Homosexuality

[SilenceInMotion]

It is always possible\likely that in the future (maybe decades) medical researchers will discover how\why individuals are born with a specific sexual disposition.

Until they do, it is merely an arbitrary assumption that people are born with a sexual disposition. Do you know where the notion that people are born gay came from? Nowhere. It just came out of someone's mouth and that's been the politically correct notion.

 

[dragonfly]

Hello Jack,

It is always possible\likely that in the future (maybe decades) medical researchers will discover how\why individuals are born with a specific sexual disposition. For some who feel homosexuality is a moral crime, it will not matter to them what genetic factors causes a person to be heterosexual or homosexual, they will still consider those born as homosexual to be immoral. IMHO, for the vast majority of people, it will help them understand why some people have genetic factors that cause them to be sexually attracted to the same sex.

Anyone who has really tuned into the complexities of how people end up with a demon driving them towards sex with another of the same sex, knows what causes 'homosexuality', although there are endless factors - including choices made by the person in the face of opportunities to do or not do - which make every one of them unique. Nevertheless, at a genetic level, very few people are not 'male' or 'female'. By that I mean... there are genetic abnormalities which may affect hormonal triggers and responses, but for the most part, there is a dominating influence by the Y or X chromosome which joined the original X from the mother. Many other influences are engendered by circumstances and reactions to them - nurture.

Another unwelcome factor in the mix is that despite what children may tell you that they just 'knew' about themselves, there is VERY likely to be someone in their circle how was a victim of, or, who practices homosexual liaisons, even if that male also has heterosexual liaisons. When pressed to say, many males who 'feel' 'homosexual', can recall some uninvited sexual advance on them by another male, when they were younger.

 

[Rex]

Until they do, it is merely an arbitrary assumption that people are born with a sexual disposition. Do you know where the notion that people are born gay came from? Nowhere. It just came out of someone's mouth and that's been the politically correct notion.

We had a brief exchange of feelings yesterday.

I find your understanding and biblical comprehension for the greater part very sound, yet i find it amazing that you do not see and understand catholic doctrine as I do.

What brought it mind was your comment and understanding of the "born this way" mentality as simply coming out of someone mouth.
It's the very same opinion I have of Catholic leadership. I find it unusual that someone with eyes and understanding of scripture can then so easily make the jump to the catholic catechism as a reflection of Gods intent.

I don't want to take or violate forum rules, my intent is to not distract from the topic but I seen an opportunity to express myself and beliefs as the opportunity presented itself.

 

[Axehead]

Hi KC,

Christians do not expect 'homosexuals' to be keeping God's commands unless they turn from their idolatry -

Exodus 20: 3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Romans 1:18 - 28 and more 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. 7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain.

Very good point, dragonfly and the rest of the post was excellent, too.

"One of the essential rules of the Christian life is never to ask a non-Christian to conduct himself like a Christian. If grace really renews a person; if the Christian life is already evidence of the life of someone who is in Christ; if obedience to the Christian ethic is the loving response of a recipient of grace to Him who has shown His love by bestowing grace, then how can one ask a man who has not received, or who did not know that he was under grace, to act as though . . . as though his person were renewed, as though he had experienced grace bestowed upon him, as though he knew that he was the object of God's love? The obligation placed upon him is nothing but restraint. The morality to which he submits can only be based upon the fear of punishment, and God becomes then the great condemner. That is what regularly happens in so-called Christian societies." (Jacques Ellul - To Will and To Do. Pilgrim Press. 1969. pg. 104)


Mixture is one reason the visible church is in the mess that they are.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

What brought it mind was your comment and understanding of the "born this way" mentality as simply coming out of someone mouth.
It's the very same opinion I have of Catholic leadership. I find it unusual that someone with eyes and understanding of scripture can then
so easily make the jump to the catholic catechism as a reflection of Gods intent.

Not all of Scripture is speaking to the same audience. At least not directly anyway. The epistles are to the people of the time they were written. The morals and commands in them are timeless, but then there are things that demand a broader view:

The people of those times had religions. If you were Jewish, you followed either the Old Law or a pagan diety which, as you will find in Jewish paganism, is anything but benevolent. If you were Roman, you paid tribute to the Roman gods. They had one for everything- you couldn't even buy food without doing so. The penalty in most cases for not obeying religions was death, and if you had no faith in Christ, you would have no reason to follow any of his commands.

The apostles speak out to them: what faith do you have if you have no works, and what are works without faith? The answer is found here- you cannot serve two masters. If you have faith, you will serve only one, and if you have only works, your works are in vain by the tribute you pay to paganism.

An atheist was put to death right beside Christianity and anything that wasn't a belief in a certain god or pantheon. The only difference in martyrdom is that one would be protesting, while the believer would be sending a message of the gospel. These are the believers who were called saints.

Sainthood is those who are called greater in Heaven. They find favor in God, and we ask them to speak on our behalf through their passion. Those who are not saints are called lesser in Heaven, but are saved nonetheless. Their lacking suffering on Earth is put forth in Purgatory, because as th eBible tells, you must suffer with Christ to be buried with him.

When you look from the Catholic perspective, you start to see the dots connecting in Scripture with the Church. A lot of these things are put away by other grand designs, like Luther's OSAS or Calvin's TULIP. But in my opinion, the church is the one that has it right. It's ancient tradition. Other concepts have come and gone, and it was only a matter of time before one became successfully launched, and that is what I feel Protestantism is.
Jews will say the same thing about Christianity though. They will say that it was only a matter of time before a heresy did just the same. I feel that it is an unsolvable issue until Christ returns and becomes our Savior once again.

 

[JackSafari]

Until they do, it is merely an arbitrary assumption that people are born with a sexual disposition. Do you know where the notion that people are born gay came from? Nowhere. It just came out of someone's mouth and that's been the politically correct notion.

It still remains an interesting question, and a moral dilemma for those who denounce homosexuality. If in the future it is determined that genetic factors are the source of a person's sexual disposition, then denouncing their sexuality is to reject a person based genetic factors that are inherent to who they are. It would be like denouncing left handed people as being immoral for being born left handed, or that brown eye people are immoral.

At the moment, it is unknown what causes anyone's sexual orientation. Most are heterosexual dominate, but some are not. Many many studies show that people, including children as they grown up, have an innate sexual disposition, just as they do being right or left handed. Medical research has not identified the factors of what creates a person's sexual orientation, but that pattern are clear that its not an individual choice.

 

[KCKID]

Below is the link to (51) Gay Affirming Churches in Australia as requested (I think) by KingJ.

http://www.gaychurch.org/find a church/foreign nations/australia.htm

For some reason or other I couldn't post them by name. Anyway, I hope the link works for those who might be interested in checking it out.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

It still remains an interesting question, and a moral dilemma for those who denounce homosexuality. If in the future it is determined that genetic factors are the source of a person's sexual disposition, then denouncing their sexuality is to reject a person based genetic factors that are inherent to who they are. It would be like denouncing left handed people as being immoral for being born left handed, or that brown eye people are immoral.

At the moment, it is unknown what causes anyone's sexual orientation. Most are heterosexual dominate, but some are not. Many many studies show that people, including children as they grown up, have an innate sexual disposition, just as they do being right or left handed. Medical research has not identified the factors of what creates a person's sexual orientation, but that pattern are clear that its not an individual choice.

Homosexuality is more logically due to environment in contrast to the person's mentality. There are a lot of interesting studies which point in that direction.

For example, homophobics have a higher chance of becoming homosexual. A sizable amount of people who have had sex wit the opposite gender and yet become homosexual admit to have actually been homophobic beforehand. Homophibia has never been assumed to be environmental, due to whatever social workings and indoctrination they are brough up in. Somewhere in that working is a stigma that forms in the person's mentality, which in some way makes them more inclined to becoming a homosexual their self.

Another example would be that a good amount of homosexuals are also left handed. An idea could be put forth that perhaps their psychology is reversed- left hand, homosexual, examine objects starting from the bottom right, etc.
But that was quickly thrown out because there are people that are any one of those things and not the others. So that notion simply fails. It's more reasonable to say that they have simply felt different, being left handed, and throughout their life they see themselves as 'backward compatible' to a lot of things they do in general. This in turn could become involuntary and a direct mental stigma for homosexuality.

The problem with the notion of a gay gene is that a heterosexual gene hasn't been found. Scientists struggle with the concept of a gay gene' because there doesn't seem to be a way to discern it if it does. If it exists, it's like looking for gravity, if that makes sense.

 

[stefen]

Hi,

My only one direct question here is, why sodom and gomorrah is recognised as sin city by God which made him to fiire it off?? Did God see which looks natural when they called angels for sex??

In new testament, we all know that paul wrote very very strong like those acts are just filled with Lust.

 

[KCKID]

Sorry for supplying a link that doesn't appear to work. Anyway, below are the Welcoming Gay Friendly Churches in Australi that I spoke of.

Integrity Adelaide. Adelaide. Anglican

Ashfield Parish Mission. Ashfield. Uniting Church

Burdekin Uniting Church. Ayr QLD. Uniting Church
Balmain Uniting Church. Balmain. Uniting Church

Blackwood Uniting Church. Blackwood, Adelaide. Uniting
Church

Bondi Beach, Chapel By The Sea. Bondi Beach. Uniting Church

St. John’s Anglican Cathedral. Brisbane, QLD. Anglican

MCC Brisbane. Brisbane, QLD. MCC

New Way Community Chapel. Brisbane, QLD. Non-denominational

Brunswick Baptist Church. Brunswick. Baptist

Canberra Baptist Church. Canberra City. Baptist

Canberra City Uniting Church. Canberra City. Uniting Church

Church of the Trinity. Clarence Park. Uniting Church

Community Church of Saint Mark. Clifton Hill. Baptist

St. James’ Congregation. Curtin, Canberra. Uniting Church

Christ Church Anglican Cathedral. Darwin. Anglican

United Ecumenical Catholic Church. Dundas Valley. Ecumenical
Catholic Church

Yilki Uniting Church. Encounter bay. Uniting Church

St. Chad’s Anglican Church. Fullarton. Anglican

Glebe Café Church. Glebe. Uniting Church

Gordon Uniting Church. Gordon. Uniting Church

MCC Good Shepherd. Granville. MCC

Homebush Uniting Church. Homebush. Uniting Church

Wayside Chapel Parish Mission. Kings Cross. Uniting Church

St. Ninian’s Congregation. Lyneham. Uniting Church

Integrity Melbourne. Melbourne. Anglican

Ashburton Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist

Box Hill Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist

Collins Street Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist

East Doncaster Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist

Footscray Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist

St. Kilda Baptist Church. Melbourne. Baptist

MCC Melbourne. Melbourne. MCC

Acts2Faith Fellowship. Melbourne. Non-denominational

Nambucca Heads Uniting Church. Nambucca Heads. Uniting Church

Hamilton Uniting Church. Newcastle. Uniting Church

North Adelaide Baptist Church. North Adelaide. Baptist

Paddington Uniting Church. Paddington. Uniting Church

The Open Door. Penrith. Community of Christ

Randwick Uniting Church. Randwick. Uniting Church

Strathfield Uniting Church. Strathfield. Uniting Church

St. Andrews Anglican Church. Subiaco. Anglican

St. James King Street. Sydney. Anglican

Community of Christ Our Hope. Sydney. Ecumenical Catholic
Church of Australia

Crave MCC. Sydney, Paddington. MCC

MCC Sydney. Sydney. MCC

Pitt Street Congregation. Sydney. Uniting Church
South Sydney Uniting Church. Sydney. Uniting Church

Waverley Lugar Brae Uniting Church. Waverley. Uniting Church

Footscray Baptist Church. Victoria, Footscray. Baptist

South Yarra Community Baptist Church. Victoria. South Yarra.
Baptist

St. Francis & St. Clare Liberal Catholic Mission.
Victoria. Liberal Catholic Church

Westgate Baptist Community. Yarraville. Baptist

 

[SilenceInMotion]

The majority of those churches are Anlgican and uber liberal Baptist.

Why that is relevant: the Anglican communion is under fire by the uber liberal UK, and Baptist churches have always been abnormally split by conservative and liberal notions.

 

[KCKID]

Hi,

My only one direct question here is, why sodom and gomorrah is recognised as sin city by God which made him to fiire it off?? Did God see which looks natural when they called angels for sex??

In new testament, we all know that paul wrote very very strong like those acts are just filled with Lust.

Kinda hard to follow the wording in your post (perhaps English isn't your first language?) but calling someone out to have sex with them is not consentual and is therefore referred to as 'rape' ...or, in this case. 'attempted rape' since it never occurred. That said, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah (probably a myth anyway) would have been heterosexuals desiring to intimidate and demean strangers by raping them which was apparently their wicked custom. It's referred to in Ezekiel as 'inhospitable' ...no mention of homosexuality whatever. That these twin cities were inhabited by homosexuals is especially a myth but still deceptively perpetuated by some Christians who need to store this (probably) mythical drama in their anti-gay arsenal.

The majority of those churches are Anlgican and uber liberal Baptist.

Why that is relevant: the Anglican communion is under fire by the uber liberal UK, and Baptist churches have always been abnormally split by conservative and liberal notions.

The majority of them might be Anglican and uber liberal Baptist but there are also others such as the Uniting Church and the MCC. Would you be willing to go out on a limb and say that none of these Churches and their membership can possibly be Christian? If not, then don't we have somewhat of a dilemma here? I also refer to myself as a Christian (i.e. Christ follower) but I'm in total disagreement with you and others on this forum with regard to the issue of homosexuality. Is there any way that we can reconcile our differences without resorting to name calling and insults?

 

[stefen]

Kinda hard to follow the wording in your post (perhaps English isn't your first language?)

Yeah English is not 1st or even 2nd language in our country. English is not taught in some states in my country. We learn it on our own wish. Anyway Language is to communicate with one and another. Thats doesnt require it should be gramatically perfect. Thats my perception.

but calling someone out to have sex with them is not consentual and is therefore referred to as 'rape' ...or, in this case. 'attempted rape' since it never occurred.

Do you call it as a rape?? How funny it is?? Lot have allowed to send his own daughters but they wanted the angels only. Is this is termed as rape in your country?

That said, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah (probably a myth anyway)

No single word in the Bible is myth. Thats how we trust in My bible. Everything wrote in the Bible is inspired by Holy Spirit who wont lie.

would have been heterosexuals desiring to intimidate and demean strangers by raping them which was apparently their wicked custom. It's referred to in Ezekiel as 'inhospitable' ...no mention of homosexuality whatever. That these twin cities were inhabited by homosexuals is especially a myth but still deceptively perpetuated by some Christians who need to store this (probably) mythical drama in their anti-gay arsenal.

This is a sin which maked God to treat this as spoling the nature of His creation. Thats why He washed away whole city.

 

[KCKID]

Incidentally, MCC stands for Metropolitan Community Church whose Mission Statement is this:

Metropolitan Community Churches are on a bold mission to transform hearts, lives, and history…Just as Jesus did, we are called to: Do justice, show kindness, and live humbly with God. (Micah 6:8) – From MCC’s Statement of Vision. MCC recognizes a state of need around the world in the areas of human rights and justice. As people of faith, we have a responsibility to act on behalf of those who cannot effect change on their own. We endeavor to build bridges that liberate and unite voices of sacred defiance.

Does anyone find this Mission Statement to be non-Christian or in any way offensive to 'mainstream' Christians?

 

[JackSafari]

Homosexuality is more logically due to environment in contrast to the person's mentality. There are a lot of interesting studies which point in that direction.

For example, homophobics have a higher chance of becoming homosexual. A sizable amount of people who have had sex wit the opposite gender and yet become homosexual admit to have actually been homophobic beforehand. Homophibia has never been assumed to be environmental, due to whatever social workings and indoctrination they are brough up in. Somewhere in that working is a stigma that forms in the person's mentality, which in some way makes them more inclined to becoming a homosexual their self.

Another example would be that a good amount of homosexuals are also left handed. An idea could be put forth that perhaps their psychology is reversed- left hand, homosexual, examine objects starting from the bottom right, etc.
But that was quickly thrown out because there are people that are any one of those things and not the others. So that notion simply fails. It's more reasonable to say that they have simply felt different, being left handed, and throughout their life they see themselves as 'backward compatible' to a lot of things they do in general. This in turn could become involuntary and a direct mental stigma for homosexuality.

The problem with the notion of a gay gene is that a heterosexual gene hasn't been found. Scientists struggle with the concept of a gay gene' because there doesn't seem to be a way to discern it if it does. If it exists, it's like looking for gravity, if that makes sense.

From all studies I have read that come from credible\unbiased sources in that past 10-20 years, all point that sexual orientation is being pre-established; a person is born with more-or-less hardwired, much like other personal traits that can not be permanently changed. Sexual orientation is not a learned or created process, where a child grows up and life events develop into a sexual orientation. However, "sexual behavior" is not the same as "sexual orientation"; how a person choose to expresses himself sexually is combination of many factors that includes life experience both good and bad.

Some Homophobic people that have homosexual feelings is more of an indication they are rejecting what has always been their sexual nature, not that homophobia creates homosexuality. I have known such people who for many years rejected their own homosexual tenancies that were present even as children, but ultimately they accepted themselves as they got older and discovered that they were unable to changes their sexual orientation.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

The majority of them might be Anglican and uber liberal Baptist but there are also others such as the Uniting Church and the MCC. Would you be willing to go out on a limb and say that none of these Churches and their membership can possibly be Christian? If not, then don't we have somewhat of a dilemma here? I also refer to myself as a Christian (i.e. Christ follower) but I'm in total disagreement with you and others on this forum with regard to the issue of homosexuality. Is there any way that we can reconcile our differences without resorting to name calling and insults?

How does it matter what a bunch of laymen people think? Any church that supports homosexuality do so because they are pressured to. Nothing changed in the belief of what the Bible deems homosexuality until this past decade when liberals decided to blow their trumpets.

That about wraps up the whole thing. Australia, the UK- good luck having conservative values there without being called a 'bigot'. It's their new favorite word in the English language.

You won't catch any of this nonsense in a Latin country, and you see a lot less of it in the States and other countries with a strong conservative prescence. That's because the more one focuses on God instead of what society demands, the more you start to reject things that are wrong. A lot of churches are simply failing.

 

[JackSafari]

Below is the link to (51) Gay Affirming Churches in Australia as requested (I think) by KingJ.

http://www.gaychurch.org/find a church/foreign nations/australia.htm

For some reason or other I couldn't post them by name. Anyway, I hope the link works for those who might be interested in checking it out.

This is why I find religion in general to be nebulousness. What some churches finds acceptable, others out right rejects. My personal elevation is simplified down to "Is a church 'inclusive' or 'exclusive'".

If the church is 'inclusive', they have a healthy spiritual environment because they are open to all. They are accepting, moving away from condemnation.
If a church is 'exclusive' then its very likely to have a lot (older) beliefs that limit spiritual growth. They lean toward condemnation, rather than acceptance.

 

[KCKID]

Yeah English is not 1st or even 2nd language in our country. English is not taught in some states in my country. We learn it on our own wish. Anyway Language is to communicate with one and another. Thats doesnt require it should be gramatically perfect. Thats my perception.

That's fine. It wasn't a criticism of your English ...just an observation.

Do you call it as a rape?? How funny it is?? Lot have allowed to send his own daughters but they wanted the angels only. Is this is termed as rape in your country?

Forgive me, but I will not even try try to converse with someone with such a mindset. It was attempted rape. Finish.

No single word in the Bible is myth. Thats how we trust in My bible. Everything wrote in the Bible is inspired by Holy Spirit who wont lie.

I said that it's probably a myth. We have no impirical evidence that Sodom &Gomorrah ever existed. The Bible abounds with allegories, figuratives, often symbolisms, and, at times, hyperbole. None of these things are lies but merely illustrations that have meaning. Lying is something totally different.

That said, do you stone to death those who profane the Sabbath (Friday sunset until Saturday sunset)? Do you take disobedient children to the outskirts of town and execute them? Do you do the same with adulterers and homosexuals? I would expect that your answer would be 'yes' to all of those things if you truly believe that everything in the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit who won't lie.

This is a sin which maked God to treat this as spoling the nature of His creation. Thats why He washed away whole city.

God had decided to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah before the angel/people drama took place. There is much ignorance surrounding the story of S&G and I'm not only making reference to you.

 

[stefen]

That's fine. It wasn't a criticism of your English ...just an observation.

Forgive me, but I will not even try try to converse with someone with such a mindset. It was attempted rape. Finish.

I said that it's probably a myth. We have no impirical evidence that Sodom &Gomorrah ever existed. The Bible abounds with allegories, figuratives, often symbolisms, and, at times, hyperbole. None of these things are lies but merely illustrations that have meaning. Lying is something totally different.

That said, do you stone to death those who profane the Sabbath (Friday sunset until Saturday sunset)? Do you take disobedient children to the outskirts of town and execute them? Do you do the same with adulterers and homosexuals? I would expect that your answer would be 'yes' to all of those things if you truly believe that everything in the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit who won't lie.

Yes. I am still saying that Bible is written inspired by Holy Spirit. I am living by Grace now, Not by OT Law. Law has no rule here when there is Grace of God. We cant live holy by the Law, So, Jesus came to Die for it and He did, we are saved.

But i am saying that Homo's are thrown out of the world?? No and Never, Jesus Blood will clean them also, if they repent. They are always welcome to church. But its no use, until they repent. Its SIN, SIN, SIN

God had decided to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah before the angel/people drama took place. There is much ignorance surrounding the story of S&G and I'm not only making reference to you.

Yeah God have decided earlier itself, But this was shown to us as an example. Bible didnt show any other example as irritating thing in that city.

See, Finally.. If you want to contradict the Bible. Do it. We have no loss in that. For who believes in that. It is power. who wont believe, its nothing for them.

 

[KCKID]

How does it matter what a bunch of laymen people think? Any church that supports homosexuality do so because they are pressured to. Nothing changed in the belief of what the Bible deems homosexuality until this past decade when liberals decided to blow their trumpets.

Is that what you - a layperson - thinks? I doubt that any Church would or could be pressured into supporting anything that was opposed to its core Christian values. That would be ridiculous. What HAS occurred, I believe, is that so many people in the past 20 years or so have come out of the closet, so to speak, that it raised the question as to whether homosexuality was INDEED 'natural' for homosexuals. But, what about the Bible ...does the Bible not say that homosexuality is a sin? Well, yes, it appears to or, at least, that's what we've always been taught. So, those particular scriptures have since been re-examined exergetically by scholars that are NOT necessarily homosexuals and - guess what? - ALL of those so-called 'clobber texts' make no reference to homosexuality per se (as we refer to it today) but to idolatry practices ...many of which were being introduced into the early Christian Church by pagans who knew no better. This is precisely what the authors of the New Testament (Paul, Jude and Timothy in particular) are referencing in their 'condemnation' of the sexual practices surrounding idol worship within the Church. If one types in 'Cybele Worship' they will find many references on the Internet as to what these biblical luminaries were really addressing. The question I would have to ask is ...why is it necessary for Christians to ignore these equally valid - perhaps even more so - interpretations of these scriptures in favor of the traditional interpretations that are used to hate and to condemn others? Would not one think that a Christian might prefer to err on the side of the less condemning scripture ...particularly since these interpretations have equal - perhaps more so - merit? ????

I'll admit that I've never had a Christian ax to grind against homosexuals even before I was enlightened by the recent 'new and improved' definitions of the so-called 'clobber texts'. Does this mean that I approve of everything sexual or otherwise that a homosexual might do. No, of course not. The same with regard to heterosexuals. But, one thing I have learned, probably the hard way, is that what two adult people might do in the privacy of their own homes is TOTALLY their business and not mine. Paul, Jude and company appear to have shown no interest in what people might have been doing in private either. What irked them is what the pagans were doing IN PUBLIC and, particularly, what they were doing in their beloved CHRISTIAN CHURCH ...THAT IS violating the numero uno commandment "thou shalt have no other gods but me." Again, check out 'Cybele Worship' on the Internet and the meaning behind Paul's, Judes, et al, words will become quite evident.

That about wraps up the whole thing. Australia, the UK- good luck having conservative values there without being called a 'bigot'. It's their new favorite word in the English language.

You won't catch any of this nonsense in a Latin country, and you see a lot less of it in the States and other countries with a strong conservative prescence. That's because the more one focuses on God instead of what society demands, the more you start to reject things that are wrong. A lot of churches are simply failing.

If the word 'bigot' is appropriate then there is no reason why it should not be used appropriately. As for your comment about Latin countries who are steeped in the dogma of Catholic tradition I would hardly recommend them as a religious culture we ought to follow. They already believe a great deal of nonsense. As for the states, as I mentioned previously, I have never in all of my years seen and heard such blatant mocking of Christianity, both socially and on TV, as I see and hear today. Australia is just the same, I quickly add. Christianity has become a joke to many and the Christian Fundamentalists are the ones who have fuelled this blatant disregard by many in society of the very person its actions should be emulating ...Jesus.