Where are the Religious-Right & conservatives
Lac...@webtv.net
Where the hell is the OUTRAGE from the conservative radio
media and the Religious-Right about the latest bombings by
a christian group called the ARMY OF GOD. They get all
UPSET about Gay characters on TV, Gay weddings on TV, they
get all upset about about Gay Rights legislation. When a
Gay or Lesbian does something civily disobedient, The
Religious-Right paints ALL GAY & LESBIAN people with a
broad brush and expects the rest of us to condemn that
person. But now that a Christian group bombs a abortion
clinic and a lesbian bar, the Religious-Right has had
nothing to say about it. The topic is NOT being discussed
on conservative radio and very little on the 700 Club.
If a Gay or Lesbian group were to bomb a church, we
would NEVER hear the end of it. Till this day, Pat
Robertson of the 700 Club still talks about a bomb he
recieved about ten years ago. When he recieved it, he said
that it had to be from a "radical" homosexual group. But
that was never proven.
Gays and lesbians protest infront of a church in San
Francisco, it is ALL OVER the 700 Club and the Host Pat
Robertson says that it is part of the "Homosexual Agenda"
But when Rev. Fred Phelphs protests in front of Gay and
Lesbian funerals including President Clintons mothers
funeral, it is NOT discussed on the 700 Club. And when a
spokesperson from Pat Robertsons Christian Coalition was
confronted on a talk show (Rolanda) with the Rev. Fred
Phelphs, she had nothing to say to the Rev. Fred Phelphs
and she DID NOT want to condemn Rev. Fred Phelphs for his
actions. Instead the Christian Coalition spokesperson
condemned the talk show host and told her "HOW DARE YOU
BRING THESE PEOPLE ON YOUR SHOW TRYING TO MAKE US LOOK BAD"
Obviously the Christian Coalition spokesperson DID NOT
believe that the Rev Phelphs should be exposed, but when
the 700 Club exposes civil disobedience by Gays & Lesbians,
they call it TELLING AMERICA THE TRUTH" What a bunch of
hypocrites these Right-Winged Christians are.
The same with Phil Donahue when he had Rev. Paul Hill
on his show via sattellite from his prison. Paul Hill was
in prison for killing an abortion doctor. Another member of
the Christian Coalition who was also on the show had
nothing to say to or about Paul Hill or about what Paul
Hill had done. Instead, this member from the Christian
Coalition blasted Phil Donahue, telling him "HOW DARE YOU
BRING THIS MAN ON YOUR SHOW. And also told Phil Donahue
that he is the reason why Fathers leave their children.
You can see that these people from the Christian
Coalition are crazy, attacking the messenger, and changing
the topic.
If the Evangelical Christians are sick and tired of
people painting ALL of them with a broad brush, and if they
are individuals, then maybe the Evangelical Christians
shouls stop painting ALL Gay and Lesbian people with a
broad brush and begin to treat each Gay or Lesbian person
as an individual. The Evangelicals should stop linking
NAMBLA with the whole Gay community.
Maybe the reason why the 700 Club & the Christian
Coalition are not condemning these people, such as Fred
Phelphs, Paul Hill, or groups such as Army of God, is
probably because they agree with what they are doing. the
Christian Coalition can go on TV and look nice and let
somebody else (Fred Phelphs, Army of God) do the dirty work
for them. If you don't condemn something, it means that you
are condoning it.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
xona
They are in cesspools, toilets, and dark and damp places where they thrive
like bacteria and other shit eating micro-organisms.
xona
Mitchell Holman
In article <856844...@dejanews.com>, Lac...@webtv.net wrote:
}
}
}
}Where the hell is the OUTRAGE from the conservative radio
}media and the Religious-Right about the latest bombings by
}a christian group called the ARMY OF GOD. They get all
}UPSET about Gay characters on TV, Gay weddings on TV, they
}get all upset about about Gay Rights legislation. When a
}Gay or Lesbian does something civily disobedient, The
}Religious-Right paints ALL GAY & LESBIAN people with a
}broad brush and expects the rest of us to condemn that
}person. But now that a Christian group bombs a abortion
}clinic and a lesbian bar, the Religious-Right has had
}nothing to say about it. The topic is NOT being discussed
}on conservative radio and very little on the 700 Club.
Just listen to Rush. Everytime a liberal puts their foot in
their mouth, it is "typical of feminists" or "typical of liberals".
But when far-right gun loons blow up federal buildings or
abortion clinics, it "just an isolated incident", "totally out of
character with mainstream conservatism".
Better yet is the laughable claim that pro-choice forces
are blowing up clinics "in an effort to smear the name of
the pro-life movement". As if their reputation for violence
needed any assistance......
Mitchell Holman
"I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good.
Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a biblical duty, we are called
on by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't
want pluralism."
-- Randall Terry, head of Operation Rescue
RevMike
Dear Laconia,
I am going to violate my own suggestion about crossposting to unrelated
groups in order to answer your question about the bombings at the abortion
clinics and at the lesbian bar. I have posted suggestions in our newsgroups
(Christian) to not crosspost in order to cut down on the viciousness going
on between the groups. But yours is one that demands a reply.
First, and I can only speak for myself on this subject, neither the
Christian Coalition, nor Pat Robertson, nor Rush Limbaugh speak for me or
represent me. Just as the media fails to cover certain things that counter
to their agenda, so too do these individuals. I would like to think that
there are plenty of other Christians that feel that way too.
Secondly, ANY violence by ANY group should be immediately condemned. I
don't agree with abortion personally, but we each have to make our choices
and will have to stand before God and be judged for them. It is not my, or
any other Christians, place to be the judge, jury and darn sure not the
executioner of anyone. The closest that Jesus ever came to being violent is
when he drove the money changers out of the Temple (this is the category in
which I place Pat Robertson and anyone else who makes money off the Gospel
that they received freely.)
I'm sure that we all realize that there are fringe wackos on both sides of
the fence. It does no good for anyone to "paint with a broad brush" any
other group. Remember one other thing: just because someone is born in a
garage, it doesn't make them a car. The "Army of God" is not a Christian
group, but an extremist right wing group. When Jesus was telling His
disciples about the Judgment, He said that there would be those there that
would say "Lord, Lord. We did all these things in your Name" and He will
say to them, "Depart from me, you workers of evil. I never knew you."
Anyone can say they are doing something for God, but true Christians know
that "by their fruit shall you know them".
Finally, to xonia and Mitchell Holman, who responded to your post before I
saw it: Please trim your headers before posting if all you want to do is
spew venom on not be constructive. The Christian groups did not need to see
your obscene comments. Let's try to help the Internet grow up a little,
okay?
While I certainly don't have the national audience that Pat Robertson does,
I do plan to post both your letter and this response to our website below.
I hope this will help get the word out a little more.
Best Wishes,
--
Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
Cyberspace Celebrations
http://www.seanet.com/~gypsy95/
Heartland Chapel
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/5349
Rich Travsky
Lac...@webtv.net wrote:
> Where the hell is the OUTRAGE from the conservative radio
> media and the Religious-Right about the latest bombings by
> a christian group called the ARMY OF GOD. They get all
Are you kidding? This is the sort of thing that fills the right
wing with joy.
> [...]
> Maybe the reason why the 700 Club & the Christian
> Coalition are not condemning these people, such as Fred
> Phelphs, Paul Hill, or groups such as Army of God, is
> probably because they agree with what they are doing. the
More likely they are providing out right actual support: money,
hiding them, arming them. The right wing only pays lip service
to religion, needing it only to separate useful fools from their
money.
> [...]
RT
It is by Rush alone that I set my mind in motion.
It is by the words of Rush that the lip begins to droop,
the lip acquires drool, the drool becomes a warning.
It is by Rush alone that I set my mind in motion.
Hudson PAC
In <856844...@dejanews.com> Lac...@webtv.net wrote:
Where the hell is the OUTRAGE from the conservative radio
media and the Religious-Right about the latest bombings by
a christian group called the ARMY OF GOD.
[According to AP, The Center for Democratic Renewal, a hate-group
monitoring agency, doubts the involvement of the so-called "Army of God."
There actually isn't any such organized group, this is the name of an
anarchist's manual of dirty deeds, like the "Anarchist's Cookbook."]
You can see that these people from the Christian
Coalition are crazy, attacking the messenger, and changing
the topic.
[Just like the Clinton Administration. Why don't you get your head out of
Xona's ass.]
James D. Prior 1, Esq.
Rich Travsky <rtravsky@REMOVE_THIS.uwyo.edu> wrote in article <
> It is by Rush alone that I set my mind in motion.
> It is by the words of Rush that the lip begins to droop,
> the lip acquires drool, the drool becomes a warning.
> It is by Rush alone that I set my mind in motion.
>
liberal as they come. If you
watch him closely...he says one thing and does another!! I believe he has
been hired by the democrats
to pose as a conservative republican to get republicans to desert the party
and turn traito...uh....democrat.
Just like the joker living at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C. Who
is he?? Why he is the
bastard from Arkansas of course, President Billy Bob Clinton!! Or is it
Billy Joe this week??
Chessie Bill Gray
On 25 Feb 1997 15:25:05 GMT, "RevMike" <gyp...@seanet.com> wrote:
>Dear Laconia,
>
>I am going to violate my own suggestion about crossposting to unrelated
Let's try to help the Internet grow up a little,
>okay?
>
>Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
>Cyberspace Celebrations
>http://www.seanet.com/~gypsy95/
>Heartland Chapel
>http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/5349
thanks Rev. Mike,
As a gay male I would like to thank you for your response. If only
more christians had your integrity and compassion there would be a lot
less of this hate mongering being accepted under the guise of
religion. sincerely, Robert Gray
Jason Abdon
Ezekiel Krahlin
On Mon, 24 Feb 1997 23:21:22 -0600, Lac...@webtv.net imparted this
delicious tidbit of wisdom:
>Where the hell is the OUTRAGE from the conservative radio
>media and the Religious-Right about the latest bombings by
>a christian group called the ARMY OF GOD. They get all
<snip>
Thanks for your accurate analysis of the vileness of these bible
thumpers. Your words may help some others to see the light re. the
horrors of homophobia...and yet still others might become enraged
enough to fight even harder for, and/or join, the noble cause of
same-sex love.
I know you have all the answers to your questions...you were just
reaching out to help others less savvy understand. Your message is
elegant, straightforward, and effective. Thanks for being here,
Laconia.
----------signature:
I prefer public dialogue...no personal replies, please
(except on request; will consider pen-pals).
Private, hostile comments will be re-posted in public.
lac...@webtv.net
LACONIA RESPONS TO REV. MIKE
In article <8569305...@dejanews.com>,
> "RevMike" <gyp...@seanet.com> wrote:
> Dear Laconia,
> I am going to violate my own suggestion
> about crossposting to unrelated
> groups in order to answer your question
> about the bombings at the abortion
> clinics and at the lesbian bar. I have
> posted suggestions in our newsgroups
> (Christian) to not crosspost in order to
> cut down on the viciousness going
> on between the groups. But yours is one
> that demands a reply.
> First, and I can only speak for myself on
> this subject, neither the
> Christian Coalition, nor Pat Robertson,
> nor Rush Limbaugh speak for me or
> represent me.
[Then I suggest that you and those who disagree with Pat
Robertson, Rush Limbaugh and the Christian Coalition stand
up and speak out against them. Obviously, Pat
Robertson, Rush Limbaugh & the Christian Coalition must
speak for a large segment of American Christians. They
recieve alot of money, donations, and control more that 60%
of the Republican party, and are beginning to control the
Democratic party, and they have turned bill Clinton who
used to be a Liberal and they made him into a Conservative.
They probably don't represent you Rev. Mike, but they do
represent a majority of the Christian faith in this
country, or they wouldn't have the power that they have.]
Laconia
>
> Just as the media fails to
> cover certain things that counter
> to their agenda, so too do these
> individuals. I would like to think that
> there are plenty of other Christians that
> feel that way too.
WHERE THE HELL ARE THEY???
WHERE ARE THEY HIDING???
WHY DON'T THEY START A TV SHOW???
Laconia
> Secondly, ANY violence by ANY group
> should be immediately condemned. I
> don't agree with abortion personally, but
> we each have to make our choices
> and will have to stand before God and be
> judged for them. It is not my, or
> any other Christians, place to be the
> judge, jury and darn sure not the
> executioner of anyone.
[I wish that more Christians believed the way you do, but
obviously they don't. I wish that the Religious-Right would
stay out of the business of the gay & Lesbian community, &
Gay Rights. They don't crusade against Divorce (some of
them are, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich), They
don't crusade against those who wear tattos, men with long
hair, those who use "filthy language", or heterosexuals who
"live together" without being married. They have given up
their fight against "rock music" and began to sing it
themselves (Amy Grant, DC Talk) Why do they single out gay
& lesbian people??? Why can't they wait for us to go to
the "judgement throne"??? Too long a wait for them???
Laconia
> The closest that
> Jesus ever came to being violent is
> when he drove the money changers out of
> the Temple (this is the category in
> which I place Pat Robertson and anyone
> else who makes money off the Gospel
> that they received freely.)
> I'm sure that we all realize that there
> are fringe wackos on both sides of
> the fence. It does no good for anyone to
> "paint with a broad brush" any
> other group.
[have you contacted Pat Robertson, the Christian Coalition,
Fred Phelphs, or their followers and told them that???
Laconia
> Remember one other thing:
> just because someone is born in a
> garage, it doesn't make them a car. The
> "Army of God" is not a Christian group,
> but an extremist right wing group.
Then why is it O.K. for the Christians to link groups like
NAMBLA with the whole gay & Lesbian Community??? Why is it
everytime that someone on the Right-Wing does something, it
is an isolated incident, but when it is on the left-Wing,
especially if it is a Gay or Lesbian person or small gay or
Lesbian group, the Evangelical's on TV say that it is a
part of the "Gay Agenda"??? Do you believe that all Gay &
Lesbian people have an "Agenda" or do you believe that we
are individuals??? Have you and your church condemned the
Right-Wing film "The Gay Agenda"??? What would you say if
we in the Gay Community started a film called "The
Religious-Right Agenda"???
Laconia
> When Jesus was telling His
> disciples about the Judgment, He said
> that there would be those there that
> would say "Lord, Lord. We did all these
> things in your Name" and He will
> say to them, "Depart from me, you workers
> of evil. I never knew you."
> Anyone can say they are doing something
> for God, but true Christians know
> that "by their fruit shall you know
> them".
> Finally, to xonia and Mitchell Holman,
> who responded to your post before I
> saw it: Please trim your headers before
> posting if all you want to do is
> spew venom on not be constructive.
Do you think that they are spewing more venom than Pat
Robertson, Jesse helms, Fred Phelphs, G. Gordon Liddy or
Bob Grant?????
> The Christian groups did not need to see
> your obscene comments.
I thought you christians believed in FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
Isn't that why Jay Sekulow started the "American Center for
law & Justice". Why is it O.K. for Pat Robertson, Fred
Phelphs, Jerry Fawell, and Rush Limbaugh to express their
opinions, but I can't. We in the Gay & Lesbian community
don't have a national TV show like the 700 Club and we
don't have a voice on Talk Radio. When the Christian
community stops getting into the business of Gay Rights,
Gay Marriage, and when Pat Robertson stops going on TV
verbally bashing gay & Lesbian people, saying that it O.K.
to fire someone, deny someone a house, apartment or child
custody just because they are gay. When Rev. Fred Phelphs
stops protesting at Gay and Lesbian funerals calling
everyone "Sodomites" & "Fags", And when Bob Grant stops
going on radio telling Cops to mow down Gays & Lesbians
with bullets, then I'll shut up!
Laconia
> Let's try to help
> the Internet grow up a little,
> okay?
TELL THE CHRISTIAN-RIGHT TO GROW UP!!!
Laconia
> While I certainly don't have the national
> audience that Pat Robertson does,
Obviously, the majority of the Christian community dosn't
agree with you.
Laconia
> I do plan to post both your letter and
> this response to our website below.
> I hope this will help get the word out a
> little more.
> Best Wishes,
> Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
>
> > Cyberspace Celebrations
> http://www.seanet.com/~gypsy95/
> Heartland Chapel
> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/5
349
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News
Ezekiel Krahlin
This is a carbon copy I sent to lac...@webtv.net, which I also want
you to see:
-------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997 23:11:50 -0600, lac...@webtv.net said:
>In article <856844...@dejanews.com>,
>
> Lac...@webtv.net wrote on 2/25/97:
>
>>
> Where the hell is the OUTRAGE from the conservative
>> radio media and the Religious-Right about the latest
>> bombings by a christian group called the ARMY OF GOD.
I am no friend of The Christian Coalition, but I believe in educating
ourselves about our enemies as much as possible...as you obviously do,
too, Laconia. The Christian Coalition has a web page:
http://cc.org/
On this page is a link to the document: "Statement by Ralph Reed
regarding the bombing of a gay nightclub in Atlanta" in which he
says:
"The recent bombing of a predominantly gay and lesbian bar in Atlanta
was an act of indefensible terrorism and cowardice. It is the very
antithesis of our humane and compassionate stand on behalf of the
sanctity of the traditional family."
Now, I really don't take this as a serious statement...for with one
hand these people murder, then with the other hand they speak out
against their own crimes as if they were committed by others. This is
just an obvious ploy to divert attention from their actions.
Laconia, your stance is strong and truthful...you didn't need to
explain further *which* class of Christians you were addressing...as I
don't see the "good" Rev. Mike speaking out against homophobia...nor
do I see any of the mainstream Christian churches that are considered
"moderate" speaking out, either. And Rev. Mike identifies with these
"moderate" Christians.
I even searched for Rev. Mike's messages in DejaNews database...I came
up with not one single comment on his part, in defense of Les/Gay
Rights. So much for his holyness. A forked tongue with a drop of
honey, eh? Do not let any of these friendly snakes water down your
declarations and informative messages...that is also another tactic.
These are just sugar-coated versions of the same ol' murderous
homophobes.
There is *no* major Christian group--not even liberal--that is out
there demonstrating and mass-mailing on behalf of defending same-sex
lovers. This speaks mountains of how icy-cold majority of Christians
in this nation regard us...actions (or lack thereof) speak far louder
than sweet-scented words...from Rev. Mike or anyone else.
P.S.: Rev. Mike will receive a carbon copy of this letter.
RevMike
I think a clear and public statement of my beliefs are in order here, so
that there are no further misunderstandings.
1. As a Literalist, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
2. I believe that there is sufficient basis in scripture to state that
homosexuality is sin. Note: not "the" sin, just one of many. But "sin" is a
spiritual state, not a crime. (I know that some are.)
3. If questioned on the subject, I will give specific scriptures. I will
not, however, try to shove the Bible down anyone's throat.
4. I also believe, as an American, that people have rights. I would no more
withhold rights which are promised under the Constitution of the United
States from gays than from any other person practicing "sin".
5. Therefore, Cyberspace Celebrations website is open to the entire public
without regard to race, color, creed, national origin, gender or sexual
orientation. Heartland Chapel website exists as a public ministry on the
Internet and questions are answered there from a Biblical perspective.
6. It is God's job, not mine, to pass judgment on sin. It is my job to love
people, even if I disagree with them. Bombings, beatings, screaming and
murder are not means of sharing the Gospel. Those who do such things are
sinning and need to seek God's forgiveness. A true Christian has the Holy
Spirit living inside him/her and these things are contrary to the Fruits of
the Spirit as stated by Paul.
This statement will also be posted to Heartland Chapel website.
Best Wishes,
--
Ezekiel Krahlin
On 2 Mar 1997 18:44:21 GMT, "RevMike" <gyp...@seanet.com> said:
>I think a clear and public statement of my beliefs are in order here, so
>that there are no further misunderstandings.
No one asked you, homophobe. You are most definitely out of order.
>1. As a Literalist, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
You're in good company with millions of other monkeys.
>2. I believe that there is sufficient basis in scripture to state that
>homosexuality is sin.
I believe there is sufficient evidence to declare you insane and
commit you to an insane asylum...to keep you from harming society.
>3. If questioned on the subject, I will give specific scriptures. I will
>not, however, try to shove the Bible down anyone's throat.
You're shoving it down our throats right now, Christian-Hypocrite, by
you condescending, smug declarations to a people more beloved by God
than you could ever dream of: Thracians (same-sex lovers).
>4. I also believe, as an American, that people have rights. I would no more
>withhold rights which are promised under the Constitution of the United
>States from gays than from any other person practicing "sin".
By preaching that homosexuality is a sin, you incite violence against
a basically harmless and decent group of people. Blood is on your
hands as surely as it was on Judas Iscariot. Christ's heart bleeds
that much more, thanks to arrogant 'phobes like you...Christ weeps
over your horrible blasphemies.
>5. Therefore, Cyberspace Celebrations website is open to the entire public
>without regard to race, color, creed, national origin, gender or sexual
>orientation.
Thanks...you are now on my bookmark "enemy list". I will alert all my
Thracian sisters and brothers.
>6. It is God's job, not mine, to pass judgment on sin. It is my job to love
>people, even if I disagree with them. Bombings, beatings, screaming and
>murder are not means of sharing the Gospel. Those who do such things are
>sinning and need to seek God's forgiveness.
You just incite these bombings, beatings, screaming and murder...but
you'd never get your own hands dirty, would you? Neither would
Hitler.
>A true Christian has the Holy
>Spirit living inside him/her and these things are contrary to the Fruits of
>the Spirit as stated by Paul.
A true Christian would vociferously denounce your kind and join in
public demonstrations on behalf of the civil rights of same-sex
lovers.
>This statement will also be posted to Heartland Chapel website.
Oh goody, goody...aren't you the humble one!
>Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
Two more snakes in the grass to root out.
>Cyberspace Celebrations
Cyberspace Inquisitions
>Heartland Chapel
Heartless Chapel
Eric Bohlman
lac...@webtv.net wrote:
: Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, The 700 Club, & the
: Christian Coalition have alot of power in this country and
: they speak for probably a majority of the Christians in
: this country. They control more than 60% of the Republican
: Party and are beginning to control the Democratic party,
I don't buy the argument that they represent a majority of American
Christians. It takes the support of much less than a majority of the
population to gain that kind of power, and in particular to gain control
of a political party.
In fact, it's quite instructive to look at how the hard Christian Right
gained control of the Republican party. The viability of any political
party depends on a lot of local-level grassroots volunteer work: writing
local platforms, building lists of supporters, calling people on election
day to make sure they vote, etc. All this is rather unglamorous "scut
work" and most local party organizations usually have a hard time finding
people to do it. During and after Robertson's 1988 campaign, however,
plenty of his supporters began volunteering for this vital but seemingly
unrewarding work. They didn't pull a coup, they simply stepped into a
vacuum. And as a result, the Republican leadership wound up owing them
lots of favors. They got in at the lowest levels and rose to the top.
The majority of Americans, including American Christians, are politically
apathetic. As a result, a minority of the population can become a
majority of the politically active, and it's only the politically active
who count in shaping American politics. Take a look at the Republican
sweep in 1994. It had nothing to do with "angry white males" or any sort
of real ideological shift among Americans. It had everything to do with
the fact that few people vote in non-Presidential election years, which
means that whichever party does the best job of getting the vote out is
going to win. The Republicans, and especially the more extreme factions
of the party, did a good job of this. The Democrats did a shitty job of
it.
The same phenomenon explains why religious political extremists get
elected to school boards, but then can't get re-elected. Very few people
vote in school board elections (I remember going to the polls right
before closing to vote in one, and learning that I was the 15th person
out of 150 registered voters in my precinct to vote). Therefore all the
extremists need to do is get the word out among themselves, and they can
become a majority of the people who actually vote in such an election.
When they start proposing and enacting kooky policies, what happens is
that in the *next* election, a much larger percentage of the voters turn
out, and throw out the extremists. But this mobilization of the general
electorate doesn't last; by the next election, we're back to apathy.
lec...@earthlink.net
In article <01bc2671$75399840$3444b6cc@gypsy95>, "RevMike"
<gyp...@seanet.com> wrote:
> I think a clear and public statement of my beliefs are in order here, so
> that there are no further misunderstandings.
>
> 1. As a Literalist, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
> 2. I believe that there is sufficient basis in scripture to state that
> homosexuality is sin. Note: not "the" sin, just one of many. But "sin" is a
> spiritual state, not a crime. (I know that some are.)
> 3. If questioned on the subject, I will give specific scriptures. I will
> not, however, try to shove the Bible down anyone's throat.
> 4. I also believe, as an American, that people have rights. I would no more
> withhold rights which are promised under the Constitution of the United
> States from gays than from any other person practicing "sin".
> 5. Therefore, Cyberspace Celebrations website is open to the entire public
> without regard to race, color, creed, national origin, gender or sexual
> orientation. Heartland Chapel website exists as a public ministry on the
> Internet and questions are answered there from a Biblical perspective.
> 6. It is God's job, not mine, to pass judgment on sin. It is my job to love
> people, even if I disagree with them. Bombings, beatings, screaming and
> murder are not means of sharing the Gospel. Those who do such things are
> sinning and need to seek God's forgiveness. A true Christian has the Holy
> Spirit living inside him/her and these things are contrary to the Fruits of
> the Spirit as stated by Paul.
>
>
> This statement will also be posted to Heartland Chapel website.
>
> Best Wishes,
>
>
> --
> Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
> Cyberspace Celebrations
> http://www.seanet.com/~gypsy95/
> Heartland Chapel
> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/5349
A minister whose interests are love, modesty, and things spiritual rather
than hate,
self-congratulation, and things political-'scuse me while I faint and wish
there were more like him. Just a few could be the beginning of a wonderful
healing.
Lorri
--
"Love thy neighbor."-It works.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
msha...@interlog.com
I see a snake in the grass. All Christians are arrogant, superstitious,
lying, illogical snakes in the grass who say one thing and mean another.
RevMike
RevMike's response to:
Ezekiel Krahlin <Chief_T...@Athenia.New> wrote in article
<331a652b...@news.wco.com>...
> On 2 Mar 1997 18:44:21 GMT, "RevMike" <gyp...@seanet.com> said:
>
> >I think a clear and public statement of my beliefs are in order here, so
> >that there are no further misunderstandings.
>
> No one asked you, homophobe. You are most definitely out of order.
I beg to differ. When you label not only me, but my wife as well, as
homophobes you invite a reasoned response. That's what this post was and
this post is.
> >1. As a Literalist, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
>
> You're in good company with millions of other monkeys.
Anyone who doesn't agree exactly with your beliefs is a monkey? I don't
think so.
> >2. I believe that there is sufficient basis in scripture to state that
> >homosexuality is sin.
>
> I believe there is sufficient evidence to declare you insane and
> commit you to an insane asylum...to keep you from harming society.
Ezekiel, at this time in America it is not a crime to be a Christian. Also,
if anyone had to judge sanity based on the responses between what I post
and you post...well, let's just say that you stand a real good chance of
weaving baskets.
> >3. If questioned on the subject, I will give specific scriptures. I will
> >not, however, try to shove the Bible down anyone's throat.
>
> You're shoving it down our throats right now, Christian-Hypocrite, by
> you condescending, smug declarations to a people more beloved by God
> than you could ever dream of: Thracians (same-sex lovers).
No, Ezekiel. It's called a reasoned response. You are the one who is doing
the labeling, thus inviting this response which outlines my beliefs. Also,
could you prove this statement about "people more beloved by God"??
> >4. I also believe, as an American, that people have rights. I would no
more
> >withhold rights which are promised under the Constitution of the United
> >States from gays than from any other person practicing "sin".
>
> By preaching that homosexuality is a sin, you incite violence against
> a basically harmless and decent group of people. Blood is on your
> hands as surely as it was on Judas Iscariot. Christ's heart bleeds
> that much more, thanks to arrogant 'phobes like you...Christ weeps
> over your horrible blasphemies.
How does the preaching of homosexuality as a sin incite violence? It no
more incites violence against homosexuals than any other sin. I don't see
anyone beating up alcoholics, adulterers, etc. The violence comes from
those who are not following the Word of God, not from true Christians.
> >5. Therefore, Cyberspace Celebrations website is open to the entire
public
> >without regard to race, color, creed, national origin, gender or sexual
> >orientation.
>
> Thanks...you are now on my bookmark "enemy list". I will alert all my
> Thracian sisters and brothers.
I suggest that before you decide who your enemies are, you might want to
research a little better. Such as taking a look at the Engagement Page of
Cyberspace Celebrations http://www.seanet.com/~gypsy95/engage.html There
is a link there that says it all.
> >6. It is God's job, not mine, to pass judgment on sin. It is my job to
love
> >people, even if I disagree with them. Bombings, beatings, screaming and
> >murder are not means of sharing the Gospel. Those who do such things are
> >sinning and need to seek God's forgiveness.
>
> You just incite these bombings, beatings, screaming and murder...but
> you'd never get your own hands dirty, would you? Neither would
> Hitler.
Ezekiel, I think the venom in your own heart keeps you from really
listening to anyone else. I pity you.
> >A true Christian has the Holy
> >Spirit living inside him/her and these things are contrary to the Fruits
of
> >the Spirit as stated by Paul.
>
> A true Christian would vociferously denounce your kind and join in
> public demonstrations on behalf of the civil rights of same-sex
> lovers.
You're nearly right in this statement. Some, not most, Christians would
denounce my kind (a minister that has compassion and tolerance for the
homosexuals and lesbians).
> >This statement will also be posted to Heartland Chapel website.
>
> Oh goody, goody...aren't you the humble one!
Ezekiel, it's all I can do. I don't have a multi-billion dollar satellite
network at my disposal. All I have is the websites and these newsgroups.
Oh, speaking of that. If you could do a little better search of Deja News
than just the last 30 days, you'd find posts in alt.wedding and
soc.couples.wedding where I very much supported the principal of same sex
marriages. No, I don't post constantly on this subject. My focus is a
little more diverse than yours, for obvious reasons.
> >Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
> Two more snakes in the grass to root out.
Ezekiel, there is an old Klingon saying: The enemy of my enemy is my
friend. You need to learn to tell the difference.
lac...@webtv.net
In article <ebohlmanE...@netcom.com>,
> lac...@webtv.net wrote:
> : Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, The 700
Club, & the
> : Christian Coalition have alot of power
in this country and
> : they speak for probably a majority of
the Christians in
> : this country. They control more than
60% of the Republican
> : Party and are beginning to control the
Democratic party,
eboh...@net.com wrote:
> I don't buy the argument that they
represent a majority of American
> Christians. It takes the support of much
less than a majority of the
> population to gain that kind of power,
and in particular to gain control
> of a political party.
> In fact, it's quite instructive to look
at how the hard Christian Right
> gained control of the Republican party.
The viability of any political
> party depends on a lot of local-level
grassroots volunteer work: writing
> local platforms, building lists of
supporters, calling people on election
> day to make sure they vote, etc. All
this is rather unglamorous "scut
> work" and most local party organizations
usually have a hard time finding
> people to do it.
Lac...@webtv.net writes:
The Christian coalition are not the only ones out
there "busting their butts" to get their "small" groups of
people to vote. The Black community has campained to get
more people to vote, (remember the Million Man March), the
Hispanic community & even the Gay community has done many
of the same things that the Religious-Right has done to get
people to vote.
The Black, Hispanic & Gay community usually tells
people to vote democrat, especially in the light of the
Republicans Welfare cuts, Anti-immigration laws,
Anti-Affirmative action, higher penalties for crimes
(especially when our "Justice System" discriminates against
minorities & the poor). No matter how much the Black,
Hispanic & Gay community works to get people their people
to vote to vote their way, the Religious-Right allways
wins, otherwise the Congress would be Democrat & Bill
Clinton would still be a liberal today.
DavidJR
RevMike <gyp...@seanet.com> wrote in article
<01bc2671$75399840$3444b6cc@gypsy95>...
> I think a clear and public statement of my beliefs are in order here, so
> that there are no further misunderstandings.
>
Unless I'm mistaken the God of the old testament is a god of retribution
whereas the God of the new is a forgiving, loving God. Each manifestation
was appropriate for its time (the Old testament being a book of law whereas
the New testament is a more modern moral and ethical code). Thus, the word
of God can only be seen as consistent if properly interpreted and not read
verbatim with a literal interpretation.
> 2. I believe that there is sufficient basis in scripture to state that
> homosexuality is sin. Note: not "the" sin, just one of many. But "sin" is
a
> spiritual state, not a crime. (I know that some are.)
You should also find it equally abominable to eat a bacon sandwich and
defecate too close to your tent. Interestingly, the sin (as you call it)
is not precluded by any one of the 10 commandments. It is beyond my
comprehension why so many Christians consider homosexuality a worse sin
than theft or adultery. In fact why don't they deal with the many evils
that prevail in society today.
> 3. If questioned on the subject, I will give specific scriptures. I will
> not, however, try to shove the Bible down anyone's throat.
In quoting or referring to scripture in Gay newsgroups you are preaching to
the converted. We grew up with the intolerance bred of scripture and
reinforced by law. Many of us have rationally reassessed the morality with
which we were raised and rejected the illogical notion that it is a sin to
follow your God given nature in a way that harms no one and can but
enriches your own life. Contrary to popular opinion we do not
automatically reject the remainder of Christian doctrine and continue to
live moral lives.
> 4. I also believe, as an American, that people have rights. I would no
more
> withhold rights which are promised under the Constitution of the United
> States from gays than from any other person practicing "sin".
They also have the right to be treated equally under the law when they do
nothing to the detriment of the common or individual good. I trust we can
now count on your support for gay civil rights.
DavidJR
Eugene V. Greathouse
msha...@interlog.com wrote:
>lec...@earthlink.net wrote:
>>
>> In article <01bc2671$75399840$3444b6cc@gypsy95>, "RevMike"
>> <gyp...@seanet.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I think a clear and public statement of my beliefs are in order here, so
>> > that there are no further misunderstandings.
A true Christian has the Holy
>> > Spirit living inside him/her and these things are contrary to the Fruits of
>> > the Spirit as stated by Paul.
>> >
>> >
>> > This statement will also be posted to Heartland Chapel website.
>> >
>> > Best Wishes,
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
>> > Cyberspace Celebrations
>> > http://www.seanet.com/~gypsy95/
>> > Heartland Chapel
>> > http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/5349
>>
>> A minister whose interests are love, modesty, and things spiritual rather
>> than hate,
>> self-congratulation, and things political-'scuse me while I faint and wish
>> there were more like him. Just a few could be the beginning of a wonderful
>> healing.
>> Lorri
>> --
>> "Love thy neighbor."-It works.
>> Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
>
>
>I see a snake in the grass. All Christians are arrogant, superstitious,
>lying, illogical snakes in the grass who say one thing and mean another.
>
>
Yes and all non-christians are enlightened, honest, saviors of
humanity.
Look, before you make a sweeping statement like the above do
something. Read the gospels three times, straight through. Pay
particular attention to Jesus' discussions with the religious elite of
His day. Do they remind you of anyone? Note His attitude toward them.
Did Jesus feel these people were worthy of the kingdom of God? Why
would His attitude change between then and now? Does Jesus' philosophy
make sense? If so why? If not why not? Remember these are not
platitudes, these are blueprints to living the Christlike life. These
outline humanities relationships with God, with one another, and with
ourselves. Do these positions square with what you observe in the
religious zealots of our day? Were Jesus here today, what do you think
He would say to these leaders? Would he support them?
Believe it or not there are people who take their marching orders in
life from the words of Jesus contained in the gospels. Would you call
someone who didn't a Christian?
Of course you won't be able to answer any of these questions
truthfully until you've read the gospels three times. Can you do it?
If you can't then please refrain from passing judgement on "all
Christians".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gene Greathouse (ink...@airmail.net)
Trying to follow in the footsteps of the greatest humanist of
all, Jesus Christ.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
lac...@webtv.net
Why do the Evangelical Christians have to be dragged
kicking and screaming in order to condemn acts of violence
against Gays & Lesbians. And why only acts of violence. The
Evangelicals NEVER condemned Rev. Fred Phelphs for
protesting in front of Gay & Lesbian Funerals screaming out
"The Fag Died Of AIDS, Thats good for him", including
protests infront of Bill Clinton's mothers funeral, and
sending nasty faxes to Gay organizations. Maybe the
mainstream Christian community thinks there is nothing
wrong with that.
Why didn't The Christian community condemn talk show
host Bob Grant when he threatened to punch a Gay man during
a taping of the "Richard Bey" show, or when Bob Grant told
the police during his radio show that they should spray the
Gay Pride parade with bullets. These Evangelicals must
think that threasts of violence against Gays & Lesbians are
O.K., but they will wait until it is actually carried out
before they "condemn" it. Pat Robertson has been a regular
guest on Bob Grant's show, but he has NEVER condemned Bob
Grant for his threats of violence. Maybe Ezekel Krahlin's
posting was right about the sugar-coated Christian
preachers & the violent radicals working together.
There is still one question that these Right-Wing
hypocrite Christians won't ever answer. And that is why do
they single out Gays & Lesbians. Dosen't the same bible
that they us to condemn "homosexuality" also condemn
divorce. How come they aren't protesting in front of the
Family Courts??? What about drunkeness, why aren't the
Right-Wing Evangelicals protesting in front of the liquor
stores. Or trying to outlaw the sale of it. How come the
Evangelical Christians want to penalize people for being
Gay or Lesbian, but they don't want to penalize people for
being divorced, drunks, tattoo wearers, those who have
premarital sex and those who "take the lords name in vain"
(use of the word G-- D-M-)
Why isn't the Religious-Right trying to keep
"divorcees", "drunks", "swarers", and "adulters" out of the
millitary. How come people get fired from their jobs for
being Gay, but rarely (almost never) does someone get fired
for being divorced, drunks (as long as they come to work
sober), or for having premarital sex.
The Evangelicals want to outlaw Gay Marriage, but you
NEVER see them tring to outlaw divorce, or remarriage. The
same bible that they use against "homosexuality" also says
that anyone who divorces and remarries is an "adulterer"
The Evangelical Christians have even endorsed candidates
for political office who have divorced & remarried (Ronald
Reagan, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Phil Grahmn) and one of
the Evangelical Christians best friends is Rush Limbaugh
(married 3 times). I wasn't aware that God changed the
rules on Divorce & Remarriage.
I just ask one simple question, and that one simple
question is why do the Evangelical Christians single out
Gays & Lesbians and only thump thoes biblical verses
pertaining to "homosexuality. The Religious-Right has NO
ANSWER for that question because when they honestly look at
themselves, they know that it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that they
are Hypocrites!!!! Picking & choosing the verses from the
bible that they are comfortable with, and ignoring the
biblical verses that they are uncomfortable with. It is
allways easier to "crusade" against someone elses "sin",
but you become uncomfortable when someone "crusades"
against your "sin" The Evangelicals want to keep as many
friends as they can. Many of their friends are divorced
(dozens of political candidates.) many of their friends
drink, smoke, curse (talk show host Bob Grant, a frend of
Pat Robertsons) and have Pre-marital sex (country singer
Wynonna Judd who had a child out of wedlock appeared on Pat
Robertsons 700 Club, plus her mother Naomi Judd who
appeared twice on the 700 Club gave birth to Wynonna out of
wedlock)
The Religious-Right has given up their crusades and
boycotts against Heterosexual adultery and Heterosexual sex
on television, (since Charleton Heston, a friend of Pat
Robertsons played a character on "Dynasty" who was in the
process of divorcing his wife, so he could marry her
younger sister, and was having an affair with the young
sister while still married to the older sister.) But the
Religious-Right will protest and boycott any television
show which have Gay & Lesbian characters on them, even if
there are no sex scenes.
Another sign of hypocricy is when the Religious-Right
protests aginst Abortion, but when someone decides to have
their baby, the Religious-Right does not want to help to
support it. The Religious-Right is only "Pro-Birth". They
tell women that they should carry their baby to term and
give birth. And then the Religious-Right wants to cut
welfare and food stamps to those babies who are born,
causing these babies they "saved" to starve and live in
poverty. I suggest that if the Religious-Right and their
conservative friends don't want their tax dollars going to
support some other women's baby(s), then I suggest that
they stop telling these women who they complain "spounge"
off the government that they have to have their babies if
they don't want to help support them. They say that
abortion is wrong in cases of rape because your punishing
the baby for the "sins" of it's father. If they are cutting
welfare because the babys mother is lazy, or having extra
babies to get more money from the government, aren't the
Welfare Cuts or denial of welfare to extra babies punishing
the baby for the "sins" of the mother????
I only ask of the Religious-Right that if they are
going to crusade against "sin", that they crusade against
ALL "sin' and thump EVERY verse and EVERY scripture in the
bible to EVERYONE & ANYONE commiting EVERY "sin". And then
everything will be fair. Or don't thump the bible AT ALL.
Thank you
P.S. When addressing my post, please DO NOT take ANYTHING
out of context. Some people are slick cutting up parts of
peoples posts taking sentences and paragraphs out of its
context to make the original statement(s) look different
or to avoid other issues in a posting. I ask of anyone who
wants to "RE:" my posting to address ALL issues brought up.
Although I know people will take my sentences out of
context anyway, if you did address EVERY issue, you would
not appear to me that you are trying to "avoid" or 'dodge"
anything.
Ezekiel Krahlin
On 4 Mar 1997 03:09:21 GMT, "RevMike" <gyp...@seanet.com> said:
>RevMike's response to:
>
>Ezekiel Krahlin <Chief_T...@Athenia.New> wrote in article
>> I believe there is sufficient evidence to declare you insane and
>> commit you to an insane asylum...to keep you from harming society.
>Ezekiel, at this time in America it is not a crime to be a Christian.
It should be, for your type: homophobic. Homophobic with a smile,
but still homophobic.
>Also,
>if anyone had to judge sanity based on the responses between what I post
>and you post...well, let's just say that you stand a real good chance of
>weaving baskets.
Nonsense, I'm solid and sane. I stand firm against you. You say you
stand up for the homosexual, yet believe that homosexuality is a sin,
because that is how you interpret passages from the Bible, which you
believe condemn homosexuality. A *true* Christian knows homosexuality
is no sin...and will defend GayFolk straight from the heart, not
lukewarm such as yourself. (Remember what Jesus said about lukewarm
people?) Here's the voice of a *real* Christian who is also
heterosexual:
-----begin quote:
What is the point. Their is nothing biblically wrong with having sex
with the same sex. I suggest you do more serious research before you
pass on these lies that hurt so many Your teaching these lies is the
abomination.
The abomination is the false translations of the Hebrew/Greek which
had nothing at all to do with homosexuality. This lie is one of the
biggest sins of Christianity - to hurt so many whose only "sin" is to
be just as God created them to be. I was born very heterosexual just
as others were born gay, lesbian or bisexual. It is not a choice.
Note: Why I am totally supportive of Christian homosexuality, I happen
to be extremely heterosexual. I can't help it, that's how I was born.
I hardly like hugging men! Liberated Christians in our newsletters
and Fellowship Groups does not deal with homosexual issues, but rather
loving, women-centered intimacy and Christian sexuality for
heterosexual couples and women. I say this to avoid all the wonderful
gays and lesbians wanting our info thinking we are homosexual oriented
due to my support.
Dave, Liberated Christians, Phoenix Az
-----end quote:
> >3. If questioned on the subject, I will give specific scriptures. I will
> >not, however, try to shove the Bible down anyone's throat.
Oh, I'm educated, as well as Christian, you dork. You don't need to
refer me to any passages. Here they are, with my notes:
-----begin quote:
>Aside from Leviticus, then, explain Genesis 19, Judges 19:22-30,
>Romans 1:22-27, 1Corinthians 6:9,10.
In reviewing those passages, I must conclude that not only was
homosexuality not the issue in all those cases...but that violence and
rape by clearly heterosexual behavior was the true sin. You simple
Bible-thumpers, by focusing on these sections of The Bible, only make
more and more people realize the evils of heterosexism and male
chauvanism! Let me begin:
===================================
Excerpt from Genesis 19 (King James):
4. But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of
Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people
from every quarter:
5. And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men
which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may
know them.
6. And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door
after him,
7. And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
8. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let
me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good
in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they
under the shadow of my roof.
----------
The sin of the citizens of Sodom was not homosexual desire, but sexual
desire of any sort that was unwelcome and forceful enough to be
considered a wish to rape. They wanted to rape God's angels! Whether
they be women or men, this is a sin. To desire to forcefully know
*anyone* is a sin against your fellow human being (or angel). It
seems the residents of Sodom were bisexual...but sexuality per se was
clearly not the offense. How would you feel if you had some women
guests visiting you, when suddenly your neighbors pounded on your
door, demanding to have sex with them? Don't you think this is
disgusting and sinful? The offense of the Sodomites was not
homosexual desire, but forceful, selfish, and violent desire to do
unto others what you would never want done unto yourself.
But I also question Lot so willingly giving his daughters to these
folk! Don't you, Mike, ever question that? The actual offense, as it
turns out, was 100% heterosexual...if you insist on defining this
incident from a sexual viewpoint.
===================================
Excerpt from Judges 19 (King James):
22. Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of
the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and
beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man,
saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may
know him.
23. And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and
said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly;
seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly.
24. Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them
I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what
seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing.
25. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his
concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and
abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to
spring, they let her go.
----------
Almost an identical incident as that in Sodom...including the cruel,
night-long gang rape of a young girl by men. The violation, again, is
clearly heterosexual. Not only was she raped many times, she was
abused...implying violence along with forced sex was part of this
sinful heterosexual behavior. Hetero, hetero, hetero! A few verses
later, a *woman* was sliced up into little pieces:
29. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid
hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into
twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.
These passages I've quoted, imply a society that was bisexual, and
didn't judge sin by one's sexuality, but by how you regarded your
neighbors, visitors, and strangers: with respect or abuse. I don't
get any lesson whatsoever, on the (supposed) evils of homosexuality,
as you claim, Mike. It does show a shallow disregard for women,
however...and again, the implied evil of base heterosexuality.
Now, movin' right on to the New Testament, we have:
===================================
Romans 1:22-27 (King James):
22. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image
made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and
creeping things.
24. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the
lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between
themselves:
25. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and
served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.
Amen.
26. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even
their women did change the natural use into that which is against
nature:
27. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the
woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working
that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of
their error which was meet.
----------
I don't see homosexuality itself as the sin. I see infidelity, and
animal sex as the sins. Lust involves complete disregard for the
other person, while getting whatever pleases you. Rape is an example
or sexual lust. It can also be an aspect of infidelity, if you
presently have a lover or spouse. Sexual lust is a sin, whether the
sex act is performed between a man and woman, or two people of the
opposite sex.
The real sin in this passage is the defilement of worship: idolizing
their own human form, and that of other creatures. It was that which
led them to eventually lust after each other, disrespecting the
sanctity of each person's individual soul and body. You really can't
effectively quote this passage to prove your case against
homosexuality. But you certainly can use it to prove the evils of
disregard for another's feelings.
===================================
I Corinthians 6:9,10 (King James):
9. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom
of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10. Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
----------
Do you interpret "effeminate" as homosexual? There are effeminate
straight men as well as gay men. I know that some modernized
interpretations of The Bible, replace the word "effeminate" with
"homosexual"...but that is only recent, and does not include any Bible
ever written before 1950 A.D. I am aware that you Bible-thumpers are
rewriting The Bible to replace more and more terms with the word
"homosexual", just to make yourselves look accurate. (And I wonder
what the original word the Greeks meant by King James' interpretation
into "effeminate"?)
Be that as it may, these two references from the New Testament, are
very weak cases to prove your belief that homosexuality is a sinful
practice. And the excerpts from the Old Testament are not only weak,
but invalid in proving likewise.
You really need to come up with more solid examples than these, dear
Mike! If brought to testify on this issue before a judge, you'd be
laughed out of any courthouse in the world!
In close, here's a little poem in your honor, Mike:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Permission granted by author for anyone to distribute this
shaman's chant gratis to anyone, anywhere, any time...under
condition that story remains intact and complete, including
title and credit to the original author: Ezekiel J. Krahlin
(ekra...@fog.net).
-------------------------------------------------------------
A CHRISTIAN SHAMAN'S CHANT
------------------------------------------
copyright 1997 by Ezekiel J. Krahlin
Oh, Jesus is indeed my lord,
Why should I want another way?
When he has shown me everything,
Including that he's gay.
It's you *fundies* who need to 'fess your crimes
of false morality,
For the many times that you've condemned
our sexuality.
For the angel of wrath is soon to pour
Her vessel of justice on you all...
And the waters that rise to your very eyes
Shall drown you when you fall.
For the hetero perverts that you are,
Your reward is found in hell.
And just how long before you repent,
Only time and God can tell.
Yers trooly: Jehovah's Queer Witness
"There's a little homo in every homo sapiens." --e.j.krahlin
-----end quote:
>> You're shoving it down our throats right now, Christian-Hypocrite, by
>> you condescending, smug declarations to a people more beloved by God
>> than you could ever dream of: Thracians (same-sex lovers).
>How does the preaching of homosexuality as a sin incite violence?
I've heard *that* excuse many times over from you homphobic
KKKristians. It is *obvious* how preaching homosexuality to be a sin
incites violence...as if you didn't know, oh innocent little you.
People learn to *hate* anyone they believe commits sins...you,
therefore, have blood on your hands for perpetuating a lie, at the
expense of the innocent suffering and dying.
>It no
>more incites violence against homosexuals than any other sin. I don't see
>anyone beating up alcoholics, adulterers, etc.
That's because the alcohlics, adulterers, etc. are the ones bashing
homosexuals. You are a blatant liar, and doing Satan's work very
well, thank you. So, you don't see how preaching homosexuality is
evil, causes anyone to be violent? Then you had better take a basic
course on human psychology.
However, I do believe that you *know* you incite violence...you're
just smiling like a crocodile. You don't fool me for a moment. What
did Jesus say in such a situation as this? "Get behind me!"
>The violence comes from
>those who are not following the Word of God, not from true Christians.
You're a doublespeaking bastard.
>> Thanks...you are now on my bookmark "enemy list". I will alert all my
>> Thracian sisters and brothers.
>I suggest that before you decide who your enemies are, you might want to
>research a little better.
I'm a lot smarter than you think.
>> >6. It is God's job, not mine, to pass judgment on sin. It is my job to
>love
>> >people, even if I disagree with them.
Then your love would be as exemplified by the Christian a quoted
above. You are not like that at all. You are simple, a wolf in
sheep's clothing...a devil in Jesus's robe.
>Bombings, beatings, screaming and
>> >murder are not means of sharing the Gospel. Those who do such things are
>> >sinning and need to seek God's forgiveness.
Well, you bring it about by insisting we GayFolk are sinning.
>> You just incite these bombings, beatings, screaming and murder...but
>> you'd never get your own hands dirty, would you? Neither would
>> Hitler.
>Ezekiel, I think the venom in your own heart keeps you from really
>listening to anyone else. I pity you.
It ain't venom, honey, it's righteous rage...just as Jesus felt when
he knocked over the stalls in the temple. Pity all you want, but you
are a liar, with a stone instead of a heart...and an intellect that
you have turned into a most wicked, unholy tool.
>> >A true Christian has the Holy
>> >Spirit living inside him/her and these things are contrary to the Fruits
>of
>> >the Spirit as stated by Paul.
And you are contrary to all things that are good, holy, and
compassionate. There may be a spirit living inside you, but it sure
ain't Holy!
>> A true Christian would vociferously denounce your kind and join in
>> public demonstrations on behalf of the civil rights of same-sex
>> lovers.
>You're nearly right in this statement. Some, not most, Christians would
>denounce my kind (a minister that has compassion and tolerance for the
>homosexuals and lesbians).
Tolerance? What a niggardly attitude. I don't ask for tolerance. I
demand equal rights. I demand that your kind answer to your
conscience, and stop defiling the sacred gift that is homosexual love.
>> Oh goody, goody...aren't you the humble one!
>Oh, speaking of that. If you could do a little better search of Deja News
>than just the last 30 days, you'd find posts in alt.wedding and
>soc.couples.wedding where I very much supported the principal of same sex
>marriages.
I don't need to ready anything else by you. The fact that you
believe, and preach, that homosexual acts are sinful, tells me exactly
the kind of perverted soul you are.
>> Two more snakes in the grass to root out.
>Ezekiel, there is an old Klingon saying: The enemy of my enemy is my
>friend. You need to learn to tell the difference.
Oh, I have the gift of discernment well established. I am also an
anthropologist, and student of world religions. There is also a
saying, "Do not cast your pearls before swine." So I shall take heed,
and cease casting them in your direction.
>Best Wishes,
You cold, snake...as if you really cared. Me, sinning because I have
sex with another man...how dare you stick your nose up my crack? Get
the hell out of my bed, you unholy and disgusting pervert!
---
(Hail, Athenia...brave new nation!)
Please keep our dialogues public; private mail by request only.
Hostile private replies will be re-posted in the public arena.
tsor...@nordtcom.org
Clarence Snyder wrote:
>
> On Wed, 05 Mar 1997 00:21:15 -0600, lac...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >>P.S. When addressing my post, please DO NOT take ANYTHING
> >out of context. Some people are slick cutting up parts of
> >peoples posts taking sentences and paragraphs out of its
> >context to make the original statement(s) look different
> >or to avoid other issues in a posting. I ask of anyone who
> >wants to "RE:" my posting to address ALL issues brought up.
> >Although I know people will take my sentences out of
> >context anyway, if you did address EVERY issue, you would
> >not appear to me that you are trying to "avoid" or 'dodge"
> >anything.
> >
Christians are an arrogant lot who pick and choose whichever biblical
verses suit their particular biases and hatreds at the time. They
conveniently ignore other verses which make them uncomfortable in their
own sinning. What a bunch of hypocrite Pharisees? We, the intelligent,
the unbrainwashed, see right through you!!!
Clarence Snyder
On Wed, 05 Mar 1997 00:21:15 -0600, lac...@webtv.net wrote:
>
>
>>P.S. When addressing my post, please DO NOT take ANYTHING
>out of context. Some people are slick cutting up parts of
>peoples posts taking sentences and paragraphs out of its
>context to make the original statement(s) look different
>or to avoid other issues in a posting. I ask of anyone who
>wants to "RE:" my posting to address ALL issues brought up.
>Although I know people will take my sentences out of
>context anyway, if you did address EVERY issue, you would
>not appear to me that you are trying to "avoid" or 'dodge"
>anything.
>
>-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
OK, Here goes nothing:
First of all, I do not consider myself "Religious Right",, but I am an
"evangelical" Christian
> Why do the Evangelical Christians have to be dragged
>kicking and screaming in order to condemn acts of violence
>against Gays & Lesbians.
As a member of an Historic Peace Church ( Anabaptist - Mennonite), we
teach against violence of all kinds.
We teach Acceptance of the sinner, as we are all sinners, saved by
grace. It is the Sin Act that we are against.
And why only acts of violence. The
>Evangelicals NEVER condemned Rev. Fred Phelphs for
>protesting in front of Gay & Lesbian Funerals screaming out
>"The Fag Died Of AIDS, Thats good for him", including
>protests infront of Bill Clinton's mothers funeral, and
>sending nasty faxes to Gay organizations. Maybe the
>mainstream Christian community thinks there is nothing
>wrong with that.
We stand for decency, and for honouring others - we do not support
those who dishonour . We might not holler out REAL LOUD about those
who do, I guess that is why we are referred to as "The Quiet in the
Land"
>
> Why didn't The Christian community condemn talk show
>host Bob Grant when he threatened to punch a Gay man during
>a taping of the "Richard Bey" show, or when Bob Grant told
>the police during his radio show that they should spray the
>Gay Pride parade with bullets. These Evangelicals must
>think that threasts of violence against Gays & Lesbians are
> O.K., but they will wait until it is actually carried out
>before they "condemn" it. Pat Robertson has been a regular
>guest on Bob Grant's show, but he has NEVER condemned Bob
>Grant for his threats of violence. Maybe Ezekel Krahlin's
>posting was right about the sugar-coated Christian
>preachers & the violent radicals working together.
We do "condemn" that kind of behaviour and actions.
>
> There is still one question that these Right-Wing
>hypocrite Christians won't ever answer. And that is why do
>they single out Gays & Lesbians. Dosen't the same bible
>that they us to condemn "homosexuality" also condemn
>divorce.
Yes, and it is to our shame that this is not addressed more openly,
and with more candor than it is. It is my belief - NOTE- I said MY
belief, that if a CHRISTIAN couple is married, they should not
divorce, and if they do, they should remain single until the death of
their (former) spouse.
Ideally, a Christian should not marry a non-Christian, so the second
scenario should not happen, but it does.
This is the event of a Christian and a Non-Christian marrying, then
divorcing. The Christian partner should remain single, again, until
the death of the spouse.
If Non-Christians marry, and one becomes a Christian, the Christian
should not divorce the non-Christian. If the Non-Christian divorces
the Christian, it would still likely be best to remain single, but
from how I understand Paul, that person is not bound.
If the Christian divorces the Non-Christian then he/she should remain
single.
See 1st Corrintians 7:10 - 16
How come they aren't protesting in front of the
>Family Courts??? What about drunkeness, why aren't the
>Right-Wing Evangelicals protesting in front of the liquor
>stores. Or trying to outlaw the sale of it.
This was tried - remember the Temperance Movement?
How come the
>Evangelical Christians want to penalize people for being
>Gay or Lesbian,
It is not the sexual orientation that is bad, per-se. Mabee it is not
their fault they are wired the way they are. The fact is, they are NOT
wired according to plan. Like single Hetros, they should remain
celibate.
If you are "wired" to be a Pedophile, it is not your "wiring" that
gets you in trouble, it is the resulting actions.
>but they don't want to penalize people for
>being divorced, drunks, tattoo wearers, those who have
>premarital sex and those who "take the lords name in vain"
>(use of the word G-- D-M-)
>
> Why isn't the Religious-Right trying to keep
>"divorcees", "drunks", "swarers", and "adulters" out of the
>millitary. How come people get fired from their jobs for
>being Gay, but rarely (almost never) does someone get fired
>for being divorced, drunks (as long as they come to work
>sober), or for having premarital sex.
>
> The Evangelicals want to outlaw Gay Marriage, but you
>NEVER see them tring to outlaw divorce, or remarriage. The
>same bible that they use against "homosexuality" also says
>that anyone who divorces and remarries is an "adulterer"
>The Evangelical Christians have even endorsed candidates
>for political office who have divorced & remarried
Mabee the lesser of two evils?
(Ronald
>Reagan, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Phil Grahmn) and one of
>the Evangelical Christians best friends is Rush Limbaugh
>(married 3 times). I wasn't aware that God changed the
>rules on Divorce & Remarriage.
>
> I just ask one simple question, and that one simple
>question is why do the Evangelical Christians single out
>Gays & Lesbians and only thump thoes biblical verses
>pertaining to "homosexuality.
The same question can be asked of the GAY community. Are they only
GAY, or primarily GAY? Are they not HUMAN, and concerned with other
issues, beyond GAY RIGHTS, AIDS RESEARCH, and CHRISTIAN BASHING?
Lets see the gay community speaking up about, and getting involved
with, the urban poor problem, the homeless, even the rights of the
unborn, or CANCER, or ANY other cause not specific to the GAY
community? Lets see the GAY community show some concern for the rest
of the world around them, and mabee they would be seen in a kinder
light by "The Rest of Us".
Those GAYS who claim to be Christian, lets see the proof of your
claims in your living. Let it be seen in your community, and in the
community at large.
> The Religious-Right has NO
>ANSWER for that question because when they honestly look at
>themselves, they know that it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that they
>are Hypocrites!!!!
Many of us are, to be sure. Many of "you" out there are as well.
>Picking & choosing the verses from the
>bible that they are comfortable with, and ignoring the
>biblical verses that they are uncomfortable with. It is
>allways easier to "crusade" against someone elses "sin",
>but you become uncomfortable when someone "crusades"
>against your "sin" The Evangelicals want to keep as many
>friends as they can
We are called to live "in" the world, not necessarily to be "of" the
world. To influence the world, we, like salt, must be "mixed into" the
world.
> Many of their friends are divorced
>(dozens of political candidates.) many of their friends
>drink, smoke, curse (talk show host Bob Grant, a frend of
>Pat Robertsons) and have Pre-marital sex (country singer
>Wynonna Judd who had a child out of wedlock appeared on Pat
>Robertsons 700 Club, plus her mother Naomi Judd who
>appeared twice on the 700 Club gave birth to Wynonna out of
>wedlock)
All sin can be forgiven - That's right, ALL.
You have to admit it is sin first, and that step, by and large, is
missing in the GAY community. If I foul up, and do what I know is
wrong, I have to admit it before I can be forgiven. Denying it is
wrong gets me no-where.
> The Religious-Right has given up their crusades and
>boycotts against Heterosexual adultery and Heterosexual sex
How about the "dare to wait" campaigns, and the pledges of abstinance
being encouraged among the youth of America? Where is that coming
from?
>on television, (since Charleton Heston, a friend of Pat
>Robertsons played a character on "Dynasty" who was in the
>process of divorcing his wife, so he could marry her
>younger sister, and was having an affair with the young
>sister while still married to the older sister.) But the
>
>Religious-Right
Your description - the religious right is not necessarily Christian,
and the Christian is not necessarily the Religious Right
>will protest and boycott any television
>show which have Gay & Lesbian characters on them, even if
>there are no sex scenes.
>
> Another sign of hypocricy is when the Religious-Right
>protests aginst Abortion, but when someone decides to have
>their baby, the Religious-Right does not want to help to
>support it.
Evangelical Christianity would prevent the pregnancy in the first
place, if their teachings were followed. Since not everyone can live
that way, we attempt to preserve the life that has been produced.
If the mother is unable, and unwilling, to look after the child, there
is an ever-growing percentage of married couples UNABLE to have
children, who would give almost anything for the right to raise that
child . Do you know how long the wait is to adopt a child in North
America? Black, white, or pink with purple polka-dots?
The Religious-Right is only "Pro-Birth".
Evangelical Christianity is "pro responsibility"
>They
>tell women that they should carry their baby to term and
>give birth. And then the
"Religious-Right "
See above
>wants to cut
>welfare and food stamps to those babies who are born,
>causing these babies they "saved" to starve and live in
>poverty.
Again see above.
> I suggest that if the Religious-Right and their
>conservative friends don't want their tax dollars going to
>support some other women's baby(s), then I suggest that
>they stop telling these women who they complain "spounge"
>off the government that they have to have their babies if
>they don't want to help support them. They say that
>abortion is wrong in cases of rape because your punishing
>the baby for the "sins" of it's father. If they are cutting
>welfare because the babys mother is lazy, or having extra
>babies to get more money from the government, aren't the
>Welfare Cuts or denial of welfare to extra babies punishing
>the baby for the "sins" of the mother????
>
> I only ask of the Religious-Right that if they are
>going to crusade against "sin", that they crusade against
>ALL "sin' and thump EVERY verse and EVERY scripture in the
>bible to EVERYONE & ANYONE commiting EVERY "sin". And then
>everything will be fair. Or don't thump the bible AT ALL.
>
> Thank you
>
How about just tapping it a little bit?
Read it with an open mind, and an open heart. Most of the answers are
there if you look for them.
Don't look at the "Extremists" Doing so tars us all with one brush,
just like saying all GAYS are like those who have sex in public
washrooms, or in the middle of city parks, or recruit young boys for
sex.
If Hetos had sex in public, flaunting it at any opportunity, they
would be "persecuted" as well. If I go looking for young girls to have
sex with, I'll be locked up in a very real jail cell, and if not in
protective custody, there is a very real chance I would not live out
my sentance. Why should Gays be any different?
If I should happen to have those inclinations, but curb them, I am
allowed to live in peace. So is the Gay.
(Statistics support the premise that the majority of pedophilia crimes
are gay crimes, not hetro)
As for the "Religious Right" leaders that get caught with their pants
down, there are bad eggs in every basket, For some, it is just a good
marketing ploy - take the "stand" of the "Religious Right" or
"Fundamentalist Evangelical", then fleece the trusting flock.
Just because I say I am Julius Caesar does not make me Julius Caesar.
Notice, it is possible to dissagree with someone, without being
dissagreeable about it?
Love the sinner, abhor the sin.
Snyder Enterprises
Appropriate Technology for the Information Age
Waterloo Ontario.
To reply please drop the r, and send to :
cls...@ibm.net
Too many misdirected replies plugging my mail box!!!
Jason Ahrens
I know people will complain about how much was removed, but the whole
posting boils down to the one line...
Clarence Snyder (clsn...@Ibm.net) wrote:
: Love the sinner, abhor the sin.
Since when is love a sin?
Lac...@webtv.net
In article
> On Wed, 05 Mar 1997 00:21:15 -0600,
lac...@webtv.net wrote:
> > P.S. When addressing my post, please DO NOT take
> > ANYTHING out of context. Some people are slick cutting
> > up parts of peoples posts taking sentences and
> > paragraphs out of its context to make the original
> > statement(s) look different or to avoid other issues in
> > a posting. I ask of anyone who wants to "RE:" my
> > posting to address ALL issues brought up.
> > Although I know people will take my sentences out of
> > context anyway, if you did address EVERY issue, you
> > would not appear to me that you are trying to avoid" or
> > 'dodge" anything.
clsn...@ibm.net (Clarence Snyder) wrote:
> OK, Here goes nothing:
> First of all, I do not consider myself "Religious
> Right",, but I am an "evangelical" Christian
> > Why do the Evangelical Christians have to be
> > dragged kicking and screaming in order to condemn acts
> > of violence against Gays & Lesbians.
> As a member of an Historic Peace Church (Anabaptist -
> Mennonite), we teach against violence of all kinds.
Never heard of your church. I would like to get resopnses
from the Very political Christians in the Christian
Coalition & the 700 Club.
> We teach Acceptance of the sinner, as we are all sinners,
> saved by grace. It is the Sin Act that we are against.
Acceptance of every "sinner" except for the "homosexual"
> > And why only acts of violence. The Evangelicals
> > NEVER condemned Rev. Fred Phelphs for protesting in
> > front of Gay & Lesbian Funerals screaming out "The Fag
> > Died Of AIDS, Thats good for him", including protests
> > infront of Bill Clinton's mothers funeral, and sending
> > nasty faxes to Gay organizations. Maybe the mainstream
> > Christian community thinks there is nothing wrong with
> > that.
> We stand for decency, and for honouring others - we do
> not support those who dishonour . We might not holler out
> REAL LOUD about those who do,
You holler REAL LOUD about Gay Rights, Gay Marriage and
anything that is done against Christians (have you ever
heard of Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law &
Justice)
> I guess that is why we are referred to as "The Quiet in
> the Land"
If you are not one of the Vocal Voices of the
Religious-Right, then maybe you should let one of then
answer these questions.
> > Why didn't The Christian community condemn talk
> > show host Bob Grant when he threatened to punch a Gay
> > man during a taping of the "Richard Bey" show, or when
> > Bob Grant told the police during his radio show that
> > they should spray the Gay Pride parade with bullets.
> > These Evangelicals must think that threasts of violence
> > against Gays & Lesbians are O.K., but they will wait
> > until it is actually carried outbefore they "condemn"
> > it. Pat Robertson has been a regular guest on Bob
> > Grant's show, but he has NEVER condemned Bob Grant for
> > his threats of violence. Maybe Ezekel Krahlin's posting
> > was right about the sugar-coated Christian preachers &
> > the violent radicals working together.
> We do "condemn" that kind of behaviour and actions.
As I said, you had to be dragged kicking and sreaming.
You wouldn't have condemned it if you weren't asked to.
And instead of condemning it on the net where only a few
people will see it. Why aren't the Christian-Right out
there in the public eye and on the 700 Club condemning
these actions. They bust their backs condemning
"Homosexuality" on Television (700 Club), and at Gay pride
parades. But they are VERY WEAK about condemning anti-Gay
radical acts done by Rev. Fred Phelphs & Bob Grant. Plus,
the Religious-Right are still friends of Bob Grants. that
dosen't sound like to me like they are condemning his acts.
The Christian-Right is allways quick to comdemn acts of
civil disobedience done by Gays. A protest at a Church in
San Francisco by a Gay group was all over the 700 Club. But
you will NEVER hear anything about Fred Phelphs or Bob
Grant on the 700 Club (unless they kill someone).
> > There is still one question that these Right-Wing
> > hypocrite Christians won't ever answer. And that is why
> > do they single out Gays & Lesbians. Dosen't the same
> > bible that they us to condemn "homosexuality" also
> > condemn divorce.
> Yes, and it is to our shame that this is not addressed
> more openly, and with more candor than it is. It is my
> belief - NOTE- I said MY belief, that if a CHRISTIAN
> couple is married, they should not divorce, and if they
> do, they should remain single until the death of their
> (former) spouse.
What about Non-Christian couples. Why aren't you forcing
your beliefs on them just like you are forcing you beliefs
on Non-Christian Gays???
> Ideally, a Christian should not marry a non-Christian, so
> the second scenario should not happen, but it does. This
> is the event of a Christian and a Non-Christian marrying,
> then divorcing.
Jim & Tammy Faye Bakker are both Christians. Why did they
divorce???
> The Christian partner should remain single, again, until
> the death of the spouse.
Jim Bakker is not dead yet. So why did Tammy Faye remarry??
> If Non-Christians marry, and one becomes a Christian, the
> Christian should not divorce the non-Christian. If the
> Non-Christian divorces the
> Christian, it would still likely be best to remain
> single, but from how I understand Paul, that person is
> not bound. If the Christian divorces the Non-Christian
> then he/she should remain single.
> See 1st Corrintians 7:10 - 16
How come people DO NOT obey that???
> > How come they aren't protesting in front of the Family
> > Courts??? What about drunkeness, why aren't the
> > Right-Wing Evangelicals protesting in front of the
> > liquorstores. Or trying to outlaw the sale of it.
> This was tried - remember the Temperance Movement?
Are you talking aout Prohibition??? That was over 70 years
ago!!! The Religious-Right has given up on that because the
Heterosexual Majority wanted to have alcoholic drinks when
they wanted to. I am talking about TODAY!!! Where's the
protesting TODAY!!!
> > How come the Evangelical Christians want to penalize
> > people for being Gay or Lesbian,
> It is not the sexual orientation that is bad, per-se.
All the churches don't agree with that. Different Christian
churches have different beliefs on that part of the issue.
Many think that "lust in the heart" or "desire" is "sin"
also. Since the churches can't make up their mind on that,
then the churches should stay out of the the business of
making laws that affect peoples personal lives.
> Mabee it is not their fault they are wired the way they
> are.
The Churches are fighting with each other about wether or
not that is true.!!!!
> The fact is, they are NOT wired according to plan.
Who's plan. God's plan. Who else made us the way we are and
"wired us" besides God????
> Like single Hetros, they should remain celibate.
Most single heterosexuals DO NOT stay celebate until
marriage, so why aren't they being bible thumped, or
'penalized" for having premarital sex.
> If you are "wired" to be a Pedophile, it is not your
> "wiring" that gets you in trouble, it is the resulting
> actions.
See there you go again, stating that all gay men are child
molesters and belong to NAMBLA.
As for the actions of the majority of Gays who are not
pedophiles. What actions. What about those young Gays who
never had sex who get beaten up in school. What about those
celibate Gays & Lesbians who get fired and get kicked out
of their homes and can't enter the millitary.
> > but they don't want to penalize people for being
> > divorced, drunks, tattoo wearers, those who have
> > premarital sex and those who "take the lords name in
> > vain" (use of the word G-- D-M-)
> > Why isn't the Religious-Right trying to keep
> > "divorcees", "drunks", "swarers", and "adulters" out of
> > the millitary. How come people get fired from their
> > jobs for being Gay, but rarely (almost never) does
> > someone get fired for being divorced, drunks (as long
> > as they come to work sober), or for having premarital
> > sex.
He still has not answer my question on why Gays & Lesbians
get penalized for being Gay, being kept out of the
millitary, being fired from jobs, but people who commit
other "sins" are not penalized. This man is a dodger.
> > The Evangelicals want to outlaw Gay Marriage, but
> > you NEVER see them tring to outlaw divorce, or
> > remarriage.
He still hasn't answer why they are not trying to outlaw
divorce & remarriage.
> > The same bible that they use against "homosexuality"
> > also says that anyone who divorces and remarries is an
> > "adulterer"
> >The Evangelical Christians have even endorsed candidates
> > for political office who have divorced & remarried
> Mabee the lesser of two evils?
I believe clinton was the lesser of two evils.
Bill Clinton has only been married once. And about his
marital affairs, Bob Dole had marital affairs also, plus he
paid for a woman to abort his baby, so Bob Dole is also a
"Baby Killer" in the eyes of the church.
Plus Pat Robertson had said he wouldn't endorse candidates
that broke the biblical laws (or is that only Homosexuality
or biblical laws broken by Liberals (Bill Clinton Ted
Kennedy, Marion Barry)
> > (Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Phil Grahmn)
> > and one of the Evangelical Christians best friends is
> > Rush Limbaugh (married 3 times). I wasn't aware that
> > God changed the rules on Divorce & Remarriage.
> > I just ask one simple question, and that one
> > simple question is why do the Evangelical Christians
> > single out Gays & Lesbians and only thump thoes
> > biblical verses pertaining to "homosexuality.
> The same question can be asked of the GAY community. Are
> they only GAY, or primarily GAY? Are they not HUMAN, and
> concerned with other issues, beyond GAY RIGHTS, AIDS
> RESEARCH,
Gays are concerned primarily with Gay issues just like
Christians are primarily concerned with Christian issues
(School prayer, prayer at graduations) just as Blacks are
conserned with issues that affect Blacks. just as Jews are
conserned with issues that affect Jews, Hispanics are
concerned with issues that affect Hispanics Americans, and
so on.
And you still DID NOT answer my question on why only verses
pertaining to "homosexuality" are spouted, and not verses
about other "sins". You keep dodging my questions.
> and CHRISTIAN BASHING?
How often do you hear about someone being beaten up because
they are a Christian????
If your talking about "verbal" bashing. Gays do no more
verbal "Christian bashing" than Christians do verbal "Gay
Bashing." Watch the 700 Club.
> Lets see the gay community speaking up about, and getting
> involved with, the urban poor problem, the homeless,
Yes the Gay community is involved with feeding the homeless
and the inner city problem. listen to Gay radio and read
gay newspapers and you will know that.
I also believe that it was conservatives on radio who said
that people who were "poor" were "immoral" And that the
majority of Evangelical Christians that belong to the
Republican party. The party that wants to cut welfare to
the poor, but has said very little about cutting "corporate
welfare" to the rich. The same political party passes laws
that kicks the homeless out of the train stations. The same
party that has begun the rollback of Affirmative Action .
The same party that wants to send immigrants back to their
poverty striken and war torn countries. Where is the
Conservative-Right going to get involved with creating JOBS
so that we don't have homeless. feeding them once a day in
a soup kitchen dosn't help much.
> even the rights of the unborn,
there are Gay & Lesbian people who are Pro-Life, but your
Right-Wing media (700 Club) dosn't want to aknoledge that
they exist.
> or CANCER, or ANY other cause not specific to the GAY
> community?
That just shows the ignorence of the Religious community.
we get involved in many political issues that has nothing
to do with the gay community. Especially issues that the
Right-Wing dosn't get too involved in, RACISM, DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE & WOMENS RIGHTS (not just on abortion, but also
jobs & equal pay)
> Lets see the GAY community show some concern for the rest
> of the world around them, and mabee they would be seen in
> a kinder light by "The Rest of Us".
> Those GAYS who claim to be Christian, lets see the proof
> of your claims in your living. Let it be seen in your
> community, and in the community at large.
Most of us don't claim to be Christian. But those of us who
are Christians, we show better compasion for people than
the Extreme-Right does.
> > The Religious-Right has NO ANSWER for that question
> > because when they honestly look at themselves, they
> > know that it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that they are
> > Hypocrites!!!!
> Many of us are, to be sure. Many of "you" out there are
> as well.
The Gay & Lesbian community are not the ones running around
talking about "obeying the bible" and "morality". Why can't
we choose not to be religious without being harrassed just
like many heterosexuals have choosen not no be religious or
to obey the bible are not harrassed???
> > Picking & choosing the verses from the bible that they
> > are comfortable with, and ignoring the biblical verses
> > that they are uncomfortable with. It is allways easier
> > to "crusade" against someone elses "sin", but you
> > become uncomfortable when someone "crusades" against
> > your "sin" The Evangelicals want to keep as many
> > friends as they can
> We are called to live "in" the world, not necessarily to
> be "of" the world. To influence the world, we, like salt,
> must be "mixed into" the world.
You still haven't answered my question on why Gays are
treated differently in the "sin" crusades and why only
verses pertaining to "homosexuality" are spouted.
> > Many of their friends are divorced (dozens of political
> > candidates.) many of their friends drink, smoke, curse
> > (talk show host Bob Grant, a frend of Pat Robertsons)
> > and have Pre-marital sex (country singer Wynonna Judd
> > who had a child out of wedlock appeared on Pat
> > Robertsons 700 Club, plus her mother Naomi Judd who
> > appeared twice on the 700 Club gave birth to Wynonna
> > out of wedlock)
> All sin can be forgiven - That's right, ALL. You have to
> admit it is sin first,
I don't remember hearing any of the political candidates
who claim to be Christian admiting that thier divorces were
"sin". I don't remember hearing Bob Grant admit that his
cursing is a sin, he still curses on the radio today. And
the Judds appeared on the 700 Club before and after
Wynonnas out of wedlock pregmnancy. Plus she had planned
not to marry the father. Remember when the Dan Quayle
(another man who claims to be a Christian) got angry
because "Murphy Brown" (a fictional TV Character) was going
to have a baby out of wedlock, and she refused to marry the
baby's father. You also stated that a person who is
divorced should not remarry. Then why did Rush Limbaugh
remarry after he claimed to have become a Christian???
> and that step, by and large, is
> missing in the GAY community. If I foul up, and do what I
> know is wrong, I have to admit it before I can be
> forgiven. Denying it is wrong gets me no-where.
Why are you only forcing your religious beliefs on the Gay
community. Straight people who do not go to church and do
not believe in religion are not having religion forced down
their throats. Sure someone may try to hand then a tract
once in a while, but no one is trying to take their rights
away.
> > The Religious-Right has given up their crusades and
> > boycotts against Heterosexual adultery and Heterosexual
> > sex
> How about the "dare to wait" campaigns, and the pledges
> of abstinance being encouraged among the youth of
> America? Where is that coming from?
What about crusades against ADULT heterosexual adultery???
You broke up my sentence, I was talking about crusades
against sex scenes between heterosexuals on television.
> > on television, (since Charleton Heston, a friend of Pat
> > Robertsons played a character on "Dynasty" who was in
> > the process of divorcing his wife, so he could marry
> > her younger sister, and was having an affair with the
> > young sister while still married to the older sister.)
> > But the
> > Religious-Right
> Your description - the religious right is not
> necessarily Christian, and the Christian is not
> necessarily the Religious Right
He still HAS NOT answered my question about the boycotting
of shows with Heterosexual sex and heterosexual "adultery".
Where are he protests and boycotting of soap operas and
crime dramas with steamy heterosexual sex scenes?????
He is dodging the issue (and they call Clinton a dodger)
> > will protest and boycott any television show which have
> > Gay & Lesbian characters on them, even if there are no
> > sex scenes.
> > Another sign of hypocricy is when the
> > Religious-Right protests aginst Abortion, but when
> > someone decides to have their baby, the Religious-Right
> > does not want to help to support it.
> Evangelical Christianity would prevent the pregnancy in
> the first place, if their teachings were followed. Since
> not everyone can live that way, we attempt to preserve
> the life that has been produced.
How come Wynnonna Judd didn't follow the teachings???
She's lucky that she is Rich from selling all those Country
albums. So she can care for her unplanned baby.
> If the mother is unable, and unwilling, to look after the
> child, there is an ever-growing percentage of married
> couples UNABLE to have children, who would give almost
> anything for the right to raise that child . Do you know
> how long the wait is to adopt a child in North America?
Thats a problen with the system.
And why do children get sent from foster home to foster
home to foster home every year or two???
> Black, white, or pink with purple polka-dots?
Most people who want to adopt babies usually only want
White, blonde haired blue eye babies (look in the
classified section of the paper under adoptions)
But then again, thats another subject.
> > The Religious-Right is only "Pro-Birth".
> Evangelical Christianity is "pro responsibility"
Evangelical Christians can't even handle their own
responsibilities, why are they forcing everyone else to be
responsible.
> > They tell women that they should carry their baby to
> > term and give birth. And then the
> > "Religious-Right "
> See above
> > wants to cut welfare and food stamps to those babies
> > who are born, causing these babies they "saved" to
> >starve and live in poverty.
> Again see above.
> > I suggest that if the Religious-Right and their
> > conservative friends don't want their tax dollars going
> > to support some other women's baby(s), then I suggest
> > that they stop telling these women who they complain
> > "spounge" off the government that they have to have
> > their babies if they don't want to help support them.
> > They say that abortion is wrong in cases of rape
> > because your punishing the baby for the "sins" of it's
> > father. If they are cutting welfare because the babys
> > mother is lazy, or having extra babies to get more
> > money from the government, aren't the Welfare Cuts or
> > denial of welfare to extra babies punishing the baby
> > for the "sins" of the mother????
He Still HAS NOT answered my question about the welfare
cuts and how it hurts innocent babies.
> > I only ask of the Religious-Right that if they are
> > going to crusade against "sin", that they crusade
> > against ALL "sin' and thump EVERY verse and EVERY
> > scripture in the bible to EVERYONE & ANYONE commiting
> > EVERY "sin". And then everything will be fair. Or don't
> > thump the bible AT ALL.
> > Thank you
> How about just tapping it a little bit?
> Read it with an open mind, and an open heart. Most of the
> answers are there if you look for them.
> Don't look at the "Extremists" Doing so tars us all with
> one brush, just like saying all GAYS are like those who
> have sex in public washrooms, or in the middle of city
> parks, or recruit young boys for sex.
WHO STARTED SPOUTING THE STEREOTYPES FIRST.
> If Hetos had sex in public, flaunting it at any
> opportunity, they would be "persecuted" as well.
Yes Gays who do have sex in bathrooms should be arrested,
did I say that they shouldn't??? Don't put words in my
mouth.
And Heterosexuals don't need to look for sex in bathrooms.
since Heterosexuality is VERY open, heterosexuals meet
their sex partners in school, at work, at the laundromat,
at the soda shop, and are introduced and set up on dates by
friends.
> If I go looking for young girls to have sex with, I'll be
> locked up in a very real jail cell, and if not in
> protective custody, there is a very real chance I would
> not live out my sentance. Why should Gays be any
> different?
Did I say that Gays should be treated different, stop
putting words in my mouth.
> If I should happen to have those inclinations, but curb
> them, I am allowed to live in peace. So is the Gay.
> (Statistics support the premise that the majority of
> pedophilia crimes are gay crimes, not hetro)
Which statistics, statistics from a Right Wing biased
source (like the 700 Club or Christian Coalition)
> As for the "Religious Right" leaders that get caught with
> their pants down, there are bad eggs in every basket,
I know, Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart. But when the media
talks about it, the Religious leaders tell the media to
shut up. And they say that they are being "persecuted" by
the "Liberal Media" (The media IS NOT liberal).
> For some, it is just a good marketing ploy - take the
> "stand" of the "Religious Right" or "Fundamentalist
> Evangelical", then fleece the trusting flock. Just
> because I say I am Julius Caesar does not make me Julius
> Caesar.
Since you don't consider yourself a part of the
Religious-Right that controls the Republican party and
helps make laws against Gays and lesbians, then maybe you
should let one of the leaders of the Religious-Right try to
answer these issues.
> Notice, it is possible to dissagree with someone, without
> being dissagreeable about it?
> Love the sinner, abhor the sin.
>
> Snyder Enterprises
> Appropriate Technology for the Information Age
> Waterloo Ontario.
>
> To reply please drop the r, and send to :
> cls...@ibm.net
> Too many misdirected replies plugging my mail box!!!
AstroJack
clsn...@Ibm.net (Clarence Snyder) wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Mar 1997 00:21:15 -0600, lac...@webtv.net wrote:
>>P.S. When addressing my post, please DO NOT take ANYTHING
>>out of context. Some people are slick cutting up parts of
>>peoples posts taking sentences and paragraphs out of its
>>context to make the original statement(s) look different
>>or to avoid other issues in a posting. I ask of anyone who
>>wants to "RE:" my posting to address ALL issues brought up.
>>Although I know people will take my sentences out of
>>context anyway, if you did address EVERY issue, you would
>>not appear to me that you are trying to "avoid" or 'dodge"
>>anything.
Oh, poo. Your longwinded hysterical rant is barely worth respoinding
to, let alone quoting in entirety. As I'm getting into the middle of
two people (and it can be confusing, plese note the difference between
> the straight christian
and
>> shrill gay activist
>OK, Here goes nothing:
>First of all, I do not consider myself "Religious Right",, but I am an
>"evangelical" Christian
>> Why do the Evangelical Christians have to be dragged
>>kicking and screaming in order to condemn acts of violence
>>against Gays & Lesbians.
First, you're starting with the polarizing nonsense of queers vs.
Christians and ignoring the many queer Christians (like myself)
christian friends of queers, and non-christian queers who respect
christians who respect queers, and vice versa, etc.... and the rest of
us who don't fall inside your narrow little boxes.....
but there are extremist shrill hysterics on either side of just about
any question. For such folks there are no more principles than whose
ox is being gored.
>The same question can be asked of the GAY community. Are they only
>GAY, or primarily GAY? Are they not HUMAN, and concerned with other
>issues, beyond GAY RIGHTS, AIDS RESEARCH, and CHRISTIAN BASHING?
>Lets see the gay community speaking up about, and getting involved
>with, the urban poor problem, the homeless, even the rights of the
>unborn, or CANCER, or ANY other cause not specific to the GAY
>community? Lets see the GAY community show some concern for the rest
>of the world around them, and mabee they would be seen in a kinder
>light by "The Rest of Us".
Indeed a great many of us are deeply involved in these issues. Many
of us volunteer at homeless shelters, have been involved in various
civil rights movements (besides "our own") struggles for economic
justice, a full range of medical issues, and all sides of the abortion
struggle. (Most outspoken gays are very pro-choice, but there is a
group of organized gays and lesbians who want to outlaw abortion.)
Gay organizations back to the sixties have organized fundraisers for
seniors and toys-for-tots drives. I've personally been involved in
everything from bringing food into riot torn communities in 1968 to
tutoring immigrant children to anti-war activism. That's only an
example, not bragging. I know lots of queers who have done a great
deal more than I.
>Those GAYS who claim to be Christian, lets see the proof of your
>claims in your living. Let it be seen in your community, and in the
>community at large.
We are doing so every day. You who have eyes to see will indeed see
it!
>>on television, (since Charleton Heston, a friend of Pat
>>Robertsons played a character on "Dynasty" who was in the
>>process of divorcing his wife, so he could marry her
>>younger sister, and was having an affair with the young
>>sister while still married to the older sister.) But the
>>
I'm no fan of Heston's, but puh-leeze, Girlfriend, get real! An actor
can play any role s/he likes without that character relflecting on
his/he real life or values. Gays play straights, straights play gays,
nice people play thives and murderers, vicious scum play angels and
sweethearts.
>Evangelical Christianity would prevent the pregnancy in the first
>place, if their teachings were followed. Since not everyone can live
>that way, we attempt to preserve the life that has been produced.
>If the mother is unable, and unwilling, to look after the child, there
>is an ever-growing percentage of married couples UNABLE to have
>children, who would give almost anything for the right to raise that
>child . Do you know how long the wait is to adopt a child in North
>America? Black, white, or pink with purple polka-dots?
The wait for adopting children of color is quite short! In fact many
children need homes, but they're not white.
>>
>How about just tapping it a little bit?
>Read it with an open mind, and an open heart. Most of the answers are
>there if you look for them.
I'd have to agree. I only wish that more people who claim religious
motivation for their politics took a stronger stand against usery,
militarism, racism, ecology (stewardship of the Earth) and the death
penalty.
One of my favorite examples is Oliver North who lied through his teeth
to cover an arms-for-drugs deal to subvert the consitution and has the
nerve to crusade for "morality".
Morality has at least as much to do with honesty and integrity as it
has with bedroom behaviours. Too many self-styled christians forget
that, shrugging over major corporate rip-offs and screaming bloody
hell over same-sex couples.
>If Hetos had sex in public, flaunting it at any opportunity, they
They do, and they call it "Soap Operas". Mercy! You can hardly turn
around without seeing heteroeroticism all over the print and broadcast
media, even billboards show men and women in passionate embraces.
>would be "persecuted" as well. If I go looking for young girls to have
>sex with, I'll be locked up in a very real jail cell, and if not in
>protective custody, there is a very real chance I would not live out
>my sentance. Why should Gays be any different?
>If I should happen to have those inclinations, but curb them, I am
>allowed to live in peace. So is the Gay.
>(Statistics support the premise that the majority of pedophilia crimes
>are gay crimes, not hetro)
I've seen statistics to the contrary, but "lies, damn lies, and
statistics..." child abuse is just, that respective of gender.
** Jack Fertig * Astrologer **
** Birth Charts * Forecasting * Compatibility **
** Personal and Business Services * Workshops * Lectures **
** 415/864-8302 * ti...@backdoor.com **
** http://www.postfun.com/astrojack/ **
Dwight R. Welch
Distribution:
: > OK, Here goes nothing:
: > First of all, I do not consider myself "Religious
: > Right",, but I am an "evangelical" Christian
: > > Why do the Evangelical Christians have to be
: > > dragged kicking and screaming in order to condemn acts
: > > of violence against Gays & Lesbians.
: > As a member of an Historic Peace Church (Anabaptist -
: > Mennonite), we teach against violence of all kinds.
: Never heard of your church. I would like to get resopnses
: from the Very political Christians in the Christian
: Coalition & the 700 Club.
Well Mennonites can be very political. In fact Christian Peacemaker
Teams, which is made up of Mennonites, Quakers, and Brethern churches
have been involved from inner cities, to the West Bank, to Haiti on
peacemaking missions. Working for interreligious dialogue, and fighting
against violence. While I'm not an evangelical Christian, I'm a liberal
mainline protestant church many churches have not only condemned violence
against gays and lesbians, but also have purposely sought to become open
and affirming of gays and lesbians. My church is open and affirming. The
United Church of Christ, Episcopal, Metropolitican Community Churches
ordain gays and lesbians, all mainline protestant churches including the
ELCA Lutheran Church, United Methodist, American Baptist, Presbyterian
Church USA and Moravian oppose discrimination against gays and lesbians!
: > We teach Acceptance of the sinner, as we are all sinners,
: > saved by grace. It is the Sin Act that we are against.
: Acceptance of every "sinner" except for the "homosexual"
and some of us don't believe it's a sin
but a wonderful gift of God
: > > And why only acts of violence. The Evangelicals
: > > NEVER condemned Rev. Fred Phelphs for protesting in
: > > front of Gay & Lesbian Funerals screaming out "The Fag
: > > Died Of AIDS, Thats good for him", including protests
: > > infront of Bill Clinton's mothers funeral, and sending
: > > nasty faxes to Gay organizations. Maybe the mainstream
: > > Christian community thinks there is nothing wrong with
: > > that.
: > We stand for decency, and for honouring others - we do
: > not support those who dishonour . We might not holler out
: > REAL LOUD about those who do,
: You holler REAL LOUD about Gay Rights, Gay Marriage and
: anything that is done against Christians (have you ever
: heard of Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law &
: Justice)
and perhaps you have never heard of the Interfaith Alliance (mainline
clergy organizing against the religious right) with people of both sexual
orientations who are on the board of that group they have organized
clergy and laity for human rights for all, including gays and lesbians
: > I guess that is why we are referred to as "The Quiet in
: > the Land"
: If you are not one of the Vocal Voices of the
: Religious-Right, then maybe you should let one of then
: answer these questions.
well it's just that it's frustrating how many people seem to believe that
only fundamentalism, Robertson, and the religious right somehow define
christians.
: > > Why didn't The Christian community condemn talk
: > > show host Bob Grant when he threatened to punch a Gay
: > > man during a taping of the "Richard Bey" show, or when
: > > Bob Grant told the police during his radio show that
: > > they should spray the Gay Pride parade with bullets.
: > > These Evangelicals must think that threasts of violence
: > > against Gays & Lesbians are O.K., but they will wait
: > > until it is actually carried outbefore they "condemn"
: > > it. Pat Robertson has been a regular guest on Bob
: > > Grant's show, but he has NEVER condemned Bob Grant for
: > > his threats of violence. Maybe Ezekel Krahlin's posting
: > > was right about the sugar-coated Christian preachers &
: > > the violent radicals working together.
: > We do "condemn" that kind of behaviour and actions.
: As I said, you had to be dragged kicking and sreaming.
: You wouldn't have condemned it if you weren't asked to.
: And instead of condemning it on the net where only a few
: people will see it. Why aren't the Christian-Right out
: there in the public eye and on the 700 Club condemning
: these actions. They bust their backs condemning
: "Homosexuality" on Television (700 Club), and at Gay pride
: parades. But they are VERY WEAK about condemning anti-Gay
: radical acts done by Rev. Fred Phelphs & Bob Grant. Plus,
: the Religious-Right are still friends of Bob Grants. that
: dosen't sound like to me like they are condemning his acts.
True, but we on the religious left have been in those very pride parades,
we've had our churches vandalized by the religious right (the
Metropolitan Community Church, and a couple of Catholic churches that
opposed the anti-gay iniative in Oregon had broken windows, death
threats, etc). And we've been out there working on these issues. I would
recommend the book Staying Power, written by a lesbian Episcopalian
priest and feminist/liberationist theologian Carter Heyward, the book
just came out last year actually from Pilgrim Press (United Church of
Christ publishing house)
: The Christian-Right is allways quick to comdemn acts of
: civil disobedience done by Gays. A protest at a Church in
: San Francisco by a Gay group was all over the 700 Club. But
: you will NEVER hear anything about Fred Phelphs or Bob
: Grant on the 700 Club (unless they kill someone).
: > > There is still one question that these Right-Wing
: > > hypocrite Christians won't ever answer. And that is why
: > > do they single out Gays & Lesbians. Dosen't the same
: > > bible that they us to condemn "homosexuality" also
: > > condemn divorce.
: > Yes, and it is to our shame that this is not addressed
: > more openly, and with more candor than it is. It is my
: > belief - NOTE- I said MY belief, that if a CHRISTIAN
: > couple is married, they should not divorce, and if they
: > do, they should remain single until the death of their
: > (former) spouse.
: What about Non-Christian couples. Why aren't you forcing
: your beliefs on them just like you are forcing you beliefs
: on Non-Christian Gays???
some of us Christians actually already do bless same sex unions
in fact i would alo recommend to you the book Living in Sin? A Bishop
Rethinks Sexuality, by John Spong, whose an Episcopalian Bishop who
includes in hos book a liturgy for same sex unions. In fact my
denomination: the Unitarian Universalist Assocation has been blessing
same sex unions for over 20 years
: > Ideally, a Christian should not marry a non-Christian, so
: > the second scenario should not happen, but it does. This
: > is the event of a Christian and a Non-Christian marrying,
: > then divorcing.
: Jim & Tammy Faye Bakker are both Christians. Why did they
: divorce???
good question
: > The Christian partner should remain single, again, until
: > the death of the spouse.
: Jim Bakker is not dead yet. So why did Tammy Faye remarry??
good question
: > If Non-Christians marry, and one becomes a Christian, the
: > Christian should not divorce the non-Christian. If the
: > Non-Christian divorces the
: > Christian, it would still likely be best to remain
: > single, but from how I understand Paul, that person is
: > not bound. If the Christian divorces the Non-Christian
: > then he/she should remain single.
: > See 1st Corrintians 7:10 - 16
: How come people DO NOT obey that???
good question
: > > How come they aren't protesting in front of the Family
: > > Courts??? What about drunkeness, why aren't the
: > > Right-Wing Evangelicals protesting in front of the
: > > liquorstores. Or trying to outlaw the sale of it.
: > This was tried - remember the Temperance Movement?
: Are you talking aout Prohibition??? That was over 70 years
: ago!!! The Religious-Right has given up on that because the
: Heterosexual Majority wanted to have alcoholic drinks when
: they wanted to. I am talking about TODAY!!! Where's the
: protesting TODAY!!!
some of us are protesting
i cqn link ya up with some resources of Christians who are fighting
against the religious right and homophobia
http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/1764
: > > How come the Evangelical Christians want to penalize
: > > people for being Gay or Lesbian,
there are some that don't
for instance noted evangelicals including Tony Compolo, Jim Wallis, Ron
Sider have been very emphatic and public in their opposition to laws that
discriminate against gays and lesbians. Evangelicals Concerned (a group
that Compolo's wife is on the board of) is a group for gay and lesbian
and friends in the Evangelical movement
: > It is not the sexual orientation that is bad, per-se.
: All the churches don't agree with that. Different Christian
: churches have different beliefs on that part of the issue.
: Many think that "lust in the heart" or "desire" is "sin"
: also. Since the churches can't make up their mind on that,
: then the churches should stay out of the the business of
: making laws that affect peoples personal lives.
yes like i noted earlier
some churches, including my own bless same sex unions, etc
and believe that sexual orientation is a blessing from God
not a curse deserving discrimination and hatred
: > Mabee it is not their fault they are wired the way they
: > are.
: The Churches are fighting with each other about wether or
: not that is true.!!!!
true
: > The fact is, they are NOT wired according to plan.
: Who's plan. God's plan. Who else made us the way we are and
: "wired us" besides God????
: > Like single Hetros, they should remain celibate.
: Most single heterosexuals DO NOT stay celebate until
: marriage, so why aren't they being bible thumped, or
: 'penalized" for having premarital sex.
or perhaps provide alternative structures that promote loving monogmous
relations including
-being open and welcoming to gays and lesbians
-bless their unions, and allow them to celebrate their high moments in
life as much as anyone else
: > If you are "wired" to be a Pedophile, it is not your
: > "wiring" that gets you in trouble, it is the resulting
: > actions.
: See there you go again, stating that all gay men are child
: molesters and belong to NAMBLA.
: As for the actions of the majority of Gays who are not
: pedophiles. What actions. What about those young Gays who
: never had sex who get beaten up in school. What about those
: celibate Gays & Lesbians who get fired and get kicked out
: of their homes and can't enter the millitary.
consensual sex that is based on love is very different than sexual
exploitation based on inequality (as much as rape, etc.)
: Gays are concerned primarily with Gay issues just like
: Christians are primarily concerned with Christian issues
: (School prayer, prayer at graduations) just as Blacks are
: conserned with issues that affect Blacks. just as Jews are
: conserned with issues that affect Jews, Hispanics are
: concerned with issues that affect Hispanics Americans, and
: so on.
actually many christians oppose mandated school prayers, and support
separation of church and state
: And you still DID NOT answer my question on why only verses
: pertaining to "homosexuality" are spouted, and not verses
: about other "sins". You keep dodging my questions.
: > and CHRISTIAN BASHING?
: How often do you hear about someone being beaten up because
: they are a Christian????
: If your talking about "verbal" bashing. Gays do no more
: verbal "Christian bashing" than Christians do verbal "Gay
: Bashing." Watch the 700 Club.
: > Lets see the gay community speaking up about, and getting
: > involved with, the urban poor problem, the homeless,
: Yes the Gay community is involved with feeding the homeless
: and the inner city problem. listen to Gay radio and read
: gay newspapers and you will know that.
: I also believe that it was conservatives on radio who said
: that people who were "poor" were "immoral" And that the
: majority of Evangelical Christians that belong to the
: Republican party. The party that wants to cut welfare to
: the poor, but has said very little about cutting "corporate
: welfare" to the rich. The same political party passes laws
: that kicks the homeless out of the train stations. The same
: party that has begun the rollback of Affirmative Action .
: The same party that wants to send immigrants back to their
: poverty striken and war torn countries. Where is the
: Conservative-Right going to get involved with creating JOBS
: so that we don't have homeless. feeding them once a day in
: a soup kitchen dosn't help much.
ironic aint it
especially in one in 10 verses in the NT relate to social justice for the
poor
and the prophets like Isaiah, Amos, Micah believe that justice for the
poor is the crux of what determines God's judgement and determing
Israel's fidelity
how unbiblical can the religious right be?
good question
some evangelicals have raised the same questions such as Sojourners
movement, Evangelicals for Social Action
: > even the rights of the unborn,
: there are Gay & Lesbian people who are Pro-Life, but your
: Right-Wing media (700 Club) dosn't want to aknoledge that
: they exist.
: > or CANCER, or ANY other cause not specific to the GAY
: > community?
: That just shows the ignorence of the Religious community.
: we get involved in many political issues that has nothing
: to do with the gay community. Especially issues that the
: Right-Wing dosn't get too involved in, RACISM, DOMESTIC
: VIOLENCE & WOMENS RIGHTS (not just on abortion, but also
: jobs & equal pay)
true, but they are issues that the religious left (including some
leftwing evangelicals work on)
: > Lets see the GAY community show some concern for
the rest : > of the world around them, and mabee they would be seen in
: > a kinder light by "The Rest of Us".
: > Those GAYS who claim to be Christian, lets see the proof
: > of your claims in your living. Let it be seen in your
: > community, and in the community at large.
: Most of us don't claim to be Christian. But those of us who
: are Christians, we show better compasion for people than
: the Extreme-Right does.
yep, true
as a Christian I've seen that gays and lesbians tend to not only be
concerned about their own equal rights, and dignity but also the human
rights of all, poverty, etc more so than many christians i've run into
but regardless of how one measures how "good" one group is over another,
that never justifies the discrimination and hate that is so common in the
religious right
: > > The Religious-Right has NO ANSWER for that question
: > > because when they honestly look at themselves, they
: > > know that it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that they are
: > > Hypocrites!!!!
: > Many of us are, to be sure. Many of "you" out there are
: > as well.
: The Gay & Lesbian community are not the ones running around
: talking about "obeying the bible" and "morality". Why can't
: we choose not to be religious without being harrassed just
: like many heterosexuals have choosen not no be religious or
: to obey the bible are not harrassed???
think how hard it is for gay and lesbian Christians
: > > Picking & choosing the verses from the bible that they
: > > are comfortable with, and ignoring the biblical verses
: > > that they are uncomfortable with. It is allways easier
: > > to "crusade" against someone elses "sin", but you
: > > become uncomfortable when someone "crusades" against
: > > your "sin" The Evangelicals want to keep as many
: > > friends as they can
: > We are called to live "in" the world, not necessarily to
: > be "of" the world. To influence the world, we, like salt,
: > must be "mixed into" the world.
: You still haven't answered my question on why Gays are
: treated differently in the "sin" crusades and why only
: verses pertaining to "homosexuality" are spouted.
good question
i suspect greed, gays and lesbians are a wonderful fundraising device of
the religious right
: Why are you only forcing your religious beliefs on the Gay
: community. Straight people who do not go to church and do
: not believe in religion are not having religion forced down
: their throats. Sure someone may try to hand then a tract
: once in a while, but no one is trying to take their rights
: away.
true
and think how hard it can be for gay and lesbian Christians who suffer that
hatred not only by the law but in thier own churches
: > > Another sign of hypocricy is when the
: > > Religious-Right protests aginst Abortion, but when
: > > someone decides to have their baby, the Religious-Right
: > > does not want to help to support it.
: > Evangelical Christianity would prevent the pregnancy in
: > the first place, if their teachings were followed. Since
: > not everyone can live that way, we attempt to preserve
: > the life that has been produced.
actually that is not the case
since many groups from the Christian coalition, etc. have sought to slash
prenatal care, killed health care reform, fought to slash our social
safety net to bits, etc.
: > > The Religious-Right is only "Pro-Birth".
: > Evangelical Christianity is "pro responsibility"
: Evangelical Christians can't even handle their own
: responsibilities, why are they forcing everyone else to be
: responsible.
and certainly not
corporate responsibility
the big deal though you see is to punish the woman
since sexuality is the biggest sin of all, we must punish her with the law
or so the reasoning goes
: > If I should happen to have those inclinations, but curb
: > them, I am allowed to live in peace. So is the Gay.
: > (Statistics support the premise that the majority of
: > pedophilia crimes are gay crimes, not hetro)
: Which statistics, statistics from a Right Wing biased
: source (like the 700 Club or Christian Coalition)
actually 95 to 98% of all child molestations are committed by
heterosexual males (source: Dr.Benjamin Spock but not sure where he got it)
Dwight Welch
(a member of the religious left)
http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/1764
K. Knopp
> jah...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Jason Ahrens)
Love isn't. According to the bible, homosexual intercourse is the sin.
Ward Stewart
kkn...@citynet.net (K. Knopp) wrote:
I am neither Christian nor Jew -- why should I
expect that YOUR bible must be the accepted
measure for my life?
YOUR narrow strictures on love are of NO interest
to me whatsoever!
ward
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"There is no better tool with which to pound plowshares
into swords than the bible.
J. A. Stanley
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mitchell Holman
}
} According to the bible, homosexual intercourse is the sin.
According to the Bible, eating shellfish, women wearing
pants, and working on the Sabbath are just as much "sins".
Ever eaten a shrimp? You are much a "sinner" as a gay person.
Mitchell Holman
"I hope I live to see the day when we won't have any public schools. The churches
will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy
day that will be!"- Jerry Falwell, America Can Be Saved, 1979
AstroJack
wste...@hi.net (Ward Stewart) wrote:
>kkn...@citynet.net (K. Knopp) wrote:
>>> jah...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Jason Ahrens)
>>> wrote:
>>> >I know people will complain about how much was removed, but the whole
>>> >posting boils down to the one line...
>>> >Clarence Snyder (clsn...@Ibm.net) wrote:
>>> >: Love the sinner, abhor the sin.
>>> >Since when is love a sin?
>>Love isn't. According to the bible, homosexual intercourse is the sin.
>I am neither Christian nor Jew -- why should I
>expect that YOUR bible must be the accepted
>measure for my life?
>YOUR narrow strictures on love are of NO interest
>to me whatsoever!
>ward
Indeed. Separation of Church and State is a cornerstone of American
democracy. Any insistance on Christian or OT teachings as a political
standard, or a basis of law is, strictly speaking, anti-American.
(Mr. Ahrens in Canada may comment on his country's standards of
secular democracy.)
Any religion is entitled to have its own standards and practices and
to butt out of the rest of our lives, allowing others the same rights
to autonomy that they themselves are entitled.
That said, as a Christian I am pleased to debate theology and exegesis
with any other Christian. Church-justified homophobia is based on
highly selective and flawed interpretations of the Bible.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>"There is no better tool with which to pound plowshares
>into swords than the bible.
> J. A. Stanley
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And certainly any tool can be abused.
K. Knopp
wste...@hi.net (Ward Stewart)
> kkn...@citynet.net (K. Knopp) wrote:
>
> >> jah...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Jason Ahrens)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I know people will complain about how much was removed, but the whole
> >> >posting boils down to the one line...
> >>
> >> >Clarence Snyder (clsn...@Ibm.net) wrote:
> >>
> >> >: Love the sinner, abhor the sin.
> >>
> >> >Since when is love a sin?
>
> >Love isn't. According to the bible, homosexual intercourse is the sin.
>
> I am neither Christian nor Jew -- why should I
> expect that YOUR bible must be the accepted
> measure for my life?
I never said that it was. I simply gave an answer to a question given.
> YOUR narrow strictures on love are of NO interest
> to me whatsoever!
>
> ward
I suggest then that you get yourself a good newsreader and make a killfile
for posts containing the words "homosexual", "Bible", and "Sin".
Tim Reed
msha...@interlog.com wrote:
>
> lec...@earthlink.net wrote:
> >
> > In article <01bc2671$75399840$3444b6cc@gypsy95>, "RevMike"
> > <gyp...@seanet.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I think a clear and public statement of my beliefs are in order here, so
> > > that there are no further misunderstandings.
> > >
> > > homosexuality is sin. Note: not "the" sin, just one of many. But "sin" is a
> > > spiritual state, not a crime. (I know that some are.)
> > > not, however, try to shove the Bible down anyone's throat.
> > > withhold rights which are promised under the Constitution of the United
> > > 5. Therefore, Cyberspace Celebrations website is open to the entire public
> > > without regard to race, color, creed, national origin, gender or sexual
> > > Internet and questions are answered there from a Biblical perspective.
> > > murder are not means of sharing the Gospel. Those who do such things are
> > > Spirit living inside him/her and these things are contrary to the Fruits of
> > > the Spirit as stated by Paul.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Wishes,
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Rev. Mike and Virgie Bugal
> > > Cyberspace Celebrations
> > > http://www.seanet.com/~gypsy95/
> > > Heartland Chapel
> > > http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/5349
> >
> > A minister whose interests are love, modesty, and things spiritual rather
> > than hate,
> > self-congratulation, and things political-'scuse me while I faint and wish
> > there were more like him. Just a few could be the beginning of a wonderful
> > healing.
> > Lorri
> > --
> > "Love thy neighbor."-It works.
> > Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
>
> I see a snake in the grass. All Christians are arrogant, superstitious,
> lying, illogical snakes in the grass who say one thing and mean another.
As long as you like to make blanket judgements you might want to
consider becomeing a racist.
RevMike
I want to just address one point brought up by Astrojack. He stated that
the waiting list for adoption for children of color is quite short, and
that many children need homes but are not white. This infers that the
reason that these children are not being adopted is racism, which is not
entirely wrong.
First, you have white people that are actually prejudice and won't adopt
them. Then you have white people who are not prejudiced and would adopt
them, except the black community has raised heck about white people
adopting black children and now most private and public agencies that deal
with this refuse to allow a white couple to adopt children of color.
I have had personal experience with this. My former Brother and
Sister-in-Law were providing foster care for a baby named Michael, who was
black. They decided that they wanted to adopt him. The State of Missouri
refused to allow this simply because they wanted him to be adopted by a
black couple, though none was available. Then they removed Michael from
their home and placed him in another foster home. The state still allows
them to be foster parents under the agreement that they would never again
ask to adopt any child of color.
So, you see, the racism exists from both sides. I think that what race a
child is should be inconsequential. All that should matter is that the
parents provide a safe, happy and loving environment for the child to grow
in. Finding people who are willing to open their hearts and homes and take
the responsibility for raising a child to a responsible adult who is not
their flesh and blood is hard enough without throwing in these type of
roadblocks.
God Bless,
AstroJack
>msha...@interlog.com wrote:
>> I see a snake in the grass. All Christians are arrogant, superstitious,
>> lying, illogical snakes in the grass who say one thing and mean another.
All Christians?
Dorothy Day? Martin Luther King? Troy Perry?
Indeed there are many self-proclaimed Christians who fit your narrow
viewpoint, but far from all.
You, Sir, are a religious bigot, as arrogant, superstitious, and
hateful as the people you seek to castigate.
John De Salvio
> Love isn't. According to the bible, homosexual intercourse is the sin.
The original poster had a list of questions and wondered why
Evangelical Christians don't answer them.
You, and the immediate post preceding you, prove his point.
You REFUSE to answer any questions that might show you to be hypocrites.
Instead, you get on your sanctimonious, judgmental throne,
and play God's spokesman.
--
John
NOTE: "From" address is deliberately wrong.
My correct e-mail address is:
Ezekiel Krahlin
On Fri, 07 Mar 1997 02:33:19 GMT, clsn...@Ibm.net (Clarence Snyder)
said:
>As a member of an Historic Peace Church ( Anabaptist - Mennonite), we
>teach against violence of all kinds.
Yeah, right.
>We teach Acceptance of the sinner, as we are all sinners, saved by
>grace. It is the Sin Act that we are against.
Homosexuality is not a sinful act...no more than is heterosexuality.
>We stand for decency, and for honouring others - we do not support
>those who dishonour . We might not holler out REAL LOUD about those
>who do, I guess that is why we are referred to as "The Quiet in the
>Land"
Silence = Death.
> How come the
>>Evangelical Christians want to penalize people for being
>>Gay or Lesbian,
>
>It is not the sexual orientation that is bad, per-se. Mabee it is not
>their fault they are wired the way they are. The fact is, they are NOT
>wired according to plan. Like single Hetros, they should remain
>celibate.
It is not the fact that your sect preaches peace, per-se. Mabee it is
not your fault that you insist on calling homosexuality a blasphemy in
God's eyes. Nevertheless, such violent brainwashing definitely and
directly foments violence against a basically innocent and decent
people. Blood is on your hands, dear.
>If you are "wired" to be a Pedophile, it is not your "wiring" that
>gets you in trouble, it is the resulting actions.
How dare you speak of pedophiles, in the same breath as homosexuals?
That's like equating heteros with mass murderers (but perhaps that's
not far from wrong.)
Well, you certainly speak sweet, soft spoken words to get across your
vile bigotry against GayFolk. You are one of the devil's favorit
toys.
>> I just ask one simple question, and that one simple
>>question is why do the Evangelical Christians single out
>>Gays & Lesbians and only thump thoes biblical verses
>>pertaining to "homosexuality.
>
>The same question can be asked of the GAY community. Are they only
>GAY, or primarily GAY? Are they not HUMAN, and concerned with other
>issues, beyond GAY RIGHTS, AIDS RESEARCH, and CHRISTIAN BASHING?
(Of course not...we're just the selfish, ignorant perverts you suggest
we are!) I see your true colors finally came out, towards the end of
this lengthy message! You intentionally distort GayFolk as if they
were subhuman...by suggesting we do not have anything on our minds
beyond Gay Civil Rights (which is the noblest cause anyone could be
devoted to, by the way). How dare you be so arrogant as to imply that
we Hellenes don't do other good works? You are clearly a
hate-mongerer.
I am not only proudly Thracian, but also a Christian. I invite you to
my web page, to see how a Gay-Christian such as myself, deals with
controversial issues.
>Lets see the gay community speaking up about, and getting involved
>with, the urban poor problem, the homeless, even the rights of the
>unborn, or CANCER, or ANY other cause not specific to the GAY
>community? Lets see the GAY community show some concern for the rest
>of the world around them, and mabee they would be seen in a kinder
>light by "The Rest of Us".
You're a real ignoramus. The Lesbian/Gay community has an excellent
track record of reaching out to all sorts on non-gay causes. But you
prefer to stereotype us as subhuman. Just goes to show what a phony
KKKristian you truly are. When Jesus returns, you will number among
those to whom he'll say: "I know you not."
>Those GAYS who claim to be Christian, lets see the proof of your
>claims in your living. Let it be seen in your community, and in the
>community at large.
You're a blind fool. All you need to do, is go to any number of
homophile organizations, to see the records of our generous
contributions.
>Many of us are, to be sure. Many of "you" out there are as well.
Ergo, you feel justified in portraying *all* GayFolk as perverted
subhumans. What elegant reasoning you have there. I'm certain Jesus
has a special place in mind for you.
>We are called to live "in" the world, not necessarily to be "of" the
>world. To influence the world, we, like salt, must be "mixed into" the
>world.
Salt? No, more like cyanide crystals.
>All sin can be forgiven - That's right, ALL.
>You have to admit it is sin first, and that step, by and large, is
>missing in the GAY community.
Oh, you are such an expert on GayFolk, boy, you really impress me!
>Your description - the religious right is not necessarily Christian,
>and the Christian is not necessarily the Religious Right
Most of the most virile forms of homophobia are coming from the
Christian camps...of which are many fundamentalist types.
KKKristians, Religious Right, Aryan groups, and Republican
reactionaries all have a common bond: hatred. They are far more
linked than they own up to.
>Don't look at the "Extremists" Doing so tars us all with one brush,
>just like saying all GAYS are like those who have sex in public
>washrooms, or in the middle of city parks, or recruit young boys for
>sex.
Yeah, well go back and read some of the accusation you just made in
your message. You did a pretty good job of portraying GayFolk as
perverts. You are a true hypocrite who hides behind Christ's robe.
You are what I termed a KKKristian.
>If Hetos had sex in public, flaunting it at any opportunity, they
>would be "persecuted" as well. If I go looking for young girls to have
>sex with, I'll be locked up in a very real jail cell, and if not in
>protective custody, there is a very real chance I would not live out
>my sentance. Why should Gays be any different?
Boy, here you go agian portraying us as subhuman. This is not the
issue at all...and you know it...you just enjoy perverting truth,
being the devil's servant that you are.
>If I should happen to have those inclinations, but curb them, I am
>allowed to live in peace. So is the Gay.
Nonsense. Gays and Lesbians are being bashed just for existing, and
trying to live and work decently. You are an arrogant asshole.
>(Statistics support the premise that the majority of pedophilia crimes
>are gay crimes, not hetro)
Quite the opposite. Child abuse by heterosexual men is rampant, an
epidemic of growing proportion. The majority of pedophiliac crimes
are done by straight males towards little girls.
>As for the "Religious Right" leaders that get caught with their pants
>down, there are bad eggs in every basket,
And you sure stink as one of the worst!
>Just because I say I am Julius Caesar does not make me Julius Caesar.
Just because you say you're Christian does not make you a Christian.
>Notice, it is possible to dissagree with someone, without being
>dissagreeable about it?
Not the way you do it.
>Love the sinner, abhor the sin.
Oh, gee, thanks so much for your holy tolerance. Homosexuality is no
sin.
---
My web page kicks ass!
http://www.fog.net/ekrahlin
ekra...@fog.net
Public dialog only, no spamming.
Hostile private replies will be publicly posted.
Ezekiel Krahlin
On Sun, 09 Mar 1997 14:02:27 -0500, kkn...@citynet.net (K. Knopp)
said:
>Love isn't. According to the bible, homosexual intercourse is the sin.
Pervert.