J
Jermosh
Guest
But you are a sinner as well. Even the rightous fall 7 times a day. So your going to rebuke yourself?No problem Mr. Pot. Bible says we are to rebuke sinners. Thats what I’m doing.
But you are a sinner as well. Even the rightous fall 7 times a day. So your going to rebuke yourself?No problem Mr. Pot. Bible says we are to rebuke sinners. Thats what I’m doing.
I thought it was paediophilia. There was a well known dutch Senetor who was a prolific writer trying to defend his lifestyle of paediophilia.Correct. 80% of the cases were teenage boys. The correct term is *ephebophilia. *I don’t know of the data, but it is quite different from pedophilia.
I believe that there is plenty of evidence to show that a man’s “sex” drive is second only to his drive for “recognition”.I don’t believe that there is any evidence to show that homosexual men are more inclined to paedophile behaviour than heterosexual ones. It may be more widely reported but then abuse by Catholic priests is more widely reported than that by other authority figures. Reporting of crime is not an accurate guide to the actual frequency of crime.
watches intensly at the unfolding debate…No problem Mr. Pot. Bible says we are to rebuke sinners. Thats what I’m doing.
I never looked at like that, you make a great point.I believe that there is plenty of evidence to show that a man’s “sex” drive is second only to his drive for “recognition”.
I don’t want my son in the same “locker room” as an authorative figure who is attracted to his same gender at any age, and therefore could possibly be attracted to him.
The same would go for a daughter if i had one.
To me it is just as wrong as a male teacher going into the girls locker room, and It is just an invitation to disaster.
Peace of the Lord be with you!
Actually I have read the Bible. I don’t recall any part of the Gospel where Our Lord used words like whore, thief or pervert to describe the “public sinners” he ministered to. He reserved his sternest words for the outwardly religious types of his day who felt that the highest calling of God was to condemn others rather than serve them.That its NOT ok to be a homo. I suggest you get some counseling, or better yet…actually read the Bible.
I’ve read the text of the bill and the underlying legislation. Those reports are incorrect.Katherine,
I listened to an Illinois represenative this morning, one signed the bill, and she said there is NO exemption for Churches and that she feels there should not be an exemption for Churches. It was also reported in the newspaper that there is no Church exemption.
No. I agree with you and that is why I support the new law.Katherine,
I agree that gays should not be discriminated against regarding housing and employment–with the exception that Churches should be able to hire people who follow the teachings of their faith.
Do you feel that Catholic Churches should be forced to hire gays or lesbians?
Under the Illinois law you could not be sued.Let’s see…say I own a men’s haberdashery with a help wanted sign in the window. I need to hire a salesman to wait on the customers who come in. A young man comes in who is very effiminate in manner and during the course of the interview he informs me that he would be an excellent salesman because he just loves to fit men in their suits. In fact, he does all the shopping for his “life partner” and has a good eye for what looks good on men. My customers are primarily middle-aged married men who would likely be very uncomfortable dealing with such a man. I decline to hire him. Now I can be sued for illegal discrimination? Is that your idea of justice?
Ouch!!! or as we say in this country “A hit my friend, a veritable hit”Actually I have read the Bible. I don’t recall any part of the Gospel where Our Lord used words like whore, thief or pervert to describe the “public sinners” he ministered to. He reserved his sternest words for the outwardly religious types of his day who felt that the highest calling of God was to condemn others rather than serve them.
That being so is the word “homo” a loving and charitable way to refer to homosexual persons?
And this just shows I will have even LESS of a chance of any representation!!!In other business, the Senate voted to carve up Lake, Kane, McHenry, Will and four other Republican-leaning northern Illinois counties into judicial districts meant to elect more minorities to the bench. That bill, which Republicans castigated as a power grab by Democrats, now moves to the House.
Here’s an answer.Ouch!!! or as we say in this country “A hit my friend, a veritable hit”
Have you noticed, at least 3 posts on and NOBODY has answered you yet. I wonder why?
No, actually the comment was about the use of the expression “HOMO”. A derogatory euphamism used as an insult for non-heterosexuals. And to date niether you,or anyone else yet has defended that.Here’s an answer.
It is one thing to be charitable to homosexuals, to everyone, it is entirely an opposite and evil thing to support or endorse those actively pursuing sinful behaviour. In fact, condemning homosexual activity is a charitable act if done sincerely and with the intent of helping somone who approves of sin to understand that they are turning from God and love.
There is no need for laws for the person struggling with SSAD. These laws are coming onto the books to legitimize a lifestyle that directly leads to selfishness and a loss of chrarity by turning sexuality into a self interested experience, not procreative and unitive.
These laws are telling the nation’s citizens to approve of sin and to silence any dissaproval.
OK honky.norwich,
Why is “homo” considered poor taste? If someone called me a “hetero,” that would not make me upset in the least–it is an accurate term. Why do we so often get all tied-up in the use of words?
You mean like a “gay” person calling a Christian homophobic for speaking the truth in charity?OK honky.