Legal Group Seeks Dismissal of Homosexual Activists’ ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ Suit Against Pastor

lively videoSPRINGFIELD, Mass. — A nationally-recognized religious liberties organization is seeking the dismissal of an international lawsuit filed by an African homosexual activist group, which accuses an American pastor of committing ‘crimes against humanity’ for speaking out against homosexual behavior in the country.

As previously reported, Massachusetts Pastor Scott Lively, author of “The Pink Swastika,” had visited the nation of Uganda in 2009, where he spoke on what the Bible says about homosexuality and expressed support of pastors in the country that were working to oppose the proliferation of sexual activity between those of the same gender.

Several years following his visit, the group Sexual Minorities of Uganda (SMUG), filed a lawsuit against Lively, asserting that he had violated international law because his words allegedly encouraged government persecution against homosexuals in the nation. The group also alleges that Lively was a part of a “conspiracy” to deprive homosexuals of their rights.

He was sued under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), which allows individuals from foreign nations to file federal complaints against U.S. citizens who have committed torts overseas.

“That’s about as ridiculous as it gets,” Lively told the New York Times in 2013. “I’ve never done anything in Uganda except preach the Gospel and speak my opinion about the homosexual issue.”

Lawmakers in Uganda had been working to criminalize homosexual behavior in the country during the time of the lawsuit, and had been under intense international pressure to back down from their efforts. However, religious groups in Uganda urged parliament to pass legislation to protect social and personal morality in the nation.

The most controversial aspect of the legislation required life imprisonment for those who engage in “aggravated homosexuality,” meaning those who intentionally spread the HIV virus, commit homosexual pedophilia, or repeatedly engage in sex acts with those of the same gender.

  • Connect with Christian News

The legislation was signed into law by President Yoweri Museveni, but later struck down by Uganda’s Constitutional Court.

Lively’s case, which came three years after his visit to the nation, has been in the courts for the past four years, and last week, attorneys for Lively filed for summary judgment in seeking dismissal of the matter.

“Lively specifically objected to Ugandan attempts to enact laws that were, in Lively’s views, abhorrently harsh,” the motion, filed by the Florida-based group Liberty Counsel, reads. “Therefore, nothing in the record provides any evidence that Lively’s ‘sole’ and ‘immediate’ objective was violence to or abuse of LGBTI Ugandans.”

“The suit is an attempt to silence Pastor Scott Lively because of his speech about homosexuality and pornography. The implications of this suit are frightening because SMUG is trying to punish a U.S. citizen for constitutionally protected speech under some vague and undefined international law,” Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said in a statement.

“From the beginning this case had no merit, but we have had to spend four years and countless hours defending an innocent pastor against a lawsuit designed only to intimidate,” he remarked. “This case is a direct assault on the supremacy of the United States Constitution.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • http://www.facebook.com/chuck.anziulewicz Chuck Anziulewicz

    Inciting violence and persecution against LGBT people in Uganda or anywhere else is not what “free speech” is about.

    • Oboehner

      But violence against those who disagree with sexual perversion is peachy.

      • Ronald Carter

        But inciting violence and persecution against LGBT people is MORE peachy?

        • Oboehner

          They can be as sick and twisted as they like, just don’t expect me to champion it, or even accept it as normal.

          • Ronald Carter

            They aren’t sick and twisted. And it IS normal.

          • Oboehner

            Your opinion, far from fact.

          • Ronald Carter

            Only to those who don’t understand what facts are. Like yourself.

    • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

      It sounds like you don’t like free speech. It’s only free when you agree. Free speech is not “free speech”. If a man incites violence, prosecute him for that violence … but wait! There was no violence! The only violence was the violence done to the truth.

    • ElsaDominga

      He never made a call to violence.Stop exaggerating. He has every right as an orthodox preacher to extol the virtues of the holy and intimate bond between man/woman and discuss the pitfalls and perversions that arise when one strays from the glory of natural order and sacred teachings.

  • Reason2012

    Putting this man Scott aside (never listened to him), you can slaughter 50 LGBT people in the name of allah, and the left / progressives will immediately jump to defend islam as the “religion of peace”. Those into homosexuality are still_killed in 13 countries dominated by shariah law / islam. So does the LGBT activists sue local mosques for teaching the the LGBT community must die? No. The LGBT activists seek to legally attack Christianity instead.

    It just shows that homosexual activists are all about hatefully attacking Christianity, not any sort of sincere care for the LGBT community.

    • SFBruce

      You couldn’t be more wrong. This is not an attack on Christianity, it’s a lawsuit against Scott Lively for encouraging violence against a marginalized group, something I consider completely alien to the teachings of Jesus. The article tries to diminish the harshness of the Uganda measure with it’s indication only “aggravated” homosexuality is a crime, but as the article points out, that could only mean one has engaged in repeated acts, something which is part of a committed relationship. What’s more, at one time, it was proposed that homosexuality be a capital offense, and it’s still not clear exactly what Lively’s role was in that portion of the proposal. So far at least, American Muslims have not actively participated in efforts to deny equality to LGBT people, but many conservative Christians have done exactly that. Indeed, that’s the source of the vast majority of opposition to gay equality, most of which is based on long discredited ideas about what it means to be gay.

      • Reason2012

        Please show me the lawsuits against mosques in the United States for teaching that homosexuals must be_KILLED, which is the point. Activists were then instead defending islam as the “religion of peace” instead.

        That you sit there and defend islam yet again proves my point.

        They already had “equality” – NO ONE was denied the “right” to one man and one woman being a marriage. You want a NEW right that NO one has, but false call it inequality, which is dishonest.

        Since you bring up what Jesus taught as if that means something to you, when talking about divorce, Jesus re-iterated what marriage is to begin with: one man and one woman.

        Matthew 19:4-6 “And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

        Jesus even points out that for the cause of making them male and female, this is why male will leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife.

        Mark 10:5-7 “And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (6) But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. (7) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;”

        Jesus said God made them male and female – not male and male – not female and female.
        Jesus said man shall leave father and mother, not father and father, not mother and mother.
        Jesus said man shall cleave to his wife, not to his husband, not to her wife.

        1 Corinthians 7:2 “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

        Not to mention Jesus is God, so the entire Word of God is the Words of Christ. As Jesus is The Word.

        John 1:1-3 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

        John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”

        The Lord rebukes us for our attempts to destroy what He defined as one man and one woman.

        You continue to defend islam / shariah law, how they point out LGBT people need to be_killed, while you attack Christianity, while islam / shariah law leads to them_KILLING LGBT people and Christians do not go around_killing them, which proves you’re using the LGBT community and do not care about them.

        The LGBT community is starting to wake up to how activist like you are using them and do not care about them.

        • RWH

          Show us the proof that Islamic clergy are advocating the murder of gays in the United States. Since you’re so sure of your proof, you should be able to give us names of clergy, dates, and the locations of the mosques.

          • Reason2012

            See what I mean? Here you are defending islam after in the name of islam / shariah law they just killed 50 LGBT people.

            It’s what islam commands – it’s what they teach – it’s in their “holy book”. To claim they do NOT teach what’s in their “holy book” here in the US but only teach it in the 13 countries where they are_killed, while more continue to kill those into homosexuality here, proves you couldn’t care less about them and just pretend to be one of them to use them in your hate campaign against Christianity.

            And notice they subpoena Christian sermons, but even after the attack do not subpoena muslim “sermons” even in the mosque he attended.

            Please cite one place you condemned islam / shariah law on the day of the attack in orlando, let alone on ANY day.

            Facts expose your claims.

          • RWH

            I need to prove nothing. You’re the one making the claims that imams preach the murder of gays in mosques within the United States. If you’re so sure of your facts, you should have no problems providing documentation. This way we can see how full of baloney you are.

            Just as Christians in the third world don’t think like Christians in the west, especially the United States, the same holds true for members of other religions, including Islam.

            So, I suggest that you walk the walk instead of merely talking the talk and expecting others to believe you.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            “It’s what islam commands – it’s what they teach – it’s in their “holy book”. To claim they do NOT teach what’s in their “holy book” here in the US but only teach it in the 13 countries where they are_killed, while more continue to kill those into homosexuality here, proves you couldn’t care less about them and just pretend to be one of them to use them in your hate campaign against Christianity.”

            So if I pulled out a Bible and started reading all of the atrocities in it, would that be a fair characterization of Christianity? Of course not. Because most Christian pastors are smart enough not to preach the absurd parts. So why would Muslims be any different?

          • Reason2012

            You’d be reading what God told only the Jewish people to do at specific times in history to enemies of Jerusalem, for their atrocious, murderous acts. Those are not commands for Christians to go out and slaughter others, which is what Islam teaches.

            That you also defend islam after someone who follows what it says just got done slaughtering 50 LGBT people, but instead join in on attacking Christianity shows you hate the LGBT community and just use them to promote your anti-Christian anti-America agenda.

            If you really cared for the LGBT community, you’d be spending your time exposing the hate ideology of islam that seeks to_kill homosexuals everywhere, including now here in America.

            Instead you defend islam and attack Christianity. Your behavior contradicts your words.

          • Jannet

            Don’t you know that there is no condemnation of homosexuality in the Quran?
            It is only in the last two centuries that the muslims became anti homosexual. Why? because they started to follow the “christian” interpretation of the story of Sodom. Which interpretation is historically incorrect.

          • Becky

            Another lie.

          • Jannet

            Go read Judges 19&20. Exactly same story as S&G. Visitors come to a city. Citizens of the city respond hostile to the visitors and rape one of the visitors. The city gets demolished to the last stone as a result. Only difference with the S&G story is that it is a woman that gets raped. Now tell me, does this mean that heterosexuality is equally condemned?

          • Reason2012

            Quran (7:80-84) – “…For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds….”

            You just said it wasn’t ion the quoran.
            It is.
            That’s one verse of many.

            There’s nothing to interpret -words mean what they say.

        • Stephen W.

          As the dialogue continues, Jesus’ disciples are disturbed by his strict teaching on divorce. The disciples say that if divorce is not a ready option, perhaps it would be best for a man not to marry a woman. Jesus responds:

          “Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

          Here Jesus identifies three classes of men who should not marry women. Taking his categories in reverse order, first, there are those who have made themselves “eunuchs” for the kingdom of heaven, i.e., those who forswear marriage to better serve God. Second, he mentions those who have been “made eunuchs by others,” an apparent reference to castrated males. But Jesus mentions a third category — eunuchs who were born that way. Some might argue that Jesus was referring to males born without testicles, but this would be extremely rare. Moreover, this interpretation ignores how the term “born eunuchs” was used in other literature of the time.

          In the ancient world, including ancient Jewish culture (as reflected in the Talmud), “natural” or “born” eunuchs were not associated with missing testicles. Rather, they were associated with stereotypically effeminate characteristics and behavior (just like modern gay men), and were thought by Rabbi Eliezer to be subject to “cure” (just like modern gays). Moreover, as we have also seen, eunuchs were commonly associated with homosexual desire. As a reasonably informed person of his time, Jesus would have been aware of this common view of eunuchs. Yet he very matter-of-factly asserts that some people are simply born that way. The implication of his statement is profound — God created gay people the way they are! Jesus says so.

          Unlike Rabbi Eliezer, Jesus feels no need to “cure” these born eunuchs. He speaks no words of condemnation. Rather he lists people born gay alongside another honored class (eunuchs for the kingdom), and accepts them as a natural part of God’s creation order.

          Thus, when Matthew 19 is read as a whole, we see Jesus teaches that most people are created for heterosexual marriage. But, unlike some modern Christians, Jesus does not see this as the only honorable way to live. He acknowledges that some human beings have been created by God to follow a less common, but equally legitimate path. There are some who have been eunuchs from birth — gay men, made that way by God.

          • Reason2012

            Yes, this has been exposed as another dishonest attempt to pretend “eunuch” means “gay man”.

            Eunuch is someone who’s castrated, not a person who’s homosexual.

            “[Jesus said] For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
            Matthew 19:12

            Using your logic, Jesus was saying there are some homosexuals who were born that way, some who were made homosexual of men, or some who made themselves a homosexual.

            If you try to pretend it means to choose to live in celibacy, a person is not “born from the mother’s womb choosing to live in celibacy”, which again shows how you’re simply being dishonest.

            It’s translated from the Greek Word eunouchos, which means “a castrated person”.

            Not to mention more logic that refutes your false claim: Jesus is not going to say that it’s good to do something that instead elsewhere God says it’s a sin. He’s not going to say “A person committed a bad life-long sin for the kingdom of Heaven’s sake”. And you’re not choosing to be celibate if it’s “you’re made celibate of men” as part of that verse says.

            Even if a person didn’t know the word meant “castrated”, reading the verse makes it clear it CAN’T be “homosexual” or “choosing to be celibate”.

            You can try to twist scripture all you want, but it’s God you’ll have to convince that he approves of homosexuality, not men, as you’re bearing false witness of what God says and will answer to the deception you spread that God is just fine with homosexuality. I suggest you stop.

          • Jannet

            Jesus didn’t have your dictionary. He used the Talmud and Roman law. Both are very clear that born eunuchs are homosexuals.

            This is confirmed by one of the first church fathers, Clement of Alexandria in his stromatas (which are still accessible for reference):

            the Christian theologian Clement of Alexandria provided a complementary perspective about the born eunuch, by way of quoting the Basilidian Christians with respect to the gospel verse about eunuchs (Stromata 3.1.1):

            Some men by birth have a nature to turn away from women, and those who are subject to this natural constitution do well not to marry a woman. These, they say, are the eunuchs by birth.

            I will provide you with further proof and references from Roman law and the Talmud if you are interested

          • Reason2012

            // Both are very clear that born eunuchs are homosexuals.

            You ignore the rest. Why is that?

            Here it is: And there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.

            So using your logic, God’s Word says “there are some homosexuals, which were made homosexuals of men..”

            So homosexuals are made homosexuals by other men? Interesting.

            Using your logic God’s Word also says: :there be homosexuals, which have made themselves homosexuals for the kingdom of heaven’s sake”

            So a person can make themselves a homosexual by force of will, let alone supposed doing it for God – for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake, when God’s Word points out that homosexual behavior is a sin?

            Not to mention you cannot make yourself a homosexual, nor do others make you homosexuals according to people like you as well.

            No, Eunuch is translated from Greek Word eunouchos, which means “a castrated person”, and that Greek word is used in all THREE cases in that ONE verse.

            So even if we ignore what the word means, putting in “homosexual” into the verse makes it clear there’s no way that’s what it means.

            It’s God you’ll have to answer to for trying to pervert His Word to pretend He promotes homosexuality, and for all those you deceived, I would think again.

            Luke 12:4-5 “[Jesus said] And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.”

          • Jannet

            Such an intellectual dishonest reply from your side.
            there are three kinds of eunuchs:
            Born eunuchs
            Man made Eunuchs
            And Eunuchs that make themselves eunuch for the kingdom of heaven.

            Born Eunuchs is the category that refers to homosexuals. Man made Eunuchs are castrated men and Eunuchs that make themselves eunuch for the kingdom of heaven are celibates.

            Following your logic, and your assumption that all eunuchs are castrated men doesn’t make sense for the last category either, as only unblemished men (with all tools in place) are allowed in to the temple according to the bible. Castrating yourself for the kingdom of heaven is a contradiction interminis as it excludes you from accessing God’s temple.

            Again, Jesus didn’t have access to your (greek) dictionary. His reference was the talmud and roman law. Which both are very specific about what a born/natural Eunuch means. As is confirmed by the early Church Father Clementh of Alexandria.

            The meaning of the word Eunuch was changed by the Roman Catholich Church around 390 after Christ. That is why your dictionary gives a different, more narrow definition that the original meaning.

            I don’t fear anybody, and I don’t fear God. Because I know I will be judged righteously, because no good fruit comes from a bad tree, and no bad fruit from a good tree. As Jesus has thought us. I have committed many sins, but me loving my husband is for sure not one of them.

        • SFBruce

          Show me the lawsuits against a Christian church for teaching homosexuality is a sin, or that the state should execute gay people. Yes, there have been lawsuits against business owners who turned away gay customers in defiance of laws forbidding sexual orientation discrimination, but just as no mosque has been sued, no Christian church has been sued.

          In my comment I made no defense of Islam, and I don’t even mention sharia law, let alone defend it. There’s no question that some Muslims do despicable things which they claim honor Allah, but there are also Muslims who insist those same actions are a perversion of their religion. Surely you know the widespread disagreement among Christians about same sex intimacy. Some sects welcome and bless same sex unions, while some very conservative Christians (a very small minority, I hope) believe the state should execute gay people, and a good number would like to see it criminalized. All Muslims are not exactly alike, just as there are different beliefs among Christians.

          Your claim that gay people already had marriage equality since we could have married someone of the opposite sex is like saying laws forbidding interracial marriage aren’t unfair because all the races are equally constrained.

          And lastly, as a member of the LGBT community myself, I care very much about the treatment gay people receive, and I’m grateful for progressives who’ve joined our struggle for equality under the law.

          • Reason2012

            // Your claim that gay people already had marriage equality since we could have married someone of the opposite sex is like saying laws forbidding interracial marriage aren’t unfair because all the races are equally constrained.

            No, marriage is one man and one woman, so forbidding one man and one woman on the base of race (which you are BORN as) is not the same as putting one man and one woman aside and wanting two men to be called a “marriage”.

            To come up with cases where a man and a woman cannot be called a marriage (assuming non-related) would violate the very definition of marriage.

            Marriage is not “two living things that love each other” – marriage is man and a woman.

            Don’t WANT that? Fine.

            But don’t pretend it’s about inequality when it’s about wanting something that NO ONE can get.

            So while some mayors now are trying to subpoena sermons from Christian churches, to try calling it “hate speech” to point out male on male sex behavior is a sin, while mosques remain immune even though those who go to mosques now kill others, including LGBT, thank you for showing how muslims are left alone and defended in spite of even saughtering 50 LGBT in the name of islam.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “But don’t pretend it’s about inequality when it’s about wanting something that NO ONE can get.”

            People have been getting same-sex marriages all throughout the country for over a year now, you know. Even if it’s not a marriage by the definitions of your religion, marriage is not necessarily a religious ceremony.

            This is probably just going off on a tangent here, but you said “one man and one woman”…..where, if anywhere does the Bible say it’s ONE man and ONE woman? Honest question here, I’m not (well, not ONLY) trying to be a pain….I have heard of plenty of instances in the Bible where someone had more than one wife. Solomon supposedly had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

          • Reason2012

            Marriage existed before any government ever did. Legal marriage contracts were created to deal with the legal aspects of marriage, not to define it, and certainly cannot redefine it. So all they have is a piece of paper that points out what legal benefits they’ll get for being together – but it’s not a marriage – it’s a legal contract..

            The activists had civil unions, but rejected it because they demanded the government redefine the religious institution of marriage instead, which of course shows what the real motive of the activists was: to attack, smear, distort, pervert marriage – not the legal contract itself, which can easily be gotten no matter what they “named” it.

            Sin is not in the Bible to condone it. A man and three wives is three marriages: the man with wife A, then man with wife B and so on. In each case, one man and one woman – the women are not married to each other and are not in any way romantically involved one to another.

            Hope this helps.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “The activists had civil unions”

            Not in every state. To my understanding, civil unions usually if not always didn’t provide the same benefits of regular marriage. (where they DID have them, that is!) At best, it was a case of “separate but equal.”

            “Sin is not in the Bible to condone it. A man and three wives is
            three marriages: the man with wife A, then man with wife B and so on.
            In each case, one man and one woman – the women are not married to each other and are not in any way romantically involved one to another.

            Hope this helps.”

            No, it doesn’t, it totally doesn’t answer my question.

        • Jannet

          Biblical marriage:
          20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.
          (Deuteronomy 2)

          The bible is full with same sex covenants before God. You just close your eyes for it.

          The thing you won’t find in the gospel is your bigotry and prejudice.

          Why don’t you read all of matthew 19? verse 11 & 12 provide you with the exemptions for heterosexual marriage.

          And what a coincidence that when Jonathan falls in love with David, for this cause David leaves the house of his father and mother. And a covenant is made between the two before God. A covenant that even Saul recognizes as he calls David his son in law twice after he marries his daughter as well.

          More proof of God’s real intention. For every 100 women, 107 men are being born. So for 100 out of 107 men, Matthew 19:4-6 is perfectly applicable. For 7 out of 107 men, no women was created in the first place. As we know from Genesis 2 that it is not good for a man to be alone, it becomes obvious that God created a man as a fitting partner for these 7. And guess what? 7 divided by 207 is 3.4%, which is pretty close to the current day percentage of homosexuals within most populations. For 7 out of the 107 your interpretation is bogus, because God never created a woman for these men. Because gay men are created as such by God, and God doesn’t make mistakes. This you can read in Matthew 19:11&12 as well, the parts you so eagerly ignore as they don’t support your prejudice.

          Don’t forget that bearing false witness made it to the famous ten. Now go and sin no more…

          • Reason2012

            Deuteronomey 22 not 2.
            Notice you ignore all the verses that came before it and only show a couple of verses to make it look like it’s saying something different than it is.

            The entire context of which you left it all out:

            It’s a big deal in those days (unlike today’s society of have as much_sex as you want and abort any mistakes). So if a woman SAYS she’s a virgin, he marries her, and it turns out she LIED about it to deceive him, THEN she is punished as you pointed out. Of course it has to be true and proven.

            If you’re not a virgin, you have only to make sure the man you want to marry knows and it’s a non-issue.

            // The bible is full with same sex covenants before God.

            Actually it’s not. You haven’t shown any and instead show cases that rebuke your claims.

            Mat 19:11-12 is talking about those who are castrated: either born that way, made that way of other men, or make THEMSELVES that way for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake.

            Matthew 19:11-12 “But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”

            Unless you’re trying to claim homosexuals can be made that way by others, or you can make yourself a homosexual, which of course exposes this false claim.

            It’s translated from the Greek Word eunouchos, which means “a castrated person”.

            Even if a person didn’t know the word meant “castrated”, reading the verse makes it clear it CAN’T be “homosexual” as it would then mean, again, that you can make yourself a homosexual, or be made a homosexual by others, which of course is nonsense.

            // .. when Jonathan falls in love with David, for this cause David leaves the house of his father and mother. And a covenant is made between the two before God. A covenant that even Saul recognizes as he calls David his son in law twice after he marries his daughter as well.

            More false claims. David and John were never married. You twist it into a lie by adding your own wording of “he left his mother and father and makes a covenant with David”.

            Please quote the exact verse that says they were married, that he then “went in unto him” after getting married, that he was now “his husband”.

            1 Samuel 18:27 “Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full tale to the king, that he might be the king’s son in law. And Saul gave him Michal his daughter to wife.”

            Here it points out that a man and a woman is a marriage: the woman was his wife.

            1 Samuel 18:3 “Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.”

            Here it doesn’t say “marriage” or “husband” it just says they made a covenant – a brotherly love. Just like a man loves his own brother, but that doesn’t mean that’s a marriage either.

            // More proof of God’s real intention.

            God’s “intentions” do not contradict what He has made plain. You try to ignore God’s Word and instead present your claims as to “His intentions”.

            // For every 100 women, 107 men are being born. So for 100 out of 107 men, Matthew 19:4-6 is perfectly applicable. For 7 out of 107 men, no women was created in the first place.

            So that’s your logic now? The count of the number of men / women born? Where is that in the Bible?

            It’s not.

            Matthew 19:4-5 “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?”

            Man leave father and mother: not father and father, not mother and mother.

            cleave to his wife, not cleave to his husband, or cleave to her wife.

            So Matthew 19:4 says why God created Adam and Eve, a male and a female, why he didn’t JUST make males or JUST make females: because males go together with females, because males do NOT go together with males, because females do NOT go together with females.

            It doesn’t in any way claim that the birth rather for males and females will be perfectly 50% at all moments in time in history for the existence of the world.

            // As we know from Genesis 2 that it is not good for a man to be alone, it becomes obvious that God created a man as a fitting partner for these

            You didn’t back up a word of what you claim from the Bible. In fact, the verse you cite rebukes your claim – it says God created male AND female so that males and females come together, and not what you claim instead.

            It doesn’t say “the exact population at every moment in the entire world will be perfectly 50% males and 50% females”, and if not, then homosexuality or lesbianism will be just fine” that you imply.

            // Don’t forget that bearing false witness made it to the famous ten. Now go and sin no more…

            We will all answer for our sins – I suggest you not try to pervert God’s Word and pretend God says male on male sex is fine and that marriage can be two men or two women. In the end it’s God you’ll have to answer to for trying to publicly promote these perversions as if God said it, and answer for all those you deceived into believing those lies.

          • Jannet

            The count of men verses women is a well established fact in biology. You don’t need the bible for that, you can just witness it in real life. Only human intervention (abortions, one child policy, chemicals in the environment, etc) changes the male/female birth ratio from its biological mean.
            The number has been like this in all times. It has to do with the fact that an y chromosome (male) is smaller than an x chromosome (female). As a result, the male spermatozoa is slightly lighter and therefore has a slightly better chance to be the first to the egg cell.
            Matthew 19:11 & 12 talks about three categories: born eunuchs, man made eunuchs and eunuchs that made themselves eunuch for the kingdom of heaven. Born eunuchs are homosexual according to the historical context (as per Roman law of that time, as well as the Talmud and the early church fathers Clement of Alexandria). Your current day dictionary has no relevance to the historical context. And eunuchs that made themselves eunuch for the kingdom of heaven were most surely not castrates, as a castrated man was denied access to the temple. So your idea that all eunuchs are castrates falls flat.

    • The Skeptical Chymist

      Show me some examples of progressives defending the Islamic murders of gays and lesbians. I haven’t seen any.

      The left threw the LGBT community under the bus following Orlando??? I haven’t seen anyone (except a few “Christian” preachers and some extremist Muslims) who expressed anything but condemnation for the Orlando attack.

      You paint with too broad a brush.

      • Reason2012

        The main stream media. After 50 LGBT people were killed by a person following islam / shariah law, they were immediately defending islam as a religion of peace.

        Please cite CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS going after islam / shariah law and condemning their teaching that those into homosexuality must be_killed.

        Please cite where you posted against islam on that day, claiming mosques needed to be investigated for teaching that LGBT people need to be_killed.

        Scroll down and see how SFBruce, a progressive who supposedly cares about LGBT people was just defending islam yet again “American Muslims have not actively participated in efforts to deny equality to LGBT people”

        Facts betray your talking points.

        • james blue

          In the article above can you point to where the group Sexual Minorities of Uganda is suing Christianity? What they are doing is going after one person.

          • Reason2012

            I didn’t say they were suing Christianity. Why be dishonest?

            They are going after a Christian – and they have no problems calling him a Christian. It’s smearing Christianity – that’s how they attack Christianity.

            A person following islam / shariah law_KILLS 50 people into homosexuality, and they can’t even call it ISLAM terrorism, which again shows it’s about attacking / defacing / smearing Christianity while defending islam.

            Please cite where you posted condemnation for what islam / shariah law commands: the_killing of homosexuals and how it leads some who follow it to do just that, on the day of the attacks or any day.

            What’s funny is Christians condemn them and condemn islam. Homosexual “activists” instead defend islam as the “religion of peace”.
            It’s Christians that stand up for the LGBT’s being slaughtered while the homosexual activists defend islam.

          • Guest

            james blue is gizmo under a new handle. Just thought you’d like to know. He also posts as pete j.

          • Reason2012

            Thank you for the heads up – activists typically use multiple handles it seems to come across as more people.

          • LadyInChrist♥BlessedBeTheLord

            “weasel1886″ has said a lot of the same things that” gizmo23″ has said to me as well.

          • Guest

            He gives himself away every time, doesn’t he? 🙂

          • LadyInChrist♥BlessedBeTheLord

            Yes he sure does 🙂

          • The Skeptical Chymist

            OK, so “going after” Scott Lively and referring to him as a Christian is attacking all of Christianity? Not at all – it’s attacking your brand of Christianity., not all versions thereof.

            Most Muslims despise the vile attacks in Orlando or Nice. You’re just too blinkered to recognize it. Just like most Christians the world over despise the domestic terrorism of Robert Dear attacking the abortion clinic. No one is painting all Christians as terrorists out to bomb abortion clinics, and no one is claiming that Christians in general applauded when he conducted his assault on the clinic. No one should make similar claims about the Muslims either. Both claims would be equally untrue.

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          So when a Muslim terrorist attacks in the name of his God, all Muslims are bad? But when a white Christian does the same, you all be like, but he wasn’t a real Christian. You can’t blame all Christians for what one does, and I don’t. But you and your ilk blame all people from one religion for what a few do. You and your ilk love to paint them all with the same broad brush, don’t you?

          • Reason2012

            Those into homosexuality are_killed in 13 countries. That you want to pretend it’s only a few “radicals” that are killing them in those 13 COUNTRIES only shows how dishonest you are, and how again you defend islam even when they slaughter 50 LGBT people here in America.

            The vast majority of those who follow islam want shariah law to rule. Shariah law dictates that homsoexual behavior is punishable by imprisonment or death.

            Please cite where you were standing up against the hateful things islam teaches on the day of the Orlando attacks.

            “My ilk”? My, what hate. Thank you for proving my point.

            It’s Christians that stand up to islam and their slaughter of homosexuals – that expose that ideology’s murderous agenda of hate. You are here defending islam. Those facts say it all.

            Why do you hate the LGBT community so much that you pretend to care for them while defending the ideology (islam / shariah law) responsible for their slaughter?

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Yep as I said before you love to paint them all with the same broad brush.

            I defend those you paint with that brush. What ISIS does is evil, but that doesn’t mean that all Muslims are evil. Some Christian extremists do evil things, but that doesn’t mean that all Christians are evil. I don’t hate Christians or Christianity. You can worship your God, Jesus, Christ or whatever as much as you want. But say hatefull things about my friends and I will defend them tooth and nail. I’m friends with people from all walks of life, Christians, Muslims, Hindu, etc, black, whites, heteroes, homosexuals. We have our differences, we argue, but at the end of the day we are just friends. We live and let live.

          • Jannet

            You clearly don’t know much about the Islam. The Quran doesn’t condemn homosexuality. It was only the “christian” influence that made muslims condemn homosexuality since two centuries ago. The influence meaning the historically incorrect interpretation of the S&G story.

          • Reason2012

            Quran (7:80-84) – “…For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds…. And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)” –

            That’s one of many verses that condemns homosexual behavior.

  • Jolanda Tiellemans

    Oh, that guy.

  • Jolanda Tiellemans

    Well what else do you expect from the man who wrote the Pink Swastika. Anyone surprised? I’m not!

    • RWH

      Yeah! It’s about as reliable as the Protocols of Zion.

  • Reason2012

    Notice you can go to a mosque that teaches sharia law, where those into homosexuality are to be imprisoned or_killed, can now_kill dozens of LGBT members, and the activists even in this post defend islam instead while continuing to attack Christianity. It shows these activists hate LGBT but just use them as a tool to attack Christianity.

    As for homosexual behavior: Adults continue to permanently turn away from homosexuality, even after decades of believing the lie they were “born that way”, proving it’s not genetic, but the product of indoctrination, confusion, mental instability and/or abuse.

    Homosexual behavior is most literally pointed out as a sin, and God has not changed on that regard. But if a person has those inclinations but does not act upon them, does not dwell in lust upon others, but is instead struggling against them to avoid them, then it’s not a sin. It’s just like sinful inclinations of any kind: it’s acting upon it when it becomes a sin.

    And this is what God says about sin and specifically the behavior of homosexuality:

    Romans 1:26-27 ”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.”

    1 Corinthians 6:9-10 ”Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [men who willingly take on the part of a “woman” with another man], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [s odomites], (10) Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

    1 Timothy 1:9-10 ”Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, (10) For_whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind [s odomites], for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

    Jude 1:7 ”Even as_Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

    Luke 17:29 ”[Jesus said] But the same day that Lot went out of_Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.”

    Matthew 19:4-6 ”And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

    Jesus made it quite clear God made us male and female so that a man will leave his father and mother (not two fathers, not three mothers and so on) and cleave onto his wife (not his husband and so on).

    The Word of God rebukes us all – even if we all try to say we don’t believe the Bible, the very Word of God will be our judge when we face Him. And God is a righteous judge and will judge us all – not turn a blind eye to our sin. Do not be deceived by the world: it’s God we will have to convince that His word was a lie, not men. What happened in Noah’s day when the entire world rejected God? Did God spare them because there were so many? No – they all perished except for Noah and his family!

    Proverbs 9:10 ”The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.”

    God spared not His chosen people – we are kidding ourselves if we think He will spare the United States of America if we choose to blatantly turn away from Him.

    Jeremiah 12:17 ”But if they will not obey, I will utterly pluck up and destroy that nation, saith the LORD.”

    Luke 17:28-30 “So also as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; (29) but the day Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from the heaven and destroyed them all. (30) Even so it shall be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.”

    Romans 1:18-32 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold [suppress] the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

    For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 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.

    Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 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.

    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: 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.

    And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, m urder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.”

    The entire Bible points out men having_sex with men is an abomination. Likewise woman having_sex with women. It’s not just Paul that pointed it out.

    Genesis 19:4-13 “But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of S odom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: 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 [men wanting to have_sex with men].

    And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. 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 [he offers his daughters to be_raped to keep them from having_sex with another man – shows_rape is not the issue but male on male_sex]; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

    And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

    And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.”

    These two messengers were sent to destroy that place before the event where they tried to_rape these messengers.

    Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

    Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination …”

    Even cross-dressing is an abomination:

    Deuteronomy 22:5 “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.”

    Deuteronomy 23:17 “There shall be no_whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a s odomite of the sons of Israel.”

    1 Kings 22:46 “And the remnant of the s odomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land.”

    1 Kings 15:11-12 “And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father. And he took away the s odomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.”

    2 Kings 23:7 “And he brake down the houses of the s odomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove.”

    Ezekiel 16:49-50 “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister S odom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.”

    And the “pride” parades about homosexuality are more of the same.

    Matthew 19:4-5 “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?”

    Not father and father. Not mother and mother. Not his husband.

    And only two people of opposite gender can become “one flesh”.

    Live forever, people – not temporarily only to be cast out for living for the things of this world.

    May God/Jesus Christ be glorified!

    • Jolanda Tiellemans

      Oh, look, you’re posting the same old thing. You’re a stubborn one, aren’t you?

    • Jannet

      So many errors.

      Strange flesh refers to strangers. The angels visiting S&G were strangers. So Jude does not claim homosexuality to be the sin of S&G.

      Lev 18&20, as well as Romans 1 are all within the context of Idolatry. Etc. Etc.

      You only display your ignorance about the meaning of the gospel.

      Now lets have a good look at one of the most fundamental parts of the gospel (a similar text can also be found in the old testament)

      Matthew 22:
      36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

      37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

      Verse 40 tells you that there are only two commandments, and everything else follows from these two. Now kindly explain to me how homosexuality violates the commandment Love God and/or Love your Neighbor.

      You can not…

      • Becky

        Rubbish! The scriptures tell us that Egypt and Canaan (and other nations) were notorious for practicing idolatry, but it also tells us that they were guilty of sexual immorality. In Leviticus 18, God Almighty tells Moses that he expects his people to obey his laws. Take note that in verses 6-20 it’s clearly describing sinful acts of sexual immorality. In verse 21 it’s explicitly describing the sinful act of idolatry, IN ITSELF. Incidentally, there’s also murder involved in this sinful act. In verses 22-23, again, it’s clearly describing acts of sexual immorality. So, even if every sinful act within Levitus 18 was dealing with idolatry, note that each and every one of those sins would still remain sins without any idolatry involved (eg incest, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, murder).

        • Jannet

          The sexual immorality and the idolatry were linked with each other in the form of fertility rituals where men and women had sex with everything on two and four legs. That is the context of both Lev 18 and 20. The verse in 18 preceding the one about homosexuality talks for example about offering your children to Molech. The word abomination is a semi translation of the word Toevah, many times used in the bible, all within the context of Idolatry.
          Ask yourself, why demanded the Sanhedrin (the jewish court) four witnesses to the same incidence? this alone already points to something in a public setting. Or do you regularly have sex with your partner with four witnesses?
          In Lev 18 we also find the condemnation of having sex with a woman during her period as an abomination. However, in Lev 15:24 the same “sin” is not a problem at all.
          The other sexual acts in Lev 18 are not necessarily a sin outside the context of Idolatry. Only if they are also contravening the Love your Neighbor commandment (or the subsequent commandments of the famous ten) they are also a sin in a broader context. However, that is not applicable to having sex with a woman during her period, and equally that is not applicable to men having sex with each other.
          Murder and Adultery made it to the famous ten and are in clear contravention of the love your neighbor commandment (and therefore can be found in the famous ten).

          Again, there are only two commandments. Love God and Love your neighbor. These two commandments form the basis of all others. If it doesn’t contravene those two, it is not a sin at all.

          And again, Lev 18 and 20 does not forbid incest between father and daughter. As it doesn’t violate the love your neighbor commandment in the biblical interpretation. But I have told you this in an earlier post.

      • Reason2012

        // Strange flesh refers to strangers. The angels visiting S&G were strangers.

        No, strangers refers to strangers. Strange FLESH means strange FLESH.

        Please show where in the Bible God calls strangers “strange flesh” instead of just “strangers”.

        What also rebukes your claim is the angels were sent to destroy it – so destruction for going after strange FLESH was going to happen before they tried to rape the angels, unlike your claim of them going after strangers, these visitors, is what caused God to destroy that city.

        Not to mention BOTH cities were destroyed, one of which the angels did not visit, again for going after strange FLESH.

        Genesis 19:13 “For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.”

        I thank you for bringing up these false claims – it lets others see how they’re rebuked. I would think again for promoting these lies, more so now that you’ve been shown they’re false, which makes you even more accountable for ignoring it and teaching it anyway.

        • Jannet

          Please show where in the Bible God calls homosexuals “strange flesh” instead of just “men who ly with men as with women”….
          Basically strange flesh can mean anything. It can refer to strangers, it can refer to having sex with angels (which is pretty strange I think).

          Thanks for bringing up the argument that S&G was condemned before the angels arrived. That is normally one of my arguments. Because the story about the trying to rape the angels is clearly not the reason why S&G was condemned in the first place. And as no other references to S&G in the bible talk about homosexuality as being part of the sins of S&G, it means that there is no biblical justification for the assumption that S&G was condemned because of homosexuality.

          S&G was destroyed because of greed, grave injustice and inhospitality to strangers. Nothing points to homosexuality.

          It is my turn to say thanks for bringing it up…

  • Jolanda Tiellemans

    If I see the comments of one particulair person, I have to wonder if she/he even reads what is written. Me think not. I don’t deffend what ISIS does, I defend those who like me condemn what ISIS is doing. In every society there are bad apples, in every country there are bad apples, in every nation there are bad apples. But painting all people living in that particulair society, country, nation with the same broad brush, is wrong. Oh and this is so off topic, how does that keep happening? Well, I hope one day we can all live in peace.

    • Grace Kim Kwon

      No peace in baby-killing Sodom. Secular West must stop persecuting the Christians.

  • Judy Zwyghuizen

    Why not he has his right’s too! to Speak however he feel’s this isn’t nothing wrong with it! they alway’s skeak their peace! “NO PROBLEM” here that I can see!

    • Jannet

      inciting violence against people is not a right, it is a crime. Why is the book “mein kampf” from Hitler forbidden in most countries?

  • Jannet

    I seldomly have read an article which take so many liberties with the truth. Scot Lively not only aimed to criminalize homosexuality, he also promoted the ideas to have homosexuals executed. As a direct result the kill the gay law was put in place by the Uganda government.
    Anybody that somehow defends this man and still calls himself “christian” has lost all credibility….

    • Becky

      According to the word of God, anyone who commits sin, including homosexuality, will lose their salvation and see death. If you don’t believe that then it doesn’t matter what you think about Christians.

      • Jannet

        Homosexuality has never been a sin. That is the mistake you make.
        And I consider myself a Christian.

        • Becky

          Then you’re not a Christian, but a liar.

          • Jannet

            Again, bearing false witness made it to the famous ten.
            You are entitled to your opinion, but without substantiation it is not much more than that. A prejudiced opinion.

            I suggest you start reading the gospel. It might help you becoming a better person. There is salvation for everyone willing to accept his word.

          • Becky

            The books of Moses (writings Christ commanded we believe John 5:46-47), and throughout the bible, clearly and repeatedly reveal that God Almighty commanded that if a man has sex with another man it is an abomination against Him, with or without any idolatry involved, it’s still sexual immorality…it’s still a sin (eg Leviticus 18) . Like incest, with or without idolatry involved, it’s still sexual immorality…it’s still a sin. Like bestiality, with or without idolatry involved, it’s still sexual immorality…it’s still a sin. Like adultery, with or without idolatry involved, it’s still sexual immorality…it’s still a sin. The word of God proves that you’re a liar.

          • Amos Moses

            It is always idolatry …… that is why it is an abomination …..

          • Jannet

            that is nonsense. Idolatry is about having other gods before God, or worshipping the creation and not the creator. The ten commandments explain pretty much the direction of violations of the Love God commandment. However, a commandment against homosexuality is not one of them….
            Bearing false witness is….

          • Amos Moses

            No ……. what you are spinning is nonsense ………. idolatry is ANY THING in place of God ….. SHOPPING can be idolatry, smoking can be idolatry, television can be idolatry …….. if it disregards God ……. and Romans 1 CLEARLY defines what idolatry is ……. worship of the CREATION and NOT the Creator ………….. and disregard for Gods law …………. which, again …… is what homosexuals do ………… disregard God and His law ……. they are not repentant for this sin …….. they want everyone to think it is not sin …. and that is lying about God and is blasphemy ….

            ROMANS 1
            1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. (homosexuals worship and SERVE the CREATION) (You are turning Gods word into a lie)

            1:26 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:
            1:27 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.
            1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

            Men with men……………burning with lust for another man …………. doing that which is not convenient …………… case closed ………

          • Jannet

            Hahahahahaha, now shopping is Idolatry?
            No, you are wrong. If you love something or someone else than God more than you love God himself it becomes Idolatry. When you put the creation before the creator it is Idolatry. The ten commandments are pretty conclusive when it comes to how to interpret Idolatry.

            I agree with you on Romans 1 .25 that Idolatry is about worshipping the creation and not the creator.
            However, Romans 1 surely doesn’t state that homosexuals disregard Gods law. Because God’s law is clear (Love God and Love your Neighbor). Romans 1 is a letter from Paul to the ….. Romans. What did the Romans do? They had other gods (apollo, venus, Ishtar) and they worshipped the sun (hence we still have Easter (from Ishtar), Christmas (Saturnalia) and have our “sabbath” on Sunday, etc). So the Romans worshipped other gods and the creation.

            How did they worship their gods? It included fertility rituals, where men and women had sex with everything on two and four legs. It were lustful occasions where men and women had sex not only according to their nature, but also against their nature (so straight men had all the sudden sex with other men as well, and where homosexual men all the sudden had sex with women, and vice versa).

            That is what Romans 1 is about. That is the Idolatry Romans 1 talks about.

            Which obviously has nothing to do with current day homosexuality.

          • Amos Moses

            No ……. not now ……….. always …….. if it takes your eyes off God …….. it is idolatry …..

            “If you love something or someone else than God more than you love God himself it becomes Idolatry. When you put the creation before the creator it is Idolatry.”

            And that is what i said ………. despite your bad phrasing ……….. so we agree ………

            ” Romans 1 surely doesn’t state that homosexuals disregard Gods law. ”

            Wrong …………. it violates Leviticus and you know it ………. but it also violates the first and second commandment ………….. and when you disregard Gods laws ……….. and Romans 1 REITERATES Leviticus …………. CLEARLY AND WITHOUT AMBIGUATION ………… homosexuality IS idolatry …………..

          • Jannet

            Assuming you are a man, does your love for your wife equal to idolatry?
            And again. Leviticus 18 and 20 are about homosexual acts as part of Moleck worshipping.

          • Amos Moses

            “Assuming you are a man, does your love for your wife equal to idolatry?”

            Well that would be inline with Gods plan ………… but scripture says ….. if you do love her more than Christ ………. YES ……….. it is idolatry …….

            “There is no way that you can conclude that Romans 1 equals homosexuality to Idolatry.”

            No ………… there is no way you want to be inline with Christs teaching that it is ………

          • Jannet

            It is equally in line with God’s plan that I love my same sex partner. Because he creates us both this way. As is confirmed by Jesus in Matthew 19:11&12.

            That is not Christs teaching. That is your opinion. But Romans 1 doesn’t say support your opinion, because it isn’t there…

          • Amos Moses

            ” Because he creates us both this way. As is confirmed by Jesus in Matthew 19:11&12.”

            Sorry ………. did you have an orchiectomy ………. i bet it hurt ………. or were you born without stones ……….

            “That is not Christs teaching. That is your opinion.”

            No ……… that is YOUR OPINION …………… and your opinion is contrary to scripture ………. so guess which one is going to stand before God in pride ……….. good luck with that ……..

          • Jannet

            And again you are mistaken.
            first of all, the word Abomination is a translation of the word Toevah, which is many times used in the bible, all within the context of idolatry. Your “abomination” can be found in both Lev 18 and 20. The first mistake you make is to assume that Lev 18 and 20 is about sexual practices. It is not. It is about idolatry. Proof of this can be found in Lev 18:21: You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the LORD. Only hereafter you find the verse about sex between men.
            Lev 18 and 20 is about Molech worshipping. How was Molech worshipped? By offering your offspring in the fire of Molech as well as by fertillity/sex rituals where men and women had sex with everything on two and four legs. Temple prostitution (both male and female), etc. This is all very well documented by historians.
            Lev 20 even starts with a complete introduction about Molech worshipping.
            Now both Lev 18 and 20 also condemns having sex with a woman during her period. It makes it a pretty big thing and is also included in the blanket condemnation as an abomination and you are kicked out of the people of Israel.
            However, in Lev 15:24 we find that having sex with a woman during her period is not a sin. It is only a ritual impurity for seven days. Not really a big issue. Only consequence is that you can’t visit the temple for seven days. This proofs that there is a context within Lev 18& 20 that makes the act of sex between a men and a women during her period a sin. that context is idolatry. The worship of Molech. The same context is obviously applicable to sex between two men.
            Outside of that context, homosexuality is perfectly fine.
            And that agrees also perfectly with the two foundational commandments Love God and Love your Neighbor. Ever asked yourself why homosexuality didn’t make it to the famous ten?
            Funny that you bring up incest. Because nowhere in the bible you find condemnation of a father having sex with his daughter (not even in Lev 18 and 20). Why not? Because a daughter was property of the father. A girl was worth a bridal price, which was only payable if she was a virgin. If she lost her virginity before marriage, her worth was zero hence sex before marriage was seen as steeling (against the Love your Neighbor commandment). this is confirmed in Genesis (I believe) where it states that a man that has sex with a virgin girl before marriage has to pay the bridal price to the father. However, if a father choses to have sex with his girl, and taking her virginity by doing so, he is steeling from himself, not from somebody else. That is why incest between a father and his daughter is not considered a sin according to the bible.
            Homosexuality has never been a sin.

          • Amos Moses

            Again ……….. you are doing violence to Gods word …….

          • Jannet

            No, I don’t agree with your interpretation of Gods word, and so far I have not seen any substantiation on your side that your interpretation is based on anything. I however have substantiated every single post I have made so far.
            I truly believe you are following human construct, which unfortunately has not much to do with God’s word.

          • Amos Moses

            Correct …………… GODS WORD IS GODS WORD ……….. and you are doing VIOLENCE to it …..

          • Jannet

            You are not God.

            And please explain where and how i violence the word of God. Substantiation is required, otherwise your reply is only a display of prejudice

          • Amos Moses

            psssssssst ………. NEITHER ARE YOU ………………..

          • Jannet

            I never claimed to be God.

          • Amos Moses

            Nor did i ………. but you are here making claims AGAINST His word ……….. so you must think you is smarter than He is ………… and you aint …………..

          • Jannet

            I am making claims against YOUR interpretation of his word. However you are claiming that your interpretation is equal to his word. Hence the remark that you are not God. Your interpretation is your interpretation. I have mine. I can substantiate my interpretation. The question is if you can substantiate yours.

          • Amos Moses

            No ……. YOU are making an interpretation ……….. i am giving you the scriptures …….. interpretation is ADDING to scripture and is FORBIDDEN by 5 separate scriptures ……
            Deuteronomy 4:2, Deuteronomy 12:32, Proverbs 30:6, Galatians 1:8-9, Revelation 22 18-21

          • Jannet

            That is your opinion, but not substantiated by anything. Maybe it is you that is not a Christian?

          • mic1969

            Jannet, most Christians would disagree with you, and not just today, but throughout history, beginning with Moses.

          • Jannet

            Again factually wrong.
            First of all, Moses was a Jew and not a Christian. And Moses his writings don’t condemn homosexuality at all. Even the most conservative Judaism scholars these days agree that both lev 18 and 20 are talking about homosexuality within a context of Idolatry (worshipping of Moleck). This has nothing to do with current day homosexuality. Secondly, till 390 AC Christianity was absolutely fine with homosexuality. It was only because the Roman Catholic Church couldn’t win from the Arians (even though the council of Nicea was won by the RCC), because the Arians (including Eusebius of Nicomedia, and another Eusebius at the court of Constantine) where in very powerful and trusted positions. Because they were homosexuals (Eunuchs). Only by making homosexuality the sin of sins was the power of the arians ultimately destroyed as they lost their position of power at the courts. It was only then that the S&G got its current day interpretation, and it was only then that the meaning of the word eunuch was limited to castrates only.

          • Oboehner

            “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” Leviticus 18:22 (writings of Moses as relayed to him by God)

          • Jannet

            May i first refer to the preceding verse 18:21?
            And then lets have a look at the word abomination, which is a semi translation of the word Toevah, a word used many times in the bible within the context of Idolatry.
            Leviticus 18 and 20 is about Idolatrous practices and Molec worshipping, including the offering of your children, as well as fertility rituals. In these fertility rituals men and women had sex with everything of two and four legs. This included also homosexual sex acts. Or sex with women during her period. Within this context (Idolatry) these practices were considered a sin. However, outside the context of Molech worshipping these practices were perfectly fine as proven by Lev 15:24 where sex with a woman during her period is absolutely not a problem.
            However, some sexual practices mentioned in Lev 18 & 20 remain a sin, as they go against some of the ten commandments or the commandment Love your Neighbor. The others that do not violate these two commandments (Love god/Love your neighbor) are perfectly fine outside the context of Idolatry.
            So no, Lev 18 and 20 do not condemn homosexuality. It condemn Molech worshipping. Which is all over the two chapters.

          • Oboehner

            You can twist it up all you like, verse 22 is crystal clear and says nothing at all about rituals. One could go back to the beginning of the book for further twisting, but that changes nothing. ““Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

          • Jannet

            Leviticus 18:19 is cristal clear about having sexual relations during her period, it is an equal abomination. And still in Lev 15:24 it is not a problem at all, only a ritual uncleanliness. the difference? the context…

            You can not take one verse out of its biblical (and historical) context and declare it universally valid.

          • Oboehner

            You can not take one verse out of its biblical (and historical) context and declare it universally valid.

            “Leviticus 18:19 is cristal clear about having sexual relations during her period, it is an equal abomination.” Nope, it does not, now you are sinking to lying about scripture in your desperation to justify your lifestyle choice. The verse Leviticus 18:19 states nothing about an abomination nor does it state anything about being put to death.

          • Ronald Carter

            Maybe that’s why so few people take it seriously. Nothing fails like prayer, after all.

          • Oboehner

            Only to those without a clue.

          • Ronald Carter

            More like those grounded in reality – oh look, the talking snake just failed you again.

          • Jannet

            Read the last verse of Lev 18 that declares all things described in Lev 18 as abominations…

          • Amos Moses

            “First of all, Moses was a Jew and not a Christian. ”

            FIRST OF ALL …………. Moses was a Hebrew ………….. and a Levite ….. and most definitely not a Jew …… Jews are only from the tribe of Judah …….

            ” And Moses his writings don’t condemn homosexuality at all.”

            Second of all …………. Moses did not write it ……….. the Holy Spirit is the author of ALL scripture ….. so unless you want to make the case that the Holy Spirit did not know what was being talked about ………. then you do not ……

        • Harry Oh!

          It’s just plain sick….ok.

          • Jannet

            Thanks for your contribution to the discussion. At least you are honest about your prejudice and don’t try to make it sound right by abusing God’s word.

            I am wondering why you think it is sick? You don’t like the idea of anal sex? Don’t you know that approx. 40% of the woman claim to have had anal sex in the last year when asked for it? And don’t you know that only approx. 50% of homosexuals have anal sex? The rest stick to old fashioned BJs and HJs… So we are really not that different from straight couples.

            Or does seeing two men kissing make you feel uncomfortable? If that is the case, i can tell you I recognize the feeling from when I was still in the closet. It is the feeling of attraction to something, something deep in your nature, which you find socially not acceptable. It is this conflict that brings the uncomfortable feeling.

          • Harry Oh!

            Oh God thinks it’s sick too, no question about that. And because you’re confused about what I meant by ‘sick’ I’ll say it’s ‘pathological’ instead. Look it up, I know it’s a big word, sorry bout that.

          • Jannet

            God doesn’t think it is sick, or pathological.

            This is what God says about homosexuals:
            5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.

            Isaiah 56

          • Harry Oh!

            Dream on and study up on exegesis hermeneutics. You obviously know nothing about context, time factors and audience relevance.

          • Amos Moses

            and in that passage ………. the word translated as eunuch is……..

            H5631
            סרס סריס
            sârı̂ys sâris
            saw-reece’, saw-reece’
            From an unused root meaning to castrate; a eunuch; by implication valet (especially of the female apartments), and thus a minister of state: – chamberlain, eunuch, officer. Compare H7249.

            NOTHING about homosexuals …….. or any others ……….

          • Charles

            Everyone has a sinful nature. Thinking that you are going to “Suffer” the sin of another is ridiculous. Each has their own sin.. For you it’s attraction to the same sex.. The only way to conquer this sin is through Christ Jesus.. No matter what “Self” help, or new Psychiatry technique, you’ll never reduce that sin (Whichever it happens to be) without the Lord Jesus Christ.. Hint: It was setup that way for a reason.

          • Jannet

            he was not talking about sin, he was talking about being disgusted.
            Jesus would for sure not want me to stop loving my same sex partner. Even Paul said that everybody has received his own gift of God.
            Your idea of a God “burdening” people with homosexuality is the biggest crap I have ever heard.
            It is much simpeler: LOVE IS THE FULFILlMENT OF THE LAW

          • Charles

            “”LOVE IS THE FULFILlMENT OF THE LAW””

            Oh, right.. Sorry, I didn’t know you worshiped “Hippie” Jesus.. That’s not the real and living God I’m afraid. Simply one of your own making..

        • Amos Moses

          Homosexuality violates the first one ………… it is idolatry …… and that does not honor or show love to God …..

          • Jannet

            Having a homosexual relationship has as much to do with idolatry as having a heterosexual relationship. A relationship with a human being is not about worshipping another God, or worshipping the creation. That is nonsense.

            Your second one fails the requirements as it doesn’t follow from the two foundational commandments. You need something else (outside of the two commandments) to come to a conclusion that homosexuality is not honoring God or does not show love to God. Which automatically means it is invalid as the only two commandments are Love God and Love your Neighbor.

            Have you ever asked yourself why homosexuality never made it to the famous ten? The answer is simple. Because it never has been an issue for God.

            Idolatry is a big issue, and clearly violates both the ten commandments and the foundational two. And I already have explained (and proven to) you that both Leviticus 18 &20 & Romans 1 are about worshipping other Gods. Within that context everything is a sin. Outside that context, homosexuality is perfectly fine.

          • Amos Moses

            “Having a homosexual relationship has as much to do with idolatry as having a heterosexual relationship.”

            If EITHER is outside of what God has defined as marriage ………… IT IS IDOLATRY …….. God nowhere stated that men should marry anything but a woman ………………

          • Jannet

            God nowhere stated that men should not marry other men.

          • Amos Moses

            An argument from silence is not an argument ……………. it is silence …………. and it is nowhere affirmed ……….. and we have Matthew 19 where Christ AFFIRMS His plan for marriage as outlined in Genesis ………..and we have Romans 1 CLEARLY stating that men with men or women with women is DISREGARD of God and His plan ……….. and is IDOLATRY …….

          • Jannet

            We also have in matthew 19: 11&12 the clear exceptions, which i have explained already to you. You know by now that born eunuchs are homosexuals (Jesus confirming that homosexuals are born so from mothers womb).
            So God has a very well defined plan for the majority of men and women, which Jesus confirms in Matthew 19:4-6, but there are also clearly exceptions to this plan as jesus confirms in Matthew 19:11&12. He doesn’t say anything about what these people are supposed to do. But from Genesis 2 we know that in God’s opinion it is not good for a man to be alone, and that God has made a fitting “helper” for everyone. As for every 100 women , 107 men are being born (this is a biological fact that is applicable for all countries, of all times), it is already obvious that in God’s plan, there are no women created for 7 out of 107 men. So these men are clearly aimed to be together. Which comes to 7/207=3.4% of the population is more or less equal to the percentage homosexuals in society.

          • Amos Moses

            No ………. it does not ………. eunuchs ARE NOT homosexuals or trannys …….. that is an interpretation and is FORBIDDEN by scripture ………. Deuteronomy 4:2, Deuteronomy 12:32, Proverbs 30:6, Galatians 1:8-9, Revelation 22 18-21 ……….. SCRIPTURE interprets SCRIPTURE …………. NOT you, NOT me …………. and IF you cannot show clearly in another scripture that confirms your scripture and it does not violate another scripture …… then ……. MAYBE ……… you have a point ………….. but you dont…………….. scripture DOES NOT contradict scripture …………

          • Jannet

            Born eunuchs are homosexuals, man made eunuchs are castrates and eunuchs that made themselves eunuch for the kingdom of heave are celibates.
            Your dictionary doesn’t qualify as scripture. And although the Roman law of that time and the Talmud is not considered scripture either, it for sure was the context of Jesus Christ. And you know that this context confirms what I state above.
            That the meaning of the word Eunuch is not limited to castrates only is already proven by the last category. Because castrates were not allowed access to the temple. Only “unblemished” men were allowed in. So to castrate yourself for the kingdom of heaven is a bit of a contradiction interminus don’t you think?
            And proof of this is to be found within scripture.
            Nowhere did I include your “trannys” in my argumentation. So far the discussion has been about homosexuality. I intend it to keep it that way. Or do you want to include the subject into the discussion because you can’t win the homosexuality debate?

          • Oboehner

            “Born eunuchs are homosexuals”, is that in the chapter with the unicorns in it?

          • TheKingOfRhye

            “is that in the chapter with the unicorns in it?”

            Which one? lol

          • Amos Moses

            Not sure that is a good argument ……… the bible talks about unicorns and other things we do not see today …………. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence …….

          • Oboehner

            Pixie dust then.

          • Amos Moses

            Where is your scriptural evidence that eunuchs are homosexual ………. when the VERY FACT that they are eunuchs ……….. PRETTY MUCH EXCLUDES ANY SEX ……..

            i do not have to use my dictionary ………. along with scripture ……… we have CHRISTS dictionary ………. and it does not support your view ………. nor does the whole of scripture …

            Here is the flaw in your line of reasoning ……… you are saying that if certain characters committed certain things that scripture says is SIN …….. then it is okay for you to do it ….. WRONG ………..

          • Charles

            Lev 18:22 KJV
            (22) Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

            There you have it. Clear as a bell.

          • Jannet

            Abomination is a translation of the word toevah, many times used in the bible, all within the context of idolatry. Read Lev 18:21, about offering your children to Molech. Leviticus 18 is not a blanket condemnation of homosexuality. It is a condemnation of a number of sexual practices within the context of idolatry. Why else would something in Leviticus 18 like having sex with a woman during her period be an abomination, while it is perfectly fine in Leviticus 15:24? CONTEXT.
            The bible is full with references to cult prostitutes (both male and female) or temple prostitutes. Molech worshipping was about fertility rituals, where men and women had sex with everything of two and four legs. That is condemned by Lev 18 (&20).
            Has nothing to do with normal loving and caring homosexual relationships. And why would it. Because such relationships don’t violate the Love God and Love your Neighbor commandments. And from these two follow all other laws.

          • Charles

            God isn’t talking about idol worship here.. He’s talking about homosexuality. Your best bet would be the Talmud if you want everything accepted under the pretense of lies. Doesn’t fly in God’s world though.. Hence his issues with the Pharisee. Once again, the God you worship isn’t real, the God you worship is “Hippie” Jesus.. Doesn’t exist.

        • mic1969

          Homosexuality is inherently worshiping the created thing rather than its creator. It is called unnatural in Romans 1. And the immediate context denounces it as vile sin. You might consider yourself a Christian, but you are not obeying Christ by twisting the meaning of clear Scripture against basic morality.

          • Jannet

            That is nonsense. Homosexuality has as much to do with worshipping other gods or creation as heterosexuality does. And it is not even called unnatural in Romans 1. Romans 1 talks about men (and women) going against THEIR nature, within a context of Idolatry. Within the Roman context. Romans 1 talks about pagan sex rituals as part of the worshipping of their gods.
            That has absolutely no relevance for homosexual relationships as we know them today.
            You are bearing false witness, which made it to the famous ten.

          • Oboehner

            Romans 1:24 – “Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:” 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.”
            Lust has EVERYTHING to do with homosexuality, and not idolatry.

          • Jannet

            Why do you leave Romans 1.25 out? As that exactly shows you the Idolatrous context of Romans 1…

          • Oboehner

            No, it just states that because of their idolatry, God gave them up to their own sinful lusts. More dishonest scripture twisting.

          • Jannet

            so the context is? Idolatry.

            The meaning of the text is that people engaged in idolatry, and as a result had orgies where they had sex with everything.

            That does not mean that homosexuals are engaging in idolatrous acts…

            Idolatry goes against the love god commandment. Homosexuality does not…

          • Oboehner

            Ah, no. try more rudimentary reading comprehension and less trying to justify you twisted belief, try again.
            There is a big difference between loving your neighbor and lusting after them for the purpose of sex.

          • Jannet

            again you don’t understand.
            homosexuality does not go against the commandment Love your neighbor, just as heterosexuality does not go against the commandment love your neighbor.
            When it comes to lust, homosexuality is no different from heterosexuality. It starts with lust, but after a few weeks it is love or nothing…

          • Oboehner

            Again you don’t understand, I wasn’t the one tossing the “love you neighbor” line out there to justify an abomination. Love thy neighbor doesn’t mean to sodomize them.

          • Oboehner

            The context is men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly. That means homos are dishonoring their bodies and burning in their lust.

          • Jannet

            Romans 1:25King James Version (KJV)

            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.

            The following verse starts with:

            26 For this cause …..

            Clearly the context is about worshipping and serving the creature.

            Now a little lessen in History for you:
            Romans 1 is a letter to? Indeed the Romans. Written in the 1st century AC. So what happened in Rome of that time? Rome was not Christian yet. Roman was pagan. They worshipped the sun (creation), ishtar (false god), Saturn (again the creation), fertility (again the creation), etc. The worshipping had many forms, including pagan festivals we still know today (Saturnalia which is the same as our Christmas, including Christmas trees, carol singing, which is celebration of the winter solstice etc. etc. etc. the Ishtar festival which is our Easter, Sunday (instead of the Sabbath), the summer solstice (St. John’s celebration), Lupercalia (13-15 februari, fertility festival), worshipping of erect phallus.

            On 17 March, during the feast of the Liberalia, the adulthood of young people was officially recognised and it is said that the male genitalia were openly worshipped in the name of the god Libero. A huge phallus was placed on a cart which was driven first through the countryside and then through the city where at the end of the procession it was “crowned” by a matron of the nobility.

            Equally Bachus was worshipped, the pagan god for alcohol and sex, especially between women. Vestal virgins. The gods Liber and cupido speak for themselves.
            Pagan Fertility rituals included orgies, with temple prostitutes, both male and female. We still have the current day word bacchanal to describe the setting of these lustful orgies were everybody had sex with everybody, including straight men with straight men (against their nature) and straight women with straight women (against their nature).

            That is what Romans 1 is talking about.

            but you should not stop at the end of Romans 1, because it only serves as an introduction to Romans 2:

            1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

            2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

            3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

            And now ask yourself, are you celebrating saturnalia (christmas)? are you worshipping Ishtar (Easter)? are you worshipping the sun on the day of the venerable day of the sun (=Sunday)?

            Romans 1 is not about homosexuals, Romans 1 is about you yourself! Because you are worshipping the creation and not the creator. Just as the Romans did.

          • Oboehner

            After asking myself, nope none of the above. Most of which you rambled on about was brought on by the RCC and has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality being a sin.
            Now you can ask yourself why was homosexuality brought up specifically and not something like eating a sandwich? It is because “gay” is a vile abomination.

          • Charles

            Lie.

          • Jannet

            Substantiate please?

          • Charles

            Anything to justify your sin.. I get it. I know, I know.. “It’s Idolatry”.. Problem is is mentioned side by side with abusers of Mankind with themselves.

        • Limit

          1 Corinthians 6:9-11
          9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor [f]effeminate, nor HOMOSEXUALS,

          10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
          (NASB)

          • Jannet

            You are using a modern day, prejudiced translation.
            Lets start with the original in greek. It doesn’t speak of homosexuals, sodomites or pederaste (as was the historical word for homosexuals in the time of Paul). No, Paul decided to use a new word, never used before: Arsenokoitai. Nobody knows exactly what it means. It is because of this reasons that the KJV translated it to abusers of themselves with mankind. This again doesn’t provide much clarity. As we don’t know the sex of the abusers, and we don’t know the sex of mankind (as mankind refers to the whole of human kind, both male and female). So it has been understood in many different ways in history. If the KJV translators were convinced that arenokoitai referred to current day homosexuals, they would have used the word sodomite, as that is how in the time of the translation (around 1600) homosexuals were called. Over the years it has been understood to refer to rapists, masturbators, cult prostitutes, male prostitutes for woman, and your homosexuals. So basically nobody knows, and you version is only the prejudiced flavor of the day, with not a single bit of evidence backing it up…

          • Charles

            No it isn’t.. It’s the Greek equivalent of man lying with man in Hebrew..

          • Jannet

            That might be in your current day dictionary, but Paul didn’t use that dictionary. He made up the word himself.

        • Dee

          Your statement about the two “greatest” commandments is true. The statement about homosexuality is not. Homosexuality stems from our desire for a sexual relationship with the same gender where “love” is replaced with an idol called the self. Jesus, in Matthew 19, stated marriage has been the same from the beginning. Humans have not evolved on this issue, our sin just looks more enjoyable than a holy God.

          • Jannet

            What a nonsense. Homosexuality stems from love for another human being. It has as much to do with idolatry as a heterosexual relationship. Because there is no difference between the two, except for that the one can result in offspring, and the other not. Jesus in Matthew 19:11&12 gives the exceptions to the general rule himself.

        • Charles

          OH! How many times are you going to pass that lie off as “Truth”? Look..

          1Co 6:9-10 KJV
          (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.

          So if what you say is true.. It’s been repeated twice (Which is ridiculous).. Idolatry is already mentioned.. You people are like bots that keep repeating the lies over and over hoping someone will believe it.

          • Jannet

            And where do I find a reference to homosexuals? because it is not to be found in this text…

          • Charles

            It’s there.. Stop covering your eyes.. it’s easy enough to read.

      • iconoclast12

        Sin as in eating shellfish, working on the sabbath and wearing clothes of different fabrics?

      • fllwyrrlgin

        And even more importantly it doesn’t matter what Christians think about her.

    • Gary Metzger

      You’re lying! Here’s excerpts of what Lively has really said. Pay special attention to the last line!

      “Lively says he recommended an approach rooted in rehabilitation, not punishment and says an anti-gay bill being considered by the Ugandan Parliament goes too far”,[27] even though he himself is not opposed to criminalizing homosexuality.[28]

      [M]y advice to the parliament was to go the other direction from what they did to actually go on a proactive positive message promoting the family, promoting marriage, etcetera, through the schools, and that if they were going to continue to criminalize homosexuality that they should focus on rehabilitation and not punishment. And I was very disappointed when the law came out as it is written now with such incredibly harsh punishments.[27]

      Lively has claimed the bill was the lesser of two evils[29] and that he will endorse the bill if the death penalty is removed.[30]

      • Jannet

        These are not excerpts. This is what Lively says now, now he is being prosecuted. The above text is the equivalent of him not pleading guilty. As many criminals do… The evidence of his actions speaks for itself. He himself admits that he has influenced the persecution laws of LGBT people in Russia, as well as the same in Uganda.

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Nice Christian. so he is not all about love the sinner, hate the sin. It’s obvious that he hates the sinner too, since he himself admits that he has influenced the persecution laws in Russia and in Uganda.

          • Jannet

            This man has nothing to do with christianity. He only abuses and misrepresents Christianity as support for his own prejudice.
            Watched a documentary about Matthew Sheppard last night. It is people like Scott Lively that have his blood on their hands…
            History repeats itself…

      • Jolanda Tiellemans

        What? He wants to “pray the gay away”? He actually compares homosexuality with drug and alcohol abuse and they should just like drug users and drunks get into therapy. Homosexuality is as much a addiction as heterosexuality is.

    • mic1969

      But homosexuality is a crime against society, whether in the constitution or not, it violates the promotion of families, the natural order of society and proper sexual orientation, and basically screws up the human moral compass. So yes, it should be outlawed in a moral society. Enough of this suppression of basic right and wrong sexual orientation.

      • Jannet

        What a nonsense. Homosexuality doesn’t violate any promotion of the family.
        What you don’t seem to understand is that for most people there is a family life as in man-woman-children. That is in their nature and that is absolutely perfectly fine. Gay people are not against this. However for gay people this is not in their nature.
        Now talking about society, you probably don’t know that for every 100 women, 107 men are being born. So for 100 men out of 107 your concept of family life is attainable as God has created a women for these men. However, for 7 out of 107 God never created a women. So you can talk about natural order whatever you want, but nature didn’t provide for a female partner for these men in the first place. That is nature. That is a biological fact. If you divide 7 by 207, you get 3.4% as a percentage. Pretty close to the percentage homosexuals in society. And this is something of all times, all countries and all societies.
        The natural order is that most people are straight, and that a few are born gay.

        Your “proper sexual orientation” and “human moral compass” is only your prejudiced opinion and is not based on anything. So it is not more than that. Irrelevant.

      • Mellow Fellow

        Christianity is a crime against society, whether in the constitution or not, it violates the promotion of families, the natural order of society and proper sexual orientation, and basically screws up the human moral compass. So yes, it should be outlawed in a moral society. Enough of this suppression of basic right and wrong sexual orientation.

  • Becky

    Homosexual activists have an agenda and they will do and say whatever it takes to make certain that Christians are looked upon as evil, violent, oppressors, and that our beliefs, along with the Holy Bible, are what should be criminalised straightaway. That’s their goal…they don’t want us even believing that homosexuality is a sin against God, so they’ll attack us and God’s word. Christ told us what the end days will look like and it’s unfolding before our eyes.

    • Jannet

      Christian activist have had an agenda and they will do and have been doing and saying whatever it takes to make certain that homosexuals are looked upon as evil, violent, oppressors, pedophiles, etc. and that their inner being and their loved ones should be criminalized straightaway. That’s their goal… they don’t want us even believe that loving our loved ones is something good in the eyes of God, so they’ll attack us and abuse God’s word. Christ told us what the end days will look like, he warned us against the wolves in sheep clothes, and it’s unfolding before our eyes.

    • Jalapeno

      “That’s their goal…they don’t want us even believing that homosexuality is a sin against God”

      Most people don’t actually give a crap if you think that. What matters is whether or not you expect THEM to act on YOUR beliefs.

      • Amos Moses

        “Most people don’t actually give a crap if you think that. ”

        Yeah …….. that is why homosexuals and their supporters all show up on christian forums …….. to not change peoples minds that they dont care about ………….

        • Jalapeno

          Think maybe that has something to do with the fact that people are trying to force those views on other people?

          • Amos Moses

            Yeah …….. homosexuals are ….

          • Jalapeno

            How are they trying to force their views on you?

          • Amos Moses

            Have you not been paying attention for the last 4 or 5 years ……..

          • Jalapeno

            Plenty. I see lots of people being mad that they don’t get treated like they are special anymore.

            How are they trying to force their views on you?

          • Amos Moses

            They were treated just as everyone else ………….. now they think they are better than everyone else ……… and it has not stopped yet …….. they were held to the exact same standard ………… but now their depravity is “protected” ……. sorry ………. they are not going to like how that turns out ….

          • Jalapeno

            What “better” treatment do you think they’re trying to get?

          • Amos Moses

            There SIN is now protected ………..

          • Jalapeno

            People are protected from discrimination based on their sexual orientation.
            That applies equally to heterosexual people, it’s not special treatment.

          • Amos Moses

            Yeah …… SIN ……………

          • Jalapeno

            How is it special treatment if all people are protected equally?

          • Amos Moses

            No ……… their sexual sin is now protected ………. and it is special treatment …….

          • Jalapeno

            What protections do they have that you don’t?

          • Charles

            Because they parade down streets so no one can see them? Because it’s important for them to shove that nonsense into peoples minds. Infecting children with that garbage in schools, etc.

          • Jalapeno

            So… They aren’t pretending like they don’t exist, so their views are being forced on you?

            Do you hold those standards for anyone who advertises being Christian?

          • Charles

            Being a Christian IS the standard. The last time I checked.. I don’t remember a Christian Parade with my butt cheeks hanging out or the other vile things in those “Parades”..

          • Jalapeno

            Not everyone follows your religion.

            Youre mad that gay people are sometimes outwardly proud of who they are. Do you get mad when Christians do the same?

          • Charles

            There’s the first problem.. “Pride”. Don’t you know where that leads?

          • Jalapeno

            If someone has a Christian float in be parade, do you think they’re trying to force Christianity on people?

          • Charles

            I don’t involve myself in parades whatever they are.. Second, I am a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ.. I wish to follow my Lord’s Laws. Therefore, I do not involve myself with Prideful things.

          • Jalapeno

            That’s not what I asked.

          • Charles

            Well.. It’s not just about a parade though is it.. They teach this trash in schools. Last time I checked they weren’t forcing Christianity in schools.

          • Jalapeno

            Still not what I asked.

            If someone has a Christian parade float, does that mean they’re trying to force their views on other people?

            If we teach that Christian people exist and we need to be respectful of their beliefs, does that mean that they are forcing their views on people?

          • Charles

            “”If we teach that Christian people exist and we need to be respectful of their beliefs, does that mean that they are forcing their views on people?””

            If you respected Christians beliefs, you wouldn’t be having a public parade in nasty attire with children. If you respected Christians you wouldn’t be going after Christians, then suing them in court because you want them to acknowledge your sin.. If you respected Christians, you wouldn’t be indoctrinating kids in schools. I could go on, and on with this.

          • Jalapeno

            Why are you still not answering the question?

            If we teach in schools that Christians exist and we should be respectful, does that mean that we are forcing those beliefs on people?

          • Charles

            What question? About a fictional Christian parade? So what?! It’s not the parade that’s troublesome.. It’s the way they are presented. Not to mention the vile behavior of some trying to beat up Christians for expressing their free speech. You don’t teach Christians exist in school. You deny them, and call them bigots because they love God’s laws. A servant is not greater than his master. They mocked the Lord, they mock Christians. But we knew this was coming.

          • Jalapeno

            If we teach in schools that Christians exist and that we need to be respectful to them, does that mean that we’re forcing Christianity on people?

          • Becky

            Oh, rubbish. As if that were the extent of their agenda. They’ve viciously infiltrated their atrocious propaganda into nearly everything, even the boy scouts! Their goal is to remove all opposition about homosexuality and then convert as many as possible into complete and utter perverts…like them. Their target? The public education system. They’re teaching innocent children that they, too, can be as perverted and vile as they are.

          • Jalapeno

            You’re pretty far off base.

  • Mellow Fellow

    The Orlando shootings comments sections featured many so-called christians claiming that the gays were getting what they deserved. I’m very glad to see that type of evil subside for the more reasonable conversations found here.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    LGBT people’s life should be protected since Jesus gave sexually sinful people unspecified time for repentance and reform, but the exposure to homosexuality is a crime against global children. Children have rights to innocence and morality. The world suffered under the racist Western powers for centuries before. How many years should the world suffer under the Sodomic Western powers? Why are today’s Westerners trying to impose Sodomy like some madmen on a sinking planet sacrificing all children’s welfare as if the world does not have enough troubles already? Well-fed nudist rich people’s Post-christian madness. The Western Church must take responsibility and fight back against this mentally ill evil culture. Poor nations are powerless against the rich Western powers. No known civilization pushed abnormal sexual immorality like today’s Post-christian godless Western culture is doing. Human rights should include sane morality.

    • Jannet

      Nobody is imposing “sodomy” on anyone. However quite some people try to impose heterosexuality on people that are not. People are born straight or gay and can not be converted from one to the other. It is in the best interest of children born gay to know that there is absolutely nothing wrong with them and that they should never be afraid or ashamed for the gift God has given to them. It is equally important and morally essential that non-gay kids know that gay children are perfectly ok and normal and being gay is never a reason to bully anyone.

      As to your poor nation story, that is absolutely crap. Homosexuality is of all times, all cultures and all times. The only imported western culture is Christianity. There are many examples of homosexual kings and chiefs within the African history. Long before Westerners cape to their shores. And we all know how the imported christian religion has done “well” for the people of Africa as it has been abused ruthlessly by wester powers for the suppression and exploitation of the african people.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        You are wrong. Homosexuality is depravity and sin, even by a pagan standard. Children should be raised by moral people; otherwise, it’s child-abuse. No civilization ever endorsed homosexuality openly because such practice is too destructive; it’s been always a shame and those who openly forced them were utterly destroyed by God without exception. Secular West is too well-fed and is bored and is spreading the mentally-ill sin with the blood money they’ve got. Rich people become perv and do such things often, seeking warped amusement using defenseless humans. It’s typical. Racist Westerners of yesteryears are better than today’s West because they were not sexually pervs or baby-killers.

        They also had a lot of excellent things to learn from and copy. Racism is every Earthling’s problem but not push of Sodomy; warped sexuality is the fattened secular West’s unique mental illness. Sodomic West will bring down God’s wrath upon the earth so the evil must be attempted to get halted. The West has been spoiled by the gentle Christianity for too many decades; that’s why the society is so chaotic regarding morality. Life is serious for poor people on Planet Earth. It is so unfair that the rich perv West oppresses mankind for not-supporting Sodomy. You guys are a shame to all your noble forefathers. They did not toil for a destructive Sodom on earth. Liberty is for truth, not for sexual chaos.

        • Jannet

          You might think I am wrong, but that is only your opinion and not much more. There is nothing wrong with homosexuality, both the Christian bible and many pagan religions confirm so. Most civilizations endorsed homosexuality, and many even included same sex marriage. Greek, China, India, Egypt, Babylon, Rome, Japan, South American tribes, North American tribes, etc. all where perfectly fine with homosexuality and homosexuals were mostly elected for leading positions in their tribes. It is only the cultures where the monotheistic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) became dominant that homosexuality has been condemned. But even that only started in 390 after Christ. Not because it is destructive for society, but because homosexuals were very powerful people at the courts of emperors as they were the trusted people. As the Roman Catholic Church had difficulties with becoming the dominant religion and their competition (Arianism) was promoted by people in such powerful positions (like Eusebius of Nicomedea, and another Eusebius at the court of Constantine, amongst many others), the only way for the RCC to finally win their battle was to discredit the position of these people. (the council of Nicea was clearly not enough to settle the question). That is when homosexuality was made the sin of sins. That is when S&G got its current day interpretation and that is when the word Eunuch was limited to castrates.
          So homosexuality has never been a sin and never was immoral. It was only political expedient for the RCC to turn it into this.
          God has never destroyed somebody for homosexuality. People did.
          To be honest, the rest of your ranting is so incoherent that I worry for your mental health. So I chose to ignore the rest if you don’t mind. If you believe it to be important please clarify further.

          • mic1969

            Most Christian literature I have read that writes of the sexuality that God approves of never condones homosexuality. In fact, historically, homosexuality is a trademark of the decline of many former world empires.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Yes, but no one was crazy enough to force normal humans to acknowledge same-sex “marriage” as marriage. The Western Sodomites are behaving like Emperor Nero on the American soil. If the Church does not try to stop this madness in a free world, everyone will have God’s wrath. Silence in facing evil is an evil itself. (Proverbs ch.24)

          • Jannet

            That is again factually wrong.
            Rome knew homosexuality from its beginnings and it never resulted in the decline of the Roman empire. coincidentally within 100 years after Constantine accepted Christianity as their religion, Rome was finished….
            Maybe you should not read so much prejudiced “literature” but should stick to the bible itself. I would start reading the story about David & Jonathan. A very condoning story I can ensure you.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are confined in your own depraved culture which needs a fix by the Biblical Church to be made civilized again. The world cannot be submissive to the perv West whose culture is utterly destructive to children. Don’t be so suicidal. Get some basic morality. At least don’t criminalize the religious people who oppose the sinful sexuality. If the Western nations continue to support Sodomy by oppressing the religious people, they are the human-rights abusers thise century. Secular West got the money and power, but not the truth if they have no Christianity. The West has no moral standard apart from the Holy Bible. God destroys every Sodom. (Book of Jude ch.1) Stop being bored and start being ashamed of sins as all normal humans should. You must repent of your sins to get saved. (John ch.1)

          • Jannet

            Current day moral standard is defined by the universal declaration of human rights. Because we have concluded that any other theism as “moral standard” has resulted in barbarity.
            Sodom has nothing to do with this discussion, as it is not about homosexuality but about greed, grave injustice and inhospitality.
            Read Judges 19&20. Same story, same outcome, city destroyed. But this time the stranger that gets raped is female. So now heterosexuality is equally condemned?
            I read a lot of prejudiced opinion in your post, however zero substantiation. Therefore it is not much more than your prejudiced opinion and therefore irrelevant. If you want your opinion to be relevant, then substantiate…

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Don’t wait for anything substantial from her posts, she says the same thing all the time.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Stop bullying. People have rights declare the known truths to anyone.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Western secularism lives for blasphemy, infanticide, suicide, and abnormal sexual immorality. Secularism kills babies and sells the body parts and people feel not a thing. That is the absense of morality. Atheists killed more than all groups combined in history in mere several decades. Read Genesis ch. 6 and 18 and Leviticus ch.18-20 and Jude ch.1; God destroys sexually depraved worlds and Sodom’s sin was indeed homosexuality. Read those texts. Unlike other sins, endorsement of homosexuality and transgederism is forced and that’s why it’s more problematic than all other sins in today’s Western world and its mimickers. Jannet, you should get concerned that Anti-christians come even to the Christian sites and bully the Christians. You guys should stop bullying. Secular Westerners have no moral standard. Secularism’s core value is selfishness and sexual depravity. You must not at least persecute the Christians in the land.

          • Meepestos

            “Atheists killed more than all groups combined in history” With the help of many theists. Take Russia for instance: Those atheists couldn’t have done what they did without some help from zealous and naive theists that had no issue with suppressing others’ religious freedoms not to mention aiding with the attempts at ridding the USSR of some rival religious organizations. Theists also engaged in mass murders involving national and ethnic motivations under Stalin’s reign. A reign that enabled theists and atheists alike in regards to being opportunists to seek revenge or mere survival; having no problem participating directly or indirectly with the demise of those they had disdain for such as other ethnic folk and nationalities; also some Russian Orthodox and Czar sympathizers that they blamed for conditions before 1918 and for creating the environment for Stalinism to take root. When we take into consideration the components such as intellectual, political, social, cultural, economic, diplomatic, military, and the technological that were factors let alone Christendom in the successes of despots like Stalin, we see the atrocities under Stalin’s regime and Soviet persecution were more complex than we thought.

            ” in mere several decades.”

            Of course the numbers are higher, you are not taking into consideration the size of the territories and the surplus populations let alone the modern weaponry of the 20th century that they had. Imagine if the bad theists (in power) of the past had that advantage.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are wrong. The scope of massacre is because of atheism’s creed and will, not just technology. Include the pre-born children in wombs as the victims. Atheists do not cherish human life. Pagans do not cherish life equally. Christians alone cherish everyone’s life equally. It’s the doctrines that matter. Atheists kill the most; they also commit suicide the most. Atheists must repent of their evil unbelief to get a life. (Psalm ch.14) God is returning to earth to punish the thieves and ungrateful humans. (Revelations ch.20)

          • Jannet

            Sodom’s sin was inhospitality, greed and grave injustice, as we can read in the bible. It has never been about homosexuality. Read judges 19&20. Same story, same outcome, but now heterosexual rape. The old testament is full of infanticide, and the hate for jewish people that resulted in the holocaust has its roots in the pogroms organized by the Roman Catholic Church, who condoned the holocaust and helped the perpetrators to escape to Argentina.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Cults are wrong because they only know a few Biblical verses and go against the entire Holy Bible. God condemns the homosexuals to hell because of homosexual sins. (Genesis ch.18, Leviticus ch.18-20, Romans ch.1, I Corinthians ch. 6, Jude ch.1, etc.) Nazi Germans massacred the Catholics for not complying with them. Today’s Western culture does not condone heterosexual rapes but promotes and forces willful Sodomy and transgenderism; the fact needs to be addressed in the West. Each and every culture has evils that need fix by the Church. The West is powerful and wealthy and its insane Sodomic immorality affects everywhere, endangering the entire global population by sick homosexual immorality which leads to pedophilia. This evil must be countered by sane people. Enough of atrocities done by the rich pervs on earth. Sin is slavery. No more slavery. Never again. Knowledge of the entire Holy Bible alone is always the key to freedom and justice, both then and now.

          • Jannet

            Only your first sentence makes sense as some kind of self reflection.
            S&G was never about homosexuality, otherwise Judges 19&20 would equally condemn heterosexuality, same story, same outcome, only difference being a women being raped. Both leviticus 18&20 is limited to sexual acts within a context of idolatry. Romans 1.25 clearly states the context of that letter: idolatry again. And both Corinthians and Jude don’t even talk about homosexuality at all.
            do you deny that it was not the Roman Catholic Church that started with the pogroms? Learn history or loose your credibility…
            The church has not been able to fix any evils in its history, and you know the saying: if you have not been part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
            There has never been anything wrong with homosexuality. And it has never been a sin. That is a human construct, created in 390 AC to let the RCC win from the Arians.

          • Amos Moses

            “Current day moral standard is defined by the universal declaration of human rights. ”

            Yeah …… and that very declaration says you have numerous rights ……. UNTIL THE UN SAYS YOU DO NOT …………

            The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
            Article 29.

            (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
            (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
            ****************************************************************************
            (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
            *****************************************************************************

            Article 30.

            Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

            ONLY AN IDIOT would put any credibility to that document ……………

          • Jannet

            why? It is a better try than all those religions, as they have been a source of barbarity for the last 2000 years, and not a solution to the problem (but are part of the problem).

          • Amos Moses

            Already answered ………… You have rights …… until the UN says you do not …. The US Constitution says your rights cannot be taken away by anyone …….

          • Amos Moses

            How many people did the A-theists Mao and Pol Pot murder …………

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Post-christian West is barbaric and Sodomic. The Western civilization had any good when it had Christianity.

          • David

            Christian history is equally barbaric. Don’t you know that the history of every religion is written in blood?
            And wasn’t it the “christian” US soldiers wo went to Iraq and killed approx. half to one million innocent people for no particular reason. That was one of the biggest acts of barbarism of this “new” century….

            Sodomic, as the people of Sodom: grave injustice, greed and inhospitality. Like everything DT stands for….

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            And again, you post the same old thing. Like i said to someone else, you’re a stubborn one aren’t you?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Christian majority on earth is colored people since the end of last century. Perv West must stop persecuting the white Christians.

  • Becky

    For those of you falsely teaching (eg Jannet) that the sins of sexual immorality listed in Leviticus 18, for example, are not sins, per se, but rather are sins only because it involves idolatry, read the bible. This belief mistakenly arises from the interpretation of the verse “And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the Lord.” (vs21). This can be objectively measured by reading the chapter, as there are neither parables, nor any verses open to interpret anything other than the intended meaning of that verse. Knowing this, we can see that the said verse does not imply that the other sins listed in the chapter are only sins when associated with idolatry. This is due to the way the verse is presented…it’s presented as a separate sin and not directly linked to the other sins listed in this chapter. This is evident by the use of the word ‘and’, a conjunction simply used to attach two sentences together. Thus, both the previous and following verses do not have a dependent relationship on this verse. If any other verses had a relationship with this verse, then it would be either referenced in another verse, or the verse itself would reference one of the other verses.

    Another point to keep in mind is that the verse only mentions a specific case of the generalised term ‘idolatry’. That is, the verse specifically says not to sacrifice descendants by fire to Molech. It is highly illogical to conclude that the listed sins of sexual immorality are only valid when idolatry is involved when only one specific case of idolatry is stated in the chapter. Thus, it can be concluded that this verse can neither support their false teaching, nor infer that the sins of sexual immorality listed in Leviticus 18 are dependent on the additional sin of idolatry to be considered a sin.

  • Hal Slusher

    He didn’t write their laws. He doesn’t agree with homsexuality

  • Amos Moses

    “Gay Reparations” in California – Free $1000 Every Month Given to All LGBT People

    on the youtube machine ………………

  • ElsaDominga

    Man/woman love is holy indeed and is being persecuted and oppressed and attacked daily. Children are being force taught about homosexuality in PUBLIC schools and this wrong. This whole crazy animalistic treatment of sex and the human body is an attack on holiness of unity. It is perverted and has gone haywire in USA. To the point of gay porn being some grand and awesome thing. Stop desecrating the intimate bond of man/woman that God loves so much. I have family members that are gay and even they find the whole militant homo movement wrong, vicious and very,very evil. Do no let your children take ANYclass regarding sexuality in school today. It is a very wrong teaching approach to human development, the human body and the bonds of intimacy