WDJS (What Did Jesus Say)?

John 8:7 So when they continued asking Him, He lifted up Himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

The “christian” Right needs to clean its own nose before it starts throwing rocks.

No. As a biologist I can say that the `natural order`deciding sexual preference is determined by a separate organic mechanism or function than the one that determines ones genitalia thereby resulting in the relatively high frequency of psychological.attractions to what appears to be a physical mismatch. It has NOTHING to do with the ethical or sexual choices that are made for us by nature-God.

As for biblical passages against homosexuality….you must then approve of slavery since that was accepted .If a passage displaying disapproval of homosexuality is something you must observe, then a chapter in Numbers describes the Lords command to the Israelites that they should commit genocide on the Midians by killing every man, woman and child EXCEPT for “female children too young to have lain with a man“Child virgins IOW.`These you are to keep for yourself“
Now, based on the principle that we must oppose homosexuality (or anything else for that matter) because that’s what the OT says on the matter, you must then approve of genocide, paedophilia, and child sexual slavery. No. Why not?

And what about `It is easier tor a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than A WEALTHY MAN ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN”…… and the promotion of affluence among Evangelical pastors?

Clearly you pick and choose which evils you’ll bemoan despite your insistence it a matter beyond your own mortal capacity to decide. The proof is the way you ignore the clear disapproval Jesus Christ himself has for riches, money-lending, usury and general greed.. Which also means that capitalism is a ticket to Hell based on the same logic you used to demean homosexuals as a biblically directed act.. That rather than simply admitting to the exaggerated fears that overtake you whenever you’re presented with behaviors that deviate from a traditional way that you and other conservatives see as the “normal” way of doing things.

Because THAT is what is most important to you for deciding what is acceptable or not. In-group conformity. Tacit approval given by a conservative leader whom you (and other RWAs) are compelled to please. Your compartmentalized cognitive processes allows you to keep related thoughts separated so you never have to address the conflict that would come of a belief in both His disdain for the rich, and your own desire for seek out and gain the approval of the wealthy.. ..the very people whom the Bible seems quite clear in judging to be lower on an ethics totem-pole than either Ru Paul or Pussy Tourette, ( I`ll (leave you with that as a visual!).

Do I understand correctly? An organization that agrees with YOUR point of view is legitimate. But one that does not is illegitimate. Further, that individuals cannot leave an organization if they disagree with its policy and view points? And if they do then they are somehow are not as “real”. I don’t think so. History also disagrees with you. But then history would be wrong by your definition …right…

Officials of several, including the FRC, have called for criminalizing gay sex.

Ohh you mean legitimate sodomy laws??
Since that what it comes down to.

Almost all the religious-right groups named by the SPLC also have engaged in a particularly toxic and widespread defamation of gay men: The claim that they are essentially pedophiles who molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals.

I can’t say that everyone articulates their points
100% perfect every time.Can you guarantee that you do?? Willing to bet your life on it? Doubt it. No one is that perfect. Not even you.
As for children being molested?? I have one acronym
N.A.M.B.L.A. Nuff said.

The issue here is whether there is a ABSOLUTE standard for behavior. In a culture where this is constantly denied, its no wonder we have a free for all.
As i said before, no one is perfect. That said what standard do we use to decide an issue

I believe the BiBle has something to say about it. But I doubt it will be welcome here since it specifically denounces homosexuality.

The undermining God’s design of marriage just as Satan undermined the first marriage.
Martin Luther King Jr. – Excerpts from his Letter from the Birmingham Jail April 16, 1963 “How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.”
Note: Slavery or racial discrimination, and marriage are two totally different issues. Allowing same-sex unions and marriage would violate “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” where the abolition of slavery DID NOT, and therefore, to have these “Rights” of freedom “entitled” was justified.
What new and improved wisdom do secular humanists use to justify violating “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” which was the foundation laid out in America’s Founding Document on how “unalienable Rights” were to be “entitled?” What is his foundation? How do secular humanists determine the rules and boundaries if not by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God?” What is basis of secular humanists for determining laws and “Rights?“ So, how do secular humanists justify “entitling” a “Right” for same-sex relationships?

The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”
Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.

So, to outlaw gay marriages as illegitimate is well with in biblical law

But since that view point is one you dis agree with , it has to be wrong.. right…

dont know him specifically, but it reminds me of the gay friend whose father is a small town southern cop in VA. As his described him, he has a two word vocabulary. (the n-word and the 3 letter f word. And of course they are southern baptists. The the gay son, who is probablly one of the nicest human beings one could ever meet, said that his mom, his stepfather, his stepmother are fine with him as a gay man.

And when the son came out , the bigot father’s brother came out – admitted he was gay. The father wont even speak to his brother. BTW the father is a southern Baptist, even though the last name suggests catholic.

As for the republicans – I;’m not surprised, they are just using racial hatred against Obama.. Because their base is the southern evangelicals who never stopped hating blacks (and now gays), whose worst nightmare has come true, the election of a black president

And obviously has another group to hate. = the gays. BTW he was also an actor in some christian plays in college. While not definitive, its worth noting that a large percentage of actors are gay. I’ve seen Spriggs testify at hearings. the hatred and emotion just boils from his body language as well as his words.

As for Perkins, I showed his pix to a number of gay people who didn’t recognise him. All but one said “he’s gay”, The wierd smile etc.

What I think these creeps really are is “fixed gays”, or gays in denial. Terrified by their church into believing they will go to hell, they become the worst of the worst of the Homophobic horror show.

I know someone who is a fixed gay. Ultra Ro. Catholic. the perfect parrot for the church line. And when you challenge his beliefs, and break through the veneer of civility, you get comments like “Matthew Shepards parents should have fixed him” – this nut case is blaming Matthew’s parents for their sons murder. And also “gays are supporting the (madness of the) westboro baptist church because it brings them sympathy.

I’ve long suspected these people -absolute fundamentalists – are victims of a mental disorder. Turns out it is Obsessive Compulsive Personality disorder – people who know no gray areas, are absolutists etc, no comporomist, just extremists.

BTW Besides the splinter group re the pediatricians, there is a false front – I think its called the American association of Psychologists – cooked up by EXodus or the FRC. Sounds like the legit American Psychological Association.

As someone said long ago – if you tell a lie often enough and outrageous enough it will be seen as truth” Goebbels.

And that is the mantra of these people.

The RIGHT has infiltrated the GOP and I am not shocked but outraged they they are not censored.

Keep up your great work to out these really UGLY Americans.

I live in the land of mega-churches, Colorado Springs, and they rail at every opportunity against LGBT rights, as an attractant to the people who already hate. They preach to the choir, and the children of the choir, they are not attracting new adult converts. If everyone had a job, and flag draped coffins coming home stopped, hate speech would fade into the background. SPLC press forward and keep the faith.

As for the anti-LGBT hate speech, as a regular reader of The Washington Post, I’ve noticed a recent trend in its willingness to publish radical opinions from the extreme right. I wonder sometimes if they do this just to prove to readers that they are not simply a shill for the left. Either way, I hope SPLC is willing to take out an ad of the same size rebutting their opinion (and the WP is willing to accept the ad and print it, of course). Even better would be the WP running a guest rebuttal column from the SPLC, but I shan’t hold my breath on that one.

The courage of the SPLC is inspiring. The response of the hate groups demonstrates why the SPLC’s mission, despite all the progress made over the last few decades, is just as relevant today as it was decades ago. Thank you for taking a stand.

Fortunately many more are seeing through you and your days are numbered.

You will rarely hear the FRC assert that children would be safer with lesbian parents, since women molest children (male or female) far less than do men. Logic, for these organizations, means agreeing with their conclusions. If they like the conclusion, they’ll seize any evidence that they can find that remotely suggests it and dismiss out of hand the rest.

As a point of interest, most men and women who molest children don’t easily fit into the heterosexual/homosexual/bisexual binary, as many pedophiles feel no attraction to adults of either gender. The ones that do, however, almost overwhelmingly report being heterosexual, even the ones who molest boys. In many cases, these people just have easier access to male children than female children.

These right wing fools spew utter nonsense as if it had meaning and no one even challenges idiotic statements like this!

Yes, we get the fact that the SPLC engages in the very tactics of the “racists” it despises. That’s the point. The SPLC is, by its own standards, a bigoted organization.