POLITICS - McDonnalds and Family Values

ole pizen slinger · Post by **ole pizen slinger** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:09 pm

Fellow Levergunners,
It saddens me deeply to learn that the McDonnalds food chain has decided to support the Gay and Lesbian Agenda. I do not know how most of you feel about this issue but for me it is a social problem that society must face. For a company of the size and influence of McDonnalds to 'come out of the closet' in this manner speaks of the decadence of morality in this country. As an individual, I have decided to boycott this company in an effort to fight this problem. I hope others will join me in this endeavour.
Sincerely,
Barry C Jolly
aka ole pizen slinger

http://www.afa.net/Petitions/Issuedetail.asp?id=314

spud1949 · Post by **spud1949** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:15 pm

I started years ago when they gave 2 million for gun control!

gamekeeper · Post by **gamekeeper** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:33 pm

I have boycotted this company ever since they came over here!
I prefer KFC. Please don't tell me they are gun grabbin' pansy's too!

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:01 pm

Thanks for the heads up on this.

bigbore442001 · Post by **bigbore442001** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:48 pm

I heard about their support of gun control as well as not giving to the US Olympic shooting team. Let them sit in the swill they pass off as food.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:52 pm

Well they aren't very Weight Watcher friendly either. I guess I'll just cross them off my list all together.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:33 pm

I have not eaten at McDonalds in 20 years, as I don't like their food. I eat at What-A-Burger. The family that owns all 600 stores are high quality Christians. Members of my church.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:43 pm

It does most good if you write management to inform them of the boycott. It does even more good if you own stock and vote it. Just buy one share of stock and put their sexual pervert agenda on their agenda, if you get my drift.

There's been more than one successful application of this strategerie in corporate America.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:54 pm

Here's the "note" I sent the perverts:

Dear Chairman McKenna:

I am surprised to learn that McDonald's has decided to put their entire corporate strength behind the promotion of the homosexual agenda. I'm asking McDonald's to remain neutral in the culture war. Your efforts should be in providing the finest fast food products possible, not in a political battle - especially helping promote an aberrant and destructive behavior.

You draw kids into your stores and what now, you're going to exploit them sexually? You're going to let your new pervert friends have their way with the little children?

So you're kind of like the priests and the altar boys, eh? Using your "size" to abuse them.

So your policy seems to make mcdonald's one of the premier pandering organizations on the planet.

I'm certain this will make for a lively 'dialog' at the next shareholder's meeting. I shall insist that it's on the agenda.

sore shoulder · Post by **sore shoulder** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:55 pm

Grizz wrote:It does most good if you write management to inform them of the boycott. It does even more good if you own stock and vote it. Just buy one share of stock and put their sexual pervert agenda on their agenda, if you get my drift.

There's been more than one successful application of this strategerie in corporate America.

Good idea Grizz, how much is a share of McD?

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 5:18 pm

MCD:US closed $56.66 today.

Their profits are up 30% year over year.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=MCD:US

A stiff boycott would probably impede their momentum and maybe axe the ceo. it can happen if the proxy fight gets bitter and newsy enough

here's some blog action on the topic on both sides:

http://www.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en& ... arch+Blogs

ohwin94_61 · Post by **ohwin94_61** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 6:27 pm

I never did trust McDonald's Ever since Ronald McDonald .

ursavus.elemensis · Post by **ursavus.elemensis** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:56 pm

Boycotting McDonald's....?

Does this mean that when I go there for lunch the line will not be out the door anymore and I might actually get to buy my lunch before having to get right back to work? I'm all for it. Boycott to your hearts' content. Get all your friends to boycott, too. Maybe the prices will come down if they have to attract new business because of the boycott. I'm all for this! After all, they always are trying to push those "French" fries on us, and we all "know" that French is just another word for GAY. Dang them!!!

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:53 pm

bigbore442001 wrote: Let them sit in the swill they pass off as food.

Well said!

I like Chick-Fil-A myself. You have to admire any retailer willing to forego weekend receipts to allow their employees off on Sunday to attend church and enjoy a day of rest with their families. Hobby-Lobby is another one that is closed every Sunday.

budliteguy · Post by **budliteguy** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:03 pm

Most of the McDonalds around here, You have to speak spanish to order anything. They love that cheap Labor. I prefer Hardee's, Cost more but at least the food's hot when you get it and has not been laying in a plastic tray in a warmer for god know's how long.

DennisD · Post by **DennisD** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:11 am

Charles wrote:I have not eaten at McDonalds in 20 years, as I don't like their food. I eat at What-A-Burger. The family that owns all 600 stores are high quality Christians. Members of my church.

Charles, you by any chance know if the original one is still open in Corpus?

Jason_W · Post by **Jason_W** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:20 am

There are a million other reasons to avoid McDonalds, first and foremost being clogged arteries.

As far as gay people are concerned: As long as they aren't anti-gun gay people, and they keep their blinds closed, I could care less. I'll mind my own business if they mind theirs. I'm not a huge fan of gay PDA, but I also think hetero PDA is kinda rude as well.

2ndovc · Post by **2ndovc** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:27 am

Jason_W wrote:There are a million other reasons to avoid McDonalds, first and foremost being clogged arteries.

As far as gay people are concerned: As long as they aren't anti-gun gay people, and they keep their blinds closed, I could care less. I'll mind my own business if they mind theirs. I'm not a huge fan of gay PDA, but I also think hetero PDA is kinda rude as well.

Well Said.

Jarhead · Post by **Jarhead** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:30 am

McDonalds.....nasty food! I don't eat there....Gays? Don't like them much either....It's just ain't right...I don't care what anybody says. Gun Control...anti-gunners...same feeling.

Marlin336W · Post by **Marlin336W** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:04 am

Not to hi-jack, but isn't this the way it is mostly these days?
I mean even Christian church's have publicly announced that they are ok with this.

An honest person today does not have anywhere to turn for moral support. There is always something. I mean. You can't even teach the Bible, you have to put up with the acceptance of homosexual's in church, restaurants, schools, your job!

I for one do not condone homosexuality. I think it is immoral and against God's word.

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:05 am

I dont eat that stuff anyway

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:08 am

My daughter has some views that I consider wrong......I'll continue to love her and would never push her away or avoid her. You can't change anything from the outside....... These blockades du jure just don't impress me anymore.....

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:00 pm

First, homosexuality is a sin. Period. End of discussion.

We live in a free country though. If a person wants to sin - and it is not hurting anyone else - they are free to do so. I have no say. So, if two consenting adults want to do whatever - in private - I need to learn to live with it. One's dedication to freedom is not properly measured by how vigorously they support people that agree with them, but in how vigorously they support those they disagree with or even detest (in their pursuit of freedom).

That being said, since this is a free country, I am also free NOT to patronize, with my hard-earned money, companies that I believe are contributing to the destruction of our morals or of our country's culture. Any company that gives in to the gay activists fall squarely into this category in my book. These people are not content with the "privacy of their homes"; they want to shove their sexualty in our faces, force us to accept it as just as valid as heterosexualty (which it will never be), and actively recruit young people to their lifestyle - or at least convince them not condemn the sin for what it is.

Sorry, truth hurts. I am all for loving the sinner, but I will not stop hating the sin, even if, in my respect for freedom, I must tolerate a person's right to pursue it...

Post by **AmBraCol** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:13 pm

Ysabel Kid wrote:First, homosexuality is a sin. Period. End of discussion.

We live in a free country though. If a person wants to sin - and it is not hurting anyone else - they are free to do so. I have no say. So, if two consenting adults want to do whatever - in private - I need to learn to live with it. One's dedication to freedom is not properly measured by how vigorously they support people that agree with them, but in how vigorously they support those they disagree with or even detest (in their pursuit of freedom).

That being said, since this is a free country, I am also free NOT to patronize, with my hard-earned money, companies that I believe are contributing to the destruction of our morals or of our country's culture. Any company that gives in to the gay activists fall squarely into this category in my book. These people are not content with the "privacy of their homes"; they want to shove their sexualty in our faces, force us to accept it as just as valid as heterosexualty (which it will never be), and actively recruit young people to their lifestyle - or at least convince them not condemn the sin for what it is.

Sorry, truth hurts. I am all for loving the sinner, but I will not stop hating the sin, even if, in my respect for freedom, I must tolerate a person's right to pursue it...

Well stated, Ysabel.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 4:37 pm

+1 Ysabel Kid!
Goat

Quick Karl · Post by **Quick Karl** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:07 pm

My question is: How did so many homosexuals get in the positions of influence they currently occupy, because if there were more normal folks in those positions, this kind of thing wouldn't be happening...

As for me, when I learn that someone is a homosexual, or a liberal, I avoid them like the plague, and I will not do business with, work with, nor withhold my opinions from them, regardless of the circumstance.

It's called integrity.

I figure since they don't care about how their philosophies hurt society then I don't care how my opinions make them feel.

And I've never been much of a fast-food fan anyway - I prefer home-cooked un-processed natural food.

Kismet · Post by **Kismet** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:37 pm

Quick Karl wrote:My question is: How did so many homosexuals get in the positions of influence they currently occupy, because if there were more normal folks in those positions, this kind of thing wouldn't be happening...

Gee Karl, that's easy to answer. They got wherever they are the same way most other people have gotten to where they are - they were judged on their performance. Believe or not, most people are not bigots.

Quick Karl wrote:As for me, when I learn that someone is a homosexual, or a liberal, I avoid them like the plague, and I will not do business with, work with, nor withhold my opinions from them, regardless of the circumstance.

It's called integrity.

That is integrity - rigid adherence to a code of "values." But having that kind of integrity doesn't say anything about the underlying values to which you are faithful. The simple fact that your "values" are such that you need no other information about the person to dismiss them says as much about you as it does about them. Heck, the KKK, Hitler, Warren Jeffs, and Osama Bin Laden have that kind of integrity. If you are equating your integrity with high moral values, then the problem is that most other people either don't share your values or they combine those values with other more important values such as love, tolerance, and respect.

I fully agree with Ysabel and the rest of you that people have the right not to patronize a business because it is owned/operated by gays, but if that is the case then spare the rest of us the hackneyed bit about hate the sin/love the sinner. That kind of attitude and behavior is absolutely not loving the sinner.

Karl, I realize you especially have no respect for my opinions. It is probably the reason that these kinds of discussions get heated - because no one is going to convince anyone to change their mind. But, hey, at least I agree with you that it is important to call B.S. when you see it.

Michael in NH

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:39 pm

Quick Karl wrote:My question is: How did so many homosexuals get in the positions of influence they currently occupy, because if there were more normal folks in those positions, this kind of thing wouldn't be happening...

QK - my bet - because America is the most open and accepting society on the face of the planet. We always have been, and probably always will be. Most of us are slow to judge a man for his faults, and quick to give him the benefit of a doubt. We love the underdogs, and wish to see the best in everyone around us, even when we don't agree with their views or lifestyles. This is what held us together as a society for a long time, and strengthened us. It is only now when so many are trying to "balkinize us", including radical homosexual activists, that the natural inclination fo acceptance demonstrated by most Americans becomes strained.

Kismet wrote: ...spare the rest of us the hackneyed bit about hate the sin/love the sinner. That kind of attitude and behavior is absolutely not loving the sinner.

Kismet - I will be the first one to admit I am far - really far - from being a perfect Christian. When God made man flawed I think he sprinkled an extra dose on yours truly. That being said, calling the phrase "love the sinner/hate the sin" hackneyed is simply ridiculous. It is the non-judgementalism that seeks to equate all behavior as equal that also puts a strain on the natural inclinations of Americans to "live and let live". Most people I know tend to follow that view - you do your thing, I'll do mine, leave me alone in peace and I'll do the same for you. Our society was built on that. But we also have that strong sense of right and wrong, and no amount of yelling, screaming or in-your-face confrontations will change most people's mind that homosexualty is wrong. Big difference between believing it is wrong and exterminating people for doing something you don't agree with. Also a big difference the other way, from accepting tolerance to demanding one drops their beliefs to accept yours. That is where most Americans I know say "enough is enough"!

For the homosexual who wants to live their lifestyle in private, works hard, and obeys the law, I call him my fellow American. I don't agree with his lifestyle, won't support it, won't endorse or help it in any way, but I will defend his right to live life as he sees it. Not only am I, as an American, committed to freedom for all, but as a Christian I would never deny one's coming to Christ of their own free will by forcing them to do so in any way - that would be a sin on my part.

Conversely, I will fight the perversion of our country by the activist homosexuals every chance I get, for they have gone from privately sinning to trying to lead others to sin - and if I did not try to stop this I would be sinning myself. Jesus calls us to guide one another to him; to God of our own free wills. To guide, point out, encourage, correct - but again, foster one's free will in choosing God. Also to prevent the spread of sin and evil - to fight it. It is a difficult path, and tricky balancing act. But considering what my saviour has done for us - for me - am I honored to humbly take up this challenge.

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:32 pm

Outstanding post Ysabel....well put.

Quick Karl · Post by **Quick Karl** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:52 am

Kismet wrote:Karl, I realize you especially have no respect for my opinions. It is probably the reason that these kinds of discussions get heated - because no one is going to convince anyone to change their mind. But, hey, at least I agree with you that it is important to call B.S. when you see it.

Michael in NH

Michael,

I have zero respect for your opinions because, like so many liberals, your opinions are constructed for no other reason than to contradict every tradition of right and wrong.

In truth, I suspect that liberalism is an angry reaction to a perceived childhood slight from some authority figure with high moral ideals whom they felt they never received approval from.

At work, I politely tell the slackers that they are weak, and that a few others and I are working so they can get paid, because they always have some whinny excuse for why that canâ€™t meet the reasonable expectations that a handful can. Not surprisingly, but to a person, those slackers are all liberal democrats, and the handful that always brings it home are independent conservatives with traditional moral values.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 9:47 am

C. Cash wrote:Outstanding post Ysabel....well put.

+ one more

Ysabel, you frame my thoughts faster than I can type them. Good writing friend.

The defenders of perversity at any cost will never see eye-to-eye with us unless they repent and believe. It's a spiritual battle and their vision is veiled. They have to want to know the truth before the truth can make them free. Christ bridged that gulf for each one of us. I am eternally grateful. There is no moral ambiguity in Christ.

Thanks Ysabel Kid

Grizz

Jason_W · Post by **Jason_W** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:34 am

Forgive my lack of knowledge on the subjects, but aren't most of the bible's anti-homosexuality passages from the old testament? If so, there are a lot of things the old testament lays down as sins that a lot of us commit daily. I think you're also not supposed to eat pork or shellfish, but I'm not a biblical scholar. Also, from the new testament, aren't there big messages about forgiveness, and not hating your fellow man even if they go against your personal code of values?

I guess I feel differently because growing up I knew people as they were realizing they were gay and seeing the amount of pain and turmoil they went through in the process makes it hard for me to harbor resentment.

There seems to be this misconception that people choose to be gay just go against the grain and upset people. Who would risk being disowned by their parents, and being beaten mercilessly by gangs of hate filled people (this has happened on more than one occasion) just for the sake of "going against societal norms"?

Maybe my opinions will get me blackballed from this forum, which would be a shame, because there is some good firearms advice here. That being said, there is no more room in my heart for disdain and hate. I have plenty of it directed at more deserving targets.

Sixgun · Post by **Sixgun** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:49 am

Jason_W wrote:There are a million other reasons to avoid McDonalds, first and foremost being clogged arteries.

As far as gay people are concerned: As long as they aren't anti-gun gay people, and they keep their blinds closed, I could care less. I'll mind my own business if they mind theirs. I'm not a huge fan of gay PDA, but I also think hetero PDA is kinda rude as well.

Jason, well said. I agree 1000%-----------------Sixgun

Post by **AmBraCol** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:54 am

Jason_W wrote:Forgive my lack of knowledge on the subjects, but aren't most of the bible's anti-homosexuality passages from the old testament?

That's a misconception, Jason. The New Testament is very clear on the matter as well. Since you ask, here's one of the NT passages:

Romans 1:16-32

16I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,[c] just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."[d]
God's Wrath Against Mankind
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitiesâ€”his eternal power and divine natureâ€”have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creatorâ€”who is forever praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Again, even though Kismet claims it's "hackneyed"- love the sinner, hate the sin. Homosexuality IS about making choices, even though they are often subconscious. But subconscious decisions are STILL my responsibility and no excuse for my sin. One of our biggest problems as humans is that we often do not examine ourselves and our way of acting/reacting to life in a critical manner. So we "go with the flow" - which is always downhill. The New Testament's comments on the issue are different from the Old Testament only in that the New Testament clearly states that 'those who do such things will not enter into the kingdom of Heaven' rather than commanding us to put them to death. In other words, there is much more of an individual responsibility than of a community responsibility as found in the OT to eradicate such practices. That doesn't mean we should countenance such things, it means we should lovingly reach out to folks who are in sin and seek to help them to come to God Who can cleanse them. But certain sins gain a lot of attention, such as homosexuality. Others, such as lying and heterosexual adultery, covetousness and lust are glossed over and ignored by many. God still seeks a pure people, but a people who are pure because they love Him for Who He IS and who long to be like Him and to enable others as much as possible to make the same journey.

Quick Karl · Post by **Quick Karl** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:20 am

AmBraCol wrote:Again, even though Kismet claims it's "hackneyed"- love the sinner, hate the sin. Homosexuality IS about making choices, even though they are often subconscious. But subconscious decisions are STILL my responsibility and no excuse for my sin. One of our biggest problems as humans is that we often do not examine ourselves and our way of acting/reacting to life in a critical manner. So we "go with the flow" - which is always downhill. The New Testament's comments on the issue are different from the Old Testament only in that the New Testament clearly states that 'those who do such things will not enter into the kingdom of Heaven' rather than commanding us to put them to death. In other words, there is much more of an individual responsibility than of a community responsibility as found in the OT to eradicate such practices. That doesn't mean we should countenance such things, it means we should lovingly reach out to folks who are in sin and seek to help them to come to God Who can cleanse them. But certain sins gain a lot of attention, such as homosexuality. Others, such as lying and heterosexual adultery, covetousness and lust are glossed over and ignored by many. God still seeks a pure people, but a people who are pure because they love Him for Who He IS and who long to be like Him and to enable others as much as possible to make the same journey.

I can only wish that I could say it this well.

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:29 am

AmBraCol wrote:
Jason_W wrote:Forgive my lack of knowledge on the subjects, but aren't most of the bible's anti-homosexuality passages from the old testament?
That's a misconception, Jason. The New Testament is very clear on the matter as well. Since you ask, here's one of the NT passages:
Romans 1:16-32

16I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,[c] just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."[d]
God's Wrath Against Mankind
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitiesâ€”his eternal power and divine natureâ€”have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creatorâ€”who is forever praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Again, even though Kismet claims it's "hackneyed"- love the sinner, hate the sin. Homosexuality IS about making choices, even though they are often subconscious. But subconscious decisions are STILL my responsibility and no excuse for my sin. One of our biggest problems as humans is that we often do not examine ourselves and our way of acting/reacting to life in a critical manner. So we "go with the flow" - which is always downhill. The New Testament's comments on the issue are different from the Old Testament only in that the New Testament clearly states that 'those who do such things will not enter into the kingdom of Heaven' rather than commanding us to put them to death. In other words, there is much more of an individual responsibility than of a community responsibility as found in the OT to eradicate such practices. That doesn't mean we should countenance such things, it means we should lovingly reach out to folks who are in sin and seek to help them to come to God Who can cleanse them. But certain sins gain a lot of attention, such as homosexuality. Others, such as lying and heterosexual adultery, covetousness and lust are glossed over and ignored by many. God still seeks a pure people, but a people who are pure because they love Him for Who He IS and who long to be like Him and to enable others as much as possible to make the same journey.

+1 again! In addition to Romans above, also 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11, 1st Timothy 1:9-11 and Jude the brother of Jesus writes of it in his book 1:7 Jesus does also speaks of sexual sins in the Gospels though I can't bring it up the verse off the top of my head. Again, I think the point is, if someone is doing something that is going to kill them, spiritually and perhaps physically, it is unloving to NOT tell them of what The Lord has told us through his word...that this is Sin and must be turned away from. It's not good to do it in a hypocritical, holier than thou way but rather should be done when you have already shown that you give a crack for said person and by making it evident that you too are a sinner, saved only by the Grace of Christ Jesus. Otherwise, it ain't a gonna make sense and you will further drive that person away from the Lord. The truth must be stated to help save the lost(the apple of the Lord's eye apparently) and also because there is a push to normalize the behavior and propagate it among our society and our children, as the activists for homosexuality have done these past 30+ years.

Jason_W · Post by **Jason_W** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:30 am

AmBraCol wrote:
Jason_W wrote: Homosexuality IS about making choices, even though they are often subconscious. But subconscious decisions are STILL my responsibility and no excuse for my sin.

I would be interested in hearing some elaboration on this point.

I can buy the idea that homosexual behavior is a choice (as is any behavior), but is there any scientific evidence supporting the idea that a person can control their sexual orientation any more than they can control their eye color? Do you feel it's only the behavior itself that is the sin?

I've known gay people who wished they were straight, but never a straight person who wished they were gay.

I also can't help but feel there is a lot of scapegoating that goes on when people starting blaming gays for all of societies ills. I have a whole long laundry list of what will doom our civilization to ruin, and homosexuality just doesn't make the cut.

Quick Karl · Post by **Quick Karl** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:44 am

Jason_W wrote:I would be interested in hearing some elaboration on this point.

I can buy the idea that homosexual behavior is a choice (as is any behavior), but is there any scientific evidence supporting the idea that a person can control their sexual orientation any more than they can control their eye color? Do you feel it's only the behavior itself that is the sin?

I've known gay people who wished they were straight, but never a straight person who wished they were gay.

I also can't help but feel there is a lot of scapegoating that goes on when people starting blaming gays for all of societies ills. I have a whole long laundry list of what will doom our civilization to ruin, and homosexuality just doesn't make the cut.

So whatever 'urge' you might be 'born' with, you can act on, because you were 'born' with it?

I haven't a care in the world what people do in their bedrooms, but as soon as they start trying to teach society, or our children, that homosexuality and/or liberalism, is ok, that's where I draw the line.

Sure we will always have those who have great difficulty chosing what is right over what isn't, for whatever myriad of excuses, but I will never 'go along' with the 'current fad' to gain acceptance from anyone.

Here is a foolproof way to know what a right choice is: when faced with a difficult choice, the hardest option is always the right choice, and in the end that hardest option always turns out to be the easiest option.

Post by **AmBraCol** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:46 am

Jason, as much as folks try to brainwash us into believing we're merely programmed accidents of nature, we ARE capable of controlling our sexual nature - it comes back to what effort we are willing to put forward and how much we are willing to allow God to influence us for good. An example, recently a young man I know came to the point where he was ready to end it all. Finally he let me into his life on a deeper than "Hey, how's it going?" level. We looked at what was going on and he was so deep into porn and sexual addiction that it was pitiful to see. And he claimed that he would never be free. We worked on it together and he started letting God have some say so in his life. Now he feels repugnance over what he had been before and is not attracted to porn, while regaining attraction for his wife. A matter of choice and making tough calls. Yes, I've heard folks say "I wish I was straight" or "I wish I was sober" or "I wish (fill in the blank)". But as the saying goes, "if wishes were Harleys then beggars would ride" or something like that.

From what I've observed and read and seen over the years, those who are involved in homosexuality or lesbianism seldom (never?) come from a truly stable, truly God centered home. The pathologies of the homes that produce such behavior are interesting, to say the least. And the fact that some folks go through the same situations but with different outcomes does not negate the fact that certain behaviors sometimes produce certain results. It all comes back to the individual reaction to the circumstances, like the kid raised in the ghetto who grows up to be a successful business man while his brother (same ghetto, same family) dies young as a thief, murderer and crack addict. Accepting personal responsibility for how we face the hand we are dealt in life is the key to overcoming a wide variety of problems we face.

Post by **AmBraCol** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:52 am

Jason_W wrote:I also can't help but feel there is a lot of scapegoating that goes on when people starting blaming gays for all of societies ills. I have a whole long laundry list of what will doom our civilization to ruin, and homosexuality just doesn't make the cut.

Jason, see if you can find a book titled "When Nations Die". It looks at commonality amongst a wide variety of ancient civilizations and the factors that were common amongst them when they came to their respective ends. Open acceptance and encouragement of homosexuality is one of those factors. Anyway, take a look. Some interesting stuff in there...

Kismet · Post by **Kismet** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:59 am

Ysabel Kid wrote:That being said, calling the phrase "love the sinner/hate the sin" hackneyed is simply ridiculous. It is the non-judgementalism that seeks to equate all behavior as equal that also puts a strain on the natural inclinations of Americans to "live and let live".

For the homosexual who wants to live their lifestyle in private, works hard, and obeys the law, I call him my fellow American. I don't agree with his lifestyle, won't support it, won't endorse or help it in any way, but I will defend his right to live life as he sees it. Not only am I, as an American, committed to freedom for all, but as a Christian I would never deny one's coming to Christ of their own free will by forcing them to do so in any way - that would be a sin on my part.

Perhaps "hackneyed" is overstating it, but what I mean is that the phrase "love the sinner/hate the sin" is typically used by people as a shield to defend their behavior, not their beliefs. I agree that one can freely and justifiably believe that homosexuality is a sin, but when one then says things like "I would never give the time of day to a homo," it becomes clear that the person has no intention to love the sinner.

Imagine two bookstores side by side, selling the same product. One is owned by a man that you know is gay. The other is owned by a married father of three. I'll bet dollars to donuts that I know which bookstore most of the people here are patronizing. I will also bet that I know which bookstore Jesus is going into. As I said above, I reject the idea that avoiding the gay man's bookstore is loving the sinner. But, that is exactly what everyone here seems to be saying. I won't endorse; I won't support; I will avoid them like the plague; I will boycott... I think you get the picture.

Now, having said all of this, I will admit that I may be ignorant as to what you all call the Homosexual Agenda. I haven't had anyone ask me to switch sides or anything, nor have I heard of such a thing. I have heard of people asking not to be tied to a barbed wire fence and beaten to death. I have heard of people asking not be discriminated against. If ending those kinds of injustices are the Homosexual Agenda, then I would have thought good Christians would be right on board.

Michael in NH

Sixgun · Post by **Sixgun** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:36 pm

Ysable Kid, Quick Karl, and AmBraCol---you 'da men! well said.
After working in industry for 35 years I have learned something. The dem/liberals are in the group of "slackers". They also usually have IQ's that rival my shoesize. You know, "I want this" and "how come he can do it but I can't"? attitude. The conservative guys "usually" have their heads screwed on tight and do their job.

Funny thing, you know who gets picked on? yep! Leroy and Jamal can do whatever they want but Joe and Bill have to "take up the slack"--------------Sixgun

Jason_W · Post by **Jason_W** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 2:33 pm

AmBraCol wrote:
Jason_W wrote:I also can't help but feel there is a lot of scapegoating that goes on when people starting blaming gays for all of societies ills. I have a whole long laundry list of what will doom our civilization to ruin, and homosexuality just doesn't make the cut.

Jason, see if you can find a book titled "When Nations Die". It looks at commonality amongst a wide variety of ancient civilizations and the factors that were common amongst them when they came to their respective ends. Open acceptance and encouragement of homosexuality is one of those factors. Anyway, take a look. Some interesting stuff in there...

I'll see if I can find the book since I'm interested even in views and opinions with which I disagree.

Having said that, I think I'll bow out of this and other religious threads on here. I'm not likely to see eye to eye with anyone here on the topics of religion and human sexuality, so, in the interest of keeping friends, I'll stick to what we can all agree upon: Leverguns are cool.

Jason_W · Post by **Jason_W** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 2:35 pm

Sixgun wrote: The dem/liberals are in the group of "slackers".

I'm not a dem or a liberal, but I am kind of a slacker

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:41 pm

Kismet wrote: Imagine two bookstores side by side, selling the same product. One is owned by a man that you know is gay. The other is owned by a married father of three. I'll bet dollars to donuts that I know which bookstore most of the people here are patronizing. I will also bet that I know which bookstore Jesus is going into. As I said above, I reject the idea that avoiding the gay man's bookstore is loving the sinner. But, that is exactly what everyone here seems to be saying. I won't endorse; I won't support; I will avoid them like the plague; I will boycott... I think you get the picture.

Now, having said all of this, I will admit that I may be ignorant as to what you all call the Homosexual Agenda. I haven't had anyone ask me to switch sides or anything, nor have I heard of such a thing. I have heard of people asking not to be tied to a barbed wire fence and beaten to death. I have heard of people asking not be discriminated against. If ending those kinds of injustices are the Homosexual Agenda, then I would have thought good Christians would be right on board.

Michael in NH

Michael - I see your point, or at least where you are going, but I don't agree. Using your example - let's say I needed a book, and both book stores had the book, and it was the same price. If I had been in both, and the one owned by the gay man was more customer friendly - and/or appreciative of my business, I'd still choose to do business with them. I wouldn't if I was bombarded with "in-your-face" gay activism. That is the difference.

If there were two book stores, both have the book, both at the same price, both equally friendly, etc., but one owned by a single straight guy and the other by a father, I'd pick the family man. He has more mouths to feed.

Same scenario again, but the family man is a die-hard liberal who pushes his love of Hillary in every customer's face. I'm choosing the other store.

We make these decisions all the time. I for one always try to patronize "pro-gun" places and try not to patronize "anti-gun" places. Everything is taken into consideration - that is part of freedom. Same applies with many other considerations (pro-life versus pro-abortion, straight versus gay, capitalism versus socialism, etc.). The common problem I see those advocating liberal positions, including homosexuality, is a complete unwillingness to accept the consequences of their decisions. They feel they should have the right to do whatever they want, but no one should have the right to judge them for this, and alter their behavior (such as not patronize their store, see their movie, buy their music, etc.) to their detriment. It is a childish viewpoint.

Kismet wrote: Now, having said all of this, I will admit that I may be ignorant as to what you all call the Homosexual Agenda. I haven't had anyone ask me to switch sides or anything, nor have I heard of such a thing. I have heard of people asking not to be tied to a barbed wire fence and beaten to death. I have heard of people asking not be discriminated against. If ending those kinds of injustices are the Homosexual Agenda, then I would have thought good Christians would be right on board.Michael in NH

Do you have kids? A national "Gay Day" or something along those lines is coming up this month. Activists homosexuals are trying to get schools to have a day of silence to show solidarity for gays, lesibians and transexuals. Activists homosexuals are trying to push sex education to younger and younger students, and mandate that homosexualty be presented as an equal alternative lifestyle. They are also trying to prevent parents from opting out their children - making such "education" mandatory. This is a crock.

Your point is horrendous exageration. I know many people who oppose, for religious and other reasons, homosexuality (myself included). I know NO ONE who advocates killing anyone just because they are gay. Just like I know NO ONE who advocates killing blacks or other minorities. I no NO ONE who seriously advocates killing non-Christians just because they are not Christians. I'm sure some people advocate all of these positions - but they would be such a minute fraction of the populace, it is a farce to conjur up them as the example of all Christian conservatives.

I do know my employer - like many others - has sanctioned groups in the workplace suchs as a GLAD chapter, Women in Business, African-American group, Hispanic group, Asian group. You know what group they don't have and wouldn't allow if someone tried? Heterosexual Christian Caucasian Men.

Yeah, gays are picked on in society... picked on by groups bending over backwards to appease them and throw them money...

Jaguarundi · Post by **Jaguarundi** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:11 am

spud1949 wrote:I started years ago when they gave 2 million for gun control!

+1

Quick Karl · Post by **Quick Karl** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:32 am

Ysabel Kid wrote:
Kismet wrote: Imagine two bookstores side by side, selling the same product. One is owned by a man that you know is gay. The other is owned by a married father of three. I'll bet dollars to donuts that I know which bookstore most of the people here are patronizing. I will also bet that I know which bookstore Jesus is going into. As I said above, I reject the idea that avoiding the gay man's bookstore is loving the sinner. But, that is exactly what everyone here seems to be saying. I won't endorse; I won't support; I will avoid them like the plague; I will boycott... I think you get the picture.

Now, having said all of this, I will admit that I may be ignorant as to what you all call the Homosexual Agenda. I haven't had anyone ask me to switch sides or anything, nor have I heard of such a thing. I have heard of people asking not to be tied to a barbed wire fence and beaten to death. I have heard of people asking not be discriminated against. If ending those kinds of injustices are the Homosexual Agenda, then I would have thought good Christians would be right on board.

Michael in NH
Michael - I see your point, or at least where you are going, but I don't agree. Using your example - let's say I needed a book, and both book stores had the book, and it was the same price. If I had been in both, and the one owned by the gay man was more customer friendly - and/or appreciative of my business, I'd still choose to do business with them. I wouldn't if I was bombarded with "in-your-face" gay activism. That is the difference.

If there were two book stores, both have the book, both at the same price, both equally friendly, etc., but one owned by a single straight guy and the other by a father, I'd pick the family man. He has more mouths to feed.

Same scenario again, but the family man is a die-hard liberal who pushes his love of Hillary in every customer's face. I'm choosing the other store.

We make these decisions all the time. I for one always try to patronize "pro-gun" places and try not to patronize "anti-gun" places. Everything is taken into consideration - that is part of freedom. Same applies with many other considerations (pro-life versus pro-abortion, straight versus gay, capitalism versus socialism, etc.). The common problem I see those advocating liberal positions, including homosexuality, is a complete unwillingness to accept the consequences of their decisions. They feel they should have the right to do whatever they want, but no one should have the right to judge them for this, and alter their behavior (such as not patronize their store, see their movie, buy their music, etc.) to their detriment. It is a childish viewpoint.

Kismet wrote: Now, having said all of this, I will admit that I may be ignorant as to what you all call the Homosexual Agenda. I haven't had anyone ask me to switch sides or anything, nor have I heard of such a thing. I have heard of people asking not to be tied to a barbed wire fence and beaten to death. I have heard of people asking not be discriminated against. If ending those kinds of injustices are the Homosexual Agenda, then I would have thought good Christians would be right on board.Michael in NH
Do you have kids? A national "Gay Day" or something along those lines is coming up this month. Activists homosexuals are trying to get schools to have a day of silence to show solidarity for gays, lesibians and transexuals. Activists homosexuals are trying to push sex education to younger and younger students, and mandate that homosexualty be presented as an equal alternative lifestyle. They are also trying to prevent parents from opting out their children - making such "education" mandatory. This is a crock.

Your point is horrendous exageration. I know many people who oppose, for religious and other reasons, homosexuality (myself included). I know NO ONE who advocates killing anyone just because they are gay. Just like I know NO ONE who advocates killing blacks or other minorities. I no NO ONE who seriously advocates killing non-Christians just because they are not Christians. I'm sure some people advocate all of these positions - but they would be such a minute fraction of the populace, it is a farce to conjur up them as the example of all Christian conservatives.

I do know my employer - like many others - has sanctioned groups in the workplace suchs as a GLAD chapter, Women in Business, African-American group, Hispanic group, Asian group. You know what group they don't have and wouldn't allow if someone tried? Heterosexual Christian Caucasian Men.

Yeah, gays are picked on in society... picked on by groups bending over backwards to appease them and throw them money...

I'm not going to reply to topics anymore - there's no need to when you write such awesome replies like this.

But I have one last question for the gays: lets say you're a male, you love a male, and you want to spend your life with him. If so, why is it then necessary to speak the way they do? You know, that extremely over-dramatized extra-effeminate ridiculous 'act' they take on... Real women don't even act that way, even when their hormones are off the chart. It is ridiculous beyond the absurd. It's an act for attention.

I still say it's a belligerent child's way of insulting their parents.

gamekeeper · Post by **gamekeeper** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:51 pm

C. Cash wrote:Outstanding post Ysabel....well put.

+1

Idahoser · Post by **Idahoser** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:07 pm

Fine.

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:21 pm

I saw your post Game Keeper and wanted to answer, but honestly didn't know if they were pro-gun or not. Now we know!