It goes without saying, that the person who is having an affair, while still attending church, is lying t themselves, and to the church goers. In most cases, they are going to church t actually suggest that they are not doing what they do on the side. Of course there are always exceptions. Not everyone in church are cheating on their significant others right?


But like I said before, I dont think the homosexual consider themselves as sinners, so thats why I think they believe differently than the christian religion, thats why I think their place of whorship should be seperate. Again, I dont think its the church who should kick them out, because after all, everyone should be allowed in church, n matter the level of the sins they commit. BUt if you dont believe in that yourself, why would you want to go?

Again, looking at it, from the Point of view of the homosexual. I am trying to determine, why he or she, would want to go to church!

The church is what it is! Its not like youre gonna change their views!

So openess, love and honesty don't count amongst what you think the Christian church should encourage?

Fair enough.

Except even the church has to follow the law of the land and its illegal to discriminate on the grounds of sexuality. Or would you again draw lines in the sand saying churches shouldnt hide paedophile behaviour because thats against the law but then they should be allowed to ban homosexuals even though thats against the law as well?

Believe it or not but homosexuality is a natural state and surely even if the church believes its a sinful state they still have to accept that some of their congregations will be in that state just as there will always be people in states of other sins.

The whole homosexuality is a natural state, has not been proven, its a theory, and not a scientific fact!


Illegal?? I dont think anyone will kick you out of the church, because they know you are a homosexual! I have never heard of that before, as long as its not manifested in the church! And clearly, 2 people who are known to be homosexuals, and are holding hands in the church, are manifesting it. Once again, I am looking at it forom a logical point of view.

And again, I dont understand why as a homosexual, you would want to go in there!! BEcause youre not gonna change any views of the church, weather it generates publicity, or not!

Look, as much as I have no time for the churches stance on homosexuality you don't have to be a genius to see that the two women knew exactly what they were doing.

First off I am not a homosexual, second off I dont want to go into a church except feet first. Third it is a natural state, look at the male big horn sheep or the homosexuality that’s been documented in over 450 different vertebrate species. Simply because todays science cant find a reason for something or a gene to explain things does not make something any less real.

No does being a homosexual exclude anyone from wanting to worship god in a church of their choosing.

Yes I do think they were stupid for openly defying convention in the church, yes I also think they are looking for their little bit of fame or notarity. Thats the problem with going to the press, the article will polarise opinion and no one wins, everyone looks bad.

the whole catholic church reeks of stupidity, jesus was a jew ffs.

Yeah course it does, one of the biggest money spinning cons in history. But what has the catholic Church to do with this thread? Could I refer you back to post #45 :wink:

Nope.
The teachings you took the 'snippet' from are from the Gospels where you first understand the concept is a Jewish Rabbi under Jewish Law who is teaching Law to other Jews under the Law.

In fact far from saying 'don't judge' (if you cut out 2 words from a sentence you can change the meaning entire as you did) but the actual message was:

Followed by the example of pointing out a 'speck' in a brothers eye while having a plank in your own.

Well this is for Jews and concerning their Law but the entire thing makes for a common-sense Christian principle too and simply put - be consistent in your judgment.
If the Pastor of this church was holding hands with his gay boyfriend during the sermon then he ought to hold himself to the same rules as the lesbians in the pews.

That is not complicated.

This Christian teaching is one of the very founding principles behind our societies belief in a fair and equal and just society where (we believe) that a government MP can and should be subject to the exact same laws and penalties (and right to defend) as the polish window-washer.

Again, the teaching is about judging. When you judge. about how to make proper judgments.
Obviously everything would be senseless if nobody 'judged' anything.

Duly noted you and Shasawn are delighted to be judging the Church here but I have no doubt will use different standards for some other things in your own lives?

Some of my best friends are homos! How dare you judge me!

Its not often you are right but you are most definately wrong again




"He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her". Thats from John chapter 8


What you are referring to is the Sermon on the Mount, it covers Matthew chapter 5 - 8 the part you refer to is Matthew 7:2 followed by the plank in the eye at Matt 7:3 a totally unrelated part of a completely different gospel.

I would advise you to get out your bible and check things like that out before you put your foot in your mouth like that poxi. Top Tip of the Day. Check your references before blindly spouting something you appear to know very little about. To quote yourself "That is not complicated"

Delighted, why would I be delighted? No I use the same measures and consistancies throughout my life.

I presume he judges you just as you have judged him!

Nope.
You screwed this up. not me. He was not referring to the 'cast the first stone' passage.
He was 'invoking' the 'judge not' teaching.
He referred to something saying 'Judge Not'. (which is an out of context clip from Matthew).

For some reason YOU decided he must have meant the 'first stone' passage and then he agreed with you.
Both of you were wrong.

That WAS the 'judge not' passage he was trying to refer to. You brought up an unrelated passage.
I think you should heed that advice and I think its HILARIOUS you actually screwed this up and now will feel totally stupid when you realize it.

Top tip for you: If someone references to a passage with the words 'judge not' then they probably are referring to THE PART WITH THOSE WORDS IN IT dummy! lol


I doubt that.

Ok, thanks Rimmer:xyxwave:

Poor exercise in ass covering there matey. Go back and review from about thread#40 and you will see the real truth of what you have once again twisted to suit your own argument.

You are most welcome Lister :xyxwave:

I wasn't going to rub your face in it but since you keep 'asking for it' lets go review.

Stu starts by asking/writing:
I then ask Stu:
Now at this point I know he is referring to 'judge not lest you be judged accordingly',
but,
YOU jump in and MISTAKENLY believe Stu and I are talking about 'cast the first stone'.
Watch as you even explain how you think that is the 'judge not' passage:

Now after you misidentify his reference he shows up confused thinking you must have it right.
He writes:
Both of you are wrong. He was referring to the 'Judge Not' passage all along and in the first place.
Then after I correctly identify the passage HE WAS referring to,
and,
explain to you the 'cast the first stone' passage is NOT the 'judge not' passage,
then,
even after realizing you screwed up you stupidly write:
He wasn't talking about that passage and once again that is NOT referred to as the 'judge not' passage.
D'oh!

You are 100% self-pwned and why you keep wanting to push it is baffling.
I did not 'rub your face' in this.
You did.

In the future I will not be allowing you to waste my time with this much stupidity,
but,
this should be 'lesson learned' for you. You should be a little embarrassed now and realize you ought not try this again.

You may of course have noticed that neither of us are what you would call practicing Christians, dumbass.

Stop posting.

Homosexuality has been well documented in the animal kingdom.

I love the way your ignorance is exceeded only by your arrogance.

You know what people think and believe? Do me a favour, EMS!

and not in any way shape or form agreed on. Trying to morph human things onto animals is the same as Paris Hilton dressing her dog in a tutu, and about as useful.

Interesting argument there, though I'm not sure what you've addressed exactly. What is not agreed on?

Homosexual behavior has been observed in over a thousand different species. Of course, it is continuously studied and such studies are difficult to conduct as human interference must be kept to an absolute minimum, if not entirely or else such studies are considered invalid. In order to conduct accurate studies on group social behavior in animals, the presence of human interaction(whether direct or indirect) can nullify the value of any findings.

Of course, the primary argument(obviously not evidence based conclusions) that religious fanatics trumpeted for ages was that homosexuality was relegated to humans and was the result of amoral choices. Unfortunately for them, countless species have been observed in the wild engaging in homosexual behavior, even extending into same sex companionship in some of the more socially advanced species.

Of course, I'm sure you can refute this with something about frogs wearing bathing suits.

The homophobia and flat out bigotry in this thread is alarming. This thread should be locked, and members warned.

ant YOU GOT NOWT better to do wi your life than grass ppl up on a friggin forum? keyboard warrior

i would rather ban you for your avatar and i would wager i am not alone.

Homophobia is a made-up mental illness that was popularized by gay activist orgs and people who were not psychiatrists or psychologists. It is true that the first 'documented' use (this is not the first use) might be a gay rights activist using it sarcastically (a neologism) in a hardcore porn mag,
but,
the reason it got popular was because activists and their propagandists began using it at every turn, media, placard.
Eventually the dictionary recognized it as a word being used to mean 'fear of homosexuals' (it is used that way).

But suppose there was such a thing?
An irrational fear of homosexuals or homosexuality?
I suppose there is.
Why should you want to prosecute those with this mental illness?
Why do you love the idea of threatening them with 'warnings' as if their mental problem was a crime?
Why do you want to 'lock up' homophobia sufferers?
I suppose you would like to straight-jacket them and gag them too?

These people suffer from an illness and how dare you talk of 'locking them up' and 'threatening them' to be silent!
First they are victims and now people like you want to victimize them even further for it.
There is increasing evidence that they may very well have been born this way. Its not a 'choice' but simply 'who they are' and who are you to condemn them?

Quite seriously, people like you make me sick to my stomach. Spewing hatred and bullying those with weaknesses is the worst thing there is. People like you are what is wrong with the world today and unless you learn to change your attitudes we never progress.

First you need to stop calling them 'homophobic' because that is simply unacceptable and insulting.
It starts with words.
They are called 'gay panic response sufferers' and don't need to be called derogatory names by you.

Next you need to start being a little more tolerant. Actually a LOT more tolerant. GPR people are JUST LIKE YOU AND ME and you have no right to stop them, tell them when to talk or what to do.
EVEN IF you disagree with GPR Sufferers (fine) but TOLERANCE for EVERYONE ought to be where you stand.

Last but not least - once you start using the proper terms and start learning to be tolerant you may then actually try and LEARN about GPR Sufferers!
get over your ignorance and become educated about GPR,
and,
wow.. you might even try and MEET some GPR Sufferers and realize they are actually normal people like you and me who have jobs and families and goals and not these 'horrible monsters' you make them out to be.

Its time people like you STOP your homophobist hate-spewing censoring of GPR people.

:joker:

well said lad