UK Student Expelled Over Facebook Comments Outlining Biblical Stance on Homosexuality Loses Appeal

LONDON — A student at a prominent university in the United Kingdom who was expelled over comments that he made on Facebook outlining the biblical stance on homosexuality has lost his appeal before the Royal Courts of Justice.

While Judge Rowena Collins-Rice found that the “right to express the content of deeply held religious views deserves respect in a democratic and plural society,” she said that the matter came down to “how [the student’s comments] could be accessed and read by people who would perceive them as judgmental, incompatible with service ethos, or suggestive of discriminatory intent.”

“That was a problem in its own right,” she wrote. “But whatever the actual intention was, it was the perception of the posting that would cause the damage. It was reasonable to be concerned about that perception.”

As previously reported, in September 2015, Felix Ngole, 39, checked his Facebook account and saw a news story in his feed regarding Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, who had gone to prison for declining to personally sign same-sex “marriage” certificates.

As a number of commenters were speaking against Davis, Ngole decided to chime in and note that “the Bible and God identify homosexuality as a sin.” When he was asked where the Scriptures state that homosexuality is sinful, he provided the citations, including the biblical law in Leviticus.

However, nearly two months later, Ngole’s remarks were brought to the attention of administrators at the University of Sheffield, which touts itself as a “world top-100 university and number one in the U.K. for student satisfaction in the 2014-15 Times Higher Student Experience Survey.”

Ngole, who was a second-year Master’s student studying to be a social worker, then became the subject of a “Fitness to Practice” hearing, as he was advised that he “may have caused offense to some individuals” and had “transgressed boundaries which are not deemed appropriate for someone entering the social work profession.”

  • Connect with Christian News

Following additional meetings, the Sheffield committee concluded that Ngole’s beliefs would negatively affect his “ability to carry out a role as a social worker,” and was consequently advised that he was “excluded from further study on a program leading to a professional qualification.” The school recently informed Ngole that he is “no longer recognized as a university student.”

“Your student record will be terminated shortly and your library membership and university computer account withdrawn. You may wish to contact your funding body for advice on your financial position,” it wrote.

Ngole appealed the decision, but last April, he received a letter from the appeals office at the University of Sheffield stating that his post was “inappropriate” in light of the professional conduct standards outlined in the Health and Care Professions Councils (HCPC).

It was additionally asserted that Ngole had not “offered any insight or reflection” on the “potential impact” that his comments might have had on his Facebook friends, or how it would reflect on the social work profession.

With the assistance of the Christian Legal Centre, Ngole took the matter to the Royal Courts of Justice. However, while finding the university’s punishment of Ngole to be “indeed severe,” Judge Collins-Rice agreed on Friday that his words could negatively affect his social work.

“Public religious speech has to be looked at in a regulated context from the perspective of a public readership,” she wrote. “Social workers have considerable power over the lives of vulnerable service users and trust is a precious professional commodity.”

The Christian Legal Centre has expressed concern over the ruling, opining that while homosexuals are coming out the closet, Christians are being shoved into it.

“Rulings like this show that society is becoming increasingly intolerant of Christian moral values. Christians are being told to shut up and keep quiet about their moral views or face a bar from employment. Unless the views you express are politically correct, you may be barred from office,” Chief Executive Andrea Williams said in a statement. “This is very far from how a free and fair society should operate.”

Ngole plans to appeal.

“My passion is to love everyone regardless of their race, sexuality or gender. I want to love everyone just as Christ loves them, but also to proclaim His truth. This is what I was doing during the Facebook discussion that I took part in,” he said in an article published by Premier Christianity. “I was convinced I had done the right thing by answering a question from someone who wanted to know if homosexuality was a sin and what the Bible said about it.”

“It is because of love and not hate that we share the word of God,” Ngole continued. “I don’t think I have lost the case at all because right now this very important issue is being discussed throughout the world for His glory. The word of God was also read in court, and as a result, it has been recorded for future reference. The body of Christ continues to unite in prayer in one accord because of today’s verdict. Clearly traditional Christian beliefs are being censored by our government.”


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, PDF & Email
  • Susan M Khaury

    What can we do to support this young man who was treated so unfairly? How can we prevent this type of thing?

    • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

      I think the best thing to do is show him the error of his ways.

      • sbeachbum

        He isn’t wrong. There is no error in his ways. The Bible says homosexuality is an abomination. That’s God speaking. Not Ngole.

        • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

          No it’s not God speaking, it’s someone’s interpretation of a couple of Biblical passages.

          • Lydia Church

            Someone’s interpretation that happens to be correct. It IS God speaking.
            Romans 1; 26-27, 1 Corinthians 6; 9-11, Deuteronomy 18; 20, 20; 13. Now read those passages and try to misinterpret the meaning. Good luck.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            No problem. The word “homosexuality” didn’t appear until 1946 in dictionaries. What year was your Bible written? Take your time.

          • Reason2012

            2000-3400 years ago, the Bible makes it clear male on male_sex is an abomination, in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. That fact is translated into many languages, not just English. Just because mankind made up an English word later to describe such behavior, it doesn’t change the fact that such behavior was pointed out to be an abomination up to 3400 years ago.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Strawman. The behavior described is homosexuality. The word is not necessary.

          • Lydia Church

            Bingo!!!

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            The behavior described is far more likely to be male prostitution.

          • Maxwell Edison

            You just don’t want to admit you’re wrong, do you?

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Right. Me and everyone else who is pooping your party by pointing out your beloved gay bashing scripture has a huge factual hole in it.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Of course it does, Satan.

          • meamsane

            It isn’t “gay bashing” to tell a homosexual that that practice is morally wrong anymore than telling a thief that stealing is morally wrong or an adulterer that adultery is morally wrong!
            Would this be considered “thief bashing” or “adulterer bashing?”

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            There is no single reason to believe it is wrong unless you are blindly following a religion that tells you so. We have medicine and science these days that knows and studies these things. Homosexuality has always been around and in all species. In fact the only thing I can think that would be morally wrong here would be telling a gay man that he has to somehow artificially fake an attraction to a woman he feels nothing for.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            premature death from all causes is not a reason? …. WOW …… “a huge factual hole in it.” ……… better check your mirror, mirror on the wall princess ……….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            No one listens to that crapola, Amos. They live as long as everyone else, unless you are handpicking a demographic with HIV or something.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            NOPE …………. even if you ELIMINATE the cause of HIV …..

            However, the median age of death for homosexuals was virtually the same nationwide, and overall, less than 2% survived to old age. If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39 years old. For the 829 homosexuals who died of something else besides AIDS, the median age was 42 years of age, and 9% died old. Of 163 lesbians, the median age was 44 years of age, and 20% died old. 2.8% of homosexuals died violently and they were 116 times more apt to be murdered, 24 times more apt to commit suicide, and had a traffic accident death rate 18 times greater than comparably aged white males. 20% of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident, a rate 487 times greater than that of white females aged 25 to 44.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            That’s a crock, I have zero confidence in your source. I’ll grant you things like HIV and suicides caused by bullying from things like religion are a factor but committed monogamous couples aren’t at risk of anything.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            ummmm …. i do not care if you have confidence in it or not ……

            A survey by The Advocate, a homosexual magazine, revealed that promiscuity is a reality among homosexuals. The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300.

            Unprotected homosexual sex is also a concern among health professionals. A survey in Ireland by the Gay Men’s Health Project found that almost half of homosexuals said they were having unprotected sex….

            The fact that many homosexuals appear to live their lives in sexual overdrive does not seem to concern leaders in the movement. In an editorial from the same issue (August 15) in which the survey results were published, The Advocate said: “[Homosexuals] have been proud leaders in the sexual revolution that started in the 1960s, and we have rejected attempts by conservatives to demonize that part of who we are.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) monitors six categories of priority health related behaviors among youth and young adults: 1) behaviors that contribute to unintentional injuries and violence; 2) tobacco use; 3) alcohol and other drug use; 4) sexual behaviors related to unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections,
            including human immunodeficiency virus infection; 5) unhealthy dietary behaviors; and 6) physical inactivity.
            In addition, YRBSS monitors the prevalence of obesity and asthma and other priority health-related behaviors. YRBSS includes a national schoolbased
            Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) conducted by CDC and state and large urban school district school-based YRBSs conducted by state and local education and health agencies. For the 2015 YRBSS cycle, a question to ascertain sexual identity
            and a question to ascertain sex of sexual contacts was added for the first time to the national YRBS questionnaire and to the standard YRBS questionnaire used by the states and large urban school districts as a starting point for their YRBS questionnaires.
            This report summarizes results for 118 health-related behaviors plus obesity, overweight, and asthma by sexual identity and sex of sexual contacts from the 2015 national survey, 25 state surveys, and 19 large urban school district surveys conducted among students in grades 9–12.

            Results: Across the 18 violence-related risk behaviors nationwide, the prevalence of 16 was higher among gay, lesbian, and bisexual students than heterosexual students and the prevalence of 15 was higher among students who had sexual contact with only the
            same sex or with both sexes than students who had sexual contact with only the opposite sex. Across the 13 tobacco use-related
            risk behaviors, the prevalence of 11 was higher among gay, lesbian, and bisexual students than heterosexual students and the prevalence of 10 was higher among students who had sexual contact with only the same sex or with both sexes than students who had sexual contact with only the opposite sex. Similarly, across the 19 alcohol or other drug use-related risk behaviors, the prevalence of 18 was higher among gay, lesbian, and bisexual students than heterosexual students and the prevalence of 17 was higher among students who had sexual contact with only the same sex or with
            both sexes than students who had sexual contact with only the opposite sex. This pattern also was evident across the six sexual risk behaviors. The prevalence of five of these behaviors was higher among gay, lesbian, and bisexual students than heterosexual students and the prevalence of four was higher among students who had sexual contact with only the same sex or with both sexes than students who had sexual contact with only the opposite sex. No clear pattern of differences emerged for birth control use, dietary behaviors, and physical activity.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            International Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 26, Issue 3, 1 June 1997, Pages 657–661

            Abstract
            OBJECTIVE: To assess how HIV infection and AIDS (HIV/AIDS) impacts on mortality rates for gay and bisexual men. METHODS: Vital statistics data were obtained for a large Canadian urban centre from 1987 to 1992. Three scenarios were utilized with assumed proportions of gay and bisexual men of 3%, 6% and 9% among the male population age 20 years. For each scenario, non-HIV deaths were distributed according to the assumed proportion of the total population (3%, 6% or 9%) but 95% of HIV deaths were distributed to gay and bisexual men as this is the proportion of AIDS cases in gay and bisexual men in this centre. The main outcome measures of interest were age-specific patterns of death, life expectancy and life expectancy lost due to HIV/AIDS at exact age 20 years, and the probability of living from age 20 to 65 years. RESULTS: Estimates of the mid-period gay and bisexual population ranged from 5406 to 16,219 for the three scenarios, and total deaths in these men from 953 to 1703. Age-specific mortality was significantly higher for gay and bisexual men than all men aged 30-44. Life expectancy at age 20 for gay and bisexual men ranged from 34.0 years to 46.3 years for the 3% and 9% scenarios respectively. These were all lower than the 54.3 year life expectancy at age 20 for all men. The probability of living from age 20 to 65 years for gay and bisexual men ranged from 32% for the 3% scenario, to 59% for the 9% scenario. These figures were considerably lower than for all men where the probability of living from 20 to 65 was 78%. CONCLUSION: In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Got anything newer? This is 20 years old.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            has not changed ….. SCIENCE IS SCIENCE ….. is that not WHAT YOU SAID …… there is no freshness date to research …… why would it make one IOTA of difference ……… and in fact ….. CURRENT RESEARCH supports this study ……….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Science is science. And science DOES change over time as it gets better data. I never said it was unchanging. Again, that’s what YOU said about your holy book.

            And I have seen enough of your cut and pasted stories to know that they belong in the trash. Come on, Amos. You want me to counter these with real stories just to waste my time and yours when you call them junk science because you can’t handle the fact they’ve disproven you? You really want to play that game and waste everyone’s time?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “Science is science. And science DOES change over time as it gets better data”

            well 2015 is pretty RECENT DATA ….. so it fits YOUR PROTOCOL ….. just not what you WANT IT TO SAY ………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            It’s from 1997, Amos.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            SO WHAT ……………………….

            Note – Men who have sex with men (MSM) represented 90% of all syphilis cases in 2015, with a 232% increase in diagnosis over the last five years …… More than half of the MSM diagnosed with syphilis in 2015 were also infected with HIV (2015)

            2015 ………………………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Your source says 1997 right at the top, Amos. Why are you now trying to tell us it’s from 2015?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            STD rates in California are the highest they’ve been in 25 years – LA …
            LA times
            >>>>>>> 25 Oct 2016 <<<<<<<< … Rates of chlamydia, syphilis and gonorrhea increased in 2015 in California, mirroring a troubling trend seen nationwide.
            right there …………….. 2016 …………… yoo hoo ………
            Rising Syphilis Cases Among Gay and Bisexual Men | HIV gov
            hiv dot gov
            26 Apr 2017 … But gay, bisexual, and other MSM are not the only group that has experienced increases in syphilis. Rates are on the rise among men overall, …
            right there …………….. 2017 …………… yoo hoo ………
            Syphilis rates are up in gay and bisexual men; here's why – CBS News
            cbsnews com
            7 Apr 2017 … Syphilis — an illness that's been around for centuries, afflicting monarchs, artists and regular folk alike — is on the rise in the U.S. Rates of the …
            right there …………….. 2017 …………… yoo hoo ………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Your point is that gay people live shorter lives. What does this story do to support that theory? You keep posting irrelevant mush.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            having those diseases ……….. SHORTENS their lives significantly ……. but you refuse to read the truth …………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            If they are monogamous, they CANNOT GET those diseases. And most of them don’t. In about the same proportions as straight people, isn’t that amazing?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            IF ………… and a VERY BIG IF ………………. “And most of them don’t. In about the same proportions as straight people” ………… but NO EVIDENCE ………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Provide some then.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Means nothing until you provide the same data for straight people. Next.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            already gave it to you ……… try reading ……….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            You didn’t.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            yoohoo ……2015 ……. “Rates in heterosexuals remain stable but are higher than ideal.”

            But syphilis is in no way confined to big names, nor is it a sexually transmitted infection (STI) of the past. The 2016 Public Health England (PHE) syphilis report has shown that infection rates are on the up, with disproportionate rates in London. In 2015, the capital accounted for 56% of all cases in England, with a 22% increase in diagnoses in the year 2014-15. Since 2010 the number of cases of syphilis in Londoners has increased by 163%, with a 22% increase in the year from 2014 to 2015. The borough of Lambeth has the highest rates, closely followed by the City of London and Southwark.

            Men who have sex with men (MSM) represented 90% of all syphilis cases in 2015, with a 232% increase in diagnosis over the last five years, said the report. More than half of the MSM diagnosed with syphilis in 2015 were also infected with HIV, and over half additionally tested positive for a separate STI. Rates in heterosexuals remain stable but are higher than ideal.

            It’s 2016. Safe sex campaigns and targeted prevention efforts are in place. Sexual health care is free and accessible to both high and low risk groups. So what is going on?

            The basic science can’t be sugar coated. More condomless sex leads to higher rates of syphilis, (and gonorrhoea, chlamydia, HIV … the list goes on). Untreated syphilis means the disease continues to be passed on and leads to potentially horrifying long-term medical complications. Action is needed now to address the reasons behind these patterns, particularly in MSM, the group most affected.

            In MSM, higher numbers of partners is a key reason behind the heavily inflated rates, compounded by the use of apps such as Grindr, venue based and group sex. The reported increased use of Chemsex (recreational drugs used during sex) is also of concern, lowering sexual inhibitions and making the likelihood of using a condom less likely.

            Another worrying phenomenon is “sero-sorting” – when men choose partners who have the same HIV status, in theory negating the need to use a condom. However, this puts both partners at high risk of contracting a plethora of STIs.

            So what to do? A wag of the finger and a warning to wear condoms is insufficient. While individuals do need to take responsibility for their personal health, adequate support and infrastructure is essential to achieve better sexual health in the UK and turn around these rising figures.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Here is a summary of the story you posted:

            “Infections among men who have sex with men have soared by 232% in five years in London, as sex with multiple partners combines with devastating service cuts”

            Here’s the problem. You put all gay men in the same category. You said yourself you don’t believe that gay couples can be monogamous, but that’s the assumption you are making with this story.

            Infections among men who have sex with men have soared by 232%. What do you think that means, Amos? Do you think it means that all gay men live shorter lives? What?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            i quoted the story ………. they wrote the story …………. FAIL …………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Yeah, and you continue to use the story thinking it supports your argument and it’s really got nothing to do with your argument at all.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope …. it DENIES YOUR LIES …………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            How?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “You said yourself you don’t believe that gay couples can be monogamous”

            nope ….. THEY say they NOT monogamous ……. it is what THEY have said in report after report in HOMOSEXUAL literature ………. not my saying anything ……….. and it is not that they cannot …… they DO NOT ……..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            The ones that are monogamous are not saying they aren’t monogamous Amos, because that’s crazy, and they aren’t. There ARE monogamous gay couples, and if you’re saying there aren’t, then you have to prove it.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            they have a different definition of “monogamy” ………. they have REDEFINED it ….. just as they have with marriage ………. really homomarriage ………. MONOGAMISH is not monogamy …………….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            No, nobody redefines things. Monogamy means bound to a single person.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            marriage has been redefined ………. as have many other things ……….. “Monogamy means bound to a single person.” ……… unless you are a homosexual ….. and then it means “more or less” …….. and usually “less” ………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            From my perspective I don’t care if two people are married. If they are monogamous then that’s all that matters if they want to live with longevity. Gay or straight. I don’t judge.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “I don’t judge.”

            OBVIOUSLY ….. but that is a lie also ………… because you do …………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Nope. I don’t have to justify anything to a God I don’t believe in. I live and let live.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            no you do not ….. you are a liar ….. and you just lied ……… if you did what you say ….. YOU WOULD NOT BE HERE ………… you would not care one wit what a christian thought or argue the point ………. just more of your Bovine Excrement ………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Sorry you can’t accept facts. I didn’t lie about anything. But you do constantly when you claim God chooses followers and Christians don’t choose their religion.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “suicides caused by bullying from things like religion are a factor”

            more Bovine Excrement ……. blacks and other races have suffered as much or MORE “bullying from things like religion” …… but do not suffer from such suicides ……… so no science there ….. just bloviation ………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            It really isn’t hard to go online and find Mathew Shepard-like stories of homosexual abuse, murder, taunting, etc. So you know it’s not BS but call it that for your own inexplicable reason.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            Matthew Shepherd

            But the Matthew Shepard story is not yet finished. A new twist came last year with the publication of another book, this one by investigative journalist Stephen Jimenez, who has spent 13 years interviewing more than 100 people with a connection to the case. His conclusion, outlined in The Book of Matt: Hidden Truths about the Murder of Matthew Shepard, is that the grotesque murder was not a hate crime, but could instead be blamed on crystal meth, a drug that was flooding Denver and the surrounding area at the time of Matthew’s death. This new theory has, understandably, caused a lot of anger.
            —————————————————–

            Jimenez had no intention of causing such controversy. He’s an award-winning writer and TV producer, and visited Laramie shortly after the murder to gather material for a screenplay about the case. When he started he was convinced that Matthew died at the hands of homophobes, but he soon discovered that Matthew’s tragedy began long before the night he was killed.

            Jimenez found that Matthew was addicted to and dealing crystal meth and had dabbled in heroin. He also took significant sexual risks and was being pimped alongside Aaron McKinney, one of his killers, with whom he’d had occasional sexual encounters. He was HIV positive at the time of his death.

            “This does not make the perfect poster boy for the gay-rights movement,” says Jimenez. “Which is a big part of the reason my book has been so trashed.”

            Matthew’s drug abuse, and the fact that he knew one of his killers prior to the attack, was never explored in court. Neither was the rumour that the killers knew that he had access to a shipment of crystal meth with a street value of $10,000 which they wanted to steal.

            TheGuardian uk

            so more liberal lies for a cause …………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Let’s assume Mathew Shepard was all the things this story says he was.

            Are you advocating his murder, Amos, because he was a homosexual?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            NOPE …. lets assume THE TRUTH ….. MS was a DRUG DEALER and this is WHY he was killed ………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Once again, it doesn’t matter. That is a matter of debate for one thing and there are many other murders of gay people I could cite instead.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            yes …. it matters ….. unless it does not fit the LIES about MS that you want to foist on others …………….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            This isn’t about Mathew Shepard, he was being used as an example and I am happy to substitute another gay person killed by a Christian.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            The Mathew Shepard issue is being contested and there’s no way of knowing who’s telling the truth. So what? Are you now trying to say there’s never been a murder of a homosexual by a Christian?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            well it is certain you do not care what the truth is ….. as you continually want to change the topic ………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Not changing the topic. The topic was homosexuals living shorter lives because of being murdered by religious bigots. Don’t like the Mathew Shepard example? Feel free to substitute another. There are plenty. The story remains the same.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “committed monogamous couples aren’t at risk of anything”

            so the MYTH of the homosexual “committed monogamous couples” ….. myth as it does not exist except in minute instances ……… AGAIN …..

            A survey by The Advocate, a homosexual magazine, revealed that promiscuity is a reality among homosexuals. The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            The fact that there are so many LGBT people wanting to get married disprove your bigoted statement quite handily. You don’t get married if you don’t intend to be monogamous.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “LGBT people wanting to get married disprove your bigoted statement”

            so you just want to keep jumping from point to point because you cannot prove yours ……

            The Dirty Little Secret: Most Gay Couples Aren’t Monogamous
            By Hanna Rosin

            The dirty little secret about gay marriage: Most gay couples are not monogamous. We have come to accept lately, partly thanks to Liza Mundy’s excellent recent cover story in the Atlantic and partly because we desperately need something to make the drooping institution of heterosexual marriage seem vibrant again, that gay marriage has something to teach us, that gay couples provide a model for marriages that are more egalitarian and less burdened by the old gender roles that are weighing marriage down these days.

            But the thorny part of the gay marriage experiment is sex, and more precisely, monogamous sex. Mundy writes about an old study from the ’80s that found that gay couples were extremely likely to have had sex outside their relationship—82 percent did. That was before AIDS and the great matrimony craze in the gay community. She also tells the story of Dan Savage, who started out wanting to be monogamous until he and his partner had kids, and then they loosened up on that in order to make their union last. “Monogamish” is what he calls his new model. But as Mundy asks, can anyone out there imagine a husband proposing that same deal to his pregnant wife?

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            I can refute that one in a heartbeat, just by its title. AND make it applicable to straight people at the same time.

            If a couple’s not monogamous, it opens itself up to things like disease. If you want to believe the flatulent, hate-filled statement that most gay couples aren’t monogamous (and your Hanna Rosin has some ‘splainin’ to do about her facts and stats on that one), then fine, THOSE PARTICULAR GAY PEOPLE are opening themselves up to disease.

            But like anyone else, straights included, if you are honest and enter a marriage intending to be faithful to your partner, you will live a normal and healthy life. FACT.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            learn to read ….. the study IS AVAILABLE and INCLUDES heteros ………. FAIL …………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            It does not matter. I can easily counter anything you post with information from a factual source and you will call it fake science. You have shown yourself to be impervious to facts.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            ” I can easily counter anything you post”

            and yet you have not …… but that is really not the point ………. your CONTRADICTIONS are the point ……… you have absolutely no consistency to your position …….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            If you want me to I will. I don’t care. It will be perfectly sound information and you will call it fake science. Want to take bets now?

            My position is absolutely consistent, no contradictions.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            sounds like a good bet to me ….. would you like the CDC data that counters everything you will say ….. i have it all bookmarked …………. or does the CDC not qualify as science ….. because they are saying the samething as the rest of what i have posted ……

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            I know you have it bookmarked, because you love to regurgitate it every time you get a chance. It isn’t even that the information is necessarily false, but that you are leaving crucial pieces of the story out conveniently, like when you give dictionary definitions but choose to leave out the ones that contradict you.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples

            by: Timothy J. Dailey, Ph. D.

            “Married and Gay Couples Not All that Different,” proclaimed the headline of a news article portraying homosexual households as remarkably similar to married couples. “We’re the couple next door,” claimed one partnered homosexual. “We have a dog and a cat. I drive a Volvo. I’m boring.”[1] Such down-home portrayals of homosexual couples are meant to provoke the question: Since gay couples really differ only in that both partners are of the same sex, what rational basis exists for denying them full marriage rights?

            Are homosexual households, as the article suggests, simply another variant of human relationships that should be considered, along with marriage, as “part of mainstream American society”?

            On the contrary, the evidence indicates that “committed” homosexual relationships are radically different from married couples in several key respects:

            · relationship duration
            · monogamy vs. promiscuity
            · relationship commitment
            · number of children being raised
            · health risks
            · rates of intimate partner violence

            Finally, this paper will present evidence from gay activists themselves indicating that behind the push for gay marriage lies a political agenda to radically change the institution of marriage itself.
            ————————————————————————

            Male Homosexuals

            Research indicates that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime:

            · The Dutch study of partnered homosexuals, which was published in the journal AIDS, found that men with a steady partner had an average of eight sexual partners per year.[12]

            · Bell and Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having one thousand or more sex partners.[13]

            · In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that “the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101-500.” In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1,000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than one thousand lifetime sexual partners.[14]

            · A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than one hundred sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than one thousand sexual partners.[15]

            “Commitment” in Male Homosexual Couples

            Even in those homosexual relationships in which the partners consider themselves to be in a committed relationship, the meaning of “committed” or “monogamous” typically means something radically different than in heterosexual marriage.

            · A Canadian study of homosexual men who had been in committed relationships lasting longer than one year found that only 25 percent of those interviewed reported being monogamous.” According to study author Barry Adam, “Gay culture allows men to explore different…forms of relationships besides the monogamy coveted by heterosexuals.”[16]

            · The Handbook of Family Diversity reported a study in which “many self-described ‘monogamous’ couples reported an average of three to five partners in the past year. Blasband and Peplau (1985) observed a similar pattern.”[17]

            · In The Male Couple, authors David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison reported that, in a study of 156 males in homosexual relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven years:

            Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships.[18]

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            And this shows why we should never trust you with providing unbiased data, Amos. Timothy Dailey is a member of the Family Research Council who are considered to be a hate organization.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            no,no,no,no,no ….. YOU said SCIENCE WAS SCIENCE …… and there is no bad science AND that it should all be accepted as SCIENCE ……. so is this “NO True Science …… erm …. NO TRUE SCOTSMAN” …… REALLY ……….. thats what you want to go with …….. HUH! ……..

            FYI …. all scientists have BIASES ….. EVEN YOU who just accept science by BLIND FAITH ……………. but apparently NOT …….. and that NO TRUE SCOTSMAN thing is now chomping on your BUTTOCKS ….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            That’s correct. Science is science. What Dailey provides isn’t science, it’s manipulation of facts. He mixes truth with utter propaganda, and is a purveyor of anti-LGBT junk science. NOT ONE of the science links I’ve provided have been discredited.

            And that’s the point here, Amos. You complain up and down about “scientism” and “fake science” but never say what makes it fake other than the fact you don’t like it. I’ve honestly never seen anyone here who tries to cloak his own opinions as facts as much as you do.

            20 percent of homosexuals said that had 51-300 difference sex partners? Well Amos, that sounds ominous and scary and terrifying all right. Now why don’t you do the HONEST thing and provide us the percentage for HETEROSEXUALS so we can see how it stacks up? Or is the truth too scary for you?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “You don’t get married if you don’t intend to be monogamous.”

            sure they do … people do EVERYDAY ………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Straight people included. Next.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            You are ACTUALLY saying there’s no such thing as a committed monogamous couple?

            Do we need to remind you that you also stated that there’s no such thing as an atheist? That God chooses your faith for you? That Christianity isn’t a religion?

            At this point your track record for saying things that no sane human being would say isn’t so good.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “You are ACTUALLY saying there’s no such thing as a committed monogamous couple”

            nope ……. no such thing as a committed monogamous HOMOSEXUAL couple ……… and NOPE you are now lying about what i said about a-theists …… i said they LIE to themselves about the existence of God ….. and to LIE about that …. they would have to already KNOW God exists ……….. and they do ………..

            “That God chooses your faith for you?”

            NOPE …… WRONG …… God chooses those whom He will save and did so BEFORE the creation was created …… and christianity is not a religion …. as God HATES religion …….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            I know a lesbian couple, I’m looking forward to telling them that you say the 30 years they have been together they have cheated on each other. Because you obviously know them so much better than they do.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            have fun ………. and i do not believe you ……….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Once again, it doesn’t matter. These people exist and you can go on burying your head in the sand pretending they don’t. Not all gay people are bed-hopping hedonists.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            and i do not believe them …………. “Not all gay people are bed-hopping hedonists.”

            did not say they were ………….. they say they are ………… and YOU contradict them ………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            The ones who are not bed-hoppers wouldn’t say they were, Amos. That’s a lie.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            sure ….. whatever ………. i did not make their statements for them ……… they made their statements to the Advocate, a well known homosexual/lgblt periodical and no one held a gun to their head ……………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            So because a handful of people talk to the Advocate, it means they are speaking on behalf of all homosexuals? Come on.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            that is psychology …. many call that science ….. you say science is science …… so the problem is not with whether i believe that …….. it is with YOUR beliefs ….. that science is science ….. and since everyone has a bias ….. again …… the problem is with YOUR worldview …….. not mine …..

            and here is the thing …… christians and the bible and Christ ….. we want them well and healthy and living long lives ….. because that is the outcome of refraining from being a homosexual …… what you desire is for them to NOT do that ….. that HASTENS their death from all causes …… but you seem to think that is just wonderful ……..

            but we are the bad guys ……….. go figure ……….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            If they’re homosexuals, all they can BE is homosexuals, and you’re condemning them for something that they cannot change. Of course people are going to be annoyed with you.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            ” all they can BE is homosexuals”

            that is a lie you have been fed and want to believe ……. but a lie no less ……….. sorry ….. you do not get to play the “woe is me, i cannot change, I am a victim” Bovine Excrement card here ………….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            It’s more of that science you keep mocking, of course you don’t believe it. We can’t change our orientation.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            that people cannot change ….. is garbage ……. and it is NOT science …… it is BLIND FAITH …..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Of course you would say it’s garbage, because science knows it to be true.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Better toss out your hate book that tells you that all homosexuals die of premature death. Books full of crap don’t last two minutes in my presence.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            hmmm …. ACTUALLY ….. those are the stats ….. from the OBITS ….. of The ADVOCATE and other HOMOSEXUAL periodicals ………. i do not hate them ….. they hate themselves ……. they have chosen a path of personal destruction ……

            Obituraries numbering 6516 from 16 US homosexual journals over 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers. The obituaries from the regular newspapers were similar to US averages for longevity, the median age of death of married men was 75, 80% of them died old, 65 or older. For unmarried or divorced men the median age of death was 57 and 32% of them died old.

            Married women averaged age 79 at death, 85% died old, and unmarried and divorced women averaged age 71, and 60% of them died old.

            However, the median age of death for homosexuals was virtually the same nationwide, and overall, less than 2% survived to old age. If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39 years old. For the 829 homosexuals who died of something else besides AIDS, the median age was 42 years of age, and 9% died old. Of 163 lesbians, the median age was 44 years of age, and 20% died old. 2.8% of homosexuals died violently and they were 116 times more apt to be murdered, 24 times more apt to commit suicide, and had a traffic accident death rate 18 times greater than comparably aged white males. 20% of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident, a rate 487 times greater than that of white females aged 25 to 44.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            So what are you saying here? I’m in utter disbelief that you’re suggesting that homosexuals are at greater risk of traffic accidents or murders. Where did you get this load of crap from?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            no … not my suggestion ………. SCIENCE and staistics ……….. you know science ….. REAL SCIENCE ….. not that garbage you peddle …………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            So it’s real science when it backs up your bias. Everyone can see that’s what you’re doing. You’ll take the one scientist out of 500 who has a religious prejudice and go with him. That’s all that’s going on.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            seems to be real science when it BACKS UP YOUR BIASES …………… but YOU said all science should be accepted as TRUTH …… and as i said TWO DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED ideas CANNOT BOTH BE TRUE ………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Let’s turn that around: You say all scripture should be accepted as truth. Yet you can’t accept it when another Christian disagrees with you.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            Note – Men who have sex with men (MSM) represented 90% of all syphilis cases in 2015, with a 232% increase in diagnosis over the last five years …… More than half of the MSM diagnosed with syphilis in 2015 were also infected with HIV (2015)

            But syphilis is in no way confined to big names, nor is it a sexually transmitted infection (STI) of the past. The 2016 Public Health England (PHE) syphilis report has shown that infection rates are on the up, with disproportionate rates in London. In 2015, the capital accounted for 56% of all cases in England, with a 22% increase in diagnoses in the year 2014-15. Since 2010 the number of cases of syphilis in Londoners has increased by 163%, with a 22% increase in the year from 2014 to 2015. The borough of Lambeth has the highest rates, closely followed by the City of London and Southwark.

            Men who have sex with men (MSM) represented 90% of all syphilis cases in 2015, with a 232% increase in diagnosis over the last five years, said the report. More than half of the MSM diagnosed with syphilis in 2015 were also infected with HIV, and over half additionally tested positive for a separate STI. Rates in heterosexuals remain stable but are higher than ideal.

            It’s 2016. Safe sex campaigns and targeted prevention efforts are in place. Sexual health care is free and accessible to both high and low risk groups. So what is going on?

            The basic science can’t be sugar coated. More condomless sex leads to higher rates of syphilis, (and gonorrhoea, chlamydia, HIV … the list goes on). Untreated syphilis means the disease continues to be passed on and leads to potentially horrifying long-term medical complications. Action is needed now to address the reasons behind these patterns, particularly in MSM, the group most affected.

            In MSM, higher numbers of partners is a key reason behind the heavily inflated rates, compounded by the use of apps such as Grindr, venue based and group sex. The reported increased use of Chemsex (recreational drugs used during sex) is also of concern, lowering sexual inhibitions and making the likelihood of using a condom less likely.

            Another worrying phenomenon is “sero-sorting” – when men choose partners who have the same HIV status, in theory negating the need to use a condom. However, this puts both partners at high risk of contracting a plethora of STIs.

            So what to do? A wag of the finger and a warning to wear condoms is insufficient. While individuals do need to take responsibility for their personal health, adequate support and infrastructure is essential to achieve better sexual health in the UK and turn around these rising figures.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            You continue to take your data from the demographic that suits you best, the ones who are drug addicts and have unprotected and casual sex. I don’t have to tell you how irresponsible that is, especially when you never consider the STRAIGHT people who are drug addicts and have unprotected and casual sex. This is a joke, Amos. Talk about FAIL.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope …. see …. in ENGLAND where homosexuality is MUCH MORE ACCEPTED ….. is where these statistics come from ….. and i have some from canada also that say the exact same thing ….. as well as L.A. ……. and within the last five years as you seem to all concerned about WHEN it was gathered ………….. so FAIL on your part AGAIN ………….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            And I have stats that refute those, but posting them is wasted on you.

          • meamsane

            Law is rooted in religion, therefore, there is a moral aspect to law. Since there is no higher law than God’s, All Societies throughout history have had laws that govern society as a means of restraining evil and bringing about justice, peace and order, I.E. an objective moral truth. (Rom. 13:1-7).

            Medicine and Science also must rely on an objective moral standard, otherwise there would be no ethics to govern what they should do or not do.

            Homosexuality has been around for a long time! So what? So has religion. Ask a Baboon how he feels about his homosexuality, and I bet he would not understand a word of it or know what that is. Scientists should be really careful in trying to ascribe human moral imperatives to the animal kingdom. I.E. the animal kingdom has nothing to teach us about morality!!!

            That last statement is a strawman. No one is saying that a homosexual should fake attraction to the opposite sex.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Ethics can exist just fine without God. This is why you don’t see atheists wantonly murdering and raping others.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            whose ethics and who determines those ethics ….. and ethics change …… so it matters WHO is setting that standard ………

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Basically ethics comes down to harming no one and benefiting all as much as you can. I fail to see why a God must be part of that equation.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            So everything the homosexual does harms them, their “partners” and society in general ….. so where does that leave your “ethics” ………….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Nothing in your statement is true.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            back at cha sport …………..

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            And back at you again, with reinforcements.

            “Everything the homosexuals does harms them”

            That’s a broad and ridiculous statement, Amos. Love and companionship are what homosexuals do. Tell me where there harm is in it.

          • meamsane

            How do you know that someone who is wantonly murdering and raping is not an atheist?
            If there is no objective morality outside of ourselves (There is no God), then moral codes are a matter of subjective preference or opinion and then why would you care about murder and rape?
            Even in an atheist, the image of God escapes from within sometimes!

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            No, you get your morals from the person/people who raised you, usually your parents. The golden rule is a pretty good thing to live your life by and it predates Christianity by a huge amount of time. You don’t need to treat people good because you live in fear of a God who will punish you if you don’t. You treat people well simply because it’s the right thing to do and it’s how you would want to be treated yourself.

            I’m sure the people in this world who wantonly rape and murder aren’t nearly all atheists, and you’d have a hard time proving that one.

          • meamsane

            Yes, people do get their morals from their parents, guardians, etc but without God that is incomplete, your still talking about subjective preference or opinion.
            So, one moment a tyrant rises to control everyone through fear, and the next a champion of freedom. Both may use similar methods. Yet without Objective moral absolutes, it still comes down to man deciding for himself based upon his own preferences, so what does it matter?

            I have no idea why you think that Christians do good for others out of fear of God? You have a lot of misinformation and apparent hostility there! And yet you state at least a partial truth, that it is the right thing to do. Since you reject God, you make untrue and Irrational statements about reality.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            You’re going to have to work a lot harder than that to make sense of your own logic. If you’re saying we need God to behave morally, I assume you mean the “word of God” as laid out in the Bible. Meaning you are saying that we should be embracing slavery, polygamy, torture, murder and a whole lot of other fun things.

            Also, I’d really like to know where in the “atheist playbook” anyone is urged to kill someone else just because they feel like it.

          • meamsane

            My logic isn’t the problem here. You demonstrate a relative morality as well as a confusion of sorts of what I say, bringing up things I haven’t said like reading into my words what you want to. “Atheist playbook” and “killing just because someone feels like it”??? What???
            You also demonstrate an ignorance of the bible. You read into that to. No wonder since you reject God and objective truth.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            It isn’t a relative morality. It’s very much grounded, but you can’t see it because there’s no God in the picture. That’s your issue to work out.

            You’re making the case that I’ve heard so often that God is necessary for a person to have morality, and an atheist is just “borrowing” from Christians. It’s only relative to you because you can’t envision that a person could live their life without needing a God.

          • meamsane

            There is another aspect to this. In Romans 1 Paul mentions the created order, I.E. the material creation, and from that certain aspects of God are shown through that design. Hence he states that it is “unnatural” for two women or two men to have sexual relations with each other. It is against that created order. By that design, men and women are made for the sexual relations with each other that God has ordained in marriage.

            Christ himself taught that the only legitimate sexual relationship is between a husband and wife I.E. a man/woman and everything outside of that is sin and will be judged if not repented of.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            No mention of sex for pleasure, huh? Not a terribly realistic resource then, is it?

          • meamsane

            You miss the forest for the trees! Sex is meant to be pleasurable…duh!

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            But apparently only for the people with the ability to reproduce?

          • meamsane

            The reality of the created order, as all can witness through the creation (which I have already made a point about, but will do so again) is that men/women are made for each other, not men/men nor woman/woman.

            God commanded the man/woman to multiply and fill the earth, something men/men nor woman/woman cannot do. And yes, God intended that the sexual union be pleasurable within the confines of marriage. Men/men woman/woman “unions” are a mockery of that created order and that is why Paul in Romans chapter 1 uses that as a prime example of being unnatural.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            With that same logic then you are also condemning the elderly and infertile from being married. Are you sure you want to do that?

          • meamsane

            Why should anyone have to explain the obvious to you?

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            What makes you think it’s obvious since so many people are demanding the same exact question?

          • meamsane

            So, the pleasure of sex isn’t obvious to you? Got it.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            It’s obvious to ME. I’m not the one denying it from other people based on their ability to reproduce.

          • Eldrida Urika

            No Princess. It isn’t about male prostitution it’s about men having sex with men and women with women and that they did not have sex with the opposite sex. Male prostitutes might be able to have sex with men for their own reasons (money) but they might also be heterosexual and only needing the cash… or as a female prostitute puts it sometimes it is the need for love and attention.
            It is in the bible that the definition of homosexuality is described. Sorry, those who try to twist these scriptures are only trying to make it so they won’t feel like they are sinning, and that they are still OK with God, but it just isn’t true. Sorry.
            I am the kind of Christian that is open to hearing how others interpret the bible, and I have, but nothing they have said has convinced me that the interpretation that is in the bible is wrong. Otherwise I’d be right there with you on this, but I know the bible well, and it’s very clear on the issue.
            Blessings!

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            which would still be homosexual sex ……… DUH …………

          • Daniel Allen

            Exactly.

          • Lydia Church

            See comment above. It is the understanding that needs time to sink in… but not for me and the real Christians. Take your time….

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            If the word definition didn’t exist, I don’t think you have a leg to stand on in this argument.

          • Eldrida Urika

            When they defined homosexual it is the same definition that the Bible stated. How can you say that because it wasn’t defined back then, means it is anything different with that as a fact?
            If it is about male prostitution, why did it mention the women with women. That is not a prostitution, it was an action. How do the people who feel it is about male prostitution explain that part?

          • But the practice, as you well know, goes back thousands of years and is condemned by God.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            I don’t “well know” it and neither do you. Without a definition to work from you have nothing. There are many people who would say those practices refer to male prostitution, in fact.

          • You know the truth. You do not want to admit it but you know the truth.

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            The description of the act was written over 3,000 years ago during the Exodus from Egypt; quite plainly and repeated many times; Sodom, for which the act of sodomy is named was destroyed during the times of Abraham, before the Exodus, and it wasn’t for their lack of “charity” to others; it was for their sexual amorality and perversion just as described. Oh, and it was JESUS Who TOLD Abraham He was going to destroy those plains cities for that act, while on His way to do so, because the cry against their amorality had risen to the very heavens. You can try to sugar coat it or twist it any way you like, but Yhwh God is NEVER “mocked” by such perversion of the truth either. Just because we didn’t use a particular word to describe a situation or act doesn’t mean the act or situation didn’t exist before a specific time. FUBAR didn’t come into being until the Vietnam war era; but the situation was well known long before that. Also known as SNAFU and /or cluster f^ck. Changes nothing about the reality of the situation or it’s results. Neither does the fact that the term “homosexual” didn’t come into common parlance until the 20th century, and it was a bit before 1946; since it was introduced closer to the turn of that century by psychiatrists to define a particular behavior and thought pattern that was harming people physically and psychologically alike.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            It was destroyed due to lack of hospitality. You aren’t even acknowledging the fact that there are people out there who disagree with you; you’re just ignoring them.

          • Misty Ross

            I’ll repeat my last post….Some of the oldest have been dated back 9th century and 10th century.
            And the english 1380 AD also The Aleppo Codex (920 CE) and Leningrad Codex (1008 CE) were the oldest Hebrew language manuscripts of the Tanakh

          • Lydia Church

            So now you have been shown the error of your ways.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Have I really? You’re asking us to believe that the bible speaks about homosexuality when the word itself didn’t even show up until the 1800s? Do I need to remind you that lying for Jesus is still lying?

          • Lydia Church

            Did you even READ those verses? Men with men, women with women, etc., it can’t get more explicit with or without that word. But some chose to deceive themselves and lie for Jesus and they will answer for their sin when they stand before HIM.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Ever heard of prostitution? Male prostitution in particular?

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            Sure; and any form of prostitution is fornication or adultery as well as possibly homosexual activity; that makes it a double whammy!

          • God condemns any and all same sex sex aka homosexuality.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Which God?

          • Eldrida Urika

            The Christian God obviously! lol!

          • Bob Johnson

            But which Christian God? He has more mood changes than Zeus.

          • Eldrida Urika

            Ummm No God never changes. He becomes what is needed but the God that he is never changes.
            Of course that is my belief, so yours may be different of course.

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            No, He does NOT; He is the same yesterday, today, and forever; problem is that most forget that includes His righteous nature as well as His loving nature.

          • Misty Ross

            What you mean is the Hebrew God. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. If you say it that way it narrows it down. Since christians have different versions of the one true God.

          • Eldrida Urika

            Yes the Christian God is one God but people have formed more than one denomination and those can believe differently but it is all based on the bible. It is the bible that makes a Christian different from Hebrew or Islam actually, even though we all come from the same fathers when the Lord allowed Gentiles Salvation, it changed. The Jews still have the law, but the gentiles were never made to follow the laws.
            It used to be that a Jew would not believe in the New Testament, but I understand some have created a Jews for Jesus site.
            For me as a Christian, I refer to the Christian God. I know it is the same God for the Hebrews but I think of Him as a Christian God because Christianity was about Jesus Christ – hence it’s name. I talk usually am speaking of the Gospel so I also call him Jesus as well as the Son of God. I guess I could have put “Jesus of course!!”
            Blessings!

          • You know full well who and what I am talking about.

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            Yhwh God is the ONLY One Who matters. You may hold someone or something else in His place, but that doesn’t make it “god”; only your deity.

          • Eldrida Urika

            Hi Princess! The way it was written can have no other meaning than the homosexual acts. The word was not in our dictionary meanings, but it was very clear what it meant in the bible.
            That said, I believe that when Jesus mentioned that it happened in the OT it was to tell believers that they need to be aware of the sins that will lose their salvation, and that we should rebuke each other (believers) when we see them sinning. Jesus never tells us to rebuke non-believers about their sin. No not once. He wants us to tell them the story of salvation by repentance and he told us that we had to choose to believe or not. He said to tell them about sin not to rebuke them for them. Just let them know about them when the Story of Salvation is told.
            I don’t agree with the outcome of this case. I think the man was asked a question that he answered – which can be verified – and that is not telling anyone that he agrees with it or not, just that that is how the bible and God look at it. Unless he specifically stated at the time that he believes what he said, it’s just a fact from the bible, nothing more.

          • sbeachbum

            God’s word has been around for centuries. Not just since the 1800s. And God doesn’t lie. Praying for you.

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            Doesn’t have to; the ACT is clearly described in a “word picture” making it fully understood exactly what Yhwh God is calling an abomination, and why.

          • Misty Ross

            Some of the oldest have been dated back 9th century and 10th century. And the english 1380 AD

          • Lydia Church

            Meaning that lady who doesn’t get it.
            Oh, and the UK university needs to be shown the error of THEIR ways for persecuting him for his biblical stand and for freedom of speech. Duh.

          • Eldrida Urika

            I’m sorry. She’s right, if they don’t know what sin is then it is wrong to threaten a non-believer who might not know what sin is unless they know the story of salvation. Even Jesus pointed that out.
            She actually made a point that Jesus made himself in scriptures.
            There is nothing that Jesus said that means we should rebuke someone who does not know about Salvation. He pointed it out himself that if they don’t know about Salvation they are not able to acknowledge their actions as sin because they do not know what sin is. Read the gospel and look at the scriptures about sin and you will find that I am right.
            All Jesus said about sin was with reference to the believers who sin, not the unbelievers.
            Prove where I am wrong. Please.
            Blessings!

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            It’s not about threatening. Read in Ezekiel where God explains to the prophet that if he doesn’t warn his fellows of danger, their blood is on HIS head; God wasn’t talking specifically about spiritual danger alone in that case but it applies. Suppose YOU are the last person to talk to someone before he dies; and YOU fail to warn him that he’s living in sin and needs to repent that and turn to God for forgiveness through Christ, so he dies in his sin: HIS blood is on YOUR hands too, because you failed to warn him; and we do not ever know when a person will die. As a first responder doing EMS and as an RN, I learned to NEVER “guarantee” beyond the “next 5 seconds” because any longer could be too long. You need to understand the Bible as an whole, because Jesus said a LOT more than is contained in those 4 gospels; indeed, HE is the Author of the entire Book; and ALL of it is His Words.

          • Eldrida Urika

            First of all. That is an unusual scenario for the majority of Christians to speak to a dying person unless it is family and they usually already know about it and have made their choice with regards to it.

            Secondly it is a threat to a non-believer unless the whole story of Salvation is explained.
            Otherwise it is like saying Someone’s (God) going to kill you – and without believing in God, how would that sound to you? Like a threat right.
            Whoaaa. IF he is the author of the entire book? You talk like a Christian but you don’t sound like one. That is doubting the Lord and that from a lack of trust for him. If you don’t have trust for the Lord, it could be a problem with Jesus as trusting in God/Jesus is the very basis of our belief in him. The book is a guide, a map as it were but people can worship God without ever reading or hearing scriptures. It is up to our Lord what is the Truth in those situations.
            The punishment for sins is not what brings people to Jesus. It’s the mercy and grace as well as the love that Jesus shows in the scripture.
            I have no problem discussing salvation with anyone who is willing to listen but I would not force a person to listen as their last dying moment unless no one else was there to be with them and they agree to it. You are bound by the proper behavior of our Lord Jesus and we are not to cause a scene if they do not wish to hear, and it is not a sin for us not to be able to because they chose not to listen. Jesus gave some of the things that were not our sin but could be a sin someone close to you and it does affect you. Once you know someone – lets say your brother – once he knows the story of Salvation by repentance, you are not supposed to keep seriously bothering him if he does not want you to. It is our behavior that is supposed to stand up for our faith. If someone does not want to hear the gospel as the last thing they hear, God will not punish you for that. If it is a person who is very close to you it is either that you have already spoken about Salvation or it’s just someone you are not calm about their imminent death, we tend to pray to God, not try and get them to choose whether they want to believe, and if they already know they will already have chosen whether to ask Jesus for forgiveness and repent before that moment. Try putting yourself in another person’s shoes and try to see what the commotion is like and the emotions that are bursting out everywhere you look. Death is not always a quiet affair and we have to make an attempt to speak to them, we can shout and stomp our feet about it all we want because of how we love them, but in the end it is only themselves that can decide to believe. Telling you they believe isn’t enough for the Lord, but it might be for you. Can you see what I mean? Non-believers are often not afraid of hell because of their lack of knowing God. Others figure if there is no heaven, there is no hell. Then there are the ones that have no clue about the truth or only bits and pieces of the gospel instead of the full story of Salvation.
            To threaten someone for a sin, is a sin, as we are not the ones to punish people (except by the laws of the land) and must leave the punishment to Jesus. First of all he will look in our hearts to see what manner of evil is there, and then he will look at your life to see how much love was in your life. He told us that love covers a multitude of sin and he said that is how he will know. He is the only one to know because he can look in our hearts for the motivation for our actions which is what makes sin a sin. If we are motivated to sin to harm someone in any way, it is considered evil. It’s different than realizing afterwards that you had sinned and praying about it.
            The one thing that is obvious is that non-believers will resent anything that is a direct threat to their lives. So do we when our faith is threatened in any way. It would not matter if they heard you so much as if you were able to convey the whole thing.
            The way we approach people about sin should not be overwhelming until they believe. That is when we desire to repent for Jesus’ sake.
            Jesus would know if you did not ever try to speak to someone about Jesus, and he would know why you did or didn’t talk to them about sin. It’s not like it isn’t in our life books; of course it is. I never said it was not our duty to let people know they can be saved, but I believe that Jesus would know what happens and he will decide our fate. Even we ourselves can’t truly know whether we are saved. We can hope and pray but it is up to Jesus when the time comes. He told us not all believers will be able to go in the gate because they did not follow Jesus’ commands to care for others in need. That was an example and it shows that we need to follow all of his commands and not just a few.
            I do understand the bible as a whole and still follow the gospel and believe that if someone taught us anything about our Faith, to look it up and find the scriptures to confirm the validity of the teachers lesson. I have read the bible through at least a couple of times, and I have an uncle who is an amazing speaker of God’s Word.
            The issue is not my lack of knowledge, it is that you do not agree with what I say.
            He did say a lot all through the bible even when we did not understand until the prophecies that Jesus was to be born to bring us to Salvation by dying in our place for our sin.
            I often find that when I am at variance with another person of faith, it is because I read all of it, not just bits and pieces and there are many people who do only know the things they have heard about in church. I have gone beyond that to have a personal relationship with Jesus so it is more important to me to go where he guides me than it would be because the bible told me so. I do believe the bible, but having a personal relationship with God helps you remember what the stories teach with more than the obvious taken as help men of God to help us understand how the bible can help us even in this day. It worked and will work as a guide to how to have a better life for anyone who understands it properly .
            The Lord wants us to leave the punishment for him to have revenge on our enemies.
            That is the only reason that we can forgive people for their sins as our Father did our own. Because it is not our own sin, and we are not in control of some things because they will be taken care of by God.
            Blessings!

          • meamsane

            Lev 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
            Lev 18:23 And you shall not lie with any animal and so make yourself unclean with it, neither shall any woman give herself to an animal to lie with it: it is perversion.
            Lev 18:24 “Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean,
            Lev 18:25 and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants.

            No need to “agonize” over interpretation, this is very clear.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Feel free to dispute it when you stand before Him. As for everything else, the adults are talking now.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            Your paranoid revenge fantasy, your rules, I suppose.

          • Maxwell Edison

            Your arrogance won’t protect you from reality.

            If you don’t believe in God, why are you at a Christian website?

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            To see who’s really a Christian and who loves to threaten people with a hell they don’t even know exists.

          • Eldrida Urika

            We as Christians are supposed to be ready at all times to defend our faith with scriptures. That is what the bible tells us to do.
            I agree with you about threatening people with hell without them necessarily knowing about the bible. That is why Jesus told us to just tell them about Salvation by repentance. He never said to threaten non-believers with anything that would be about our beliefs, just to tell him.
            You are right, we are to love everyone with no exceptions. We are supposed to be compassionate and caring individuals to show the world the way Christians are supposed to act is better than the norm.
            It is only with Love for the other person that you can help them understand the story of salvation at all. Otherwise it is all about threats of punishment about sin and that is not what Jesus wants us to do. We are supposed to look to ourselves and see our own sins to stop them. We are supposed to help if we see a brethren sinning against the Word of God when they know the consequences so they will (hopefully) come back to where they were before the sin was committed.
            There is nothing that states we are supposed to even trouble them about their sin.
            Love everyone and treat people the way we want to be treated is what Jesus said for us to do. I don’t know why some Christians don’t understand that. It’s all in the scriptures.
            Blessings!

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            That’s not exactly true; that’s kind of a watered down version. Did Jesus “love” those money changers in the Temple to whom He took that scourge, out of their sinful ways? Did calling the Pharisees and Sadducees whitewashed sepulchers full of dead men’s bones smack of “love” to you? Those who have heard and rejected or ignored need to be called up short and hard, sometimes, just as HE did; and that would apparently include this Pantomime Princess Margaret who knows enough to mock. Paul advocated excommunicated the sinning brother who wouldn’t turn back from his sin when called on it; also pretty harsh, and something churches today are afraid to do, for fear of losing money or hurting feelings; but instead allowing the sins to infect the whole body like leaving a stray bacterium to spread its disease and rot in the body, or worse a cancer cluster to destroy from within. That’s why today’s churches are so hopelessly ineffectual. Too many think like you present here and don’t behave like CHURCHES at all.

          • Eldrida Urika

            You are the one that does not know the complete bible since you think it was about their sin that you mention. Both of those events were done to fulfill a prophecy. Jesus mentioned every time he fulfilled the prophecies from the old testament.
            It was about leading people astray when they are in a position of teaching, and not living to the Scripture of the Laws even though they taught it.
            The church was also a prophecy that was intended to show how God – and therefore Jesus his Son, would not ignore someone who tried to damage the church in any way, including the reputation of Christians which is supposed to excel in that world to show we are Christians to other Christians as well as because Jesus told us how to behave towards others.

            I believe I have my own responsibility to learn about the bible and form my own relationship with Jesus. It is my life and what I have done that has not been repented, or the justification is questionable, so it is the onus is on me, and no one else except Jesus, to be able to judge me as a Christian because of that.

            You have no right to judge from a post anyway. We don’t always take the time to mention every little thing that we believe about a certain circumstances. Or how we deal with it or have dealt with it.

            Criticizing a believer of the bible was very discouraged in the bible. Even if you don’t agree it is teaching the scriptures and that is why there are 7 churches in Revelation.
            I am one of the most faithful without needing to base my beliefs just on my church. It should be by reading the Word of God ourselves is the testimony to knowing God’s Word and it is following the commands that Jesus gave us. About behavior and about relationships with others including non-believers. He told us that some would be turned back at that gate and gave examples of people needing attention that those – who thought they were saved – they ignored the needy when they could have done something. Jesus won’t ignore anything that he gave as commands. That is one of the purposes of the New Testament, is to allow Jesus to be given the authority of the world by God his Father. It is what a Christian is to do if they want to expect to be saved. All his grace gives us is forgiveness of sin repented. There is not guarantee of being saved, and it actually points it out that some will lose it by their actions or no actions behavior.
            If you question anything I say, please feel free to search the scriptures and show me where I am wrong. I always like to offer that to people who do not believe as I do so they can decide what the relevant scriptures actually speak of, in case they only listen to others preaching instead of understanding the onus is on us to work out our own salvation. No one else can even pray for someone’s salvation because it will take a pure heart to go to heaven, and only Jesus knows who has a pure heart.

            I think Paul was wrong and that Jesus would not have agreed. How does someone convince someone of God’s divinity outside of church in most situations.
            Jesus told us that unbelievers will change and that even the ones that did not believe after being told about Salvation could turn back to Jesus and we are not to know which is which like Jesus would. If he did not say it was Jesus who said they should be excommunicated then I don’t think that Jesus would allow us to choose who will and who will not turn back to him after turning to a sinful life; it is impossible for us to see the future and should not decide about anyone’s future because of the knowledge of Jesus and that he told us that he wants us all to repent and follow his commands to have a better life, with a God who will provide for us, who will protect us, who will help us with anything we ask. Whether someone believes that or not is between Jesus and that person. There are plenty of people who have been strong in the faith but when they went further to understand it better, they were disillusioned and gave their faith up. Even those people could turn back to what they knew before they were discouraged, and recommit their lives to Jesus. I would agree with Paul but I can’t see Jesus’ warning about others or his love which comes first. He shows everyone the same thing – the bible uses rain as a metaphor and that God makes it rain on the believers and the unbelievers the same, as he has no respect for persons. He treats everyone the same with regards to sinners that a sin without justification or repentance is enough to stop you from being saved if Jesus feels that you did not do enough to live the life of a Christian or try to reflect the goodness and love of Jesus.
            Why would Jesus want to stop any chance of the brother’s coming back by being hateful towards him. Jesus told us to love everyone and that includes sinners. There are no exceptions to his commandment to love everyone. There is no exception given when we are to give others help when we see a need we can fill. There is even no exception made between believers and non-believers or Christian and sinners.
            So when Jesus told us that if we loved him we will keep his commands he meant all of them and that to love everyone is his biggest commandment. That means it’s the most important command in all the things he told us to do. If a Christian can’t love others, they are not reflecting Jesus as the good and loving God that he is.
            Jesus never told us to do more than spread the gospel specifically not the whole bible. He refers to the OT but he did not tell us to spread the bible, but the gospel specifically.
            It is only when you understand the gospel that the OT is truly given understanding. Without the NT it would not teach the world what God intended for us in the first place. It was more about his anger at not being believed to be a good God.
            When Jesus was given the authority it did not have the anger about anything except the church and it’s beliefs, and whether someone is teaching or living what they teach as well.
            You know Walk the Walk and Talk the Talk of a Christian.

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            Hell is a very real place; and not an idle threat; but it’s not 1 we “make” in the sense of having the power or authority to send another human there of our own volition. It IS, however, a place we know isn’t very pleasant and from which we are commanded to warn others away. Kind of like knowing a key bridge is washed away on a dark, stormy night and putting up barricades and warnings to keep people from driving off a cliff in the dark, to their certain death. But I suppose you’d call that evil too…

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            Where’s the paranoia? I see none in that statement. And I am trained to recognize it. As for “revenge” there’s also none of that present; although there might be a slightly veiled warning for you in it, in that you will stand before Jesus and get to explain to Him your actions, thoughts and words in this lifetime; and with your current attitudes, I think that won’t likely be a very pleasant conversation, for you, or Him.

          • Sandra Lee Smith

            Sorry, but no, that’s not simply an interpretation of “a couple of passages”; that’s the PLAIN MEANING of EVERY passage that touches on the subject, throughout the entirety of the Bible, which doesn’t vary in its intent on that subject, over a span of some 2000 years over which it was written, by several different scribes during that span of time. That’s the thing about understanding the Bible; you NEVER pull out an isolated verse or passage; you read ALL it says on a given topic to understand what it is God is saying about that topic, which you clearly never learned. And it’s not an “interpretation” at all; that IS what the Bible in its entirety says about it.

      • Sandra Lee Smith

        Which error is that? Standing on the Word of God is NEVER an error; expressing it to others who are living in sin and need to be made aware of that is also never wrong. In other words, it wasn’t HE who made the error but the censors and school who did so.

    • Paladin Roy

      There is no way to prevent this type of thing. The world will love it’s own (abominations). The only way to support him at this point is to pray for him. But as the days grow worse and worse we are going to see the separation of the Church and the world. As I’ve said before, unless one is Called of the Lord, they cannot enter in.

      “Only those that are Bidden shall Enter” (Words of the Lord Himself).

  • get active abt it

    Keep on keeping on, Christ will be there for you in the end. The followers of satan will try and break you.

    • Lydia Church

      Right, we don’t seek the approval of man, but of God. No matter what the court’s verdict, he is right because he stands with God’s Word. And we must abide by God’s Word even if it means civil disobedience and persecution. Just as others have said, the days are growing more evil and persecution against us Christians will continue. We should not be surprised. We should oppose it of course, but this is what the unsaved world will do to us.

    • Lydia Church

      Not only that, but this shows that freedom of speech is gone in the UK. If you are a Christian and post a Biblical perspective (freedom of speech) in that land, you are persecuted (expelled from higher education). Of course they do all of this in the name of ‘love’ and ‘unity.’ But it is false love and false unity and they are the discriminating bigots, not us.

      • Sandra Lee Smith

        No; it’s neither, in fact; it’s actually hate and division, and has NOTHING to do with love or unity. The most LOVING thing anyone can do for an homosexual is TELL him he’s in sin and needs to get right with God before it’s too late (as in the rapture has happened, or he dies so); enabling his behavior is HATE, not love at all.

  • Isaiah5512

    It’s actually good to see how much this evil world singles out Christianity as the ONE and ONLY religion to exclude, to defame, to persecute, to hate on. What better proof do we have that Jesus is Lord? Only God’s true religion, only the TRUE God and His children would come under such focused hatred from this evil world.

  • Reason2012

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

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

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

    Romans 1:26-27 ”For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: (27) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their_lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

    For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

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

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

    Genesis 19:4-13 “But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of S odom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them [men wanting to have_sex with men].

    And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing [he offers his daughters to be_raped to keep them from having_sex with another man – shows_rape is not the issue but male on male_sex]; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

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

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

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

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

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

    Even cross-dressing is an abomination:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Even Jesus points out marriage is a man and a woman.

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

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

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

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

    May God/Jesus Christ be glorified!

    • Lydia Church

      End of argument.

      See you in the next post!
      ( :
      Amen brother!

    • Maxwell Edison

      Funny how Pantomine Princess Margaret has been rather silent over this.

      Maybe it’s because the Word of God is perfect and infallible, and saying, “Does the Bible really say that?” is literally the oldest trick in the book.

      When asked why he, an atheist, was at a Christian website, his response was:

      To see who’s really a Christian and who loves to threaten people with a hell they don’t even know exists.

      (As if a Christian needs to be how an atheist defines them.)

      In reality, he is here to act as an agent of Satan, trying to create doubt in the Bible. Just look at his comments herein.

      And why is this tolerated?

      • Reason2012

        Good points! May God bless!

      • Eldrida Urika

        Do you really think that people that are Christian are the only ones that should be on this board? What about the people who are searching for answers? Or the people who need to understand why we believe what we believe? You can’t just address the agreement of other Christians when we are supposed to spread the gospel. It shouldn’t matter who it is or why they are here. If you don’t want to discuss something with them, then don’t, It’s that simple.
        But don’t be so rude as to believe that by being Christians we are any better than they are. We are special to God but not to the world, and we are not better than anyone else – besides the fact that we are supposed to be humble and behave well towards others. We are all sinners and we are all able to lose our salvation by going against Jesus’ Word. He made that clear when he told us that not all would enter in but instead they will be calling Lord Lord! Being in any way but caring compassionate and loving is against what Jesus told us to be.
        Maybe some of us want to talk to these people to try to help them understand. It isn’t just you and those of your faith that come here. I prefer to talk to them rather than demean them for their words. If they don’t agree with us, how do you expect that to change for someone by criticizing them for not being a believer?
        When they did that big ban of everyone except those of one way of thinking, or of one faith, this board went rapidly down hill. No article had more than 9 comments for ages, until others came to comment. The comments were extremely boring as everyone agreed. It made this board less popular even by the Christians that used to read our posts. Thank God they let some people on who aren’t Christians and need us to help them.
        We are supposed to be spreading the gospel and helping others understand it, not being rude about the questions they try to have answered. We can’t do that by stopping non-believers from posting.
        If you can’t deal with non-believers, leave them alone and others who can will help them come to Jesus or at least we can start the process by being Christ-like in our behavior.

      • LadyInChrist♥BlessedBeTheLord

        It shouldn’t be tolerated. But sadly it is.

      • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

        Maybe if you replied to me directly I would know to respond to you, Matthew.

        And yes, expect me to be silent when people regurgitate scripture.

        • Maxwell Edison

          Your contempt for the Word of God is not surprising.

          Again, why is this being tolerated?
          Mods?

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            You are permitted to have any faith and use this forum. Right mods?

          • Maxwell Edison

            You have come here to mock Christians and Christianity. That is abundantly clear by your posts in this very thread.

            This isn’t JoeMyGod. Your behavior and agenda are not welcome here.

          • ThePantomimePrincessMargaret

            That’s not your call to make, unfortunately for you. I don’t mock Christianity. I mock ignorance and hatred.

        • Sandra Lee Smith

          God does silence the wicked; so that’s no surprise.

      • Sandra Lee Smith

        It’s tolerated because Satan is still, at this time, the prince of the power of the air over Earth and ruler of this world in which we live; until Jesus’ return to claim His rightful throne, and it’s not up to us to condemn to hell. We’re to discern (judge) by the fruits, and reject that which is evil; but nothing more than that. It will be our Lord Who puts a stop to it.

    • sbeachbum

      Thank you for sharing this, Reason.

      • Reason2012

        It’s always a blessing to hear God’s Word on topics. Glad it was a blessing!

    • Sandra Lee Smith

      Up to the action and thought it’s merely another temptation; but it becomes sin with the thought that leads to the action. We are all tempted at our weakest points. None has to succumb to them.

  • gramma aac

    We are entering the “last days”. They call evil, good and good, evil.

  • Please come soon Lord Jesus.

    • LadyInChrist♥BlessedBeTheLord

      Amen. Today would be a good day.

  • Daniel Allen

    Wow ! He offended someone ! Are they going to live?

  • Daniel Allen

    Good for you Mr Ngole !

  • David M. Mullbock

    The irony being that ha people are also adamant that the Darwinian account of origins is the only legitimate one. They ought to at least have the decency to be consistent. If people are so emotionally fragile that a person sharing the Biblical stance on homosexuality is a danger to their well-being, then perhaps it is Darwin’s will that they are not naturally selected for continuation.

  • Recognizing_Truth

    Felix, friend of Christ, your posts were informative and verifiably accurate. The fact that what you said might offend some is the sad truth in this lost world –And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.

    Christ said many things that the leaders of the day found offensive. They tried to silence Him and kill Him. The same was true for his disciples. They were punished, censured, and threatened with death. It has been the same since those days, and you are even now receiving the same treatment.

    Of course the “leaders” think THEY are doing the right thing, to censure you and shut you down:
    They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God.

    But God sees your sacrifice, and has great reward waiting for you because you have not turned your back on Him, and continue to proclaim His truth.
    Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

    Trust God. Rejoice in your suffering. Fight the good fight. You have shown yourself to be a friend of Christ and his voice of truth in a dark world.
    Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.

  • Sandra Lee Smith

    This man was deprived of HIS God-given RIGHT for the sake of the “feelings” of some potential reader; THAT’S wrong, unless the UK has passed a “right to never be offended” law somewhere. Perception is on the perceiver, not the poster! You could post “g’day” and have someone take it as an insult!

  • MEP1101

    This is a war between the two most famous Jews in History over who will rule the hearts and minds of Mankind; Jesus, the spiritual Jewish Messiah or Karl Marx, the messiah of Materialism and End Time’s Jewish Anti-Christ. – BRING IT ON !

  • TimothyJ

    This world hates Christians and will accept any and all things other than the good news in its feeble attempt (falsely motivated by the land lord) to be all inclusive, equal, fair and just so full of love. Oh, if they only knew the horror being ushered in for those who reject the King and the joys for his own. The world’s heart has hardened so much so fast.