Outspoken opponent of the gay agenda wins presidential election in Poland

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Anrakyr said:
Are there forces opposite of you on the political spectrum who are organized to undermine your way of thinking? Yes however, they are not trying to destroy you as much as prevent you from destroying them and the opposite is also true. Thankfully most LGBT people don’t see right-wing Christians as an agenda as much as people who are trying to impose their world ideas being good or bad on others.
Click to expand...
This isn’t true. They are trying to destroy traditional understanding of sexuality. That’s why they have trans story time. People can do that, but can we agree not to lie about it?
 
You are missing my point.
They are not trying to destroy anything as much as not be destroyed by society. If you don’t want to be LGBT then cool, just don’t force others.
 
Anrakyr said:
You are missing my point.
They are not trying to destroy anything as much as not be destroyed by society. If you don’t want to be LGBT then cool, just don’t force others.
Click to expand...
Don’t want an abortion? Don’t have one.
Don’t like slavery? Don’t own one.
 
Anrakyr said:
Not once has their desire been to tell others how to have sex or who to love.
Click to expand...
No one is saying that. What they are saying is that they are trying to push the idea in schools and social programs that gay marriage, gay families, trans lifestyles etc are the equivalent of the family as God wills -father, mother, child or the equivalent of being male or female. Childhood is a critical time for forming the child’s conscience properly. It is the primary duty of Catholic/Christian parents. It usurps the parents right to teach their children about God’s design for the family.
 
blackforest said:
Could somebody please define “the gay agenda” for me? Do LGBTQ people have a bullet-point mission statement somewhere?
Click to expand...
The gay agenda is simply this:
  • homosexual acts are not sinful & religions who teach otherwise are wrong.
  • children & adults should be encouraged to explore homosexually and/or bisexuality
Even if they only believe in the first bullet point, it’s very antithetical to the Catholic Church.
 
Last edited:
Anrakyr said:
You are missing my point.
They are not trying to destroy anything as much as not be destroyed by society. If you don’t want to be LGBT then cool, just don’t force others.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but I think you are missing the other point of view.

While, I know there some sexually active homosexuals who honestly believe homosexual acts are sins (Milo for example), most people who commit homosexual acts (or who are close to people who do) do NOT believe it is sinful.

It’s the same for some women who have abortions (and their loved ones). Some women who have had abortions realize that they did was a mortal sin & they repent and change. But for other women who have an abortion, they insist it is not sinful.

Again, same thing for people who commit the mortal sins of masturbation, fornication, & co-habitation, etc. Some acknowledge what they are doing (or did) is a mortal sin; while others insist it isn’t sinful.

Personally, I’ve committed a TON of sexual sins in my lifetime. But I acknowledged that every single one of them I did was a mortal sin AND I do NOT want my kids to commit the same sins I did.

It’s bad enough that Hollywood & pop culture is telling my kids that sexual sins are not sins - that’s a battle in a half. But when the government starts saying that mortal sin are not sinful; then we really have a steep hill to climb.

It’s one thing when an individual disagrees with Catholic/Christian teachings; to each their own. However, to actively teach / preach that Christianity is wrong is another thing altogether.

I know we don’t live in a Catholic country, however, you can’t expect devout Catholics (and other Christians) to sit idly by and watch the place they live to become more anti-Catholic / anti-Christian.
 
Last edited:
Anesti33 said:
The gay agendas are mostly advanced by “allies”, those who have interposed themselves in the movement and purport to speak for what they all want.
Click to expand...
Some years ago I was reading a testimony by a homosexual man who had a reversion experience and decided to live a chaste life.
He didn’t claim he had changed to “straight”. He felt attracted to men, but had chosen chastity as part of his spiritual path.
His Christian friends were happy for him, his homosexual friends were mixed — some were mad, but some were like “you do you, boo”.
The most rage he experienced was from his straight and non-religious friends. They were all mad at him for living chaste.
 
I think a lot of Catholics are confused about this issue. The phrase “gay agenda” fails to capture the nuance of Catholic teaching. As has been mentioned in this thread, being gay or lesbian is not a sin, while having sex as such is.
 
People holding Bibles have historically been beating them to death?
They are born that way?

There is an agenda that has been relentlessly pushed. Trans story hour at libraries. Legal redefinition of marriage in contradiction to Christ’s words. Pride month in schools. There were books written on this stuff as far back as the 1960s so, yes, it is an agenda.

Charity isn’t just being nice and tolerant: it’s telling the truth, even when it’s uncomfortable for those hearing it. Certainly time and place come into play but we can never deny truth.

Do you understand what the idea consequentialism? As Christians, we are not and cannot be consequentialists. Your example of the guy going to work is consequentialism to its core. No, we reject that.
 
I don’t think there’s any nuance to miss. Catholics understand the distinction between inclination/temptation and action: that’s pretty easy stuff.

However go to a parade and tell me that it’s just people who are marching just to be accepted? Have you seen the costumes? The things that go on? If one is SSA but not acting on it then what acceptance does such a person need? You’re not sinning, you’re not sinning. Many heterosexual married men may occasionally have a temptation to watch pornography, have a fling, etc.: if they don’t do it then they haven’t sinned. Likewise, there are no such things as adultery pride parades and if there were would it be a bunch of people who resist adultery but think about it or would it be a people who actively adulterate and push the message that it’s okay to do so?
 
I wish Mr Duda well and admire many of the things he is doing to keep Poland a traditional, conservative Catholic society. My son is a citizen of the Polish Republic, so I do indeed have “skin in the game”.

I would just say one thing. I know Duda loves America and that he is very fond of Trump. All well and good. You can never have enough friends in this world.

However, this business of having a US military base, even if just a transient one with troop rotation, so close to the Russian border that you could smell the borscht, with missiles that could do some real damage, is pretty provocative. Would the US be okay with it, if the Russians or the Chinese arranged with the Canadians to have a military base in, let’s say, Hamilton, Ontario? Think about it. If I were Russia, I’d feel kind of “owned” by the situation, to be perfectly honest. Just saying.

Niech żyje Polska!
 
You yourself realize that the second point is not part of the gay agenda, so why state it?

As to the first point, I don’t think it is so much a matter of sin or not sin, but rather the freedom of choice to lead whichever sexual lifestyle one chooses so long as it does not harm others, regardless of a given religion’s prohibition. And also the assurance that one will not be punished for exercising this personal freedom.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
You yourself realize that the second point is not part of the gay agenda, so why state it?

As to the first point, I don’t think it is so much a matter of sin or not sin, but rather the freedom of choice to lead whichever sexual lifestyle one chooses so long as it does not harm others, regardless of a given religion’s prohibition. And also the assurance that one will not be punished for exercising this personal freedom.
Click to expand...
And I’d add that at least in most cases the first one isn’t true either.

Most gays respect your right to hold your beliefs; your right to believe that certain things are sins, your right to teach your children what your faith teaches are sins.
 
Yes, that is probably the case.

I look at sexual freedom in the same way as religious freedom. Perhaps I am a libertarian at heart although I also believe in big government in certain instances.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
You yourself realize that the second point is not part of the gay agenda, so why state it?

As to the first point, I don’t think it is so much a matter of sin or not sin, but rather the freedom of choice to lead whichever sexual lifestyle one chooses so long as it does not harm others, regardless of a given religion’s prohibition. And also the assurance that one will not be punished for exercising this personal freedom.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say the 2nd wasn’t part of the “gay agenda.” I was implying that most gays do not subscribe to point #2.

But the Marxists who promote the “gay agenda” do.

Just like the organization “Black Lives Matter,” the “gay agenda” does not represent everyone they claim they represent. Instead, they are all marxists who are constantly pushing their “us vs them” strategies to create civic unrest.
 
So you believe there is a gay agenda with almost no following?

Are the Marxists you talk about only the leaders of the gay agenda or also the followers?
 
phil19034 said:
40.png
blackforest:
Could somebody please define “the gay agenda” for me? Do LGBTQ people have a bullet-point mission statement somewhere?
Click to expand...
The gay agenda is simply this:
  • homosexual acts are not sinful & religions who teach otherwise are wrong.
  • children & adults should be encouraged to explore homosexually and/or bisexuality
Even if they only believe in the first bullet point, it’s very antithetical to the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Here’s how the “gay agenda” comes across. I’m not saying there’s a cabal of gays and their allies in some secret room somewhere putting all this together, but as I said, here’s how it comes across:
  • To be tolerated and not treated with evil, as @Mythicalbio so well elucidated. No problem with that. I have no problem with tolerating the person. Tolerating what they do — sodomy — no, I’m not “tolerant” of that. I don’t like it when straight people commit sexual sins either. (I don’t like the sexual sins I have committed in my life.) May have to put up with it, just as I have to “put up with” the sexual sins of straight people (and dead silence from quarters that you would expect to speak out against these sins!), but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. So I’m not just picking out gays. I have had several gay friends and even family members. I’ve never hated a person for being gay, and I don’t intend to start now. But I do hate what they do, because God hates it.
But there’s more. What I see is this:
  • Militant agitation for gay marriage. Sorry, no can do. Marriage was created by Almighty God between one man and one woman. Christ elevated it to a sacrament. I can tolerate civil unions, not happy about the partners going home and practicing sodomy, but aside from that, if they want to designate each other as next of kin, or as partners equivalent to spouses but not spouses, fine. And that is a very liberal stance for a traditional, orthodox Catholic to take.
  • Normalization of homosexuality as equal in all ways to heterosexuality — inserting obviously gay characters and couples into advertising, television, films, game shows, what have you, with the view of having heterosexual people say “oh, that’s nice, it’s just as good, just as moral, just as holy, as heterosexuality”.
  • Teaching children that “it’s okay to be gay”, through the education system and curriculum.
  • Encouraging everyone to “explore their gay side”, assuming they have one, and to “go with it”, if they want to.
  • Destroying the concept of gender, reducing birth gender to something “assigned” even when there is no question whatsoever of physical intersexuality.
I’m sure there’s more, that’s just everything that comes to mind, on the spur of the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top