Christian churches ‘must be made’ to affirm homosexuality

[Uncensored2008]

You're a tad confused

Nah, Haznonuts is full of shit. Another leftist hack, mindlessly spewing shit from the hate sites.

 

[Conservative65]

What part of freedom OF religion and separation of Church and state are the homosexuals and left loons not quite grasping?

Christian churches ‘must be made’ to affirm homosexuality, says New York Times columnist

NEW YORK, April 7, 2015 – A New York Times columnist and a corporate leader have agreed that Christian churches “must” be convinced, or coerced, to change their teachings on sexual morality and abandon an “ossified” doctrinal teaching that sex outside heterosexual marriage is immoral.

Frank Bruni wrote that traditional Christianity – whether among evangelicals, Catholics, or Orthodox – provides the greatest resistance to normalizing homosexuality in the United States in a recent column in the New York Times.

“Homosexuality and Christianity don’t have to be in conflict in any church anywhere,” Bruni insisted. “The continued view of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as sinners is a decision. It’s a choice. It prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing.”

Christian churches must be made to affirm homosexuality says New York Times columnist News LifeSite

Bruni's commentary:

Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch

I can sum this OP in one sentence: One man has an OPINION that differs than mine.

"Christians" used to back segregation and slavery--both had ample scripture to support them. They'll eventually realize how pathetic they look using one or two lines of scripture (wa-aaaay out of historical context) to justify their homophobia.

Interesting that those Liberal Christians that support same sex marriage tend it ignore the verses specifically stating that the lifestyle those part of one live is wrong. They also say Jesus never said anything about opposing homosexual marriage. Wrong. Jesus, although speaking about divorce, said that a man should leave his mother and father and join with his wife. Jesus didn't say "or his husband or her wife".

 

[SassyIrishLass]

You're a tad confused

Nah, Haznonuts is full of shit. Another leftist hack, mindlessly spewing shit from the hate sites.

I get weary of them attempting to compare homosexuality with the plight of the blacks. It's apples and oranges

 

[hadit]

What part of freedom OF religion and separation of Church and state are the homosexuals and left loons not quite grasping?

Christian churches ‘must be made’ to affirm homosexuality, says New York Times columnist

NEW YORK, April 7, 2015 – A New York Times columnist and a corporate leader have agreed that Christian churches “must” be convinced, or coerced, to change their teachings on sexual morality and abandon an “ossified” doctrinal teaching that sex outside heterosexual marriage is immoral.

Frank Bruni wrote that traditional Christianity – whether among evangelicals, Catholics, or Orthodox – provides the greatest resistance to normalizing homosexuality in the United States in a recent column in the New York Times.

“Homosexuality and Christianity don’t have to be in conflict in any church anywhere,” Bruni insisted. “The continued view of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as sinners is a decision. It’s a choice. It prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing.”

Christian churches must be made to affirm homosexuality says New York Times columnist News LifeSite

Bruni's commentary:

Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch

I can sum this OP in one sentence: One man has an OPINION that differs than mine.

"Christians" used to back segregation and slavery--both had ample scripture to support them. They'll eventually realize how pathetic they look using one or two lines of scripture (wa-aaaay out of historical context) to justify their homophobia.

Christians also were the driving force behind eliminating both slavery and segregation.

 

[The Rabbi]

You're a tad confused

Nah, Haznonuts is full of shit. Another leftist hack, mindlessly spewing shit from the hate sites.

I get weary of them attempting to compare homosexuality with the plight of the blacks. It's apples and oranges

Gay marriage supporters have two and only two arguments:
1) Gays are really Negroes from the 1960s
2) We're winning the court cases.
Every argument on gay marriage sooner or later invokes one of those two arguments and nothing more.

 

[paperview]

What part of freedom OF religion and separation of Church and state are the homosexuals and left loons not quite grasping?

Christian churches ‘must be made’ to affirm homosexuality, says New York Times columnist

NEW YORK, April 7, 2015 – A New York Times columnist and a corporate leader have agreed that Christian churches “must” be convinced, or coerced, to change their teachings on sexual morality and abandon an “ossified” doctrinal teaching that sex outside heterosexual marriage is immoral.

Frank Bruni wrote that traditional Christianity – whether among evangelicals, Catholics, or Orthodox – provides the greatest resistance to normalizing homosexuality in the United States in a recent column in the New York Times.

“Homosexuality and Christianity don’t have to be in conflict in any church anywhere,” Bruni insisted. “The continued view of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as sinners is a decision. It’s a choice. It prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing.”

Christian churches must be made to affirm homosexuality says New York Times columnist News LifeSite

Bruni's commentary:

Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch

I can sum this OP in one sentence: One man has an OPINION that differs than mine.

"Christians" used to back segregation and slavery--both had ample scripture to support them. They'll eventually realize how pathetic they look using one or two lines of scripture (wa-aaaay out of historical context) to justify their homophobia.

Christians also were the driving force behind eliminating both slavery and segregation.

There were Christians on both side of the aisles, bub.

 

[The Rabbi]

What part of freedom OF religion and separation of Church and state are the homosexuals and left loons not quite grasping?

Christian churches ‘must be made’ to affirm homosexuality, says New York Times columnist

NEW YORK, April 7, 2015 – A New York Times columnist and a corporate leader have agreed that Christian churches “must” be convinced, or coerced, to change their teachings on sexual morality and abandon an “ossified” doctrinal teaching that sex outside heterosexual marriage is immoral.

Frank Bruni wrote that traditional Christianity – whether among evangelicals, Catholics, or Orthodox – provides the greatest resistance to normalizing homosexuality in the United States in a recent column in the New York Times.

“Homosexuality and Christianity don’t have to be in conflict in any church anywhere,” Bruni insisted. “The continued view of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as sinners is a decision. It’s a choice. It prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing.”

Christian churches must be made to affirm homosexuality says New York Times columnist News LifeSite

Bruni's commentary:

Frank Bruni commentary It s time to cross homosexuality off the list of sins The Columbus Dispatch

I can sum this OP in one sentence: One man has an OPINION that differs than mine.

"Christians" used to back segregation and slavery--both had ample scripture to support them. They'll eventually realize how pathetic they look using one or two lines of scripture (wa-aaaay out of historical context) to justify their homophobia.

Christians also were the driving force behind eliminating both slavery and segregation.

There were Christians on both side of the aisles, bub.

Yes, that was the point, Capt Obvious.

 

[bodecea]

You're a tad confused

Nah, Haznonuts is full of shit. Another leftist hack, mindlessly spewing shit from the hate sites.

I get weary of them attempting to compare homosexuality with the plight of the blacks. It's apples and oranges

Civil rights are only based on race to you? Yes or No?

 

[bodecea]

You're a tad confused

Nah, Haznonuts is full of shit. Another leftist hack, mindlessly spewing shit from the hate sites.

I get weary of them attempting to compare homosexuality with the plight of the blacks. It's apples and oranges

Gay marriage supporters have two and only two arguments:
1) Gays are really Negroes from the 1960s
2) We're winning the court cases.
Every argument on gay marriage sooner or later invokes one of those two arguments and nothing more.

#2....you betcha, bub.

 

[ogibillm]

Fail.
Public accomodation laws prohibit discrimination based on faith

You seem to have missed that a judge ruled that queers are exempt from acting against their beliefs.

There is no equality under the law.

It's not my fault you don't understand what you're referencing.

But the reality is public accomodation laws do not allow discrimination based on faith.

 

[PratchettFan]

No. Just people.

Spoiled brats that can't accept no for an answer on things for which the Constitution grants them nothing related to what they demand.

Yes. That is my opinion of the far right.

Nobody gives a shit about your opinion, s0n.

I have already said that you are free not to care, as am I. But I am not the one complaining that the little kid in the playground is beating me up because he won't let me hit him anymore. I am fine with you not caring and I am fine with you being afraid. Whatever makes you happy. The important thing is that you keep vocalizing your position - which provides a far better argument for the LGBT community than they could ever make for themselves.

That's because they have no argument. "I'm a fag and you should think it's normal" isn't an arugment. It's whining.

I believe the argument is "I'm a citizen of the United States and am entitled to all of the rights of a citizen". And then you come up with the above to demonstrate the quality of the counter argument. It's been very effective for them. They should thank you.

 

[Conservative65]

Spoiled brats that can't accept no for an answer on things for which the Constitution grants them nothing related to what they demand.

Yes. That is my opinion of the far right.

Nobody gives a shit about your opinion, s0n.

I have already said that you are free not to care, as am I. But I am not the one complaining that the little kid in the playground is beating me up because he won't let me hit him anymore. I am fine with you not caring and I am fine with you being afraid. Whatever makes you happy. The important thing is that you keep vocalizing your position - which provides a far better argument for the LGBT community than they could ever make for themselves.

That's because they have no argument. "I'm a fag and you should think it's normal" isn't an arugment. It's whining.

I believe the argument is "I'm a citizen of the United States and am entitled to all of the rights of a citizen". And then you come up with the above to demonstrate the quality of the counter argument. It's been very effective for them. They should thank you.

The problem is they demand as a right that isn't one. They have a right to vote, a fair trial, free speech, to own guns, not to incriminate oneself, etc. They are specifically stated in the Constitution. I'm yet to find where marraige is written.

 

[PratchettFan]

No. Just people.

Spoiled brats that can't accept no for an answer on things for which the Constitution grants them nothing related to what they demand.

Yes. That is my opinion of the far right.

One of the big things the left argues about related to spending is the amount on the military and the lack of it on social programs. Last time I looked, establishing and maintaining a military was a delegated power of Congress with no mention of food stamps, marriage, healthcare, etc. in the Constitution. While you may not like the amount spent on the military, that's a different thing that whether or not the power exists.

I have no idea what you are talking about now. I don't recall talking about the military or food stamps. Frankly, my opinion of the far left is the same as my opinion of the far right. I happen to be a conservative, a Goldwater conservative. Which, of course, makes me a RINO because I don't just toe the party line of the far right. I don't really argue with people on the left because I have no dog in that hunt. Let them police themselves. I am concerned with what has happened to the Conservative movement, which used to populated by intellectual giants such as Goldwater and Buckley. Now it has Limbaugh and Beck. They tossed out true Conservative principles in exchange for money and power, and pander to people who are only interested in being told what they want to hear.

Spoiled brats are all you are going to find on either end of the spectrum.

I used it as an example. I thought smart people could relate general principles. I'll make it easy.

You didn't mention the military or food stamps but you did say that you have the opinion that those on the right are spoiled brats. Spoiled brats expect a yes answer even yes isn't the answer that needs to be given. I used the EXAMPLE of how the left constantly bitches about military spending. I pointed out that maintaining a military, which involves spending, is a delegated power. I also pointed out, an an EXAMPLE, that social welfare spending is nowhere to be found in the same document that specially mentions the military.

Let's tie it together. You claim the right is a bunch of spoiled brats because they don't want to be told no on something specifically in the Constitution yet seem to think the left isn't when they're told no on things for which no Constitutional authority is given.

You're not a RINO you're a CINO. Those you call the far right don't have a party, it's called an ideology. I'm concerned with what happened to those like you that call themselves Conservatives. You claim you are then defend anything but conservatism. What you should say is you are concerned with what happened to conservatism in the manner YOU think it should be.

I said those on the far right. Do try to follow what I actually say. I know it makes it harder for you, but make an attempt.

Let's figure out your point.
I fully support freedom of speech under the first amendment. How is that not a Conservative value?
I fully support the right of every American citizen to equal protection of the law. How is that not a Conservative value?

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes. That is my opinion of the far right.

Nobody gives a shit about your opinion, s0n.

I have already said that you are free not to care, as am I. But I am not the one complaining that the little kid in the playground is beating me up because he won't let me hit him anymore. I am fine with you not caring and I am fine with you being afraid. Whatever makes you happy. The important thing is that you keep vocalizing your position - which provides a far better argument for the LGBT community than they could ever make for themselves.

That's because they have no argument. "I'm a fag and you should think it's normal" isn't an arugment. It's whining.

I believe the argument is "I'm a citizen of the United States and am entitled to all of the rights of a citizen". And then you come up with the above to demonstrate the quality of the counter argument. It's been very effective for them. They should thank you.

The problem is they demand as a right that isn't one. They have a right to vote, a fair trial, free speech, to own guns, not to incriminate oneself, etc. They are specifically stated in the Constitution. I'm yet to find where marraige is written.

Even if there is a right of marriage somewhere, they have exactly the same right I do. I can not marry another man any more than a homosexual can.

 

[PratchettFan]

Yes. That is my opinion of the far right.

Nobody gives a shit about your opinion, s0n.

I have already said that you are free not to care, as am I. But I am not the one complaining that the little kid in the playground is beating me up because he won't let me hit him anymore. I am fine with you not caring and I am fine with you being afraid. Whatever makes you happy. The important thing is that you keep vocalizing your position - which provides a far better argument for the LGBT community than they could ever make for themselves.

That's because they have no argument. "I'm a fag and you should think it's normal" isn't an arugment. It's whining.

I believe the argument is "I'm a citizen of the United States and am entitled to all of the rights of a citizen". And then you come up with the above to demonstrate the quality of the counter argument. It's been very effective for them. They should thank you.

The problem is they demand as a right that isn't one. They have a right to vote, a fair trial, free speech, to own guns, not to incriminate oneself, etc. They are specifically stated in the Constitution. I'm yet to find where marraige is written.

14th amendment. Every citizen is entitled to equal protection under the law. If the government decides to get out of the marriage business, then that becomes moot. Until then, every citizen should have the right to make that determination for themselves without governmental interference. A Conservative would understand that.

 

[WorldWatcher]

really? Cite them

The legal requirement that Christians back cakes for queers, but queers need not bake cakes for Christians.

Public Accommodation laws require that a bakery owned by homosexuals cannot refuse service based on the religion of the customer.

So a homosexual baker that offers wedding cakes to the public cannot refuse customer based on the fact they are Christian but then provide the same goods and services say to Jews, Muslims, and Hindus.



>>>>

 

[The Rabbi]

Nobody gives a shit about your opinion, s0n.

I have already said that you are free not to care, as am I. But I am not the one complaining that the little kid in the playground is beating me up because he won't let me hit him anymore. I am fine with you not caring and I am fine with you being afraid. Whatever makes you happy. The important thing is that you keep vocalizing your position - which provides a far better argument for the LGBT community than they could ever make for themselves.

That's because they have no argument. "I'm a fag and you should think it's normal" isn't an arugment. It's whining.

I believe the argument is "I'm a citizen of the United States and am entitled to all of the rights of a citizen". And then you come up with the above to demonstrate the quality of the counter argument. It's been very effective for them. They should thank you.

The problem is they demand as a right that isn't one. They have a right to vote, a fair trial, free speech, to own guns, not to incriminate oneself, etc. They are specifically stated in the Constitution. I'm yet to find where marraige is written.

14th amendment. Every citizen is entitled to equal protection under the law. If the government decides to get out of the marriage business, then that becomes moot. Until then, every citizen should have the right to make that determination for themselves without governmental interference. A Conservative would understand that.

Every citizen is entitled to the exact same access to marriage. I cannot marry another man either.

 

[The Rabbi]

really? Cite them

The legal requirement that Christians back cakes for queers, but queers need not bake cakes for Christians.

Public Accommodation laws require that a bakery owned by homosexuals cannot refuse service based on the religion of the customer.

So a homosexual baker that offers wedding cakes to the public cannot refuse customer based on the fact they are Christian but then provide the same goods and services say to Jews, Muslims, and Hindus.



>>>>

"Homosexual" is not a religion. It is not a protected category under the First Amendment.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Fail.
Public accomodation laws prohibit discrimination based on faith

You seem to have missed that a judge ruled that queers are exempt from acting against their beliefs.

There is no equality under the law.

You left out that the baker was willing to provide the cake but refused to write derogatory messages on the cake.

Also - Why do you assume the owner is homosexual?


>>>>


>>>>

 

[bodecea]

Yes. That is my opinion of the far right.

Nobody gives a shit about your opinion, s0n.

I have already said that you are free not to care, as am I. But I am not the one complaining that the little kid in the playground is beating me up because he won't let me hit him anymore. I am fine with you not caring and I am fine with you being afraid. Whatever makes you happy. The important thing is that you keep vocalizing your position - which provides a far better argument for the LGBT community than they could ever make for themselves.

That's because they have no argument. "I'm a fag and you should think it's normal" isn't an arugment. It's whining.

I believe the argument is "I'm a citizen of the United States and am entitled to all of the rights of a citizen". And then you come up with the above to demonstrate the quality of the counter argument. It's been very effective for them. They should thank you.

The problem is they demand as a right that isn't one. They have a right to vote, a fair trial, free speech, to own guns, not to incriminate oneself, etc. They are specifically stated in the Constitution. I'm yet to find where marraige is written.

So...there is no right to marriage? The government can keep you from marrying just for the heck of it, since you have no right to it. Is that what you want to insist on?