Do you really hate "religion"...

[Madman81]

Would be nice if someone held Madman's accountable for the hate spewed on his end though. See? I act my faith, I act in kindness as best I can. Still haven't seen anyone come forward and say why it's okay to spew hate at Christians and mock our beliefs. (outdated book 2,000 year old non thinkers...on and on....) Those words hurt too.

Please, yes. I agree. No sarcasm. Somebody hold me to account for spewing hate on this thread. One requirement: you have to first identify the hateful speech in question. Simply disagreeing with your views, explaining why, and questioning tenets of Christianity isn't "spewing hate".

 

Sorry to correct you, but I didn't call the Bible "outdated". What I said was "a 2,000 year old book whose existence predates modern English and science, which has been translated and re-translated countless times, and whose actual meaning is open to massive debate even among those who believe in it." Which part of that is incorrect?

 

-- The Bible IS 2,000 years old, give or take. People have been reading it since ancient times. The Old Testament is even older.

 

-- Its existence DOES predate modern English, and modern science. Is this even in dispute?

 

-- It HAS been translated and re-translated countless times. Is this in dispute?

 

-- Its actual meaning IS in dispute. There are multiple translations. There are multiple denominations within Christianity. Theological scholars routinely debate the various interpretations of the Bible with other theological scholars.

 

None of what I said can constitute "hate" by the standards of moderately reasonable people.

[truthbetold]

Thanks Pure. But even with this concept of Dispensationalism, the idea of progressive revelations depending on where the historical audience is "at" (which I get), that still seems to cast doubt on the applicability of any Mosaic law, including those dealing with homosexualty.

 

This is what Ezekiel 16:49-50 has to say about Sodom and it's "smiting":

 

“Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen."

 

So, we have overfed, unconcerned, not helping the poor, and being haughty. Things we suck at even today and probably should be mindful of. Last on the list is doing "detestable" stuff; which could be a reference to homosexuality, but not necessarily. Whatever it is, it's preceded by things that I think we as a society should be more concerned about than who stuck what where.

 

It still goes back to the passage in Genesis that addresses what happened in Sodom. Two angels were sent as messengers to warn Lot what God would do. Men showed up and wanted to have sex with the men. It's plain as day unless you are blind to God's word. Lot called it "wicked" he knew it was detestable and an abomination to God.

 

Lev 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.

 

Note: Jesus never changed that, it wasn't a ceremonial law. He only fulfilled the ceremonial laws, period.

 

Lev 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.

 

Rom 1:26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,

 

Rom 1:27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

 

1 Cor 6:9,10 Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

 

1 Tim 1:10 the unchaste, practicing sodomites, 5 kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching,

 

Jude 7 Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

 

Just WHO do you think the apostles got their teaching from? That's right folks, Jesus. Likely it wasn't spelled out for folks is because the audience knew exactly what was detestable from word and traditions. Guess that makes the audience back then a heck of a lot smarter than some people today who say it's not in there to justify their cause.

 

It's IN the Bible if you open your eyes and aren't blind. Don't like it? Oh well...still can't use scripture to catapult the homosexual agenda. Jesus didn't speak the specific words because he didn't HAVE to they understood it, clear from the apostles. See the word "sodomite" same thing, that word had the "homosexual" meaning back then.

 

Stop twisting the Bible to fit your agenda. Go find a fairy tale to support the agenda. Peter Pan may be a good start.

[Madman81]

Animals, who seem to get the blame for anything thought to be amoral, and disgusting, tend to kill for food only, and have been shown to love and help each other. Some will kill out of competition, but they see it as a true need to survive, like a lioness killing the cubs of another lioness - I don't like it, but are you really going to tell me that we don't have human beings who display similar traits?

Well said. It's been pointed out that we can say what we want about the animal world and the things they do to each other, but at least animals don't produce Hitlers, Stalins, Pol Pots or Dahmers. They don't inflict pain for sadistic enjoyment.

 

Does that make them better than us? No. Theirs is a brutal world in many respects, with no concept of human notions like fairness or justice. Humans have bigger brains, so it just so happens that those ideas are confined to us.

 

The point in raising animals at all in this thread was to demonstrate that, far from being unnatural, homosexual practices and behaviours are widely found in the animal world. Thus there is no viable reason why human beings should not be expected to exhibit such behaviours, or to discount them as "unnatural".

[GorillaTheater]

It still goes back to the passage in Genesis that addresses what happened in Sodom. Two angels were sent as messengers to warn Lot what God would do. Men showed up and wanted to have sex with the men. It's plain as day unless you are blind to God's word. Lot called it "wicked" he knew it was detestable and an abomination to God.

 

Lev 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.

 

Note: Jesus never changed that, it wasn't a ceremonial law. He only fulfilled the ceremonial laws, period.

 

Lev 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.

 

Rom 1:26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,

 

Rom 1:27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

 

1 Cor 6:9,10 Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

 

1 Tim 1:10 the unchaste, practicing sodomites, 5 kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching,

 

Jude 7 Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

 

Just WHO do you think the apostles got their teaching from? That's right folks, Jesus. Likely it wasn't spelled out for folks is because the audience knew exactly what was detestable from word and traditions. Guess that makes the audience back then a heck of a lot smarter than some people today who say it's not in there to justify their cause.

 

It's IN the Bible if you open your eyes and aren't blind. Don't like it? Oh well...still can't use scripture to catapult the homosexual agenda. Jesus didn't speak the specific words because he didn't HAVE to they understood it, clear from the apostles. See the word "sodomite" same thing, that word had the "homosexual" meaning back then.

 

Stop twisting the Bible to fit your agenda. Go find a fairy tale to support the agenda. Peter Pan may be a good start.

 

Whoa, that took a hostile turn. Okay then.

 

Yes, the men in Sodom wanted to have sex with the men. Of course, Lot's counter was to offer them his own daughters, which I happen to think is worse but perhaps you disagree.

 

My point from Ezekiel is that, in God's own words, homosexuality was way down the list of things he destroyed Sodom for, assuming homosexuality is on the list at all, which is debatable.

 

As for your Leviticus quote, we've covered the ground as to whether Mosaic law still applies or not.

 

As for your New Testament quotes, neither Paul nor Jude were with Jesus during his ministry. Paul was too busy killing Christians at the time, or at least thinking about it, and Jude, as Jesus' brother, was as the Bible makes pretty clear, thinking he was a nut until after his death. So you'd have to use the term apostles fairly loosely, at least as compared to Peter, John, and Matthew.

 

You can call it "my homosexual agenda" if you want, but I call it you and others spending far too much time worrying about the wrong things.

Edited March 25, 2014 by GorillaTheater

[Madman81]

Stop twisting the Bible to fit your agenda. Go find a fairy tale to support the agenda.

It would appear that the pot has officially met the kettle.

[Grumpybutfun]

I have not read this whole thread, but I have always considered you to be one of the most kind posters in this forum. You seem very angry (which I know has to take a lot) which tells me this thread is not really conducive to discussion. This will be my last post here. Best wishes

 

 

TFW,

Yes, I was out of line. You and Pure, M30 and pie2 have always been very kind to everyone so I wasn't speaking to any of you....

Nothing you post makes me angry TFW because you are fair and thoughtful. My post was not in reply to any of you. I apologize because I see now that was an unfair statement of Christians in general.

Forgive my impertinence,

G

[pureinheart]

Thanks Pure. But even with this concept of Dispensationalism, the idea of progressive revelations depending on where the historical audience is "at" (which I get), that still seems to cast doubt on the applicability of any Mosaic law, including those dealing with homosexualty.

 

This is what Ezekiel 16:49-50 has to say about Sodom and it's "smiting":

 

“Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen."

 

So, we have overfed, unconcerned, not helping the poor, and being haughty. Things we suck at even today and probably should be mindful of. Last on the list is doing "detestable" stuff; which could be a reference to homosexuality, but not necessarily. Whatever it is, it's preceded by things that I think we as a society should be more concerned about than who stuck what where.

 

…and thank you GT:) If I were to interpret the passage you gave it would be; the people of Sodom became completely out of control. Selfish, self-absorbed, they had no conscience whatsoever. I would ask anyone to picture a mob scene consisting of rape, murder and every other uncool thing and LE entering in. LE gets attacked and has no other choice but to "nuke" it per se.

 

I have to really read my own links in order to answer the first paragraph, but did see they gave good descriptions of all dispensationalism theories.

 

I know GT, it's difficult to understand and I lack in proper explanations, at least those that make sense:o

[Keenly]

Tbt, you are advocating religious fascism by saying we shouldn't be allowed to exercise our free speech to mock your religion. You can't pick and choose items from the constitution like you do the bible.

[GorillaTheater]

Fair disclosure: my oldest son is probably, in my opinion, gay, although he is still struggling with his sexual identity. He is also one of the kindest, most thoughtful people I know. I love him very much.

 

Anyone who talks about him being smited may just get smited first, by yours truly.

[pureinheart]

TFW,

Yes, I was out of line. You and Pure, M30 and pie2 have always been very kind to everyone so I wasn't speaking to any of you....

Nothing you post makes me angry TFW because you are fair and thoughtful. My post was not in reply to any of you. I apologize because I see now that was an unfair statement of Christians in general.

Forgive my impertinence,

G

 

…and G, I wanted to let you know that my soapbox on hate of which I quoted you wasn't meant for you, it's something that has concerned me on these boards and others as a whole. I should have posted it on another post.

 

You have always been way cool:D

[truthbetold]

No, but I can expect such a person to have enough intelligence and presence of mind to realize that the ability of two gay people he/she doesn't even know to marry each other (under the auspices of a totally different church or, say, at City Hall) has nothing whatsoever to do with that person's life, and he/she should mind his/her own business and not interfere with other people's rights.

 

You are clearly inferring if you oppose homosexual marriage, you don't have enough intelligence or presence of mind.

 

And what I don't get is why you even give a tinker's damn whether a gay couple you don't even know calls what they have a marriage, or a civil union, or an artichoke. Seriously, how does that affect you and your world in the slightest? Suppose they are "making a mockery of God" by calling it marriage. What on earth does that have to do with you? How can that have any bearing on you, the meaning of your faith in your life, or anything else with the vaguest, most tangential connection to you?

 

I explained that "mockery" most certainly does have something to do with me. I have a larger world view of who my life touches than just my family and friends and those whose lives are set on my path who touch me.

 

My youngest sister is a lesbian, came out about 14 years ago when she was 17. I was the one she chose to come out to first among our family members. It wasn't what I expected to hear her say at that moment; it took me by surprise at first, though in hindsight it shouldn't have because she'd always exhibited certain characteristics (what can I say, I have pathetic gay-dar); then it made complete sense. We chatted for a bit longer, I assured her I was completely cool with who she was, and on we went.

 

I remember that my parents were initially terrified by this. Not because of the revelation of who she was, but because of the suddenly radically amplified likelihood of their little girl being on the receiving end of violence, hate, bigotry and judgment from self-righteous, paleolithic, small-minded idiots. Luckily she's been largely (though not completely) safe from those things; it helps that she's brilliant, very self-assured, and can stand up for herself when she has to. Others she knows haven't been so lucky.

 

So yes, this issue is an excellent example of why we atheists have so little patience for evangelical Christians: you make it your mission to hurt and marginalize people we love with your words, accusations and judgments, people who have never done anything to you or to anybody you care about. All because you've chosen to follow very selectively and strategically chosen sections from a 2,000 year old book whose existence predates modern English and science, which has been translated and re-translated countless times, and whose actual meaning is open to massive debate even among those who believe in it.

 

So you are trying to say you are not just pointing the finger at Christians? Fine, but you most certainly are including them. I've already addressed no one should be out there forcing their views on you. If that happens, that's a reflection on them, not Christianity as a whole. I glorify God with the light of my life. I don't speak the words, but you have no choice on a forum. I can't telepathically send you my thoughts now can I?

 

Here's a list of other admonitions from Leviticus, which you've just quoted as authority for your view that homosexuality is a sin.

 

1. Death penalty for taking God's name in vain (Lev. 24:16) -- “He who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him..."

 

2. Prohibition against eating pork (Lev. 11:7–8) -- "Of their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch..."

 

3. Prohibition against eating fat (Lev. 3:17)

 

4. Forbidding of hair and beard trimming (Lev. 19:27)

 

5. Prohibition against eating crab, clams, oysters (Lev. 11:9–12) -- "But anything in the rivers that has not fins and scales, of the swarming creatures in the waters and of the living creatures that are in the waters, is an abomination to you."

 

6. Death penalty for adultery (Lev. 20:10)

 

7. The profanity of disabled individuals (Lev. 21:18–23) -- “For no one who has a blemish shall draw near, a man blind or lame, or who has a mutilated face or a limb too long, or a man who has an injured foot or an injured hand, or a hunchback, or a dwarf, or a man with a defect in his sights or an itching disease or scabs or crushed testicles; no man of the descendants of Aaron the priest who has a blemish shall come near to offer the Lord’s offerings by fire; since he has a blemish, he shall not come near to offer the bread of his God… He shall not come near the veil or approach the altar, because he has a blemish, that he may not profane my sanctuaries…”

 

8. Others (Lev. 19:19) -- “Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee.”

 

How many of these do you follow in your own life, or cleave to as God's word?

 

And I suppose "cleaving" to God is a compliment? Or is it more innuendo that Christians follow like blind sheep?

 

Please, yes. I agree. No sarcasm. Somebody hold me to account for spewing hate on this thread. One requirement: you have to first identify the hateful speech in question. Simply disagreeing with your views, explaining why, and questioning tenets of Christianity isn't "spewing hate".

 

Sorry to correct you, but I didn't call the Bible "outdated". What I said was "a 2,000 year old book whose existence predates modern English and science, which has been translated and re-translated countless times, and whose actual meaning is open to massive debate even among those who believe in it." Which part of that is incorrect?

 

-- The Bible IS 2,000 years old, give or take. People have been reading it since ancient times. The Old Testament is even older.

 

-- Its existence DOES predate modern English, and modern science. Is this even in dispute?

 

-- It HAS been translated and re-translated countless times. Is this in dispute?

 

-- Its actual meaning IS in dispute. There are multiple translations. There are multiple denominations within Christianity. Theological scholars routinely debate the various interpretations of the Bible with other theological scholars.

 

The above is demonstrative of your thinly veiled attempt to hide contempt. Contempt is a close relative of hate. So I stand corrected, you specifically did not spew hate, merely contempt. But you have sided with those that have.

None of what I said can constitute "hate" by the standards of moderately reasonable people.

 

Funny how you pull out scripture to support your straw man. Problem is Jesus did away with the ceremonial laws with his perfect sacrifice.

 

The Bible is timeless. It's a gift from God for those of us that believe.

 

I read your other post that you are at peace and great family life etc...That's fantastic! I don't begrudge you that one bit. If it's working for you wonderful. I have a great family too. But the difference is, I see that blessing as a gift from God and to be treasured. I screwed up my life when I thought the teachings were antiquated. I was wrong. I was blind NOW I see.

 

Still though, it's clear we will never agree. You can come up with more scripture, I can come up with more explanations and scripture. You don't believe and I get that. But what I have a problem with, is thinking some of us don't make reasons decisions and are just following a 2,000 year old guide. I am versed in the sciences. I have even dabbled in the occult, so please don't assume all of us are just non educated idiots with puritan values. It's so far from the truth it's laughable.

 

What I don't get. Is the anti Christians are pulling out scripture to support the homosexual agenda. When proven that it fails. Then they cry "oh well, I'm glad I don't believe that crap anyway!":confused: Really? Why do people who don't believe need or want scripture to back up anything? Makes no sense.

 

I am stepping out of this thread for good though. Like I told Pure, I can refute pretty much every argument thrown at me. I have a quest for knowledge so I've done lots of research to come up to where I am. Sometimes I think it's sad I needed that, because I think the early Christians were even more free with their beliefs than we are with this society where we have to "prove" everything. Some things in life are just a mystery and that's just the way they should be.

[pureinheart]

Fair disclosure: my oldest son is probably, in my opinion, gay, although he is still struggling with his sexual identity. He is also one of the kindest, most thoughtful people I know. I love him very much.

 

Anyone who talks about him being smited may just get smited first, by yours truly.

 

I know this WILL NOT make ANY sense at all, but what you are saying is correct IMO, and have seen this before (by God).

[TheFinalWord]

TFW,

Yes, I was out of line. You and Pure, M30 and pie2 have always been very kind to everyone so I wasn't speaking to any of you....

Nothing you post makes me angry TFW because you are fair and thoughtful. My post was not in reply to any of you. I apologize because I see now that was an unfair statement of Christians in general.

Forgive my impertinence,

G

 

No problem Grumps! I know that is out of character for you and hey, I've lost my cool on here before. TBH, I see you as a barometer for this forum, b/c you are extremely open minded and have the patience of Job. For you to get annoyed, basically can help me see the tone of a thread without having to even read it!

 

These topics are hard b/c spirituality is a very personal thing so it is easy to get frustrated. Anti-theists tend to see Christians as intellectually bankrupt devoid of free thought. Most Christians spend a lot of time in introspection, so I don't think that is a fair statement, but I respect everyone's right to think that way. Christians, have a tendency to feel a need to correct everyone, which can come across as condescending and gets annoying. Some Christians are very closed-minded (i.e. I cringe when I see Ken Ham getting air time as I think he comes across as rude). The accusations can fly from both ends. And considering we are dealing with humans some of the stereotypes are likely based in reality.

 

To me, we are all seeking the same thing...the truth. I personally believe Jesus Christ is the truth, but not everyone does. I respect everyone's path. IMHO, between our personal journeys and the truth there is a lot of grace. I know I need that! I hope our quest becomes a quest for truth and not judgement. If any "truth" leads me down a path of hate, bitterness, and contempt, I don't want anything to do with it.

 

Best wishes!

[pureinheart]

Tbt, you are advocating religious fascism by saying we shouldn't be allowed to exercise our free speech to mock your religion. You can't pick and choose items from the constitution like you do the bible.

 

Hey Keenly, just FTR, the first exchange with you (page 1) was agreeing with you…forgot to tell you that:o

 

IDK, if you look at the pages and pages- this has been accomplished:p

[Grumpybutfun]

Fair disclosure: my oldest son is probably, in my opinion, gay, although he is still struggling with his sexual identity. He is also one of the kindest, most thoughtful people I know. I love him very much.

 

Anyone who talks about him being smited may just get smited first, by yours truly.

 

I feel the same, very protective of my little girl. She thinks labels are silly and says she isn't gay, she just loves who she loves. She makes me see the world differently. I think she is amazing so I get what you are saying.

G

[pureinheart]

Fair disclosure: my oldest son is probably, in my opinion, gay, although he is still struggling with his sexual identity. He is also one of the kindest, most thoughtful people I know. I love him very much.

 

Anyone who talks about him being smited may just get smited first, by yours truly.

 

GT, just want to say that God judges the heart. We have a tendency to relate to the masses, where as God relates to the individual.

 

Kind of like our laws go …say someone murders another…God looks at why this happened- the intent. Where we may not see this- sometimes we do and it's just (just as in justice), others we can't wait to get the noose out.

[Grumpybutfun]

No problem Grumps! I know that is out of character for you and hey, I've lost my cool on here before. TBH, I see you as a barometer for this forum, b/c you are extremely open minded and have the patience of Job. For you to get annoyed, basically can help me see the tone of a thread without having to even read it!

 

These topics are hard b/c spirituality is a very personal thing so it is easy to get frustrated. Anti-theists tend to see Christians as intellectually bankrupt devoid of free thought. Most Christians spend a lot of time in introspection, so I don't think that is a fair statement, but I respect everyone's right to think that way. Christians, have a tendency to feel a need to correct everyone, which can come across as condescending and gets annoying. Some Christians are very closed-minded (i.e. I cringe when I see Ken Ham getting air time as I think he comes across as rude). The accusations can fly from both ends. And considering we are dealing with humans some of the stereotypes are likely based in reality.

 

To me, we are all seeking the same thing...the truth. I personally believe Jesus Christ is the truth, but not everyone does. I respect everyone's path. IMHO, between our personal journeys and the truth there is a lot of grace. I know I need that! I hope our quest becomes a quest for truth and not judgement. If any "truth" leads me down a path of hate, bitterness, and contempt, I don't want anything to do with it.

 

Best wishes!

 

I truly am glad you called me out. You are a good person, and I am humbled by your strength of character. When you have children, you take things more personally than if someone was attacking you. I admit to overprotectiveness. My wife says she is surprised I let any of our kids move away to college/military by themselves.

As I told Pure, no hate here.

G

[GorillaTheater]

I truly am glad you called me out. You are a good person, and I am humbled by your strength of character. When you have children, you take things more personally than if someone was attacking you. I admit to overprotectiveness. My wife says she is surprised I let any of our kids move away to college/military by themselves.

As I told Pure, no hate here.

G

 

I imagine that may explain my interest in this thread as well.

[pureinheart]

Honestly, I really believe that most evangelicals do what they do out of love for others and most importantly love for God.

 

I couldn't handle being an evangelical (the commission) as my commission is bad enough (some of it is fun though). What is brought to remembrance is the point where many have told me the truth about me- oh that sucks. This was both secular and evangelicals. Some things were said in "love" on both sides, and some was just straight up criticism. Regardless, I was the winner.

 

IMO there is an increase concerning evangelism due to the day and hour we live in. I think things are winding up quick according to Biblical prophecy. This increase in evangelism is meant to help because they see where things are headed.

 

If you see someone headed for a train wreck, most will intervene. This is what evangelicals are doing, they/we see a train wreck worldwide.

 

Russia is a good example. Look at how FAST the taking of Crimea went down…wow, in this day and age! That trips me out.

[UpwardForward]

Seeds planted are seeds planted. Don't blame the messenger. And we are responsible to share what we know.

[UpwardForward]

 

Russia is a good example. Look at how FAST the taking of Crimea went down…wow, in this day and age! That trips me out.

 

That's true. And a Christian forecast or expressed concern about it, over a year before it happened.

[pureinheart]

I actually don't think that we are. Supposed human beings have shown over and over, just how awful they/we can be, and they try to justify their deeds no matter what.

 

Animals, who seem to get the blame for anything thought to be amoral, and disgusting, tend to kill for food only, and have been shown to love and help each other. Some will kill out of competition, but they see it as a true need to survive, like a lioness killing the cubs of another lioness - I don't like it, but are you really going to tell me that we don't have human beings who display similar traits?

 

Anela, I really want to respond because of your love for animals. Thank you.

[truthbetold]

Your comments are filled with hatred and come across as bullying. Your twisted definition of love is total hate. Your hate is dangerous and scary and must be confronted head on. Gay people and animals are part of nature and gay people are dear friends of mine. The way you refer to gay people and gay animals is an abomination.

 

 

If whoever wrote the bible interpreted it as you do, then the bible deserves to be burned in the fireplace. If you are twisting it then shame on you.

 

why must I be baited? Show me ONE post where I say anything about hate? In quoting scripture it's what scripture says. Other's did it to TWIST scripture to their agenda.

 

Where did I ever say I hate animals? Seriously do you have a reading disability? (seriously asking) I love animals, I love all of God's creatures, and all of God's people including my enemies, including you JohnS whoever you are. I guess that must chap your *ss. But it's true. I hate no one. That doesn't mean I support homosexual marriage. I didn't condemn the "people" yeesh, seriously can you read?

 

It's curious you created a sock, to attack me. Why don't you stand on who you really are?

 

I came back to apologize to Grumpy. I always loved reading his posts and I'm terribly sorry you were hurt. I hope my comments didn't cause that. In no way would I ever say an unkind thing to you or yours. If quoting scripture upset you, I apologize, but I would never condemn or hate the person. I really hope you see that. I really do feel bad for all of the misconceptions on here. I think FW said it best, it's getting too hard to have a conducive discussion.

 

I also apologize to Gorilla, I think you misconstrued my intentions as well with one of the posts.

[Grumpybutfun]

 

I came back to apologize to Grumpy. I always loved reading his posts and I'm terribly sorry you were hurt. I hope my comments didn't cause that. In no way would I ever say an unkind thing to you or yours. If quoting scripture upset you, I apologize, but I would never condemn or hate the person. I really hope you see that. I really do feel bad for all of the misconceptions on here. I think FW said it best, it's getting too hard to have a conducive discussion.

 

I also apologize to Gorilla, I think you misconstrued my intentions as well with one of the posts.

 

Wow, thank you for this. I am just a protective father, and you should be able to post your opinions without me getting butthurt about it. I was clearly projecting due to my overprotectiveness of my daughter and TFW was right to call me on it. It is okay to disagree, no need to stop discussing things. I really appreciate the shout out.

Best,

Grumps

[Haydn]

This may have turned a corner.......