Homosexual activity and acts are against the divine law, they are sins. No human law can trump the divine law. Governments that enact laws that are against the divine law are not really laws at all and they do not have to be obeyed as it is written “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).
Which law concerns you? I’m not aware of any law that would cause you to act contrary to divine law. Which law do you believe you need to disobey to remain in accord with divine law?
This should apply to unnatural acts in public. Man and woman kissing each other in public may have been undecent in some societies, but it is not considered something very explicit in the modern ones. Public sex is still undecent, thanks God!
But straight activities are not intrinsically wrong, they are natural, so with them it’s just the matter of revealing what should be concealed. The homosexual acts, however, are intrinsically unnatural, and should not be made public. Imagine a person who likes to eat excrements. It is ok for the law that he does it in private, but it is obviously undecent to do in public.:nope: The fact that many people got used to it does not make it any better.Bradski’s law yet again. So holding my husband’s hand or kissing him in public is now being compared to eating excrement?This should apply to unnatural acts in public. Man and woman kissing each other in public may have been undecent in some societies, but it is not considered something very explicit in the modern ones. Public sex is still undecent, thanks God!
I see your main concern is “equality”. But I don’t see any equality possible between the righteous behaior and the sin. The fact that some people are more likely to commit a particular sin or offence does not diminish the sin.
uch:I would hate to live in a country where there were morality police going door to door checking to see how people were behaving themselves in their beds. That is as bad as having morality courts telling people whether or not they should bake cakes to suit those whom they disagree with.
Exactly, well said. Law in its ideal function is to protect person and property. What constitutes public order and decency is a matter of opinion or convention but children should not be subject to public displays of adult nudity and obscenities as in so-called pride parades.
Then don’t take your children to pride parades…
Not only my children but any child should not be exposed to that kind of smut. I speak not only as a parent but as a teacher and a person who believes that lines should be drawn as to what is acceptable and appropriate in public. This was understood so well in the past. Social sobriety, manners,civility, etc. all form a package of values where respect for others cannot occur where these are in short supply.
Pride parades are not that big a deal. Most of the ones I’ve been to did not have anything inappropriate (no more nudity than one could see by going to the beach, for example) unless you think that gay people gathering together period is inappropriate.
We oppose these parades, not because we fear them, but because they’re injustices to God. Not only do they glorify sodomy, they many times claim God approves of it, and thus add the sin of blasphemy to the sin of sodomy. Not knowing any better, you’d think they’d want to be damned.
Bathing suits are OK for the beach but birthday suits are seen on the streets of say, Toronto. The so-called street fairs in California, don’t remember the city, don’t even want to, are even worse with SM displays. Also during parades people witnessing to the Gospel on the sides are regularly spit at and even assaulted. So much for “free speech” or expression.
Homosexual, heterosexual or otherwise - children should not be the pawns in the sexual, squabbles, fantasies and desires of adults. This goes for heterosexual couples who fight over their children as if they were property or homosexual couples who believe they have a right to children in the same they have the right to own any piece of property.
I’ve never been to one but I’ve heard even at our local event, which cropped up a few years ago and is supported by major business revealing the falsehood of great discrimination, that there is a tendency by many to be revealing. I’d say you are right. At some there is no more nudity than you would see at the beach. But the thing is you aren’t at the beach. You are in the city’s downtown. Why the great need to strip off clothes? Since the whole pride event is based on sex this isn’t surprising. I do know that in other cities some of what goes on is just revolting. If allowed to grow unopposed that is what you get.
I’d like to see a grass roots revolt from people who are fed up with sex parades in the cities. There may actually be a tipping point when a backlash will happen. Such things have been imposed from the top down. From what I read, they leave enough trash around, it costs a lot of money to clear the streets, police protection, etc. It is a wasteful and demoralizing activity. Again, wasn’t the whole point for non-discrimination and for people to do what they want in their own bedrooms without being harassed? So why is it in everyone’s face including gobsmacked kids?
You get around, don’t you?
I don’t think the odds favor a backlash. In most cities most people probably think it is great. If you don’t and you express your opinion expect to be ostracized and maybe lose your job. The corporate powers are almost without exception on the side of promoting homosexuality. Heck in my state almost all the corporations think men should be in the women’s locker room. Corporations control America and so long as they promote immorality we are fighting an uphill battle.
I don’t know for sure except that in history the pendulum does swing back and forth with hardly settling in the golden mean. Extreme prudishness or puritanism is the other side of the hedonist coin. One thing can be counted on however, that the bulk of humanity would, if left to themselves, prefer to dance around the Golden Calf.
I personally object to “corporations” taking positions on social issues. The name and resources of the company should not be borrowed for such purposes in general, and if it is, only with the approval of the shareholders.
