.

If I learn nothing else from the exchange the ability to be more patient is enough of a dividend to make it worth it.

7:36 PM, May 09, 2008  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

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