Disney Airs its First-Ever ‘Gay’ Cartoon Kiss

The popular children’s entertainment company Disney aired its first-ever same-sex kissing scene on Monday during a broadcast of its television cartoon “Star vs. the Forces of Evil,” raising concerns from Christian and family groups who are calling upon parents to kiss Disney goodbye.

The episode included a scene where main character Star and her friend Marco, both 14, attend a boy band concert together. During the song “Just Friends,” couples throughout the audience begin kissing.

But in surveying the cartoon characters, at least one of the twosomes locking lips are boys and another later on appears to be two girls.

Homosexual advocacy groups cheered the inclusion, stating, “We’re getting there, one kiss at a time.”

However, others expressed concern, stating that Disney should not be pushing the homosexual agenda on children.

“This is the last place parents would expect their children to be confronted with content regarding sexual orientation,” one Million Moms wrote on their website. “Issues of this nature are being introduced too early and too soon, and it is becoming extremely common and unnecessary.”

Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis also lamented the development.

  • Connect with Christian News

“I was just burdened as I saw what Disney is doing and realized that I don’t want my grandkids watching those channels on television or anything like that, ’cause you never know what’s going to happen there now,” he said in a live Facebook video posted on Thursday.

“I’ve seen an increasing emphasis on bringing the gay [agenda] into movies and TV series, and we see what’s happening across this nation,” Ham stated. “So, we need to take a stand.”

As previously reported, the director of Disney’s upcoming “Beauty and the Beast” live-action remake has also revealed that one of the film’s characters is portrayed as homosexual and will therefore include a “gay moment.”

Director Bill Condon, who is an open homosexual, told the outlet “Attitude” that the character LeFou, who serves as the sidekick to Gaston, will have a subplot surrounding his attraction to Gaston. Luke Evans, an open homosexual, was cast as Gaston, and Josh Gad plays LeFou.

“LeFou is somebody who on one day wants to be Gaston and on another day wants to kiss Gaston,” Condon told the publication.

“He’s confused about what he wants. It’s somebody who’s just realizing that he has these feelings,” he continued. “And Josh makes something really subtle and delicious out of it. And that’s what has its payoff at the end, which I don’t want to give away. But it is a nice, exclusively gay moment in a Disney movie.”

Disney has also reportedly included homosexual relationships in productions such as “Good Luck Charlie” and “Gravity Falls,” and some have expressed suspicion about characters in several of its other films.

“Disney has decided to be politically correct versus providing family-friendly entertainment. Disney should stick to entertaining instead of pushing an agenda,” One Million Moms said.

The group is calling on parents to sign a pledge not to support Disney until it stops pushing homosexuality on the nation’s children. There were over 20,000 signees as of press time.

Ham encouraged Christian parents to rather take their children to the Creation Museum and Ark Encounter in Kentucky, or the Sight & Sound Theater in Pennsylvania and Missouri.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly
  • Amos Moses

    All part of “Club 33” …………..

  • This style 10/6

    Of course Ham recommends you take your kids to his phony ark, he likes the money.

    Has it occurred to homophobes that gay moments are family friendly to same sex families.

    • JRRMS

      Just because we don’t agree with gay lifestyles does not mean we are scared of them. Homophobe is not even a real word. It’s an oxymoron.

      • This style 10/6

        That tired old cliche! Language changes, at least the English language does and it changes with usage. Homophobe is a real word and by common consent it means hatred of homosexuality.

        You are not asked to agree with the gay life style, just stop discriminating against folk because they have a different sexuality than you do.

        • Jason Todd

          There is no such thing as homophobia.

          To wit:

          1) Homophobia is an irrational fear of homosexuality. But nobody cares what happens between consenting adults in the privacy of their own bedroom. So the idea is obviously and patently false.

          2) This word is used as a label if and when anyone objects to any facet of the homosexual agenda. For example, three years ago a photo surfaced of a scantily clad young boy gyrating at a pride event in Rio. Criticism was immediately labeled homophobic. The word was used in response to a Toronto School Board Trustee’s request to curb public nudity from the local pride parade.

          The point is, basically, as the goalposts are continually moved to cover the depraved and the vulgar, there is something wrong with those who have the audacity to say NO, regardless of the reason.

          Only the mentally disturbed and morally vacant believe this. Nobody else.

          We are going to say no, and will continue to say no, and if you don’t like it, the problem is yours.

          • This style 10/6

            Certain things are acceptable in public, kissing for example. No one objects to a man and woman kissing but when it comes to same sex kissing objections arise. Why? These couples are not having public sex.

            Same sex marriage arranges the ire of many. Why? No one is forced into it, it doesn’t affect heterosexual marriage.

            I figured d it surprising that a Toronto S B trustee would,object to partial nudity as that board is notoriously left wing.

          • Jason Todd

            How does any of this address the points I made?

          • This style 10/6

            Were you making points?

          • Jason Todd

            Of course. You cannot dispute a single thing I said. Surprised, I am not.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            homosexual behavior poisons society. It is immoral and an abomination to God. Being attracted to the same sex is not bad. It is acting upon those urges that is sinful.

          • This style 10/6

            No, it doesn’t.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            Amen

        • Amos Moses

          “just stop discriminating against folk because they have a different sexuality than you do.”

          they dont have a “different” one …… they have a lie ……… and that is made up ……….. we object, not so much that they want to lie to themselves …… but they now want to force their lie to be accepted by everyone else …. and those that dont accept their lies are somehow “bigots and haters” ….. which is just another lie ………….

          • This style 10/6

            The old lie, constantly trotted out, that homosexuality is chosen. Why would anyone choose it considering the opprobrium and dangers associated with it?

          • Jason Todd

            Is it a lie? Then why is there no proof?

          • This style 10/6

            What more proof do you need that there are millions of gay men and women in the world.

          • Jason Todd

            Red herring.

            In fact, there is no evidence homosexuals are “born that way. ” If there was, there wouldn’t be a continuous, ever changing effort to do so.

            There is, however, plenty of evidence to suggest environmental causes, including indoctrination and sexual abuse.

          • This style 10/6

            Nonsense. You have no idea.

          • Jason Todd

            I made a statement of undeniable fact. Take it or leave it, believe it or not, like it or don’t.

            The fact homosexual activist groups have a strong, vested interest in teaching homosexuality to children beginning in kindergarten is all by itself proof there is none of this “born this way” bullpuckey. It’s all lies.

          • johndoe

            Prove it.

          • johndoe

            Not all. No such thing as homosexual indoctrination.

          • Amos Moses

            millions …. debatable …… but there are BILLIONS of those who are not ….. so sounds impressive …. but it aint …. and how many homosexuals have given birth with their “Partners” …… ZERO … and how many births by heteros …… BILLIONS …….. and still counting …..

          • Amos Moses

            “The old lie, constantly trotted out, that homosexuality is chosen.”

            the old lie is that they were “born that way” ………. and it has not changed since the beginning ………

          • This style 10/6

            Tell me why anyone would choose it, especially back in the day when it could lead to prison or worse?

          • Amos Moses

            why do people commit any crime that they could go to prison for committing ……..because they are in rebellion ……… because they like that particular sin …… because they get the positive feedback of endorphins which gives them a false sense of it being right ….. because they do not want to be told what to do … because they want to defy parents, society, the church, and any other person they feel they want to offend …… because they are suppressing the truth ……

            i could go on like this all day ….. Really …… what an absolute silly question …..

          • Memom

            For the sex thrill. Why not enjoy sex any way you can.we are being indoctrinated. Transgender, gender identity, bathrooms for anyone to use. Susan sarandon saying her sexuality is “up for grabs”. She is 70 years old. If it feels good do it. It’s all so unfortunate. I’m glad my kids are raised. Now I worry about my 12 year old grandaughter.

          • Daryl Showalter

            Didn’t the face of Breitbart Milo Yiannopolis a homosexual, admit he chose the lifestyle and can’t leave it because his career would be over?

          • Chris

            So if one guy says something then that applies to everyone in that group? Ok, then all fundies are lying arrogant and intolerant because some have admitted that they are. After all if even one says it then it MUST apply to everyone in the whole group. Right?

          • Kristy Armstrong

            You cannot choose who you are attracted to, but you CAN choose not to act upon those urges.

          • This style 10/6

            Why would you? Nothing wrong with it.

        • meamsane

          The word “homo-phobe” is mainly used as a propagandist term meant to stigmatize anyone who doesn’t believe in homosexuality or a homosexual agenda meant to coerce others into acceptance! The suffix phobia is a term refering to a prolonged irrational fear. It has nothing to do with hatred or malice. This simply shows the propagandist intention by it’s use.

          • This style 10/6

            Its accepted meaning is now hatred of homosexuality. Word meanings change and English has been changing for over 1000 years.

            No one is forced to like the homosexual life style but please stop stigmatizing it. I am heterosexual but have gay friends who are perfectly normal people.

          • meamsane

            That doesn’t change anything I said. It may be accepted among those who are pro-homosexual to use as a bludgeon, but many more question that just because some disagree with homosexuality, that it is because of hate.

          • This style 10/6

            Does homosexuality affect you in any way or is your dislike just based on religion?

          • meamsane

            Homosexuality itself is not the issue, but the fact that the homosexual agenda is , by our government, a protected behavior that is contrary to an objective standard of morality, freedom of association, freedom of religion, and eventually, freedom of speech! It is affecting all of society!! And will continue to.
            Yes, my religion informs me of an absolute objective standard of truth that comes from God. This has nothing to do with hate towards any person. Telling the truth to someone is love. Hiding that truth is hate!

          • Kristy Armstrong

            Amen. Lover the sinner, hate the sin. Society is being more and more like Sodom.

          • Chris

            I hate your sin of ego worship and your idolatrous inability to tell doctrine from deity as well as your fundie intolerance but I love ya. Gotta point out the truth because, as you say, I am to love the sinner but hate the sin.

          • Chris

            “Homosexuality itself is not the issue, but the fact that the homosexual agenda i…”

            I know, The next thing gays and lesbians will want is to be treated like other human beings, with actual rights. The very idea.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            Homosexual behavior effects society. The loss of morals. And it is just getting worse. It is basically telling kids “hey it is okay if a man sticks his penis in that man’s rectum” It is immoral and UNNATURAL. Objects , etc are not meant to go into the anus.

          • meamsane

            Telling the truth about the homosexual lifestyle is not stigmatizing it. Why do you think homosexuals themselves hid this from society in the past, “in the closet” as they say? Because even they new this was not normal!

          • Chris

            Telling the truth about the fundie lifestyle is not stigmatizing it.
            Why do you think fundies themselves hide their ego worship and their idolatry from society? Because even they know this is not
            normal!

          • Kristy Armstrong

            It is not hating homosexuals. It is hating homosexual behavior. I am attracted to same sex but I refuse to act on it because it is immoral and an abomination in God’s eyes. I follow God’s laws, not man’s. Society is corrupt

          • This style 10/6

            That is your choice. Others think differently.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            For Christians in the church, we should welcome people who have feelings for the same sex, but at the same time we should help them to understand the seriousness of acting on such desires that is only meant for married man and woman. If a homosexual is celibate and acknowledges that ACTING(not feeling) upon his desires is a sin then He should be fully welcomed. But the homosexuals who justify their sin should not be allowed to take sacraments. If you do not follow God’s word, than I guess you what i just said won’t matter to you. I am speaking from a Christian standpoint.

          • This style 10/6

            Fair enough.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            By the way this goes for any sin in the church body. If a non married person is having sex outside of marriage and refuses to ackmowledge her sin, then she too should be lovingly and firmly confronted in church. That goes for ALL sin

          • Chris

            It is not hating fundies. It is hating fundie behavior.The ego worship, the inability to tell doctrine from deity and the intolerance. I gave it up so can you. Fundie society is corrupt.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        That really doesn’t address the point he’s making.

    • Amos Moses

      “same sex families.”

      contradiction in terms ……..

      • Sven

        Nonsense. There is total equality. Two men can make a baby, one supplies the egg. Oh, wait,….

        • This style 10/6

          Ever heard of adoption? Some same sex families are two women, the premier of Ontario is in such a relationship, with children.

          • Sven

            Two men cannot create a child together, nor two women. It’s impossible. So you’re not equal after all.

            Given the number of homosexual and lesbian couples who prey on their adopted children, adoption for such people should be outlawed. It is just plain child abuse.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            And what number is that?

          • John Lewis

            Sven… you keep posting comments about gays preying on children… that’s not really a thing you know… most child predators are heterosexual. Me thinks thou dost protest too much?

          • Amos Moses

            yeah … no ….. if anything it is equal ….. but most homosexuals prey on the underage and were preyed on themselves ………

          • Jason Todd

            And yet 100% of all pro-pedophile groups worldwide are homosexual.

            You shouldn’t be opening your mouth.

          • johndoe

            Again…..prove your statement. Most pedophiles are straight white males

          • Tangent002

            Mormon folks are homosexual? That’s news to me!

          • Jason Todd

            Non-sequitur.

          • Tangent002

            Why is that? Joseph Smith was definitely a proponent of man-on-girl love.

          • Jason Todd

            Not relevant. Anything to say on the subject matter?

          • Tangent002

            To what “Pro-pedophile” groups are you referring?

          • Amos Moses

            nope … just another lie ……. different twist ….. but it is still twisted and a lie …….

          • Kristy Armstrong

            I do not believe homosexual couple should be allowed to adopt. There immoral behavior is poison to the young generation.

          • This style 10/6

            In advanced countries their behaviour is not considered immoral. Our premier was elected with a large majority. Everyone knew she was married to another woman.

            I guess where you live is still in the dark ages.

          • Chris

            I do not believe fundie couples should be allowed to adopt. There immoral behavior is poison to the young generation.

        • Amos Moses

          i hate it when common sense eludes people ………

    • http://www.moonbatdan.com/ Dan

      Has it occurred to you that being insulted by gays is no big deal?

      It’s the equivalent of a compliment from a normal person.

      • This style 10/6

        What are you trying to say?

  • Croquet_Player

    Isn’t it heartwarming when One Million Moms (more like a few thousand), Ken Ham, and ISIS can find common ground? Is there something wrong with zealots’ TVs? Do they not come with an “off” or “change channel” option?

    • Jason Todd

      Excuse me? What does ISIS have to do with anything?

      • Croquet_Player

        One Million (several thousand, at most) Moms, Ken Ham, and ISIS are all anti-gay. Do they vary in degree? Absolutely. But on this point they are all closer together ideologically than perhaps any of them would care to admit. “Gay people are unnatural, abominable sinners? Check yes or no.” They would all check “yes”.

        • Jason Todd

          1) You have access to OMM’s membership rolls?

          2) No, you are implying with the inclusion of ISIS they are all killers of homosexuals. How many homosexuals has Ken Ham killed? OMM? I want names.

          • Croquet_Player

            “1) You have access to OMM’s membership rolls?” No, indeed not. But we can make a good guess. 3,631 Twitter followers. 88,501 Facebook “likes”, since their inception five years ago in 2012. How many are actual donating “members”? A few thousand is a very reasonable estimate. Let’s be generous and give them ten thousand. Even thirty thousand. Is it a million? No. Is it close to a million? No.

            “2) No, you are implying with the inclusion of ISIS they are all killers
            of homosexuals. How many homosexuals has Ken Ham killed? OMM? I want names.” In fact I did not imply that. And I was careful to very clearly point out “Do they vary in degree? Absolutely.” But they all operate on a spectrum of “there is something fundamentally wrong (“disordered”, “sinful”, use whatever pejorative you like) with gay people.” And as we know, gay people are beaten to death right here in the United States, simply because they are gay. What sort of rhetoric would you imagine encourages that sort of crime?

          • Jason Todd

            Considering the fact 49 homosexuals were killed by a Muslim in Orlando last year and Christians reached out to the wounded and the families of the dead, you are just talking out of your tuchis in trying to equate the two.

            By the way, in the wake of the shooting came a LGBTQW group of concealed gun owners that as a matter of record and as a Christian support, and will continue to do so.

            Look THAT up in your Funk & Wagnalls.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Can you ever have a discussion with people without being savagely belligerent?

          • johndoe

            Why don’t you go block someone?

          • Chris

            I’ve blocked Todd. It’s done wonders for my ulcer. You should try it. 🙂

        • Daryl Showalter

          First of all you are incredibly uninformed, to pick out ISIS out of the whole Muslim religion is incorrect. The true believers in their religion would agree. However the major difference is how the people in the groups you mentioned treat unnatural abominable sinners. Muslims want to kill them and Christians want to save them. There’s plenty of things that Christianity agrees with other religions, the difference is the actions which follows our beliefs. You are probably one of the ones who think that President Trump and Hitler are just alike too. I guess I would be willing to agree when I start seeing the police start shooting people for helping Muslims or for just merely being a Muslim.

  • Derre Ceius

    And this is just another squalor example of the amoral content American entertainment gives to us, expecting it to be normalized among the population. How entirely uncoincidental this news arrives the day after it is revealed ‘Beauty and the Beast’ will have an ‘exclusively gay moment’.
    Thankfully I have never seen a single ‘Star Vs. The Forces of Evil’ episode (and after this news I never will), but given this news, and also given that this is not the first instance of LGBT content Disney has incorporated into its content, my support for the company seriously has to be reconsidered. After all, ‘Frozen’, one of the company’s most popular animated films, has themes that are revealed to be subtle love letters addressed to the LGBT community. The Disney Channel show ‘Good Luck Charlie’ featured a lesbian couple in its final season. ‘Zootopia’ features an anthropomorphic oryx and kudu that live in the same apartment, argue a lot, and share the same (hyphenated) last name. ‘Finding Dory’ features a transgender stingray, and what some believe to be a lesbian couple. Given these recurring themes in their entertainment, and the ‘GiveElsaAGirlfriend’ hashtag that trended sometime in the last year, one shouldn’t hold their breath on what to expect in the next ‘Frozen’ film.
    Even more pitifully, Disney is not the first, and/or only child-oriented company to attempt to mix LGBT themes and entertainment together. Nintendo, after intense criticism and mockery of their franchises back in 2014 for not including same-sex marriage in the life simulation game ‘Tomodachi Life’, incorporated it into ‘Fire Emblem Fates’. Other Nintendo games released before that game also feature LGBT themes; In ‘Pokemon Alpha Sapphire’, a muscular adult male character named Matt claims to ‘love big, strong dudes’. In ‘Xenoblade Chronicles X’, there is a male NPC character named Lara Nara who is attracted to males, wears makeup and according to a side quest, has a ‘boyfriend’. In ‘Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE’, a female character named ‘TikiIsMyWaifu’ has an intense infatuation for Tiki, and believes love ‘transcends gender and dimensions’ (To point out, Tiki is a female). Nickelodeon revealed Korra, protagonist of ‘Avatar: The Legend of Korra’, is in a romantic relationship with Asami (both are female), in released artwork designed to combat LGBT self-harm. Their cartoon ‘The Loud House’ shows that the protagonist has same-sex parents. It is even believed (but not confirmed, to my knowledge) that their titular character Spongebob Squarepants is a gay character, given his friendship with Patrick Star. When Archie Comics revealed its first gay character Kevin Keller, his popularity would only spiral upward; Keller is now a major Archie character who has held relationships with other male characters, and in the ‘Life with Archie’ storyline he marries Clay Walker, the male doctor that treated him after he returned from army work overseas with an injury. Finally, the flagship character (Tracer) of Blizzard’s massively popular game ‘Overwatch’ was revealed to be queer in December 2016.
    These examples are just a tip of the iceberg among major child-oriented companies who seek to use entertainment to push anti-Christian themes to their young audiences, in the belief that the themes will be normalized in subsequent generations of humanity, and one can only expect this to be more frequent under an American presidency the LGBT community believes doesn’t care for them. Pitiful as this is, there appears to be signs of light in the darkness; the ABC show ‘When We Rise’ drew in only 3 million viewers on premiere night, Target’s stock took a sharp nosedive since it allowed customers use restrooms that align with their ‘self-identity’ and not their biological sex, and Disney is now facing backlashes and boycotting from customers who believe they’re indoctrinating children in a politically correct manner. Should this trend continue, we could possibly be looking at a mass rejection of unnecessary LGBT and anti-Christian themes in American entertainment.

  • JRRMS

    Disney is just normalizing sin and it’s just plain WRONG! Pushing the gay agenda at kids?!!! Please boycott Disney! Make them feel the seriousness of their sin and subplots to make a small community think they have (unjust) power. God is the creator and they will have to answer to him. Jesus said do not lead the little children to sin. UM which part of that do you not understand Disney!!!???

    • Ambulance Chaser

      The part where not everybody in the country is required to share or follow your religious beliefs.

      • Scott “Sable” Miller

        It’s also your Creator’s beliefs. And He put in writing. We will all stand before Yeshua and give account for our lives.

        • Ambulance Chaser

          How do you know any of that is true?

          • Scott “Sable” Miller

            Because it would require much more faith to believe in the religion of atheism.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            No, atheism is simply waiting around for evidence, which no one has been able to provide thus far. It doesn’t require any faith at all.

          • Scott “Sable” Miller

            Atheism is a cartoon. No proof of macro evolution. Nada. Your DNA has over 3 billion data bits. And that incredibly detailed info came from…. nothing?

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Atheism has nothing to do with evolution, but if you’re curious for the proof, I suggest you read Talk Origins. I’m not a biologist, and not qualified to teach you evolution.

          • FHRITP

            C’mon, the argument from personal incredulity? Always a fallacy.

          • Chris

            “No proof of macro evolution. Nada”

            Science doesn’t deal in ‘proof’ it deals in probability. After over 150 years of research the probability of evolution is rather high.

            “Your DNA has over 3 billion data
            bits. And that incredibly detailed info came from…. nothing?”

            The beginnings of life is abiogenesis. It has NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH to do with evolution. Abiogenesis explains the origin of life and evolution explains its diversity. Stop going to creationist sites and check out some science sites instead.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            There is SO much evidence if you are open minded and look for it! If you don’t believe in God, just simply get on your knees and ask if God is there and if He is(which He is) will open your eyes. Even if you don’t believe in God, simply doing this action will point you in the direction. This is how many atheists turned to God. They just got on their knees and asked out loud and say “If you do exist, God, please make this known to me” What could it hurt? But if you truly look with an open mind you will find and see the truth. But you must open your mind with the possiblity of a loving creator. When you open your mind to this, God WILL answer you. It may not happen in an instant. But, sir, God says if you ask, you shall receive. If you seek, you will find. If you don’t get an answer the first time, do it a few more times. If you are atheist it will feel funny at first but force yourself to do it anyways. Ask God to show you the truth. And He WILL. And it will be amazing and life changing. Like I said it may take awhile but He wants you to be patient and persistent but HE will not let you down or turn you away. God will NEVER turn away someone who is seeking to know about HIM. When He opens your eyes to HIS truth there is no going back. You will continue to pursue the truth and your whole sense of living will change. It might happeen immediately or it may take a few times trying to reach out to Him. But this is how many atheists found God. Just the willingness to get on ones knees and get the question out there “God, if you exist, open my eyes and ears” I urge you to try sir, but ultimately it is your choice. But God says it is not His will for any to persish, but to repent and turn to Christ.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            I also urge you to look up the book “the case for Christ” by Lee Strobel and read it. The book is written by a former atheist who went on a quest for truth. He was a writer/journalist and didn’t believe in God at all. He met with many scholars, ancient writing scholars, the evidence in the ancient scriptures that were dated to back to Christ’s day. The evidence on the scripts were written by persons who were eye witnesses to this. And there is so much more evidence given in this book. Not just words, but actual physical evidence. Lee Strobel concluded at the end of his journey that the evidence of God and Christ were overwhelming.

          • Chris

            Lee Strobel? The Lee Strobel? Mr.Half-Truth himself? The man who when he raises a question about evangelical Christianity turns to an evangelical scholar and when he raises a question about science or liberal Christianity also turns to an evangelical scholar. Notice a little bit of bias? He NEVER gives an the arguments from both sides of an issue only one side giving both sides.

          • FHRITP

            As in “…much more faith than Scott believes Scott has or could muster?” or “because it requires a bigger [leap of] faith and consequently is far more terrifying, especially at the end of life?”

          • Scott “Sable” Miller

            Becoming worm food is not terrifying, it’s just the end… no awareness; but it IS terrifying to face Almighty, Holy God and you’ve lived your life as your own god and ignored the best offer in the universe to have your sins forgiven if you believe and obey Him and put Him in charge …. It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God! (Hebrews 10)

            Hell and ultimately the Lake of Fire is the absence of God, the author of tenderness, love, joy, etc… and since you vehemently oppose bowing to Him and spending time with Him on this side of the grave, He won’t force you to spend time with Him for all eternity. That’s love. You have free will. What you do with it is a decision you will consider for all eternity.

            The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” Not my words. Just passing them along.

          • FHRITP

            Change “you’ve,” “your,” and “you” to “I’ve,” “my,” and “I.”

          • Chris

            “The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.””

            You do know that has NOTHING to do with atheists right? It’s got to do with Christians who behave as though there is no God while saying that there is. Thus saying in their heart. Most atheists who I know are prepared to say it out loud.

          • FHRITP

            It doesn’t take faith to NOT believe in the existence of the Easter Bunny. Similarly it takes no faith to NOT believe in deities.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            We know this to be true because God has opened our eyes to HIS truth. We are 100% positive. It is not just knowing God is truth, but living in His truth. And as you obey His word, you grow in faith and have a relationship with Christ. He speaks to us through the Holy Spirit.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            So, no evidence at all then.

          • Chris

            “We know this to be true because God has opened our eyes to HIS truth. We are 100% positive.”

            So you can’t be wrong which would make you infallible. Since only God is infallible that would also make you God. Care to repent?

      • Kristy Armstrong

        All unbelievers and believers alike will bow before Christ. You will bow before Christ and you will regret not accepting His gift of salvation. Believe me or not, but I know for a 100%fact that you will stand before God and realize your mistake, but it will be too late. Now, however, I hope it is not too late for you to accept Christ. If you have rejected Him enough times, God will turn you over to your sin and you will not be able to change your mind. Heed this warning, sir before it is too late. I say this lovingly to you. Not out of malice. There is ALOT of corruption within alot of “Christian” churches. I’m sorry if you view Christians as unloving or judgemental. True followers of Christ do not condemn others or judge others. We hate sin but we love the sinner. We confront sin in a loving way. We are patient, loving, kind as Jesus intends us to be. I’m sorry to say there are alot of fake Christians out there who refuse to follow Christ. Alot of these people, even pastors themselves will be corrupt and teach a false gospel. Take for example the Roman Catholic Church. The most corrupt of all.

    • Joe

      What the heck is the ‘gay agenda’?

      • FHRITP

        Wait a minute. Gay ain’t agenda. Male and female are genda’s.

        • Tangent002

          Now that’s funny!

      • Chris

        I can explain that. The gay agenda is the agenda EVERYONE knows all about except gays.

    • Mel

      I couldn’t agree more and could not have said it any better myself! Just read the Bible people!! I’m boycotting Disney because as a Christian that’s my responsibility to protect my kids and family. Total deceit!😭

    • Chris

      I am told I’m to gently remonstrate so “you are indulging in ego-worship and idolatry. Ego-worship since you seem to believe that your interpretation of the bible is EXACTLY the same as the bible and idolatry since you seem unable to tell doctrine from deity. Please stop.”

  • Sven

    Not easy raising kids in our twisted culture. It’s not so much that gays are always depicted positively in media, it’s the way the media hide all the negatives, like their sky-high rates of STDs and domestic violence and drug abuse, not to mention the many who prey on kids. The information is available, of course, but it has to be sought out, while the propaganda is there for all to see.

    • Croquet_Player

      Just stop it. Yes, you SHOULD look up what’s killing Americans. What is it? Heart disease. One out of four Americans will die of heart disease or related complications. Why? Because we love food, sitting at the table with our family, and we are eating ourselves to death. Unlike so many generations before us, we have more than enough food. And even if you’re poor, the food you can get is so fat-laden, it will make you fat, but not give you much nutrition. It’s a terrible situation. The proportion of people who die from Aids compared to those who die from heart disease is minuscule. Just stop with the false equivalencies.

      • Kristy Armstrong

        Being attracted to the same sex is not what is bad. It is acting on homosexual behavior (fornication). I have been attracted to the same sex for years, BUT I choose not to act on it because I follow the word of GOD. Homosexuality behavior is an abomination to God and mankind.

        • Chris

          I’m told I’m to gently remonstrate so “You are indulging in ego-worship and idolatry. Ego-worship since you
          seem to believe that your interpretation of the bible is EXACTLY the
          same as the bible and idolatry since you seem unable to tell doctrine
          from deity. Please stop.

    • InTheChurch

      You left out, infidelity

    • Joseph Uchiha

      Oh ? should they show the negatives of being christian too ? everything from believing in conspiracy theories to the obvious lack of emphatic many Thiests demonstrate ? as you are demonstrating in your comment right now ? How about the many verses in the bible that promote rape ? like the one where it says that a rapist has to marry the victim . Why dont we talk about that for a while you desert god believing degenerate ?

  • Lucius

    We Christians are losing the “culture war” or maybe the break down of social deterrents to immoral behavior since the late 1960s simply revealed that most were not really Christians in the first place.

    • Amos Moses

      we are not in a “culture war” …. Christ did not die for “culture” nor did he advocate any “war” on it or for it or any other thing …. we are to make disciples by spreading the gospel …. and scripture says it will in the end times fall on many deaf ears …… and it is happening just as scripture says it will ……….

      • Lucius

        I put “culture war” in quotations for a reason. I was using it as an umbrella term to describe the break down in traditional Judeo-Christian values in society. It’s true that we are to make disciples of all nations, but it is equally true that we are to have faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior, keep the Lord’s Commandments, do good works, and repent. I believe this creates a “lifestyle” aspect (or should) with regard to your Christian faith, and of course, collectively, these lifestyles produce, albeit imperfect, a Christian-centric culture.

        • Amos Moses

          “but it is equally true that we are to have faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior, keep the Lord’s Commandments, do good works, and repent.”

          all of that, those gifts, are from Christ and are already done ………. we are to preach the word …. and on this we seem to agree …..

          • Lucius

            I respectfully disagree. Salvation requires more than mere faith or even preaching the word. Even the devil believes in God and knows the word. Along with faith, and preaching the good news, I believe we must also keep the Lord’s commandments, do good works, and repent.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            Absolutely!!! Amen. Jesus says not everyone who says Lord Lord will be saved. Jesus those who keep thy fathers commandments too. Faith without works is dead

          • Amos Moses

            “Along with faith, and preaching the good news, I believe we must also keep the Lord’s commandments, do good works, and repent.”

            all of these are GIFTS of God and His work alone ……. we do good works because we are saved …. not to maintain salvation ……..

      • Kristy Armstrong

        And Paul the apostle said that when there is sin (example homosexual behavior) in the church (body of believers) we are to lovingly confront the sinner and urge him to turn from that unrighteous behavior.

        • Lucius

          Or as Jesus said to the adultress, “Go on your way. From now on, don’t sin.” People always remember the “Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone” part, in other words, don’t judge lest you be judged. But they forget Jesus didn’t give the adultress a pat on the back — “From now on, don’t sin.”

          • Kristy Armstrong

            You took that verse out of context. Paul was very specific judging behaviors within the church.

          • Lucius

            I was agreeing with your quote and pointing out that even Jesus, while forgiving, admonished the adultress to sin no more.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            3. (3-5) Paul’s prescription.

            For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

            a. Absent in body but present in spirit: When Paul mentions his spirit being present, he isn’t speaking of astral-projection in the early church. He is truly represented in their midst by his letter, which was a valid spiritual extension of his apostolic authority.

            i. In other words, Paul didn’t have to be there to exercise his authority; distance didn’t make him any less an apostle.

            ii. Paul pushes his authority hard here (have already judged), but not too much, because he recognizes that it must be done in the name and power of the Lord Jesus (in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ).

            b. For I indeed . . . have already judged: Is Paul disobeying what Jesus said in Matthew 7:1-5? After all, “judge not, lest you be judged!”

            i. Paul is not being disobedient in the slightest way. Jesus’ command in Matthew 7:1-5 forbids hypocritical judgment, and judging others by a standard that we ourselves do not want to be judged by. Paul is perfectly willing to apply the same standards to himself that he is applying to the Corinthian Christians.

            ii. Some judgment is permitted, and some is not. “While Christians are not to judge one another’s motives or ministries, we are certainly expected to be honest about each other’s conduct.”

        • Amos Moses

          and if they will not ….. to turn them over to satan for the salvation of their souls ……..

    • InTheChurch

      Lucius, I agree with you 100% and can I add, we are losing the spiritual war also.

      • Lucius

        I wish I knew what the answer was. I guess we can only do our best to keep and protect the faith in our own small worlds.

        • InTheChurch

          We need strong churches with pastors who are not afraid. We need to stand our ground with Biblical principles and we must not give in to pressure from the ungodly.
          I am doing a study on the 7 churches that God sent a message to in Rev 2. Wow, we are not different. You should read and study what God is telling the church. Very powerful stuff.

    • John_33✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

      Just focus on staying as close to God as possible in purity and holiness. God will take care of the rest.

    • Tony

      OK I am a Christian First !!!. we all SIN. “Judge not my sins for you shall be judge for judging me. If you are true “Christians” you would only worry about your “sins” and not mine. I am not gay, i am just making a point. I know people that are and they are great Christians.

      • Lucius

        “I know people that are and they are great Christians.”
        ***********************************************************************
        I don’t know how you can engages in regular homosexual relations and be a great Christian. It would be no different than me saying I am a habitual adulterer but a great Christian. That does not mean you have to be sinless to be a great Christian, but I do not think you can try to elevate sin to moral behavior (i.e., think it’s not sin or “okay” to engage in homosexual relations or adultery) and still claim to be a great Christian.

        “If you are true “Christians” you would only worry about your “sins” and not mine.”
        *************************************************************************
        It’s true that you must work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. But it is equally true, as is said in 2 Timothy 2:24, “And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness.” In other words, Christians are called to worry about the sins of others and to correct with gentleness. This is of course not the same as judging.

        • Chris

          “otherwise there would be no requirement to preach the good news or gently correct”

          On that note I will gently correct. You are indulging in ego-worship and idolatry. Ego-worship since you seem to believe that your interpretation of the bible is EXACTLY the same as the bible and idolatry since you seem unable to tell doctrine from deity. Please stop.

          • Lucius

            This is pure childish ad hominem and nothing more. Grow up and try again.

          • Chris

            Did you not write “In other words, Christians are called to worry about the sins of others,
            otherwise there would be no requirement to preach the good news or
            gently correct. This is of course not the same as judging”?

            I am just pointing out your sins. If this is childish and an ad hom blame your own advice.

          • Lucius

            You did not address the substance of my comment whatsoever, but cried that it was “ego worship” and “idolatry” and offered nothing but a terse and frankly, incoherent explanation. Serious question, are you older than 21?

          • Chris

            You did not address the main point of my reply and merely added an ad hom. What are you like 12?

          • Lucius

            Your remarks were conclusory. So here is a conclusory retort: “you are wrong.”

          • Chris

            Nope. I explained why I’m correct. However here’s your cursory retort. ‘Wrong again!’

            Wee this not listening to people is fun. Your turn.

  • Steven Nagy

    This is not disney I new and my grandchildren will not be watching it at our home or anywhere else they are too young

    • Amos Moses

      no adult should watch it either ……

    • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

      None of us were very discerning as children: but this *IS* the Disney you knew. They made “Fantasia” in 1940, with occult and humanist overtones – and they spent wildly on it, and Walt Disney was personally involved.

    • Joseph Uchiha

      i find it funny how you christians are threatened by people who love each other kissing .. meanwhile your bible is full of incest , genocide and rape …

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Ezekiel Chapter 23 for instance.

  • Rebecca

    I’m sorry but I won’t boycott Disney just because of what’s on. I monitor what my 12 yr old daughter watches. I also educate her on things in life. I’m a Christian and was taught “Not to judge people” just because I don’t agree with the way they are. That’s what is wrong with this world today.

    • Charles

      “” I’m a Christian and was taught “Not to judge people” just because I don’t agree with the way they are””

      If you were a Christian the “Correct” answer would be I judge people according to how my God instructs me to judge (Which of course he does). But like most of the one day a week “Christians”, they have no clue what the Holy Bible says. Moving on.

      • InTheChurch

        Bingo

    • FHRITP

      Your statement is better without, “I’m sorry but…”

    • Kristy Armstrong

      Paul the apostle says that when there is sin in the church (the body of believers) we are to loving confront the sin. It is our duty as Christians to speak out.

      • Chris

        On that note I will gently correct. You are indulging in ego-worship
        and idolatry. Ego-worship since you seem to believe that your
        interpretation of the bible is EXACTLY the same as the bible and
        idolatry since you seem unable to tell doctrine from deity. Please
        stop.

  • Memom

    Is it just me? I don’t have a problem with gay couples. However, I feel exposing this to young children on disney is wrong and could encourage them to try it even if they are not gay.

    • FHRITP

      You DO have problems with gay couples then, namely when they kiss in front of small children.

      • Kristy Armstrong

        Homosexual behavior is poisonous especially to the young who can easily be misled. Homosexual BEHAVIOR is the problem. NOt being attracted to the same sex. I am attracted to the same sex BUT I refuse to act upon it because it is an abomination in God’s eyes. GOD’S laws are what matters, not mans.

        • Chris

          “Homosexual behavior is poisonous especially to the young who can easily be misled.”

          Not according to the latest research. According to research the ONLY difference found between children raised in same sex households and ones raised in heterosexual households was that children raised by gays and lesbians tended to be more tolerant of difference.

          Is that what you’re really worried about? That if children grow up more tolerant of difference then bigotry will be harder to pass on to the next generation?

    • Tangent002

      Why would a kid be “encouraged” to kiss someone of their own gender if they are not attracted to them?

      • Kristy Armstrong

        Seing homosexuals kiss will confuse kids into thinking that this is okay and natural. It is NOT okay and it is NOT in any way natural. I believe in what God says, not man.

        • Chris

          “It is NOT okay and it is NOT in any way natural”

          Is something is natural then it is found in nature. Homosexuality is found in nature therefore it is natural. As evidence for this type ‘homosexual in animals’. You’ll find plenty of examples.

      • Memom

        To make it look normal.

  • cadcoke5

    I recall back when Disney’s “Who Framed Roger Rabbit” was released in 1988. It featured Baby Herman, who in addition to a fowl mouth, complained about the size of his penis. Soon after the release, I recall seeing children’s cartoon book that included this character, though it omitted the more objectionable content. To see that Disney was willing to include this sort of character among its children’s content was the last straw for me. More recently, they used Toy Story’s character Woody to promote homosexuality in a Super Bowl a while back. And now this cartoon shows how deeply entrenched they have become in immorality.

    To quote Reece Fischer’s history of Disney Land, “He [Disney] also wanted a park that catered to the entire family. The stereotypical American amusement park was not what Walt Disney had in mind. Walt was turned off by the vulgarity and grime that he found when he went to other amusement parks.” Disney Corp has abandoned its moral foundation.

    See Matt 18:6 for how Jesus feels about this sort of thing. “… if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.”

  • FHRITP

    Two guys macking it up doesn’t cause pain and suffering to others, thus it is not immoral. It’s repulsive to see, but that’s my problem.

    • Kristy Armstrong

      It is incredibly immoral to people who follow God’s word. But I guess to unbelievers it would not seem immoral because they don’t have God’s word in their hearts.

      • FHRITP

        Agreed. To unbelievers it does not “seem” immoral, because it isn’t. Repulsive to see, but not immoral. God’s words change from chapter to chapter, follower to follower, century to century, and testament to testament. Deities aside, who suffers when two girls kiss in public, Kristy?

  • Pererin

    ‘Coming in Summer 2020 … a young Aladdin befriends a monkey called Abu, a truly ground breaking film which captures the beautiful tale of true love between man and animal. Disney presents, Aladdin – the early years.’
    We all know this is next! We need to pray for our nations and our leaders, our children are suffering and will suffer further for our unwillingness to stand up to this perversion.

    • William of Glynn

      I doubt your spouse would appreciate being equated with a monkey.

      • Pererin

        Exactly! My spouse doesn’t appreciate our marriage being equated to a union of two men or two women either. I’m glad you’re on board.

        • William of Glynn

          In time, you’ll both get used to it.

          • Pererin

            God willing we won’t need to. As we have seen, times change. God willing they will change again, this time for the better and for the respect of God’s word, not man’s perversion.

          • This style 10/6

            I thought that the US was a secular state based on the Constitution, not the Bible.

          • Pererin

            It worked fine for hundreds of years before didn’t it? Seems to me that it’s all down to who’s interpreting and reporting the history. At the moment you are reporting history much more differently than people 60 years ago.

          • William of Glynn

            Let us move forward, not backward.

          • Pererin

            Yes let’s, but let’s identify forward as Godward please.

        • Tangent002

          The law doesn’t really care about what you “appreciate” or not.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            The law of man is corrupt. Hence, condoning homosexual behavior.

          • Pererin

            No, but God willing, more and more Godly people will eventually take up positions of leadership in the government again and change the laws back to respect God’s word rather than man’s perversion. We’ll see if you have such a respect for the law then.

          • This style 10/6

            Won’t you have to change the Constitution?

          • Pererin

            It worked fine for hundreds of years before didn’t it?

          • Chris

            So you’re saying you want a theocracy rather than a democracy. If you get what you wish for you may regret it. When theocracies are established what is defined as the ‘true’ faith tends to get smaller and smaller. Everyone else gets persecuted.

          • Pererin

            So do you think America was a theocracy pre1950s because the culture was Christian based?
            Whether we like it or not we will end up in one prevailing belief system ruling. What we are seeing now is a shift of the balance from Christian based culture over to a humanistic based culture. Don’t pretend that democracy does not persecute, the raise of humanism has seen the raise of persecution of Christians. It’s not just Christianity either. The raise of humanism in the form of atheism and secularism has minimised the freedoms of all religions. This isn’t always a bad thing because some Muslims have terrible, beliefs that I wouldn’t want to see. However to pretend that secularism doesn’t persecute is absolutely false. It just that the persecution of secularism is tolerable for you. I cannot tolerate the persecution of secularism, we are now only on the tipping point, so, the further we continue in a secular direction the more severe the persecution of Christians. So this is why I am praying for the revival of Christianity in America.

          • Chris

            “So do you think America was a theocracy pre1950s because the culture was Christian based?”

            No but Christians certainly had certain rights others did not share despite what your constitution says. For example many people from different faith had to send their children to classes where they were taught how great Christianity was. When people objected to those classes they were persecuted. Cars vandalized, pets killed, children bullied. Is that ok with you?

            “Whether
            we like it or not we will end up in one prevailing belief system
            ruling.”

            Why? Evidence please.

            “What we are seeing now is a shift of the balance from Christian
            based culture over to a humanistic based culture.”

            No. What you are seeing is Christianity losing its privileged position and the US becoming a secular country as it’s constitution guaranteed.

            “Don’t pretend that
            democracy does not persecute, the raise of humanism has seen the raise
            of persecution of Christians.”

            Oh for heaven sake you are NOT being persecuted. How many Christians have been killed? How many tortured? Go to countries where Christians are actually tortured and when you return, and can point to the same thing happening in your own then we’ll talk.

            I’ve heard so many American Christians, when they are told they can no longer do whatever they want, throw up their hands and cry ‘persecution’. You NEVER had such a right. You never had the right to dictate that Christianity be taught in state schools. You never had the right to demand Christian symbols be displayed in front of government buildings. Governments are there to serve ALL the people [not just Christians] and obey the CONSTITUTION. And Christian business’ NEVER had the right to discriminate against those they don’t like. You didn’t against Negroes. It was called racism. You didn’t against women. it’s called sexism. And you don’t against homosexuals. It’s called bigotry.

          • Pererin

            The difference is you are now interpreting the constitution to today’s standards. The constitution has stayed the same, the only the that has changed is us. I could accuse you of bigotry for supporting the change in law of abortion, the government certainly isn’t for all people in this case. Racism is sinful as is killing people and so is bullying so I don’t see why think that Christianity supports that. People certainly do these things under Christianity, but they do under secularism too, it’s just that they are aimed at different people. You seem to think that as long as you are not getting killed or tortured you have no right to defend yourself against persecution, any reason for that? Also, if you agree that pre1950 America was indeed not a theocracy, why would it be any different in the future if the country democratically work under Christian standards rather than humanistic and atheistic standards?

          • Chris

            “The difference is you are now interpreting the constitution to
            today’s standards.”

            Correct and that MUST be done or the constitution become a dead letter. For example the constitution mentions an army and navy. It says NOTHING about an air force. I don’t know of too many people who would argue that science an air force isn’t mentioned in the constitution then the government had no right to organize one.

            “The constitution has stayed the same, the only the that has changed is us.”

            Correct. For example the constitution allowed slavery. Today such a position would be held to be untenable and the right of everyone to life, liberty and happiness is seen as applying to all irrespective of skin colour.

            “I could accuse you of bigotry for supporting the change in law of abortion, the government certainly isn’t for all people in this case.”

            Yes it is. For each person who has been born. You have to be born in a country to be considered a citizen of that country.

            “Racism is sinful as is killing people and so is bullying so I don’t see why think that Christianity supports that.”

            The KKK, Christian Identity and various other Christians such as Bob Jones would tend to disagree with you there.

            “People certainly do these things under Christianity, but they do under secularism too,”

            I’m not saying they don’t. I’m saying that you have no right to discriminate. Black, White, Christian, or Non-Christian.

            “It’s just that they are aimed at different people.”

            Correct. Different people which are bullying others.

            “You seem to think that as long as you are not getting killed or tortured you
            have no right to defend yourself against persecution, any reason for
            that?”

            I didn’t say that. But when Christians have a church on almost every street corner, their own TV and radio stations, their own publishing companies, and their holy book left in every hotel room I can’t take tales of persecution seriously.

            “Also, if you agree that pre1950 America was indeed not a theocracy, why would it be any different in the future if the country democratically work under Christian standards rather than humanistic and atheistic standards?”

            Secular government has NOTHING to do with atheism or humanism. It merely means the government isn’t going to play favourites. Secondly the government before the 1950’s was hardly Christian either. Unless you’ve changed your mind about racism being Christian – remember the Jim Crow laws of the south?

          • Pererin

            Again, racism isn’t Christian. Sadly it was when Christians mixed with evolutionary ideas that racism really exploded within Christianity. The Bible teaches that we all came from Adam and Eve, the Bible doesn’t teach about races. No, sadly it’s only when Christianity wanders from the Word of God that trouble starts. You are simply regurgitating the same old false lies that atheists usually spout. You should really learn about Christianity from the Bible not your atheist friends.
            You also amazingly fail to recognise that secularism is not neutral at all. Atheism and humanism are now being forced on our children in schools because of secularism. You shout about seperation of church and state, then hypocritically preach to children in the public square. Your worldview has free reign in the public forum, not mine.
            Our society is responsible for the murder of millions of people through abortion, whether you recognise them as people or not, your neglect to recognise them only proves my point regarding your faith, you are just as discriminatory as you accuse the Christian to be. You have decided your ‘truth’ without authority. My authority is God. Who makes your rules? Your morals? How do you decide what good is? Can you trust your morals? Of course not, they are decided by fickle man. As I showed in my original post, today it’s homosexuality, tomorrow it’s beastiality and you will be standing up for it.

          • Chris

            “Again, racism isn’t Christian. Sadly it was when Christians mixed with
            evolutionary ideas that racism really exploded within Christianity.”

            The KKK are creationists. Sp is Christian Identity.

            “The
            Bible teaches that we all came from Adam and Eve, the Bible doesn’t
            teach about races.”

            The way they look at it the other races came about when eve was seduced by Satan.

            “No, sadly it’s only when Christianity wanders from
            the Word of God that trouble starts.”

            Then by all means explain that to them as they are quoting scripture. Go to their site if you don’t believe me. As for me I’ve read their pamphlets. I know what they believe.

          • Pererin

            And they are wrong, they are not true Christians if they twist scripture. Oops, are you going to quote the ‘no true Scotsman fallacy’?
            I would be better off convincing you of the personhood of a baby in the womb. You are the KKK are both equally in error. The KKK twist the Word of God, you twist the minds and ideas of men achieving the same thing, death. Though, secularism is killing far more today than the KKK ever could have dreamed. But as I said, it’s not too late.

          • Chris

            “And they are wrong, they are not true Christians if they twist
            scripture. Oops, are you going to quote the ‘no true Scotsman fallacy’?”

            Yep. Neither you nor your interpretation of scripture gets to decide what a true Christian is.

            “I would be better off convincing you of the personhood of a baby in the
            womb.”

            You’re welcome to try. I hold that a being with a functioning brain is a person. A bunch of cells is NOT a person thus personhood does NOT begin at conception although a baby with a functioning brain IS a person.

            “You are the KKK are both equally in error.”

            You missed out three very important words – in your opinion.

            “The KKK twist the Word of God, you twist the minds and ideas of men achieving the same thing, death.”

            Achieving the same thing? Really? Not even close. Cells are not people. Most abortions take place when the fetus is merely a bunch of multiplying cells. Since, I would argue, a functioning brain makes a person then you can’t compare the two. Negroes persecuted by the KKK had functioning brains, cells do not.

          • Pererin

            You see you absolutely prove my point. Your opinion on what a person is has turned what should be a safe protected area ‘the womb’ into the biggest holocaust in history. This is the problem with humanism. Basically whatever we decide as a society goes. If we ‘reasonably’ decide that the elderly should be euthanised at age 80 for the sake of society, that would be good. This is evil.

          • Chris

            “You see you absolutely prove my point.”

            By showing that you are wrong I have proven your point?

            “Your opinion on what a person is
            has turned what should be a safe protected area ‘the womb’ into the
            biggest holocaust in history.”

            Appeal to emotion fallacy. Sorry but if you wish to argue with me use evidence and logic.

            As to the concept that it takes a functioning brain to make a person the idea is this. According to medical science a person is dead when the brain ceases to function. It would seem to logically follow therefore that a person’s life begins when the brain begins to function.

            “This is the problem with humanism.
            Basically whatever we decide as a society goes.”

            Except that, as I have explained I am a Rossian deontologist. Anything does not go with me. Please do not attempt to strawman my argument again. Thank you.

            “If we ‘reasonably’
            decide that the elderly should be euthanised at age 80 for the sake of
            society, that would be good. This is evil”

            I have repeatedly said that my view reuires ethics as applied by reason. Why do you continue to distort what I’ve written? My view does NOT depend upon reason alone but on ethics as applied by reason.

          • Pererin

            You call the death of 1 billion babies in the womb since 1920 ’emotional’?
            You say you don’t believe in ‘anything goes’? Then you need an authority, a rule giver. Maxims are still selected. Logical rules must be agreed. Laws must be accepted as truth. Without God, you have none of that. It’s one or the other, absolute truth, or as you say ‘anything goes’. Sitting in the middle requires you to borrow from the absolute truth camp. There is no getting out of it.

          • Chris

            “You call the death of 1 billion babies in the womb since 1920 ’emotional’?”

            Nope I’m calling terms like ‘holocaust’ emotional.

            “You
            say you don’t believe in ‘anything goes’?”

            Thank you for asking questions instead of telling me what I believe. As to my ethics Rossian Deontology is classified as objectivist. That means we hold some things as objectively right and others wrong. So, no, I do not believe that anything goes.

            “Then you need an authority, a
            rule giver.”

            Nope. If one relies on rules given by an authority then one is also indulging in another logical fallacy.

            “Maxims are still selected.”

            Nope. They are recognized and applied. Just like a principle in science. Scientists do not ‘select’ laws of nature, they merely recognize them.

            “Logical rules must be agreed.”

            Nope. Once again logic is a set of principles which have been recognized and applied. The principles of logic are objective and would seem to be recognized by philosophers worldwide.

            “Laws must be accepted as truth.”

            Nope. The law of gravity doesn’t have to be accepted by anyone. You’ll still fall if you step off a building though even if you don’t accept it. Likewise logic doesn’t have to be accepted by anyone but that doesn’t stop what they are saying from being illogical.

            “Without God, you have none of that.”

            Nope. Laws of nature have been established fairly conclusively by science. The principles of logic have likewise been fairly conclusively established.

            “It’s
            one or the other, absolute truth, or as you say ‘anything goes’.”

            Nope.

            Ok. Definition time.
            A relative truth is something which is relative to an individual. e.g. If I say classical music is beatufil to me, that is a relative truth.

            An absolute truth is a truth which is true in all times and places.

            Now if I say this tree is the tallest tree in these woods then what sort of truth is it? It isn’t relative. It doesn’t depend upon my opinion. I can prove what I say by measuring it. It’s also not absolute. One day the tree will die and no longer be the tallest tree.
            So if it’s neither an absolute nor a relative truth what is it? An OBJECTIVE truth.

            Get the idea now?

          • Pererin

            So you wouldn’t define the killing of a billion babies a holocaust?

            Explain what you like, the fact that you can reject the killing of a billion babies as a holocaust goes to show that humanism can twist morals to suite whatever they want.
            As I have already stated. You need an authority to stand on what we believe or if you like, what we observe. How do you decided if something we observe, such as a person murdering and other person, is good or bad?

          • Chris

            That fact that you can’t tell the difference between emotial fallacies and reality is very telling.

            You also seem addicted to the argument by assertion fallacy.

            “How do you decided if something we observe, such as a person murdering and other person, is good or bad?”

            We apply prima facie duties.

          • Chris

            I’m still waiting for your answer to my question. Does God command something because it is good or is it good because God commands it?

          • Chris

            Let’s examine your morality shall we? Are you a divine command theorist?

            That means do you believe that the commands of God are the basis for morality?

          • Pererin

            I do. This is what the Bible teaches.

          • Chris

            Fair enough. Now is something good because God commands it or does God command it because it is good?

          • Pererin

            The Bible teaches that God literally IS good. So neither statement is true. ‘Good’ is defined by God’s character and can’t be separated from Him. God doesn’t do something because He ‘must’ do ‘good’. He is not bound by any rules, He is almighty God after all. As I said, God literally IS good, He is ‘good’ personified, ‘good’ is His character, so He wouldn’t change what is ‘good’ or He would be changing His character. Your question doesn’t fit God’s parameters. Not God of the Bible anyway.

          • Chris

            “The Bible teaches that God literally IS good. So neither statement is true.”

            All you’ve done is push the question back a step. Do you say that God’s character is good because it’s God’s character or is it good because it’s actually good?

          • Pererin

            I’m sorry, I realise it doesn’t answer your question, but there was no other way to reply. The question, or the options you give don’t ‘fit’ God. There isn’t an accurate reply to choose from. Now you are asking a similar question, but it has the same problem. God, his character is good. Good cannot be separated from Him. If someone asked you, “Chris, can you stop being so ‘Chris’ (the character/personality/attributes of Chris)?” Your reply would be, “Of course not, otherwise I would not be Chris.”
            You cannot separate Chris from his character without disolving ‘Chris’. It’s the same with God, the question is forcing me to make a choice that, if made, no longer describes God. So again, the question is flawed. God’s character isn’t good because of some description of good outside of his character. Neither is it God’s character because it is Good. God literally IS good. There is no good external to Him. Without the God of the Bible, good does not exist.

          • Pererin

            I’m not sure of the function of your question, but if you were to open up the question to, “what is ‘good’? Then my answer would be God of the Bible. What would your answer be?

          • Chris

            “As I showed in my original post, today it’s homosexuality, tomorrow it’s beastiality and you will be standing up for it.”

            That’s a logical fallacy known as the slippery slope fallacy. Would you care to rephrase?

          • Chris

            “Sadly it was when Christians mixed with evolutionary ideas that racism really exploded within Christianity”

            Bob Jones accepted evolution? Since when? But Bob Jones was a racist.

          • Pererin

            As i said, start with the Bible not with men. Many Christians were racist, many Christians have been rapists, murderers, thieves, liars, paedophilies, you name it. They were all sinners, all corrupt wicked men who put their own views first. Bob Jones was no different, he supported a segregation movement that was shameful and without Biblical grounding. Sadly he interpreted the Bible the way you suggest we interpret the constitution, fluidly. The constitution means nothing if we allow ourselves to twist it to fulfil our darkest desires. It’s happening today with the Bible too. What I do know is that the further we move from God, the more perverse we get. I pray that as a civilisation, we stop this rejection of God’s authority and finally shed this fruitless experiment in the ideas of man. Look, I get that you want God disappear, I get that you want rule over you own life. But He created you, He is your father and He is not going to disappear. You know this, it’s inside you, it has even been written down for you in a book, preserved but sadly rejected by far too many. It’s not too late.

          • Chris

            “As i said, start with the Bible not with men.”

            Ok. Point to a book in the bible not written by men.

          • Pererin

            Another strawman. Christians fully acknowledge that the Bible was written by men BUT inspired by God.

          • Chris

            “As i said, start with the Bible not with men.”

            Then since, as you’ve admitted, the bible is written by men then that’s all we’re left with.

            You can claim all you like that the men were inspired by God but all we have are their claims that this is so – the words of men.

          • Chris

            It couldn’t be a strawman since you would have had to assert that the bible was written by men as part of your response. There are some Christians who actually would assert that God wrote the bible through people. Almost using them as puppets. For example there is a wood caring from the middle ages of one of the apostles writing the gospel except his hand is being controlled by God.

            Other Christians accept that the bible was written by a group of people who wrote off their own bat. They do NOT accept that such writers were inspired by God.

            So not ALL Christians accept what you claim, though many do. But as I’ll show such a claim is unprovable.

          • Pererin

            Rubbish, by your logic, a religion is only as reliable as it’s weakest followers. Imagine using the same logic in science or philosophy. But this is your problem, I have definitive truth in the Bible, you have a fluid system of belief where absolute truth does not exist. But without absolute truth, anything is possible. If you can convince enough people that your idea is acceptable to whatever criteria you use you can do anything. This is the logical result of humanism.

          • Chris

            “Rubbish, by your logic,…”

            It isn;’t ‘my’ logic. Go to google and type in ‘fallacy files’. It’s a logic site and gives a definition of all logical fallacies as well as examples.

            “…a religion is only as reliable as it’s weakest
            followers.”

            What? Where are you getting this from?

            “Imagine using the same logic in science or philosophy.”

            Sorry but you are inventing replies I never made and responding to those.

            “I have definitive truth in the Bible, [in your opinion]”…

            You keep leaving out those four words.

            “you have a fluid system of belief where absolute truth does not exist.”

            Nope. I never mentioned absolute truth except to write that it was unnecessary in ethics. All that’s needed is objective truth.

            As to ethics, as I’ve sais many, many, many times, I am a Rossian Deontologist. If you knew philosophy you’d know they are NOT relativists. They are objectivists. They hold that some things are objectively right and others wrong. This determination is made by applying the principles of Rossian Deontology through logic.

            You seemed determined to strawman my arguments so I’ll tell you what we’ll do. If you misrepesent my position again this discussion is over. Ok?

          • Chris

            “You should really learn about Christianity from the Bible not your atheist friends.”

            I was a Christian and studied theology at a university level.

            “You also amazingly fail to recognise that secularism is not neutral at all.”

            Secularism “The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.”

            In other words NO FAVOURITES!

            “Atheism and humanism are now being forced on our children in schools because of secularism.”

            Evidence please.

            “You shout about separation of church and state, then hypocritically preach to children in the public square.”

            You mean like Christians have done for hundreds of years? The public square is NOT a government building. A park, street corner or beach is NOT a government building. You are as welcome there as anyone else.

            “Our society is responsible for the murder of millions of people through abortion, whether you recognise them as people or not,…”

            If you are going to accuse others of murdering people you should be able to prove that a single cell is a person.

            “…your neglect to recognise them only proves my point regarding your faith,…”

            What’s my faith?

            “Who makes your rules? Your morals? How do you decide what good is?”

            Applied logic does. I hold a BA [hons] in philosophy.

            “Can you trust your morals?”

            Yes. Look up the Deontology of W.D.Ross. Since my ethical system is based upon reason if I arrive at a conclusion which is rational then it is correct unless evidence is provided to show otherwise.

          • Pererin

            On what do you base your reason? You seem qualified to answer, go ahead. If it is rational to kill a million babies is that good? It certainly looks like it. Is that your ‘reason’?
            A single cell is a person, did I say that? Strawman? Surely not. You may want to rephrase that.

          • Chris

            “On what do you base your reason? You seem qualified to answer, go ahead.”

            On what is logic based? Logic is based upon maxims. The maxims are such that to argue against them is to indulge in self-refutation.

            “If it is rational to kill a million babies is that good?”

            Logic is not an end in itself. It is used to apply ethical principles. Look up prima facie duties. That answers your question.

            “A single cell is a person, did I say that?”

            Your exact quote was “”Our society is responsible for the murder of millions of people through abortion, whether you recognise them as people or not,…”

            Most abortions take place when the fetus is merely a cell or a bunch of cells.

            “Strawman? Surely not. You may want to rephrase that.”

            I believe I just did.

          • Pererin

            Maxims based on what. Unless you have an absolute truth, you are making it up according to the culture.
            Your idea or a foetus is extremely simplistic. It is not just a bunch cells. It is not like having a tumour removed. The first day of a missed period is usually when the foetus is two weeks old. Look up what a 2 week old foetus looks like. Does that look like a bunch of cells to you? The heart, brain and spinal cord are developing at 3 weeks. The vast majority of abortions are in the first 13 weeks of development. Look at the 5 week development, 7 week development, 10 week, 12 week. Don’t you see the problem?

          • Chris

            “Maxims based on what.”

            Maxims are statements which are self-refuting to argue against.

            “Unless you have an absolute truth, you are making it up according to the culture.”

            Incorrect. Truth does NOT have to be absolute, merely objective. If a statement is objectively true then it is held as true tentatively.

            “Your idea or a foetus is extremely simplistic.”

            According to YOUR opinion. Actually the idea – it isn’t mine – merely acknowledges that we don’t develope in one sudden event. We develop gradually. That being the case a gradualist definition is the only rational definition of personhood.

            “It is not just a bunch cells.”

            Medical science disagrees. After an egg is fertilized it becomes first one cell then a group of cells busily multiplying. They have no brain nor nervous system. They are as alive as the cells on my hand but that’s it. If left alone they will become a human person but that merely means they are a potential human. And potential humans can only ever have potential rights.

            “It is not like having a tumour removed. The first day of a missed period is usually when the foetus is two weeks old. Look up what a 2 week old fetus looks like. Does that look like a bunch of cells to you?”

            Are you really so ignorant of human biology? When an egg is fertilized it is first one cell then a bunch of cells. To quote from a medical site “Within 24 hours after fertilization, the egg begins dividing rapidly into many cells.”

            “The heart, brain and spinal cord are developing at 3 weeks.”

            Actually it’s the 5th week according to the Mayo clinic and the brain does not begin to FUNCTION until much later.

            The vast majority of abortions are in the first 13 weeks of development. Look at
            the 5 week development, 7 week development, 10 week, 12 week. Don’t you see the problem?”

            Actually the majority – 66% – are performed in the first 8 weeks. That’s BEFORE a brain begins to function. The brain is there it just doesn’t do anything at this point.

          • Chris

            Let’s examine another aspect of abortion using a thought experiment.

            A woman is kidnapped and hooked up to a child. She now finds herself supplying blood and nutrition to the child. She is told that after 9 months she can go free.

            Remembering that this arrangement is involuntary on her part does she have the right to escape the situation if she can? Yes or no.

          • Pererin

            This is not the same situation as pregnancy. I will not be lured in another of your strawman arguments.

          • Chris

            An argument CANNOT be a strawman. A strawman is a RESP{ONSE to someone’s original argument by distorting what they have said. Where is the distortion of what you’ve said here?

            Look, if you’re going to use terms in logic at least learn their definition.

          • Pererin

            We are talking about abortion and you introduced a thought experiment that was meant to replicate the situation of abortion but in a different context did you not? However the situation that you created did not accurately replicate the situation, it twisted it to a which twists the moral dilemma. Therefore you are building a strawman to knock down in an attempt to falsely portray a moral standpoint.

          • Chris

            “We are talking about abortion…”

            Correct.

            “and you introduced a thought experiment
            that was meant to replicate the situation of abortion…”

            Actually it was meant to replicate the situation of an unwanted prehnancy as well as the rights of someone even if the fetus is accepted as a person.

            “…but in a different
            context did you not?”

            Almost. It’s called an analogy.

            “However the situation that you created did not
            accurately replicate the situation,…”

            In what way?

            “it twisted it to a which twists the
            moral dilemma.”

            Abortion is a moral dilemma. That you refuse to even give an answer to the moral dilemma I presented is also very telling.

            “Therefore you are building a strawman to knock down in an
            attempt to falsely portray a moral standpoint.”

            That is NOT a strawman. For heaven sake look up the definition of the term.

          • Pererin

            A pregnant woman is not akin to a kidnapped woman. A child is a gift from God. A pregnant woman is a blessed woman. Extremely different situations. I explained why I didn’t answer you question, it’s not similar, you have assumed that a pregnant woman is like a kidnapped woman. I disagree and many Christians would find the comparison insulting.
            This is why I labelled it a strawman, as I have explained, the comparison is flawed and aims to drag me into explaining the situation at a level that I don’t agree with.

          • Chris

            “A pregnant woman is not akin to a kidnapped woman.”

            In your opinion. it’s an analogy. Please point out where the analogy fails instead of merely asserting that it does.

            “A child is a gift
            from God.”

            In your opinion. You seem to have a problem recognising that merely offering an opinion is NOT the same thing as a reasoned argument.

            “A pregnant woman is a blessed woman.”

            In your opinion.

            “Extremely different
            situations.”

            In your opinion. You still, as yet haven’t offered an argument merely a series of opinions.

            “I explained why I didn’t answer you question, it’s not
            similar,…”

            In your OPINION! Please explain why. Not by giving even more opinions but evidence and then reasoned argument.

            “…you have assumed that a pregnant woman is like a kidnapped
            woman.”

            Nope. I explained why the situation is analogous. If you don’t agree fine. without merely giving an opinion provide evidence and then a reasoned argument.

            “I disagree and many Christians would find the comparison
            insulting.”

            Irrelevant. I find there sense of insult insulting but that’s irrelevant too.

            “This is why I labelled it a strawman, as I have explained,
            the comparison is flawed and aims to drag me into explaining the
            situation at a level that I don’t agree with.”

            You have no idea what a straw man argument is do you? At worst my argument is a false analogy. It CANNOT be a strawman since you originally made no statement concerning the situation. However once again all you’ve done is repeat a misleading statement. Applying the Chicago rule – once is happenstance, twice is co-incidence, three times is deliberate – it shows that you are lying and know it.

            This discussion is concluded. Thank you. Bye.

          • Pererin

            That’s a shame. You are entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. You were attempting to lead the discussion falsely. Refusing to go down the paths you are trying to lead me because I disagree with the premise doesn’t make me a liar. Agree to disagree fine, but don’t lose your cool with me because your not getting you own way. Good night and all the best to you on your path. I pray it leads to God’s glory.

          • Chris

            “If it is an order from Godl to kill a million babies is that good?”

            What’s that you say? God wouldn’t give any such order. Neither would Ross’ Deontology allow murder either.

    • InTheChurch

      LOL, little mermaid beat Aladdin.

    • Kristy Armstrong

      LOL

  • Theo

    Why stop with a kiss? Why not show the tombstones with red ribbons on them, or the CDC data about 1 in 6 gay men infected with AIDS?

    • Tangent002

      Maybe Disney depictions of overweight people should come with a disclaimer that most of them will die early of heart disease.

      • Theo

        Fat isn’t infectious, idiot. All your STDs are.

        • Tangent002

          Fat parents tend to have fat kids. Your ad hominem is noted.

          BTW, I don’t have any STIs.

          • Theo

            I’m amazed at someone so ignorant of science that they can’t grasp the difference between “infection” and “heredity.”

            People stupid enough to believe in “born gay” with absolutely no proof are the most scientifically illiterate people on the planet.

            This must the day the Special Ed kids get to long on to the web.

          • Tangent002

            Sorry pal, most obese children are not genetically fat, they are taught poor dietary and exercise habits by their parents.

          • Theo

            I’m not your pal, and would not wish to be. Someone who thinks that fat people are as immoral as homosexuals has no moral sense.

          • FHRITP

            “Pal?”

          • InTheChurch

            theo, can you share with me or post a link to one of these studies? I want to read it. no one seems to have any research when I ask. They refer to them but never provide a document.

          • Theo

            They won’t let us post links, so I’ll have to just quote from the CDC site:

            “Gay and bisexual men continue to be most affected by the HIV epidemic in the U.S. At current rates, 1 in 6 MSM will be diagnosed with HIV in their lifetime. . . . Overall, the lifetime risk of HIV diagnosis in the
            U.S. is now 1 in 99.”

            If you take that quote and paste it into the search box, that should take you to the CDC page.

          • InTheChurch

            Ok, thank you. I just did it and I will save the article. Thank you again and blessings.

        • tatoo

          Most STDs are heterosexually transmitted.

          • Kristy Armstrong

            Woah, bud. Where do you get your info? I get mine from the CDC. Over 80% of new HIV infections are homosexual males.

          • tatoo

            HIV yes, but other STDs, syphallus, gonarehea, chlamidea, all heterosexually transmitted.

          • Malleus

            What is “syphallus”?

    • Ambulance Chaser

      So if gays got their STI infection rate down to the same as straight people, you’d be fine with them?

      • FHRITP

        Why start with “So?”

        • Ambulance Chaser

          Because I felt like it. You should stop policing people’s grammar.

          • FHRITP

            What did you feel which caused you to use it? It’s not grammar, it’s content. When people start a comment with “so,” it’s typically because they are wanting to argue for the sake of argument rather than debate a valid position. Plus as you know, adding or omitting a single word (though not in this case) often makes a true statement false and vice versa.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            I’m not having this conversation. Sorry, this topic is annoying and off the table.

          • FHRITP

            Then in the future, please refrain from using “so” as you did. You don’t use it, people beneath you use it.

  • Kristy Armstrong

    What homosexuals choose to do behind doors is none of my business. But when homosexuals bring it out in public and poison society with immoral behavior that is when it is a big problem. Homosexual marriage is not a real marriage. Maybe by man’s “law”, but not God’s law. Anyone who is a Christian and acts upon these abominable urges is not following Christ when He said to turn from sin and follow Him. And if you tell me judge not others, I say this: Paul said that when there is sin within the church (body of believers) to lovingly and firmly confront it. We are not just supposed to stand back and keep silent while homosexuality is being accepted by the church. If you are attracted to the same sex, that is not the sin. It is acting upon it. I am attracted to the same sex, but I refuse to act upon what is abominable to God.

    • FHRITP

      What they do in front of closed doors isn’t really your business either, Kristy. Personally seeing 2 guys kiss is repulsive to me, but it is not immoral behavior since it harm’s noone.

    • Chris

      “Homosexual marriage is not a real marriage.”

      You can think of SSM anyway you like. SSM still gives gays and lesbians the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexual marriage.

  • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

    This wouldn’t be occurring had the 18th-century founding fathers (like their 17th-century Christian Colonial forbears) established government and society upon Yahweh’s immutable/unchanging moral law, including Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.

    Had they done so, there would be no homosexual agenda in America because no sodomite or lesbian would dare risk exposing themselves to petition government for their “rights” (or produce movies promoting their abominable lifestyle).

    For more on how Yahweh’s immutable moral law applies and should be implemented today, see free online book “Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online Books page and scroll down to title.

    Then find out how much you REALLY know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of a book that EXAMINES the Constitution by the Bible.

    • Joseph Uchiha

      Yeah , lets follow rules written by ancient savages . say i can marry your daughter if i rape her right ? that is a biblical law 😀

      • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

        Joseph, you know not what you think you know.

        The two passages you’re referring to are about consensual sex not rap. Exodus 21:16 condemns kidnapping as a capital crime and being every rape constitutes a kidnapping, rape is likewise a capital crime.

        But, thanks nonetheless for demonstrating the inspiration and veracity of the Bible, especially 1 Corinthians 2:12-14.

        • Joseph Uchiha

          If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.”
          This is referring rape , you can try and deny it all you want .

          • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

            Come on Joseph!?! Really! Why should anyone accept the interpretation of someone who’s rejected the Bible as inspired and authoritarian?

            See 1 Corinthians 2:12-14.

          • Joseph Uchiha

            I love the fact that you can only quote the bible . you don’t seem to have any thoughts of your own

          • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

            If I only quoted myself, I’d be no different than you and thereby claiming my own fickle finite self as my authority and thereby making myself my own god. Why would I want to that? Talk about a dumb idea. In turn that would mean Muslims who would like to behead both you and me have as much right to follow their own fickle finite determinations as well.

          • Joseph Uchiha

            Funny enough , Christians are doing the exact same thing that muslims are doing in countries where the bible is law . 🙂 So yeah both of you are assholes

          • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

            I’m sure resorting to profanity made you feel better after losing the argument. To each his own.

          • Joseph Uchiha

            So you are going to ignore the fact that christians are currently imprisoning and even killing those accused of blasphemy in continents like africa / india etc ?

          • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

            No, but, I think I’m instructed to ignore you in Proverbs 26:4 and Matthew 7:6.

          • Joseph Uchiha

            So basically , you dont want to think for your self . and you care not for those who disagree with you .

          • Joseph Uchiha

            and i love the fact that you think a quoting a insult in a ancient book written by ancient savages is a intelligent thing to do

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Bad decision Disney