"Pushing the Homosexual Agenda"

[Josho]

But LGBT ideologies were being pushed in universities well before then. Melb uni was teaching it back around the year 2000.
My sister started uni in about 2000 after going to a Catholic high school.
By the time she had finished uni they had turned her into a fully fledged feminazi

I did not realize, so it must have came into schools a lot later.

 

[Cristo Rei]

I did not realize, so it must have came into schools a lot later.

Maybe public high schools had it earlier?

 

[Josho]

Maybe public high schools had it earlier?

Possibly, but still the non-Christian kids, did not really see it as a good thing 10 years ago.

 

[marksman]

There was a time in my life where I felt the same way, however, the reality is that we live in a world where gay people exist, nearly 10 million in the USA alone. Reality should not something that should kids from knowing exists. We need to teach them critical thinking skills and confront them with this world's realities so they can be prepared to be productive and kind in the real world.

Just a slight correction. I would think that there are over 300 million gay people in the USA. Whereas homosexuals are a very small minority.

 

[marksman]

So because you don't agree with how they have sex and that they are unable to conceive, you sought to deny them the right to marry. Yet I'd bet you don't seek to deny others the right to marry on the same basis (e.g., heterosexuals who have non-traditional sex and infertile couples). Then out of the other side of your mouth you try and tell me you have no hatred for gays? Nope, not buying that for a second.

Sorry justadude but your arguments do not hold water. For a Christian who is a Christian (many who claim to be are not), it is not a case of denying them the right to marry. All Christian teaching must if it is to be valid start with what the scripture says, otherwise you have no foundation for your arguments.

I won't go into it here because it would take several pages to elucidate, but the scripture is quite clear where it stands regarding homosexuality. The jury is not out on this one so that is where you start (if you are a Christian). We don't have the privilege of picking and choosing those parts of the Bible that suit us as all of it was inspired by God for reproof, correction, and our well being.

So saying we deny homosexuals the right to marry is to start halfway through the story. Until we start at the beginning, we cannot answer questions like that. For your information, God made us male and female. He didn't make us male and female and homosexual. The fact that he made us male and female and based the whole of creation on that fact means that is where we begin.

If you read the bible from cover to cover you will find that has never changed. Jesus in Matthew confirmed that as a fact when he quoted Genesis I.
Therefore the fact is we do not deny them the right to marry, God does. If you want to take the argument up with him be my guest but I cannot invent my own take on it contrary to the word of God and say it is OK as I see it for homosexuals to get married. If God says no then I say no. If God says you shall not murder then I say you shall not murder. if God says you shall honour your mother and father then I say to honour your mother and father.

The problem with secular thinking is that although the country is founded on the Judeo Christian ethic, they seem to be very selective and interpret everything in terms of who shouts the loudest, not what is right and proper.

And for your information, a lot of what homosexuals demand is based on lies. For instance, one of the mantras used during the same-sex marriage debate they claimed it would make them second class citizens if they were not allowed to marry.

Total rubbish of course because if it made them second class citizens then they would already be second class citizens before they married, but the facts show they are anything but second class. It is a fact that homosexuals have one of the highest per capita incomes in the country. If that makes you a second class citizen then that is what I aspire to.

In addition, because they have only themselves to think about they have a higher spending capacity than most others. If that is second class then I want to be second class.

Another fact is that there is more violence amongst homosexual couples per head of polulation that amongst heterosexual couples. If more violence means they are not going to be second class citizens, why would they want to be first-class citizens?

And one other fact you might like to consider, is that those countries that have legalised same-sex marriage, on average only 2% of homosexuals have got married. That means that the majority of homosexuals want to be second class citizens.

 

[aspen]

This past weekend, Disney/Pixar released a nine-minute short film titled "Out", which is about a young man's struggles with coming out to his parents as gay. It's the first Disney/Pixar film that centers on being gay, with a gay main character.

As expected, Christian groups are upset. That by itself is no big deal. The proper reaction to them being upset over the film is "So?" However, it's what they claim to be upset about that's concerning. A good example is the Christian news site LifeSiteNews, where they refer to the inclusion of LGBTQ characters and actors as "promotion of the LGBT agenda". Ken Ham of AnswersinGenesis said Disney "continues to push the LGBTQ agenda on kids" in a tweet.

The only thing I can take away from those reactions is that conservative Christians believe merely acknowledging the existence of LGBTQs by including them in movies is "pushing their agenda". That leads to an obvious set of questions.

How exactly do they think this works? Do they think that otherwise straight kids will see LGBTQ characters in movies and suddenly decide to be gay?

If it works that way, does it work in reverse, where a gay person seeing a heterosexual character will make them turn straight?

Would these Christian groups prefer to make inclusion of LGBTQ characters and actors illegal?

Do LGBTQs have the same rights to be in movies, TV shows, and other media as heterosexuals?

The whole thing kind of reminds me of this meme....

crazy stuff.
People will do everything possible to avoid exercise, eating right and loving all of our neighbors

 

[Justadude]

Societal morals. First we must define it and that part is subjective as we see here with different definitions

I define it as; acts that have a purpose of expanding a community.
You define it as; what the majority of people feel.

So our morals are fixed. We believe they are universally true, anywhere, any time.
Your morals are fluid. You believe they can differ depending on when and where.

Ah that's actually a really nice and simple way to put it, im quite pleased with that one... LoL

Crying and berating people who disagree with you is a very leftist thing to do. Don't be a brownshirt mate, your better than that.

Understand that older people grew up in an era where this was all frowned upon. We didn't get taught all this stuff.
Demanding that your elders forget their morals and adhere to these new contrarian morals is next to impossible

Like I told you earlier, don't lecture me about morals, especially by citing the Bible and saying your morals are "fixed". Unless you believe genocide and taking young girls as the spoils of war are "objectively moral", you don't even believe your own rhetoric.

 

[Justadude]

@Justadude

Contraception became legal, then abortion, then fornication became acceptable, then adultery, then same-sex sex became legalized, then same-sex marriage became legalized, then euthanasia.

If they were restricting on what the Church can and can't preach from the Bible in the 2025, would you support it?

If they were forcing LGBTQ ideologies into churches in 2025, would you support it?

If they were pushing for polygamy to be legalized in 2030 would you support it?

If they were pushing for theft to be legalized in 2035 would you support it?

You see where this is going....

I want to ask you justadude, where did morals originate from?

I believe a country with no morals, is a country that has moved away from God. We have seen this in history before, back when Russia was an atheist state.

Again you operate from the framework that allowing gays to marry leads to lawlessness, while at the same time insisting that you don't hate gays. The contradiction between those two is obvious.

Plus, if contraception, abortion, "fornication", etc. are all against your religious beliefs then don't do them. But the moment you try and force everyone else to live according to your religion you edge closer to effectively being the Christian version of the Taliban.

 

[Justadude]

Sorry justadude but your arguments do not hold water. For a Christian who is a Christian (many who claim to be are not), it is not a case of denying them the right to marry. All Christian teaching must if it is to be valid start with what the scripture says, otherwise you have no foundation for your arguments.

I won't go into it here because it would take several pages to elucidate, but the scripture is quite clear where it stands regarding homosexuality. The jury is not out on this one so that is where you start (if you are a Christian). We don't have the privilege of picking and choosing those parts of the Bible that suit us as all of it was inspired by God for reproof, correction, and our well being.

So saying we deny homosexuals the right to marry is to start halfway through the story. Until we start at the beginning, we cannot answer questions like that. For your information, God made us male and female. He didn't make us male and female and homosexual. The fact that he made us male and female and based the whole of creation on that fact means that is where we begin.

If you read the bible from cover to cover you will find that has never changed. Jesus in Matthew confirmed that as a fact when he quoted Genesis I.
Therefore the fact is we do not deny them the right to marry, God does. If you want to take the argument up with him be my guest but I cannot invent my own take on it contrary to the word of God and say it is OK as I see it for homosexuals to get married. If God says no then I say no. If God says you shall not murder then I say you shall not murder. if God says you shall honour your mother and father then I say to honour your mother and father.

The problem with secular thinking is that although the country is founded on the Judeo Christian ethic, they seem to be very selective and interpret everything in terms of who shouts the loudest, not what is right and proper.

And for your information, a lot of what homosexuals demand is based on lies. For instance, one of the mantras used during the same-sex marriage debate they claimed it would make them second class citizens if they were not allowed to marry.

Total rubbish of course because if it made them second class citizens then they would already be second class citizens before they married, but the facts show they are anything but second class. It is a fact that homosexuals have one of the highest per capita incomes in the country. If that makes you a second class citizen then that is what I aspire to.

In addition, because they have only themselves to think about they have a higher spending capacity than most others. If that is second class then I want to be second class.

Another fact is that there is more violence amongst homosexual couples per head of polulation that amongst heterosexual couples. If more violence means they are not going to be second class citizens, why would they want to be first-class citizens?

And one other fact you might like to consider, is that those countries that have legalised same-sex marriage, on average only 2% of homosexuals have got married. That means that the majority of homosexuals want to be second class citizens.

Here's what you're missing.....I don't give a crap what the Bible says....about anything. If you think it's "the word of god", then by all means live your life by it, just don't try and force anyone else to live according to your religion. When you try and do that, you put yourself in the same category as the Taliban.

 

[Justadude]

crazy stuff.
People will do everything possible to avoid exercise, eating right and loving all of our neighbors

I think some of the Christians here are rather upset that the days when they could force everyone to live according to their religious beliefs are over. Plus, they're conservative Christians and as history shows, conservative Christians have always hated on one group or another.

 

[Cristo Rei]

Like I told you earlier, don't lecture me about morals

Why are you so hostile and indignant now?
U weren't like that before

 

[Cristo Rei]

just don't try and force anyone else to live according to your religion

Who is forcing, we're merely expressing opinions.
Forcing is exposing children to LGBT material or mandating vaxines or requiring a drivers license to drive

When you try and do that, you put yourself in the same category as the Taliban.

Do u realize how many things in our society is forced or enforced. By that logic we already live under the Taliban

 

[Justadude]

Why are you so hostile and indignant now?
U weren't like that before

I'm done being polite to bigots.

Who is forcing, we're merely expressing opinions.
Forcing is exposing children to LGBT material or mandating vaxines or requiring a drivers license to drive

Too stupid to bother with.

Do u realize how many things in our society is forced or enforced. By that logic we already live under the Taliban

Try and think for a second. I'm talking about forcing people to live by your religion's rules, even though they aren't in your religion. You'd be pretty upset if Muslims banned pork and alcohol in your country, right? You're not a Muslim, so why should you live according to Islamic law? By the exact same reasoning, why should non-Christians have to live according to Christian law?

 

[Cristo Rei]

I'm done being polite to bigots.

Too stupid to bother with.

Try and think for a second. I'm talking about forcing people to live by your religion's rules, even though they aren't in your religion. You'd be pretty upset if Muslims banned pork and alcohol in your country, right? You're not a Muslim, so why should you live according to Islamic law? By the exact same reasoning, why should non-Christians have to live according to Christian law?

The notion that unless one is absolutely tolerant of absolutely everything one is a bigot is too stupid to argue about

Strawman... No forcing here. Your the one forcing your narrative on a Christian forum

You've changed. Ur a proper brownshirt now

 

[Justadude]

The notion that unless one is absolutely tolerant of absolutely everything one is a bigot is too stupid to argue about

Strawman... No forcing here. Your the one forcing your narrative on a Christian forum

You've changed. Ur a proper brownshirt now

So in your mind the ones advoctating for LGBTQ rights are the Nazis. I'm sure I'm not the first person who's said this to you, but you're a nut.

 

[aspen]

I think some of the Christians here are rather upset that the days when they could force everyone to live according to their religious beliefs are over. Plus, they're conservative Christians and as history shows, conservative Christians have always hated on one group or another.

dualism is rife
and it is a heresy
yet, it is seems to be a crucial component in conservative Christian doctrine

 

[Justadude]

dualism is rife
and it is a heresy
yet, it is seems to be a crucial component in conservative Christian doctrine

Do you mean "dualism" as in, that the mind and body are separate?

 

[Cristo Rei]

So in your mind the ones advocating for LGBTQ rights are the Nazis. I'm sure I'm not the first person who's said this to you, but you're a nut.

Ur a real liberal now, easily triggered by facts and full of insults

 

[Justadude]

Ur a real liberal now, easily triggered by facts and full of insults

That's rich coming from the guy who just called me a Nazi.

 

[Cristo Rei]

That's rich coming from the guy who just called me a Nazi.

Nazis had a strict ideology like you do, they would not accept any differing opinions like you do