• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Christian Moms Group Condemns Hallmark Channel for Airing Lesbian Wedding Ad"

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
Every now and then I consider starting a thread. It would be true stories of horrifically dysfunctional gay men, that start with "My parents were very religious..."
Tom

Thread, nothing... that would be a book. :(
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
Because you regularly bring them up in the same post and use the same word to describe them, "inappropriate".
You consider my belief that they are both inappropriate to be me comparing them?

If I were to share with you a list of crimes, you'd believe that because both "jaywalking" and "murder" appear on my list, that I am comparing them?

I would argue that I was claiming that jaywalking and murder were similar?

I believe you just don't like that I believe that same-sex attraction is inappropriate, so you have been trying to assault my character.
But you never give a rational reason for comparing them like this.
I don't really believe that I need one.

Is there a rational reason (outside of procreation) for sexual attraction at all?

Can you give me a rational reason for homosexuality?

Do you believe that you need one before you could share your opinion about it?
The damage done by pedophilia, both to the victims and society at large, is enormous and well documented. So it's condemned by any rational person.
What about those who believe that it just "feels natural" to be attracted to children and they consider themselves to be "born that way"?

As I said before, I don't need to wait for the "well documented" facts about raping children to know that it is bad.

I believe that God has taught that homosexuality is sinful and should be avoided.
On the other hand, nobody can make a rational argument that homosexuality, or gay marriage, does any damage at all.
Tell that to the next Christian baker that loses his livelihood.
Quite the contrary, rational people can see the advantages to encouraging competent adults to form mutually supportive, compatible, teams of two. Then cementing that relationship with legal recognition.
Aren't there people who argue that monogamy and marriage are completely unnatural and irrational?

You like to make completely subjective terms like "moral" and "rational" sound objective.
Call me a prude if you must, lots of people do.
If I were to take after your example, I would attribute a homosexual stereotype to you and claim that it would be impossible for you to be considered a prude since we all know homosexuals engage in sexual intercourse with multiple partners.

Fortunately, I won't take after your example and will say, "I'm a prude too."
But I strongly believe in modern marriage.
Anytime you put a modifier in front of a term that is inherently good - you turn it into a perversion of itself.

For example, the term "correctness" is inherently good. It points out it is correct or true.

But when you add the word "political" to it, all of a sudden people are being thrown in jail for saying the wrong thing.

Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and woman based on love and trust and the desire to build a family.
Not the old fashioned traditional marriage, where a man acquires an all purpose domestic appliance and can legally enforce exclusive use of his possession.
Again - you are perverting the term marriage by adding your modifier and historical revision.
Rather, the modern kind where two competent adults choose each other and the state recognizes them as "next of kin".
You could get the same result by becoming adopted siblings.

A marriage has always been between a man and a woman, so two men cannot be married.
I think that's the best arrangement for everyone who isn't damaged in some way, whether they're straight or gay.
Even though I believe that same-sex attraction is inappropriate and homosexuality is sinful, I do believe that it is better for those who decide to indulge this weakness to be monogamous.
Your vague, unsupported, opinion that I'm wrong doesn't carry any more weight than that of racists who think that only white people suffer from racism in modern USA.
First off, an opinion needs no support at all to be an opinion. You keep claiming that I have been attempting to convince you and others of things, but I haven't been doing that at all.

All I have been doing is sharing my opinion.

Second, I believe that my sharing has been anything other than "vague". You should know exactly why I believe same-sex attraction is a weakness and homosexuality is sinful.

Unless, of course, you haven't been reading my posts.

Third, my belief that only white people are the victims of systematic racism in the U.S. today does not make me racist.

Would you say that same thing to a black man claiming that only black people were victims of systematic racism in the U.S.?

I don't hate anyone because of their race.

You keep making personal judgments about me based on nothing.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
In post #515, I tried to clarify the distinction between your personal religion and ethics, and the LDS as a whole. Perhaps you overlooked it.
Tom
I totally missed it. Thanks.
It's occurred to me, rereading, that I wasn't very clear.

I wasn't talking about your religious community exactly(although I have a lot of ethical problems with it).
I was talking about your personal religion. Your own ethics and image of God.
Yeah, that wasn't very clear at all.
I understand that you, Katzpur, Warren Jeffs, and that guy who's wife
Is suing LDS, all identify as LDS.
LDS is your religious community.
Warren Jeffs is FLDS, not LDS.
But I don't consider you to have the same religion, really. There's too much about your beliefs, as expressed, that are extremely different to lump you all into the same religion.
That doesn't make much sense to me.

Christians are Christian, even though they all believe different things and express themselves in different ways.

I don't know much about Katzpur (that's an RF member right?) or whoever's wife is suing the Church, but if they have been baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, then they are members of the same religion as me.

That's how it works.

I am also a Republican and even though I disagree with other Republicans about things - we are all still Republicans. Even if a Republican decided not to vote for Trump in 2016 - they would still be a Republican.

It would be very strange to start claiming that they were no longer Republicans.
Does that help clarify my point?
I understand what you are trying to say, Tom, but I don't believe it.

Maybe if you hadn't claimed that my sharing my opinion was "similar" to raping children I'd have accepted this explanation.

But, from where I stand, you are a person who make rash judgments about people and makes nonsensical arguments.

You claiming that my opinion about racial issues in the U.S. somehow meant that my religion was immoral was actually a predictable thing for you to do.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Thread, nothing... that would be a book. :(
I was both a member and facilitator of an assortment of support groups, mostly back in the 80s and 90s.
The AIDS years.

Oh yeah.
Few things "trigger" me like an irrational religionist justifying their child abuse by claiming that they are representing God. That happens here on RF frequently enough. Real life, where I live, isn't much different. But it's easier and safer to call out child molesting homophobes here on RF, than rural Jesustan, Indiana.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Warren Jeffs is FLDS, not LDS.
Jeffs is more traditional than you are.
You are more traditional than Katzpur.

I realize that the LDS isn't much more monolithic, ethically, than most big religious organizations. I'm well acquainted with the RCC. It's bigger, older, and more diverse than LDS, by a lot.

But Jeffs is a Mormon, just as Cortez and Hitler were Catholic. Their behavior was also supported by their religious communities, at the time.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Maybe if you hadn't claimed that my sharing my opinion was "similar" to raping children I'd have accepted this explanation.

I've explained why I consider your teachings similar to statutory rape several times.

Somehow, you never responded with any evidence or reason.
Tom
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
Which is the comparison people keep referring to.
That is not a comparison.

I have claimed from the beginning that the only appropriate sexual attraction and relationship is the one had within marriage between a husband and wife who are legally and lawfully wedded.

This means that my list of "inappropriate sexual attraction" would also include consensual heterosexual sexual relationships outside of marriage.

Does the fact that this is also included in my list mean that I am "comparing" consensual premarital relationships with the raping of children?

That is not a comparison. It is me clearly stating my beliefs about sex and marriage.

Any reasonable person who read my posts would have come to know that I never compared pedophilia with homosexuality.
But you can't explain why you compare them, in rational and evidence based terms.
First off, I never compared them. That is the lie you and others keep chirping in this "echo chamber" of mass delusion.

Second, no one needs to be rational nor do they need evidence to have an opinion. Do you not know what opinions are?

Third, I have explained my beliefs about sex and marriage many times.

I understand that you don't like that same-sex attraction is on my list of "inappropriate sexual attraction" along with every other sexual weakness outside of a marriage between a man and woman, but that doesn't mean I compared pedophilia to homosexuality.

Tough beans.

I don't like that many Christians place Latter-day Saints in their list of "people who are going to Hell" along with murderers and rapists, but I'm not about to claim that me being on their list is them comparing me to a murderer or a rapist.

Especially if the Christian who made that list repeated over and over again that they weren't comparing me, or claiming that I was "similar", to any murderer or rapist - they just believe I'm going to Hell for believing in a "different Jesus".

It would be completely unreasonable for me to claim that they were comparing me to murderers and rapists.
On the other hand, you acted all triggered when I pointed out that your teachings and pedophilia have a strong commonality.
Triggered?

When someone says something stupid or nonsensical - I will point it out.

Especially if that stupid or nonsensical comment receives "Like" and "Winner" votes.
Both do a lot of damage to youngsters.
No, this is where you completely lose me because you are making stuff up.

Sharing a belief does not damage anyone ever. If it did, then I would have a huge bone to pick with you.

Since we are talking about children - let's delve into the public school system.

These are places where a belief in God or anything related to Him or any religion are not to be discussed or mentioned - right? "No God in schools!"?

On the flip side, teachers in public schools will teach children that it is okay to be attracted to the same-sex and that boys can become girls.

Now, I understand that there should be a separation of Church and State - so public schools shouldn't encourage any religious stuff. I get that. I agree with that.

I also understand that teachers should be teaching their students to be tolerant and open-minded about their classmates. I get that. I agree with that.

However, if the premise "Ideas can do damage to youngsters" were true - then I would have a problem and I would protest against teachers telling my kids that same-sex attraction is acceptable and appropriate and that people could change their sex.

That might "Make them gay!" or "Make them transgender!"

Don't worry - since I know for a fact that sharing ideas cannot do actual damage to anyone - I'm not going to flip my lid. Because I'm a reasonable person.

Also, wtf do you think I'm doing when I share my opinion? Do you imagine that I'm going into schools on a soapbox and shouting "SHAME!" at the top of my lungs?

It is not the idea that does damage - but what people decide to do with the idea. What does the idea motivate them to do?
People who are too unsophisticated and too malleable to recognize the damage being done, and protecting themselves from it.
This sounds like something Hitler said to justify his taking over of the press.
We expect adults to be capable of this, but not children.
If you really feel that way - don't share my posts on this website with any children.
ETA ~Telling black kids that they are the cause of racism, never victims, is similar.
ETA?

I have never told any black kids that they were the cause of racism. I never claimed that black people could not be the victims of racism.

Nor have I told any homosexuals that they are the cause of homophobia. I never claimed that homosexuals could not be the victims of homophobia.

How is this "similar" to anything? What are you talking about now? Is this another nonsensical claim?
Sorry dude, I see you as quite immoral.
Well, considering that morality is completely subjective - I don't really care.

Also, considering that you keep making stuff up and then claiming I did them and then condemning me for things I never did or said - I would never trust your judgment.
I don't blame the LDS entirely, but clearly they could have done better educating you.~
HAH! You do believe that my religion is immoral.

Oh my goodness - I thought you were such a sensible person before this thread.

But you pulled out all the stops bro.

You keeping making hasty and nonsensical claims, then you try to go back and fix it and then you say the very same things again.

If I were like you, I could try to blame all this on the fact that you are a homosexual - but I won't.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
Then why are you surprised that I would ask people if they believe an attraction to children is inappropriate?
There are also people who think that teaching gay or black kids that they're damaged and damaging.
You didn't read my initial post that started all this "hub-bub", did you?

The one where I stated that everyone on Earth is plagued by weaknesses and sins and that there is "nothing wrong" with homosexuals.
I'm comparing all of you folks, based on your primitive and unethical moral codes.
Yes, I know and I thank you for it.

You are the one making comparisons - not me.

I never compared pedophiles to homosexuals - but you and others have been comparing me with every single Christian you have ever disagreed with.

Thank you for finally admitting it and exposing your hypocrisy.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
Every now and then I consider starting a thread. It would be true stories of horrifically dysfunctional gay men, that start with "My parents were very religious..."
Tom
That's sad, but dysfunction is not monopolized by homosexuals or "religious" people.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
Few things "trigger" me like an irrational religionist justifying their child abuse by claiming that they are representing God.
Would you consider a parent sharing what the scriptures say with their children to be "child abuse"?
But it's easier and safer to call out child molesting homophobes here on RF, than rural Jesustan, Indiana.
I get the feeling you don't know what "child molestation" or "homophobe" means.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
Jeffs is more traditional than you are.
You are more traditional than Katzpur.

I realize that the LDS isn't much more monolithic, ethically, than most big religious organizations. I'm well acquainted with the RCC. It's bigger, older, and more diverse than LDS, by a lot.

But Jeffs is a Mormon, just as Cortez and Hitler were Catholic. Their behavior was also supported by their religious communities, at the time.
Tom
Just to be clear - Warren Jeffs was never a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

You need to be baptized a member of the Church in order to be considered a member of the Church.

Members of the FLDS are not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Claiming that Warren Jeffs is simply "more traditional" than me would be like claiming a Lutheran is "more traditional" than a Catholic.

A Lutheran is not a Catholic. An FLDS is not a LDS.

I have spoken to Katzpur a couple of times. Why do you consider me more traditional than her?
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
I've explained why I consider your teachings similar to statutory rape several times.

Somehow, you never responded with any evidence or reason.
Tom
Your attempted explanations are just as asinine as your initial claim.

Your claim that me sharing my opinion on a religious forum site was "similar" to raping children also lacks evidence or reason.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
I believe that God commanded all creatures to multiply after their kind when He first created them.

I believe that Adam and Eve were also commanded to multiply after their kind, but the Lord had already married them.

I believe that Our Father in Heaven wants His children to be chaste until marriage and to then be faithful in marriage, with complete fidelity.

Needless to say, but I'll say it anyway, I believe that the Lord designed marriage to be only for a man and a woman.

I've said this stuff before and I don't know what else to say now.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Would you consider a parent sharing what the scriptures say with their children to be "child abuse"?
When it robs a child of self esteem, destroys their confidence, is used to teach them they are wretched sinners deserving of hell, and gives them nightmares of going to hell, I would say that is child abuse.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
:rolleyes:People have have me grief over many things. Never has it been due to me having white skin.
That's strange. I thought you lived in California.

Maybe you have to be male too.
When it robs a child of self esteem, destroys their confidence, is used to teach them they are wretched sinners deserving of hell, and gives them nightmares of going to hell, I would say that is child abuse.
What is the "it" in this sentence?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
That's strange. I thought you lived in California.
Oh, here no one has gave me grief. In Indiana, however, it was a very different story. Living with evangelicals, fundamentalists, and religious conservatives was hell. Those Hoosiers were vile and wretched, always quick to point out "Bible this" and "god that," never able to mind the beam in their own eye, occasionally telling me to leave, and I moved to California. Now life is so much easier in so many ways.
That's strange. I thought you lived in California.

Maybe you have to be male too.

What is the "it" in this sentence?
Teachings from the Bible.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
It would be a "problem" if there were a systematic or enforced oppression of people based on their race, but there isn't, unless you consider white people.

White men are the only race and sex in the U.S. who are systematically denied certain opportunities and privileges based on their race and sex.
So you're just going to ignore the fact that black people are still subjected to far more systemic inequality than white people are? That white people occupy nearly ALL positions of power in America?

You're seriously going to suggest that white men are being systemically abused in a country where they literally have ALL of the advantages, and that racism isn't a problem just because the law says you're equal (despite all the ways in which people and institutions still continue to treat black people as inferior)?

Are you serious?
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
So you're just going to ignore the fact that black people are still subjected to far more systemic inequality than white people are? That white people occupy nearly ALL positions of power in America?

You're seriously going to suggest that white men are being systemically abused in a country where they literally have ALL of the advantages, and that racism isn't a problem just because the law says you're equal (despite all the ways in which people and institutions still continue to treat black people as inferior)?

Are you serious?
When you're used to privilege, any move toward equality feels like oppression
 
Top