[Faith-talk] More about homosexuality.

Mon Nov 10 04:11:27 UTC 2008

And God will win.
Just a friendly for warning about arguing with God.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Beth" <thebluesisloose at gmail.com>
To: "Faith-talk,for the discussion of faith and religion" 
<faith-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Faith-talk] More about homosexuality.

> That's fine by me.
> Beth
>
> On 11/9/08, Alan Wheeler <awheeler at neb.rr.com> wrote:
>> Beth,
>> for the ***FINAL** time.  Your argument is with God *NOT* with me.  It's 
>> in
>> the Bible...God's word.  People not believing it doesn't make it less 
>> true.
>> If you want to dispute God's truth...dispute it with God and not me.
>>
>>
>> +-+-+-
>>
>>    There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither 
>> is
>> there any rock like our God.
>>  1 Samuel 2:2
>> ~~~
>>
>> Alan D Wheeler
>> awheeler at neb.rr.com
>> IM me at: outlaw-cowboy at live.com
>> Skype: redwheel1
>> Check me out on the Q, Fridays from 10 AM to 1 PM eastern time at
>> www.theqonline.net
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Beth" <thebluesisloose at gmail.com>
>> To: "Faith-talk,for the discussion of faith and religion"
>> <faith-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 2:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Faith-talk] More about homosexuality.
>>
>>
>>> Allan, this article is severely biased and is hurtful to homosexual
>>> friends of mine.  Thank God they didn't read this.  To be honest, I
>>> love my friends, all my friends heterosexual and homosexual.  Every
>>> kid has the right to two loving parents, but not necessarily a mom and
>>> a dad.  Gay couples and lesbian couples are still adoptable couples.
>>> I've seen a lesbian couple that adopted two Cree First Nations
>>> children.  I saw a gay couple adopt special needs twins who had
>>> addiction problems.  This country needs to be more progressive and
>>> stop attacking homosexuals because they are homosexuals.  Before you
>>> know it, Allan, this country will put blind and visually impaired
>>> people as well as cognitively disabled people in their places: along
>>> with the homosexuals, below sighted and heterosexual people.  Before
>>> you know it, Allan, African Americans will be kicked out of office and
>>> there will be an assassination attempt on Barack Obama, who I hope
>>> will reign for eight long and healthy years.  Please watch what you're
>>> saying!  We're all Christians on this list!  Can't we accept others'
>>> beliefs and opinions here?  I'm not trying to be psychic and prophetic
>>> here, but please understand that I am very concerned that this nation
>>> is going to fall down like Rome did and we won't have a very healthy
>>> end if you know what I mean.  And not everybody believes in God.  And
>>> God loves everybody, and even though it is written that homosexuality
>>> is a sin, attacking homosexuals who are not atracted and refuse to be
>>> attracted to the opposite sex is wrong.  We cannot an will not attack
>>> others because they are a different brand of homo sapiens sapiens.
>>> Beth
>>>
>>> On 11/9/08, Alan Wheeler <awheeler at neb.rr.com> wrote:
>>>> I went to www.biblegateway.com to see what I could find about
>>>> homosexuality
>>>> and the bible.  This was among the resources.  So, again I say, and 
>>>> this
>>>> is
>>>> my last comment on the subject, if you disagree that marriage is only 
>>>> for
>>>> men and women, then your argument is with God.  It's in His book.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/gay-rights#marriage
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Sanctity of Marriage
>>>> In recent years, the homosexual movement has centered on giving
>>>> marriage-like benefits to gay couples. Many in the culture have
>>>> mistakenly
>>>> concluded that marriage is merely an institution for the convenience of
>>>> adults. In actuality, marriage is the bedrock institution for culture 
>>>> to
>>>> sustain itself through having and nurturing children. There are
>>>> complementary aspects to a man and woman that are important to the
>>>> instutution of marriage which go beyond the obvious physical 
>>>> attributes.
>>>> There are things that a man needs that can only be provided by a woman,
>>>> and
>>>> vice versa.
>>>>
>>>> These complementary aspects are important to the relationship of the
>>>> couple
>>>> itself, as well as to the children. One does not have to appeal to
>>>> religion
>>>> to instinctively understand this. Yet statistics verify the structure 
>>>> of
>>>> the
>>>> traditional family as the approach to raising children that gives the
>>>> best
>>>> measurable results. The overwhelming body of social science research
>>>> agrees
>>>> that children do best when raised in homes with married, opposite-sex
>>>> parents. Every child has the right to both a mom and a dad.
>>>>
>>>> Yet we cannot divorce the institution of marriage from its theological
>>>> roots. We acknowledge that marriage is an institution given by God
>>>> (Genesis
>>>> 2:24). The Creator of the Universe established the relationship between 
>>>> a
>>>> man and a woman, thus it is a divine institution, not a human one. To
>>>> confer
>>>> marriage-like rights to gays is not the prerogative of people (Matthew
>>>> 19:6). (This includes civil unions or domestic partnerships, as they 
>>>> are
>>>> merely marriage by other names.) Defining marriage is the prerogative 
>>>> of
>>>> God. Whatever may tend to undermine the institution of marriage would
>>>> also
>>>> undermine the authority of God, as well as hurt society.
>>>>
>>>> Liberals may argue, "Why should we arbitrarily select only heterosexual
>>>> couples for marriage? What can it hurt if two homosexuals want to 
>>>> marry?"
>>>> The answer is surprisingly simple. The institution of marriage between
>>>> and
>>>> man a woman is not, in fact, arbitrary. It's purpose is clear and of
>>>> utmost
>>>> importance to society.
>>>>
>>>> David Orland in an article entitled "The Deceit of Gay Marriage" puts 
>>>> it
>>>> very well. He says:
>>>>
>>>>   To justify giving privileges or exemptions or subsidies to some
>>>> particular
>>>> group in society, the benefit of doing so for society at large must 
>>>> first
>>>> be
>>>> shown. With heterosexual marriage, the case is clear enough. 
>>>> Heterosexual
>>>> marriage is a matter of genuine social interest because the family is
>>>> essential to society's reproduction. The crux of my argument, in other
>>>> words, was that married couples receive the benefits they do, not 
>>>> because
>>>> the state is interested in promoting romantic love, or because the 
>>>> Bible
>>>> says so or because of the influence of special interest groups but 
>>>> rather
>>>> because the next generation is something that is and should be of
>>>> interest
>>>> to all of us. And, by definition, this is not a case that can be made 
>>>> for
>>>> homosexual unions. To that degree, the attempt to turn the question of
>>>> domestic partnership into a debate about fairness falls flat.
>>>>
>>>>   The more persistent supporters of domestic partnership will of course
>>>> respond to this argument by pointing to the case in which homosexual
>>>> partners adopt children or, in the case of lesbians, undergo artificial
>>>> insemination. The intention here is to show that the nuclear family is
>>>> found
>>>> even among homosexual couples and that, to that extent, homosexual 
>>>> unions
>>>> do
>>>> indeed meet the same criterion of social interest as heterosexual ones
>>>> and
>>>> thus should be granted legal status. It is a weak argument and one that
>>>> ultimately back-fires on those who employ it. This is for two reasons:
>>>>
>>>>   First, adoption by homosexual couples is still exceedingly rare and 
>>>> the
>>>> law-though many are surprised to learn this-is aimed at the general 
>>>> case.
>>>> To
>>>> confer legal benefits on the entire class of would-be homosexual 
>>>> spouses
>>>> just because some very small minority of this class approximates the
>>>> pattern
>>>> of the nuclear family would be a bit like admitting all applicants to a
>>>> select university on the grounds that a few of them had been shown to
>>>> meet
>>>> the entrance requirements.
>>>>
>>>>   Second, the right of this small minority to the benefits of marriage 
>>>> is
>>>> dubious in the extreme. Homosexual "families" of whatever type are 
>>>> always
>>>> and necessarily parasitic on heterosexual ones.
>>>>
>>>> Every child has the right to a mom and a dad. See 5 Reasons Why 
>>>> Same-Sex
>>>> Marriage Harms Children.
>>>>
>>>> But homosexuals not only want fair treatment, they are pushing for 
>>>> "Super
>>>> Rights." According the Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute:
>>>>
>>>>   "Every member of society has a duty to contribute to the 
>>>> commonwealth.
>>>> Yet
>>>> the empirical evidence indicates that those who engage in homosexuality
>>>> 1)
>>>> contribute less and cost more in goods and services, 2)
>>>> disproportionately
>>>> disrupt social functioning, and 3) have few children while being more 
>>>> apt
>>>> to
>>>> harm them. Thus, homosexual practioners not only fail to 'pay for their
>>>> keep,' but by their negative influence on children, cloud society's
>>>> future.
>>>>
>>>>   Those who engage in homosexuality seek what they say are 'gay 
>>>> rights."
>>>> In
>>>> reality, they are demanding Super Rights. Super Rights are those
>>>> privileges
>>>> that allow one to ovverride the inalienable rights of other citizens,
>>>> such
>>>> as freedom of speech and association. These Super Rights-which are
>>>> conferred
>>>> by 'non-discrimination,' 'hate crime,' and 'hate speech' laws-allow
>>>> homosexuals, if they so choose, to endanger or punish those who would
>>>> exercise their associational rights to avoid them or protect their
>>>> children
>>>> from them.
>>>>
>>>>   As an example, empirical studies to date indicate that a male teacher
>>>> who
>>>> practices homosexuality is the most likely kind of teacher to sexually
>>>> molest students. A principal knowing this may not want to hire a 
>>>> teacher
>>>> who
>>>> declares his homosexual interests. But if that teacher wants the job, 
>>>> his
>>>> Super Rights trump the associational rights of the principal as well as
>>>> the
>>>> right of students not to experience extra risk (especially since safety
>>>> is
>>>> part of their right to life). Parents renting out one side of their
>>>> duplex
>>>> may not want to place their children at risk by renting to a gay 
>>>> couple.
>>>> But
>>>> if-even on a whim - the homosexuals want the duplex, their Super Rights
>>>> trump the property and associational rights of the parents as well as
>>>> their
>>>> children's right not to be exposed to potential molestation.
>>>>
>>>>   The Super Rights of homosexual practitioners also squelch the right 
>>>> of
>>>> others to freedom of speech. If a broadcaster opines that homosexual 
>>>> sex
>>>> is
>>>> dangerous, but a homosexual finds such speech 'offensive,' his Super
>>>> Rights
>>>> trump the broadcaster's freedom of speech and the broadcaster may be
>>>> fined
>>>> or imprisoned."
>>>>
>>>> The concept of hate crimes seems particularly reprehensible. If one of
>>>> your
>>>> (heterosexual) loved ones is the object of a despicable crime, the
>>>> perpetrator would receive a lesser punishment than someone who 
>>>> committed
>>>> the
>>>> same act against someone who practices homosexual sex!
>>>>
>>>> +-+-+-
>>>>
>>>>    He has made clear to you, O man, what is good; and what is desired
>>>> from
>>>> you by the Lord; only doing what is
>>>>  right, and loving mercy, and walking without pride before your God.
>>>> Micah
>>>> 6:8
>>>> ~~~
>>>>
>>>> Alan D Wheeler
>>>> awheeler at neb.rr.com
>>>> IM me at: outlaw-cowboy at live.com
>>>> Skype: redwheel1
>>>> Check me out on the Q, Fridays from 10 AM to 1 PM eastern time at
>>>> www.theqonline.net
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Faith-talk mailing list
>>>> Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> Faith-talk:
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/thebluesisloose%40gmail.com
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Faith-talk mailing list
>>> Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> Faith-talk:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/awheeler%40neb.rr.com
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>> Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.0/1778 - Release Date: 11/9/2008
>> 2:14 PM
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Faith-talk mailing list
>> Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> Faith-talk:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/thebluesisloose%40gmail.com
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Faith-talk mailing list
> Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> Faith-talk:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/ccook01%40knology.net
>
Corey Cook 