The politically incorrect thread

[The Senator]

Why Moviefan, why? Why do you ignore the points I raised about the Christian bookstore owner? Why are you hiding behind a shield of convenience?

 

[Schlosser85]

I'm not talking about prejudice against people for their choices (and it is a choice, no matter what anyone else says)

Who says so? You? I never made a decision what sexual orientation I was going to be, and neither did jmanspice, and you have never explained why we should take your word for it above our own personal experiences. I did not "choose" to be gay, anymore than most people "choose" to be straight (it's rather ridiculous to suggest people would choose to be gay given the prodigious amount of discrimination and prejudice that exists in the world against gays), and since you know nothing about me I don't really care if you say I did or not.

"I don't blame people for their mistakes...but I do ask that they pay for them."- John Hammond

"Thanks, Dad."- Dennis Nedry

 

[The Senator]

As one poster mentioned earlier, it takes away from the children's rights to be raised in a home with both a mother and father.

As opposed to a single mother?

Or a step-father or a step-mother?

Or in today's day and age, a step-step parent?

Children who are raised by homosexual parents turn out to be just as "normal" as any other child. Especially since the good Christian family model has been collapsing in on itself.

 

[Schlosser85]

It's not a matter of being "good" or "bad" parents; the point is that the family was designed to include both a mother and a father...not two mothers, and not two fathers.

Well, that doesn't really answer my question. You yourself equivocated gay parents and single parents by saying they both take away the child's right to be raised by a mother and a father.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Why Moviefan, why? Why do you ignore the points I raised about the Christian bookstore owner?

There's a difference between ignoring and agreeing. You've already proven to be more interested in procrastination than solution, and I refuse to waste my time with you any longer. That's why I put you on Ignore status. From this point forward, you can bug someone else with your responses.

 

[The Senator]

Why is Moviefan ignoring this point? Could it be because he dislikes the idea of homosexuals being able to practice his faith openly, and he believes they should be fired from Christian organizations regardless of the fact that several denominations allow gays to practice their faith openly?

His silence is deafening.

Yes, it would be wrong for the employer to fire that employee for being gay because there are several Christian denominations which allow homosexuals in their membership and do not view homosexuality as something which goes against Christianity. There are many non-denominational groups which follow this ideology, as well as the UCC, Lutheran, and Episcopalian denominations. So, the employer would then be firing the employee based on the employer's religious views, not taking into account the Christian views of his employee.

 

[Schlosser85]

There's a difference between ignoring and agreeing. You've already proven to be more interested in procrastination than solution, and I refuse to waste my time with you any longer. That's why I put you on Ignore status. From this point forward, you can bug someone else with your responses.

Well, that's convenient.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Who says so? You? I never made a decision what sexual orientation I was going to be, and neither did jmanspice, and you have never explained why we should take your word for it above our own personal experiences.

I've never asked you to take my word for it alone. I've pointed out several instances in Scripture, asking you to simply accept what God says on the matter. You don't want to, fine...but don't go around angry at me, simply because I said something you don't want to hear. Take it up with God, or don't. Leave me out of it.

 

[The Senator]

So, let's recount the facts:

Moviefan said that he believes a Christian bookstore owner should be able to fire his employee if that employee admits he is a homosexual. He is purposefully ignoring the point I raised, that many denominations allow homosexuals to practice Christianity openly within their congregations. But he refuses to address that point because he believes I am "prolonging" the debate.

So, it obvious that Moviefan believes that employers should be able to fire people simply because they are gay. He believes that one person's religious beliefs should govern everyone else's, even though the homosexual employee is still an active Christian and adheres to the core values represented by the Christian bookstore.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Moviefan: An Agent of Intolerance. He is the reason why our society is collapsing, because people like him believe in totalitarian theocracy in our secular society. He believes that people should be fired based on their sexual orientation [and most likely gender identity as well]. I mean, it should make sense, considering he has been an avid opponent of gay marriage and gay rights in general.

He speaks about accountability, but no one is able to hold him accountable for the nonsensical, intolerant views he holds towards those who are different from him. Our society is not supposed to be based in religious fundamentalism, it is supposed to be rooted in freedom of religion and expression... but he's actually "prolonging" the intolerance and injustices that the gay community faces on a regular basis, from narrow-minded folk like himself. Congratulations, Moviefan, on your coveted new title. Wear it proudly

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I'm not talking about prejudice against people for their choices (and it is a choice, no matter what anyone else says), but rather raising kids to know that some ways of living are wrong, even if society accepts them. I've often used one of my favorite movie quotes in situations like this, and I think it fits well here, too: "I don't blame people for their mistakes...but I do ask that they pay for them." Homosexuality is a choice, and it is a mistake. Children should not be raised to believe such a choice is morally right...period.

When did you decide to be straight then? Because if homosexualiy is a choice, heterosexuality has to be too. I don't know about you, but I never made a choice to be straight, just felt attracted to girls.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Moviefan is secretly gay.....

 

[Schlosser85]

I've pointed out several instances in Scripture, asking you to simply accept what God says on the matter.

Scripture does not say sexual orientation is a choice.

You don't want to, fine...but don't go around angry at me, simply because I said something you don't want to hear.

I'm not angry. And I'm also not the one who ignores people because they say things I don't want to hear, or ask questions I have no response to.

 

[BlackLantern]

I had a step-father...he made my life a living hell for 15 years and took pleasure in it...I still have the scars on my body from that *******....and my mother is still married to him....such are the merits of being raised by a man and a woman

 

[Moviefan2k4]

When did you decide to be straight then?

When I chose to believe that God created man and woman to compliment each other, and be joined in marriage.

Because if homosexualiy is a choice, heterosexuality has to be too.

It is a choice. It's a choice to believe and accept the natural order of things that God created, regardless of whether we understand it or not. As I said before, if homosexuality were morally right, God would've created another man for Adam instead of a woman, but He didn't.

 

[Schlosser85]

When I chose to believe that God created man and woman to compliment each other, and be joined in marriage.

So you weren't automatically attracted to one gender or the other before you chose to believe that?

As I said before, if homosexuality were morally right, God would've created another man for Adam instead of a woman, but He didn't.

That was at a time when there were only two people on Earth, who obviously needed to be physically capable of reproducing together to give birth to mankind. Mightn't it have been for obvious practical reasons?

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Scripture does not say sexual orientation is a choice.

"Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn't know how to be human either—women didn't know how to be women, men didn't know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches." ~Romans 1:26-27 (The Message)~

 

[Moviefan2k4]

So you weren't automatically attracted to one gender or the other before you chose to believe that?

God created men to be attracted to women, not other men. But as children, if we're not taught that, it becomes easy for us to delude ourselves later in life.

That was at a time when there were only two people on Earth, who obviously needed to be physically capable of reproducing together to give birth to mankind. Mightn't it have been for obvious practical reasons?

God could've made humanity to reproduce asexually, too, but He didn't. Reproduction is not the only reason for the existence of the two sexes.

 

[PemLam]

"Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn't know how to be human either—women didn't know how to be women, men didn't know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches." ~Romans 1:26-27 (The Message)~

Never got into these discussions or debates before...just watched from the sidelines, but if a gay/lesbian couple are actually in love, then there is no confusion, abuse or defiling is there?

 

[Schlosser85]

"Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn't know how to be human either—women didn't know how to be women, men didn't know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches." ~Romans 1:26-27 (The Message)~

Bible scholars are far from united in their interpretation of this, and whether it is actually a condemnation of homosexuality per se, or merely of loveless lustful promiscuous sex. Not all homosexuals engage in the "all lust, no love" promiscuousness of those described in your Scripture quote, after all; in fact, there are gay couples, especially Christian ones, who don't have sex at all. You can hardly say a couple that doesn't even engage in sex is "all lust, no love".

 

[The Senator]

Intolerance is a choice. Such as the belief that people should be able to deny rights to individuals-- regardless of the fact that those individuals are good workers and share the same core Christian values as most Christians do.

Homosexuality... that isn't a choice. But intolerance is. You can choose to not be intolerant if you want to. It may take a little effort, but realizing that gay people aren't "icky" and are just as normal as everyone else will be beneficial to our secular society

 

[amazingfantasy15]

When I chose to believe that God created man and woman to compliment each other, and be joined in marriage.

It is a choice. It's a choice to believe and accept the natural order of things that God created, regardless of whether we understand it or not. As I said before, if homosexuality were morally right, God would've created another man for Adam instead of a woman, but He didn't.

So you didn't know who to be attracted to until you read it in a book? You didn't feel an attraction to either boys or girls until you read the bible? Wow, that seems really strange to me.

 

[Schlosser85]

God created men to be attracted to women, not other men. But as children, if we're not taught that, it becomes easy for us to delude ourselves later in life.

Being raised by straight parents doesn't make you straight.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Bible scholars are far from united in their interpretation of this, and whether it is actually a condemnation of homosexuality per se, or merely of loveless lustful promiscuous sex. Not all homosexuals engage in the "all lust, no love" promiscuousness of those described in your Scripture quote, after all; in fact, there are gay couples, especially Christian ones, who don't have sex at all. You can hardly say a couple that doesn't even engage in sex is "all lust, no love".

Lust is not an act of the body, but of the mind and heart. Just because a gay couple is celibate, doesn't mean they aren't lusting...and the same can be said of straight couples as well. Jesus even said Himself that lust was equal to adultery of the heart.

 

[BlackLantern]

Intolerance is a choice. Such as the belief that people should be able to deny rights to individuals-- regardless of the fact that those individuals are good workers and share the same core Christian values as most Christians do.

Homosexuality... that isn't a choice. But intolerance is. You can choose to not be intolerant if you want to. It may take a little effort, but realizing that gay people aren't "icky" and are just as normal as everyone else will be beneficial to our secular society

..but wearing the wrong shoes makes you "icky"....

 

[Eggyman]

Come on, Moviefan! Keep the crazy talk for the other thread please.