Homosexuality and Evo, Creo, and ID

sex means male and female, not a sexual perversion.

[Msg=924]
and
[Msg=927]

Just out of curiosity, what should be done with those of us who will go on saying that homosexuality is a sin that will be punished by God if the person doesn't repent and turn to Christ, and that gay marriage is a violation of God's laws that can only bring His judgment against a nation? Or any form of preaching the gospel of Christ and Biblical truth in the public square for that matter. According to your way of construing all this will we continue to have that right or be punished for it?And by the way, it isn't just my opinion, "Sex" always meant male and female. It's been replaced by the wrong term "gender" which may be the cause of the confusion. It means male and female, period, it has nothing to do with the subjective stuff concerning sexuality.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

And what if I continue to rail against the courts?

It's homosexual acts that are the sin, sorry if I wasn't clear, and those can be repented of. I admit it must be hard, but heterosexuals also have to deny themselves sex outside of legitimate marriage.

But we can't run businesses if we won't provide services for gay marriage. Will we be allowed to walk on the sidewalks or can LGBTs shove us into the gutter as Muslims do?

And another question. When it turns out that the LGBT people aren't as generous as all of you about allowing us to say what we believe in public, but get street preachers arrested for "discriminating" against them by preaching that homosexual acts are sin, are you with them or with us? And when they come to our churches and get our pastors arrested for the same "offense" are you with them or with us? Of course I realize most of you won't even hear about such events because the mainstream media won't cover them, but just as a hypothetical, whose side are you on?

I'll say it again: Christian businesses do not deny any service to homosexuals except a service that validates gay marriage according to the conscience of the business owner.

What same treatment? Being lied about?ABE: That's what you did.Or do you mean being fined and harassed and run out of business? What same treatment am I supposedly in favor of for other religions? /ABEEdited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You lied by comparing Christian businesses who won't service a gay wedding but will service anything else homosexuals want, with racism. Yes that was a lie. I have NO idea what you are talking about.ABE: And again you lie about us discriminating against "people," which is not the case. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I utterly reject the segregationist position and you are lying again even to make a comparison of that with what we are talking about here. You are also apparently fudging the facts to make it seem like they are the same. You are lying lying lying.

You are bringing up a totally different situation as a distraction, just to serve your need to have something to accuse me of. I have no idea whether there was ever a situation of a segregationist bakery that served blacks everything but a wedding cake, and I suspect you don't either. I have no idea whether segregationist businesses were fined or driven out of business when the law went against them. I don't know enough of the history to answer you but your tactic is transparent and nasty. I might defend their right to their conscience under certain circumstances although I think they didn't have a Biblical leg to stand on, I don't know, and I don't know how such situations were handled at the time either I do know you are playing a nasty game here.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Woolworth's was discriminating against PERSONS. There is NO COMPARISON with what we are talking about. Why can't you all think logically anyway?And you don't bother to say what happened when the law went against them? Were they fined, had to close their doors? Certainly not the latter.I will happily break any laws I consider to be against God without your approval..Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I DID answer your underhanded comparison.

Poor King James, the slander against him continues to this day. This has even been discussed on other threads here and as I recall others agreed that he had been exonerated of homosexuality. I've searched but am not coming up with the right terms to get the posts I have in mind.It's irrelevant to our discussion whether he was a true Christian or not but most of the evidence goes for rather than against. When he says he loves certain men he is not implying homosexuality, and neither does the love between Jesus and John and King David and Jonathan.Why don't you quote him on the sin of homosexuality? He loathed and abhorred it.And here's my blog on the subject .Edited by Faith, : No reason given.