Is It Wrong to Think Homosexuality is a Sin?

[BS Filter]

And we do--or, at least the greatest majority of us. We also recognize that we are free to practice our faith in public, in the marketplace, etc. Homosexuality can be named a sin without it being considered unlawful. Adultery is considered a sin, but it is not unlawful, either.

You respect secular law? That's good to know , although, from the zeal with which the religious right peruses it's agenda, it's hard to believe that it is "most of us" You can consider want a sin " No one is depriving you of that and you are in fact free to practice your faith where ever you wish, as long as you understand that freedom from religion is the other side of that same coin that grants you freedom of religion.

No such thing as "freedom from religion".

I believe the phrase they're looking for is Freedom OF Religion .... if they choose to be free FROM rleigion that is their choice - but not imposable on other members of the community via legislation or any other form of governmental controls

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

 

[BULLDOG]

Being gay is fine. I mean, really, who cares? It doesnt effect anyone except for that person and who he/she chooses to be with
You can think of it in any way you want. Being wrong or "sinful" is completely subjective.
Voice it if you want!

Gay men in the US account for under 10% of the population, yet they account for well over half off all AIDS and STD cases in the US. This is a fact supported by the CDC.

However, even though the economic costs to society Dims will never see this as a reason to not encourage such behavior as "normal" and "good".

Meanwhile, they will ban soda drinks in New York cuz they are not healthy and seaways in San Fran cuz they want people to exercise so they will be healthier.

It's all part of the Dim brain rot.

Looks like you have your answer. If you are so afraid of those diseases, you should quit having gay sex.

 

[Moonglow]

You respect secular law? That's good to know , although, from the zeal with which the religious right peruses it's agenda, it's hard to believe that it is "most of us" You can consider want a sin " No one is depriving you of that and you are in fact free to practice your faith where ever you wish, as long as you understand that freedom from religion is the other side of that same coin that grants you freedom of religion.

No such thing as "freedom from religion".

I believe the phrase they're looking for is Freedom OF Religion .... if they choose to be free FROM rleigion that is their choice - but not imposable on other members of the community via legislation or any other form of governmental controls

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

 

[hobelim]

No such thing as "freedom from religion".

I believe the phrase they're looking for is Freedom OF Religion .... if they choose to be free FROM rleigion that is their choice - but not imposable on other members of the community via legislation or any other form of governmental controls

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

There should be a test for sanity or at the very least literacy....

 

[BS Filter]

No such thing as "freedom from religion".

I believe the phrase they're looking for is Freedom OF Religion .... if they choose to be free FROM rleigion that is their choice - but not imposable on other members of the community via legislation or any other form of governmental controls

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

 

[BULLDOG]

I believe the phrase they're looking for is Freedom OF Religion .... if they choose to be free FROM rleigion that is their choice - but not imposable on other members of the community via legislation or any other form of governmental controls

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

It's not slander if they really did it.

 

[hobelim]

I believe the phrase they're looking for is Freedom OF Religion .... if they choose to be free FROM rleigion that is their choice - but not imposable on other members of the community via legislation or any other form of governmental controls

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

Thats not a religious test thats what happens when a person comes out and claims that they are a devout hypocrite to curry favor with people who do not think very deeply in order to get elected to positions of authority where they can legislate their perverse views of the world.

 

[BS Filter]

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

It's not slander if they really did it.

Did what?

 

[BULLDOG]

Unless of course it's a minority religion such as Islam or Hare Krishna ....

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

It's not slander if they really did it.

Did what?

What ever you try to characterize as slander.

 

[pismoe]

What do you think?

If you believe you have a right to believe this, and you are offended, is it OK to voice this?

---------------------------------------- Sure , of course its OK to voice any opinion on homosexuality or anything else for awhile longer in the USA Bonzi . [answering the opening question]

 

[Lysistrata]

I believe the phrase they're looking for is Freedom OF Religion .... if they choose to be free FROM rleigion that is their choice - but not imposable on other members of the community via legislation or any other form of governmental controls

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

What one does in public is subject to public comment, even ridicule. LGBTs are just people out and about in society, regardless of their choice of religion (or none). They have a right to not be bothered by your choice of religious practice. And what if they have chosen another form of religious practice than yours? There are many LGBT folks who are members of the Metropolitan Community Church, founded to provide a church home for LGBT Christians.

The MCC is a wolf in sheep's clothing. The Church of Jesus Christ believes in the authority of Scripture.

The MCC is just as much a church as your's is, snob. Bet your's believes in biblical "inerrancy" and "infallibility," which basically is post-Reformation protestant fundie stuff. Believe what you wish, but don't get in anyone else's way or stick your nose in anyone else's business.

I'll speak my mind here as I wish. The Church of Jesus Christ believes the Bible to be the authoritative and inerrant Word of God. There will always be wolves in sheep's clothing and tares among the wheat. You go ahead and believe whatever you wish. No skin off my nose.

Are you a Mormon? I don't really know what the Mormons believe.

 

[BS Filter]

Yes, "protected class". The democrats know they aren't going to get the Bible believers, so they reach out to every freak and nut.

There is no religious test in our govt.

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

It's not slander if they really did it.

Did what?

What ever you try to characterize as slander.

Okay. So why do democrats in congress slander and demonize bible believing Christians that are appointed to office?

 

[BS Filter]

But that's exactly what they want, no religious practices. Nothing public.

What one does in public is subject to public comment, even ridicule. LGBTs are just people out and about in society, regardless of their choice of religion (or none). They have a right to not be bothered by your choice of religious practice. And what if they have chosen another form of religious practice than yours? There are many LGBT folks who are members of the Metropolitan Community Church, founded to provide a church home for LGBT Christians.

The MCC is a wolf in sheep's clothing. The Church of Jesus Christ believes in the authority of Scripture.

The MCC is just as much a church as your's is, snob. Bet your's believes in biblical "inerrancy" and "infallibility," which basically is post-Reformation protestant fundie stuff. Believe what you wish, but don't get in anyone else's way or stick your nose in anyone else's business.

I'll speak my mind here as I wish. The Church of Jesus Christ believes the Bible to be the authoritative and inerrant Word of God. There will always be wolves in sheep's clothing and tares among the wheat. You go ahead and believe whatever you wish. No skin off my nose.

Are you a Mormon? I don't really know what the Mormons believe.

No, I'm not a Mormon. You're confused, dear. The Church of Jesus Christ isn't an earthly organization. The Church of Jesus Christ is comprised of everyone that believes the Bible and puts their faith in Jesus Christ, regardless of denomination.

 

[BULLDOG]

There is no religious test in our govt.

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

It's not slander if they really did it.

Did what?

What ever you try to characterize as slander.

Okay. So why do democrats in congress slander and demonize bible believing Christians that are appointed to office?

Example?

 

[BS Filter]

Oh, but there is. The left will slander and demonize every bible believer they see that seeks an appointed office. You know that.

It's not slander if they really did it.

Did what?

What ever you try to characterize as slander.

Okay. So why do democrats in congress slander and demonize bible believing Christians that are appointed to office?

Example?

Sure. Have you ever watched a congressional hearing for any appointment of a bible believing conservative? Did you witness the hearing of Clarance Thomas? How about Betsy Devoss? How many examples do you need? You know as well as I do that democrats put the screws to any bible believing Christian conservative. This is the part where you play dumb, huh. Here's a classic recent example.
'The Dogma Lives Loudly Within You': Senate Democrats Grill Appointee Over Catholic Faith

 

[deanrd]

What do you think?

If you believe you have a right to believe this, and you are offended, is it OK to voice this?

Being gay is OK.

It's divorce and adultery that are sins.

 

[BULLDOG]

It's not slander if they really did it.

Did what?

What ever you try to characterize as slander.

Okay. So why do democrats in congress slander and demonize bible believing Christians that are appointed to office?

Example?

Sure. Have you ever watched a congressional hearing for any appointment of a bible believing conservative? Did you witness the hearing of Clarance Thomas? How about Betsy Devoss? How many examples do you need? You know as well as I do that democrats put the screws to any bible believing Christian conservative. This is the part where you play dumb, huh. Here's a classic recent example.
'The Dogma Lives Loudly Within You': Senate Democrats Grill Appointee Over Catholic Faith

Wow. You really picked Thomas and Devos to make your point? What an idiot.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What do you think?

If you believe you have a right to believe this, and you are offended, is it OK to voice this?

Well, it's okay to think it's a sin, but is it okay to then start treating sinners as second class citizens?

Trump is an adulterer. Yet they elected him. A sinner, not just a normal sinner, but a higher class sort of sinner. And they don't care.

But then when other sinners, maybe higher class sinners want wedding cakes, all of a sudden they have fucking principles which had gone missing for the whole of the election campaign.

 

[BS Filter]

Did what?

What ever you try to characterize as slander.

Okay. So why do democrats in congress slander and demonize bible believing Christians that are appointed to office?

Example?

Sure. Have you ever watched a congressional hearing for any appointment of a bible believing conservative? Did you witness the hearing of Clarance Thomas? How about Betsy Devoss? How many examples do you need? You know as well as I do that democrats put the screws to any bible believing Christian conservative. This is the part where you play dumb, huh. Here's a classic recent example.
'The Dogma Lives Loudly Within You': Senate Democrats Grill Appointee Over Catholic Faith

Wow. You really picked Thomas and Devos to make your point? What an idiot.

If that's all you in response, then everyone can easily see which one of us is the idiot.

 

[BS Filter]

What do you think?

If you believe you have a right to believe this, and you are offended, is it OK to voice this?

Well, it's okay to think it's a sin, but is it okay to then start treating sinners as second class citizens?

Trump is an adulterer. Yet they elected him. A sinner, not just a normal sinner, but a higher class sort of sinner. And they don't care.

But then when other sinners, maybe higher class sinners want wedding cakes, all of a sudden they have fucking principles which had gone missing for the whole of the election campaign.

You don't get it. The Christian baker has a constitutional right to his religious views. That's the point.