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

[Jainarayan]

Oh.
I thought you were talking about RF.

Really, the ads on RF for gay cruises are hot. You might try them.
Tom

I’ll bet. . Staff has the courtesy of no ads.

 

[columbus]

I’ll bet. . Staff has the courtesy of no ads.

You're missing out on hot stud muffins cavorting on cruise ships.
Tom

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Uhh no I don’t. I even specifically mentioned that there are instances of child abuse going on where there isn’t a pedophile involved. Rather an abused child is merely mimicking the behaviour as a known coping mechanism.

When people bring up the fact that there is a lack of consent, they simply mean that there is an objective reason for why someone who is sexually attracted to prepubescent children should not act upon those desires. Being sexually attracted to someone of the same sex and is roughly the same age you are does not carry that same objective stance.

If you don't believe that pedophilia describes the raping of children - then why did you give a "Winner" vote for a post that was making that claim?

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

What is the truth?

The "truth" that I was referring to - within the context of our discussion - is that you asked me - repeatedly - to justify my beliefs - then you later claimed that you did not.

The "truth" is that you got caught lying and you refuse to admit it - apologize for it - or amend it.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

It's not truth. It is your own personal beliefs. Nothing more.

The "truth" that I was referring to in that post was the fact that @Jainarayan had - repeatedly - asked me to justify my beliefs - but then he later claimed that he had not.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

It's basically the opposite of your position.

What are you claiming my position is?

Disgusting. And unfortunately, other people who are not you will pay the price for perpetuating those falla ious and harmful opinions of faith.

What "price" will they have to pay for me having my opinion?

 

[Jainarayan]

but then he later claimed that he had not.

Which he still maintains, always maintained, will maintain, and will never not maintain.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

This is the big problem here.
People who mistake their own subjective opinions for truth.
Tom

@Jainarayan repeatedly asked me to justify my beliefs - then he later claimed that he never did so.

That is not a "subjective opinion" - that is "objective reality" - and the "truth" that I was referencing.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Exactly... truth is relative and subjective. Everyone has their truth. There's a line in the tv version of Arthur C. Clarke's Childhood's End, in which the alien Karellen tells a very religious woman whose faith is shaken (paraphrasing) "All your religions can't all be right".

In my path, we're looking for the absolute truth, which may take a hundred million more lifetimes to learn. Or one lifetime, who knows? If we think we found the truth here, chances are we haven't.

Truth is neither relative nor subjective - it is absolute.

Someone can believe that something is true - but that belief does not make it so.

Unfortunately for you - I proved beyond the shadow of any doubt - that you had not only asked me to justify my beliefs - but you later lied about it.

That is the truth. Which is neither relative or subjective. It is absolute.

 

[Jainarayan]

Truth is neither relative nor subjective - it is absolute.

Someone can believe that something is true - but that belief does not make it so.

You believe in the literalness of the Bible, yes? How do you know it's true? Do you have proof? What makes it absolute truth?
You know it's absolute truth no one is born homosexual? How do you know? What makes it absolute truth?
You believe the existence of your God is an absolute truth? How do you know? What makes it absolute truth?
What is the absolute truth?

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Yup. I used to be one. It's a festering cancerous dogma, that is constantly feed by literalist, evangelical, and other fundamentalist groups. They are all certain they have the truth. And, zealous are unfortunately a malignant and malicious tumor that has spread throughout society.

People believing that they "have the truth" is not harmful to society. That describes literally everyone in some fashion.

People believing that anyone can demand that society should conform to their individual subjective "truth" is harmful.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

People believing that they "have the truth" is not harmful to society. That describes literally everyone in some fashion.

The difference is who changes their "truth" cases in new evidence and facts,and those who hold steady and won't give up or change thier "truth." Those who don't flame tend to be the ones causing most damage, and the absolute worst destructions.

People believing that anyone can demand that society should conform to their individual subjective "truth" is harmful.

Someone has to. Such as in America, where it took a collective majority of colonies to conform to self evident truths and rights and all that. The first amendment, it does prohibit a great deal when it comes to the state, but expected to conform to high levels of personal freedom with groups like the ACLU defending it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

hat "price" will they have to pay for me having my opinion?

Bullying is pretty common from conservative Christian kids when it comes to homosexuality.

 

[Jainarayan]

People believing that anyone can demand that society should conform to their individual subjective "truth" is harmful.

Like when people who believe same sex marriage is wrong because of the Bible being "true" and it should be outlawed.

 

[columbus]

Like when people who believe same sex marriage is wrong because of the Bible being "true" and it should be outlawed.

It's hard to grasp why religionists demanding that society conform to their religious beliefs, like the LDS does, fail to see this.
Tom

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Sorry, I don't feel like sifting through this same thing all over again.

Something tells me you have yet to "sift" through any of this stuff.

If you had - you would have realized your error - amended what you had said - and we would have moved on.

But you never did that - proving that you never "sifted" through anything.

But I do take issue with one thing you said ...

How can you openly admit that you did not fully read - or "sift through" my post - but you still feel fully capable of responding to it?

If you do not want to put in the time and effort required - your "due diligence" - to have a discussion or debate - then why are you here?

Look, I know you're trying to turn the tables and take the heat off yourself here, but what you've said here is an inane attempt to make yourself the victim in a thread where you are putting down gay people, (among others).

A couple of things to unpack here:

1.) I have never felt any "heat" on me whatsoever.

The bulk of all of my conversations on this thread have been about clearing up confusion about what I have said.

Confusion that - I believe - was intentionally generated by the spinning of false narratives about my beliefs and what I said by you and others.

What remained has been you guys saying, "I don't like what you say" or you mention things I never said or did.

So - no - nothing I have said has been an attempt to "take the heat" off of myself - because I don't believe any "heat" was ever really applied to me.

2.) How did you interpret me using your own words against you - to prove that you equate "pedophilia" with raping children - as me trying to set myself up as a victim?

The way you and others ignore reality - even your own words and actions - because it doesn't fit your overarching social narrative is fascinating. Horrifying and fascinating.

I mean - I understand that my beliefs about reality are not based on any evidence that you would accept - but here you are - ignoring your own words - because it doesn't fit your narrative.

It's just further proof to me that liberalism has neither a ceiling nor a floor.

By the way - I am not a victim in any way. I have been victimized before - but I never decided to be a victim then and I never intend to be one.

3.) I never "put down" homosexuals.

I may have "put down" members of this forum who are homosexual - but their sexuality was never a factor in the aforementioned "putting down".

Whenever I want to claim that you or someone else said or did something - I either quote you or reference the post number that contains the things you did.

My last post to you - the one you refused to "sift" through - is an excellent example of me either quoting what others have said or referencing a post number.

Putting forth time and effort in a discussion and being responsible and consistent may all be foreign concepts to you and others - but they help when you want to claim that someone said or did something.

I'm sorry to say but that seems par for the course with you, as I have read many of your long diatribes about how men are the real victims in society and African Americans are irresponsible decision makers, and on and on.

Again - a responsible person would either quote where I supposedly said these things or at least reference the post number of where I said them.

Don't worry - I will be responsible enough for both of us.

I did not say that "men are the real victims in society" - what I actually said in Post #540 was,

"White men are the only race and sex in the U.S. who are [systemically] denied certain opportunities and privileges based on their race and sex." (I accidentally said "systematically")

To be clear - it was not me that claimed that African-Americans make irresponsible life-choices - in general - but the facts that I presented.

I claimed that this was due to their culture - not race - and anyone who abandons those aspects of their culture that encourages them to make irresponsible life-choices could come to flourish.

By the way - considering that I have not been attacking any of these groups (including homosexuals) - you cannot accurately describe any of my posts as "diatribes".

Remember what this thread is about? It's about homosexuality. Not pedophilia. Not the plight of the African American family unit. Yet, you've gone on at length about all these other, unrelated things, thus making the case that they are related in some way.

First off - it was you that tried to make my posts about pedophilia and nothing else - not me.

I mentioned a couple examples of what I considered to be "weaknesses" and I also mentioned many weaknesses I considered to be "inappropriate sexual attractions".

The only reason I even brought up an attraction to children was to prove how weak @Jainarayan 's argument that if someone is "born that way" or it "feels natural" then their behavior is above reproach.

You blew it all out of proportion when you claimed that I had only mentioned it to "demonize" homosexuals - which I have repeatedly shown makes no sense.

It was @columbus - during his blind anti-Christian rants - like in Post #472 - who tried to claim that Christianity and the Bible were the sources of all of the world's evils - even racism.

Then it was @ImmortalFlame who came in and claimed that the United States systemically oppresses African-Americans today - that started in Post #559.

So - if you take issue with the fact that large portions of my posts were focused on these issues - you can only blame yourself and those mentioned above.

You're the one who went right to pedophilia in a thread about homosexuality. That wasn't anyone else here. That was you.

I stand by what I have said.

There is nothing wrong with mentioning other "inappropriate sexual attractions" in a discussion about "inappropriate sexual attractions".

Just because you do not believe that same-sex attraction is inappropriate does not mean I am wrong in claiming that it is.

You're not offering any hope to gay people or pedophiles or African Americans, or anybody else here. I'm sorry that you think you are.

I disagree with all my soul.

My sharing that people can overcome all of their weaknesses and sins - and achieve eventual perfection - through the Lord Jesus Christ - is the greatest message of hope.

Telling African-Americans the truth about how they possess the power to rise above all adversity - even the ravages of poverty and crime - by making responsible life-choices is an amazing message of hope.

You telling people that they are "born a certain way" and they can never change their nature - no matter what - is a message devoid of hope.

You telling African-Americans that they are destined to fail because there is an invisible enemy dedicated to destroying them - is a message devoid of hope.

These and other liberal selling points lead only to victimhood and misery.

 

[columbus]

Don't put words in my mouth.
Thanks.

Tom

 

[Jainarayan]

The only reason I even brought up an attraction to children was to prove how weak @Jainarayan 's argument that if someone is "born that way" or it "feels natural" then their behavior is above reproach.

That's absurd, because that's a black/white, up/down, left/right argument. You're still equating pedophilia and homosexuality. It's been proven time and again they are in no way comparable. It's your disdain for homosexuality and homosexuals revealing itself over and over.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Convertion therapy and Prop 8 come to mind.

Not only have I never mentioned conversion therapy in this thread - but I have also never supported it at any time in my life.

Conversion therapy is not among my beliefs. Try to stay on topic.

Proposition 8 caused no suffering at all to anyone.

Eventually, basically when it was no longer reasonable or flattering to continue to do so.

No - in the earliest days of the Church - during the life of Joseph Smith the Prophet - black and dark-skinned men were given the priesthood.

Even while the Priesthood Ban was in force - many black or dark-skinned men were given the priesthood.

It was only certain men - who descended from a particular lineage - who were denied the priesthood.

Is that why there are so many different denominations with modern Catholicism having many differences between now and what was 2000 years ago?

Any and all comments I make about "the Church" are about my Church - the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I know that you already knew that - but you needed to spin the discussion in order to make your jab at Christianity as a whole.

Well done.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

California and Indiana, especially the north central part I lived at, are not the same places. No, I am not talking about mean words and teasing.I'm talking about harassing, threats, vandalism, destruction of property and some assaults. Words do get old, but knowing someone who's car windows were just busted out makes things rather stressful. Getting followed several miles out of town is nerve wracking. Medical professionals giving total bs diagnoses so you can't get treatment is, as you can probably imagine, problematic and unethical. But, even when it's words, being told to leave is infuriating and, yes, upsetting no matter who you are that have done nothing and people hate you that much anyways.

Reminds me of when I was a missionary.