Topic: Boy Scouts reconsidering stance on gay members

[JamesR]

If it makes anyone feel any better, I wouldn't want any heterosexual men around my toddler sister either She's going to hate me when she becomes a teenager and I scare all her boyfriends away, or charge them a dowry of ten bags of fine coffee in order to be able to date my sister

[Peter J]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No, this isn’t the question at all.  Not even remotely close to the question.  The question is, should be allowed openly in the BSA.  Nice diversion tactic, but it was unsuccessful. 

Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the question to ask yeshuaisiam. His point was that gay sex is "not just sinful, but abominable", according to the Old Testament. And that's a perfectly intelligent comment (and one that I made myself in my teens and early 20s). The OT does call gay sex (but not fornication) "an abomination"; but on the other hand, the OT also made gay sex (but not fornication) punishable by death, which is why I wanted to know if yesh believes that people who commit that sin should be put to death.

[Peter J]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No.

I believe that the New Covenant Christ taught us (by example the adulterous woman) that we should not cast stones at her.  He said 'go now and sin no more' to her.

Now, if a gay person were to repent of their sin and not practice it, okay the doors are open as we all struggle.   But they won't.  

I actually thought this a good response, until I got to the fifth sentence. I know a number of ways to say "wow", but none seem to do justice to this.

[Kerdy]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No, this isn’t the question at all.  Not even remotely close to the question.  The question is, should be allowed openly in the BSA.  Nice diversion tactic, but it was unsuccessful. 

Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the question to ask yeshuaisiam. His point was that gay sex is "not just sinful, but abominable", according to the Old Testament. And that's a perfectly intelligent comment (and one that I made myself in my teens and early 20s). The OT does call gay sex (but not fornication) "an abomination"; but on the other hand, the OT also made gay sex (but not fornication) punishable by death, which is why I wanted to know if yesh believes that people who commit that sin should be put to death.

But you brought it up, he didn't.  There were things which changed with the arrival of Christ.  Knowing what did and did not is the key.

[orthonorm]

as a protection, we have something called two deep leadership

Not sounding all that reassuring in this context.

[yeshuaisiam]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No, this isn’t the question at all.  Not even remotely close to the question.  The question is, should be allowed openly in the BSA.  Nice diversion tactic, but it was unsuccessful. 

Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the question to ask yeshuaisiam. His point was that gay sex is "not just sinful, but abominable", according to the Old Testament. And that's a perfectly intelligent comment (and one that I made myself in my teens and early 20s). The OT does call gay sex (but not fornication) "an abomination"; but on the other hand, the OT also made gay sex (but not fornication) punishable by death, which is why I wanted to know if yesh believes that people who commit that sin should be put to death.

Hopefully you got my last answer, but no I do not believe that homosexual sex should be punished by death is mandated by God through his second covenant.  By example, the adulterous woman, that he clearly saved from being stoned by basically making people reflect on their own sins.

He still addressed the sin and told her to "sin no more".   Her crime was punishable by death.

In the case of homosexuals, they basically "will go now AND sin more - AND - they want you to accept it".   It is still an abomination and called "vile" and "unnatural" in the New Testament.

All other pedo issues aside which can debate forever, I would not allow my sons to attend an organization that would put somebody living this lifestyle as role models for my children.

None of us are perfect, and we all fall short to the glory of God.  I am definitely a sinner.  But I do not ask you to accept my sins and continually throw them at you to accept. 

[Peter J]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No, this isn’t the question at all.  Not even remotely close to the question.  The question is, should be allowed openly in the BSA.  Nice diversion tactic, but it was unsuccessful. 

Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the question to ask yeshuaisiam. His point was that gay sex is "not just sinful, but abominable", according to the Old Testament. And that's a perfectly intelligent comment (and one that I made myself in my teens and early 20s). The OT does call gay sex (but not fornication) "an abomination"; but on the other hand, the OT also made gay sex (but not fornication) punishable by death, which is why I wanted to know if yesh believes that people who commit that sin should be put to death.

Hopefully you got my last answer,

See post #452:

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No.

I believe that the New Covenant Christ taught us (by example the adulterous woman) that we should not cast stones at her.  He said 'go now and sin no more' to her.

Now, if a gay person were to repent of their sin and not practice it, okay the doors are open as we all struggle.   But they won't. 

I actually thought this a good response, until I got to the fifth sentence. I know a number of ways to say "wow", but none seem to do justice to this.

In the case of homosexuals, they basically "will go now AND sin more

Once again, I can't think of any way to say "wow" that would do justice to this.

[yeshuaisiam]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No.

I believe that the New Covenant Christ taught us (by example the adulterous woman) that we should not cast stones at her.  He said 'go now and sin no more' to her.

Now, if a gay person were to repent of their sin and not practice it, okay the doors are open as we all struggle.   But they won't.  

I actually thought this a good response, until I got to the fifth sentence. I know a number of ways to say "wow", but none seem to do justice to this.

Let me explain to clarify.

If a man has homosexual temptations and sees his sin, he repents.  He struggles and asks God for help.  He tries to do what is right with his life.  He could even get married.  He could have a family as well.   He could always have a longing for the attraction to men, however, he knows it comes from the evil one.   He knows how to deal with the temptation and cry out to God for help.

This is how many of us deal with sin.  We struggle with them....

Later this man and his son want to start a scout troop together.  The man will most likely call himself "straight" on the application form.   I see him as a struggling sinner as much as anybody else.  How am I better?


Man #2 has homosexual temptations.  He acts on them.  He eventually settles down with a "partner" and they consider themselves "married".   He has no moral compass to address his sin or struggle with it.  He wishes you to accept him 'how he is' and will not change.  He decides with his partner that he wants to lead a scout troop because he likes children.    He applies and puts that he is "gay" on the sexual orientation.

What I meant by "But they won't" is that the man who signs up that he is "gay" will not change.  He wants acceptance for how he is.  

Man #1 understands his sin and struggles with his sin.  He doesn't believe that people should accept his sin.  

In my opinion, Man #1 is a struggling sinner like any of us.  We all have faults and he recognizes them.  Man #2 simply wants for you to accept his sin and his homosexual partnership.  He won't change.

I do not want somebody who will not confess a major and abominable sin to God, or in the case of non-EO to not struggle with it/do the right thing, to be a leader and role model to my children.

[Kerdy]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No.

I believe that the New Covenant Christ taught us (by example the adulterous woman) that we should not cast stones at her.  He said 'go now and sin no more' to her.

Now, if a gay person were to repent of their sin and not practice it, okay the doors are open as we all struggle.   But they won't.  

I actually thought this a good response, until I got to the fifth sentence. I know a number of ways to say "wow", but none seem to do justice to this.

Let me explain to clarify.

If a man has homosexual temptations and sees his sin, he repents.  He struggles and asks God for help.  He tries to do what is right with his life.  He could even get married.  He could have a family as well.   He could always have a longing for the attraction to men, however, he knows it comes from the evil one.   He knows how to deal with the temptation and cry out to God for help.

This is how many of us deal with sin.  We struggle with them....

Later this man and his son want to start a scout troop together.  The man will most likely call himself "straight" on the application form.   I see him as a struggling sinner as much as anybody else.  How am I better?


Man #2 has homosexual temptations.  He acts on them.  He eventually settles down with a "partner" and they consider themselves "married".   He has no moral compass to address his sin or struggle with it.  He wishes you to accept him 'how he is' and will not change.  He decides with his partner that he wants to lead a scout troop because he likes children.    He applies and puts that he is "gay" on the sexual orientation.

What I meant by "But they won't" is that the man who signs up that he is "gay" will not change.  He wants acceptance for how he is.  

Man #1 understands his sin and struggles with his sin.  He doesn't believe that people should accept his sin.  

In my opinion, Man #1 is a struggling sinner like any of us.  We all have faults and he recognizes them.  Man #2 simply wants for you to accept his sin and his homosexual partnership.  He won't change.

I do not want somebody who will not confess a major and abominable sin to God, or in the case of non-EO to not struggle with it/do the right thing, to be a leader and role model to my children.

Everyone knows EXACTLY what you mean, they have from the start.  They are playing word games with you and pretending what you say is some sort of horrible phobia produced hatred, which they know is not.  That's all, nothing more, nothing new. Word games in the attempt to redefine what God has already declared.  The problem does not rest with you.

[That person]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

[Kerdy]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

[Peter J]

What I meant by "But they won't" is that the man who signs up that he is "gay" will not change.

Hi yeshuaism. After my last post, an important bible passage came to mind: the one where Peter stood up before the crowd on Pentecost and said "You should repent of your sins, but you won't" and then left with the other apostles.

[PeterTheAleut]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

I suppose it's clear to the person who wants to see it as clear. Methinks, though, that what you see clearly in other peoples' posts is your reflection.

[Kerdy]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

I suppose it's clear to the person who wants to see it as clear. Methinks, though, that what you see clearly in other peoples' posts is your reflection.

Nope, although, there is two other options. One being devils advocate, the other I will refrain from posting.

[PeterTheAleut]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

I suppose it's clear to the person who wants to see it as clear. Methinks, though, that what you see clearly in other peoples' posts is your reflection.

Nope, although, there is two other options. One being devils advocate, the other I will refrain from posting.

Of course, you could just be blind to what I see.

[Kerdy]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

I suppose it's clear to the person who wants to see it as clear. Methinks, though, that what you see clearly in other peoples' posts is your reflection.

Nope, although, there is two other options. One being devils advocate, the other I will refrain from posting.

Of course, you could just be blind to what I see.

That is basically what I was refraining from saying about other posters.

[orthonorm]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

I suppose it's clear to the person who wants to see it as clear. Methinks, though, that what you see clearly in other peoples' posts is your reflection.

Nope, although, there is two other options. One being devils advocate, the other I will refrain from posting.

I'll take the red option.

[Shiny]

Well you can't say gayness without anus

[ialmisry]

Well you can't say gayness without anus

Lesbians say it all the time.

[Jetavan]

Well you can't say gayness without anus

Same with angus.

[That person]

Well you can't say gayness without anus

Lesbians say it all the time.

So do some gay men for that matter.

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

[Shanghaiski]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No, this isn’t the question at all.  Not even remotely close to the question.  The question is, should be allowed openly in the BSA.  Nice diversion tactic, but it was unsuccessful. 

Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the question to ask yeshuaisiam. His point was that gay sex is "not just sinful, but abominable", according to the Old Testament. And that's a perfectly intelligent comment (and one that I made myself in my teens and early 20s). The OT does call gay sex (but not fornication) "an abomination"; but on the other hand, the OT also made gay sex (but not fornication) punishable by death, which is why I wanted to know if yesh believes that people who commit that sin should be put to death.

I remember reading somewhere, though I forget where but it seemed a scholarly source, that there is question over whether a lot of people were actually put to death for those things for which the Law prescribed being put to death. There doesn't seem to have been consistent enforcement. The story of the woman caught in adultery in John Chapter 8 seems like a mob action, whereas the Jewish leaders at the time needed Roman sanction to put Jesus to death, when they could have just stoned him. So, it doesn't appear clear. I also read the Hasmoneans ended capital punishment.

[yeshuaisiam]

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

Word games really are immature and the world is vexing enough.   I do not give them credence or pay attention to them.   Also, I wasn't understanding what another poster was getting at about "but they won't".   Very interesting response Peter J, and I honestly did not think of that when typing.

[yeshuaisiam]

There are A LOT of Christians that need to read the scriptures.

This is not a subject that should be debated.

God called Men who lay with Men an ABOMINATION.
God called Women who lay with Woman an ABOMINATION.

Not just sinful, but abominable!!!

Do you want somebody who has such a distraught and messed up family, who loves their own sex, will not engage in normal relations as God created us, to be the role model for your son or sons?

Us Christians DO NOT JUDGE homosexual behavior, GOD already did.  When we call homosexual behavior an abomination, we are only repeating what God called it.

No Christian should want their sons role models / mentors / troop leaders to be homosexuals.  End of story.

It is a sin.

But I guess the question to you should be: Do you believe that people who commit that sin should be put to death?

No, this isn’t the question at all.  Not even remotely close to the question.  The question is, should be allowed openly in the BSA.  Nice diversion tactic, but it was unsuccessful. 

Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the question to ask yeshuaisiam. His point was that gay sex is "not just sinful, but abominable", according to the Old Testament. And that's a perfectly intelligent comment (and one that I made myself in my teens and early 20s). The OT does call gay sex (but not fornication) "an abomination"; but on the other hand, the OT also made gay sex (but not fornication) punishable by death, which is why I wanted to know if yesh believes that people who commit that sin should be put to death.

I remember reading somewhere, though I forget where but it seemed a scholarly source, that there is question over whether a lot of people were actually put to death for those things for which the Law prescribed being put to death. There doesn't seem to have been consistent enforcement. The story of the woman caught in adultery in John Chapter 8 seems like a mob action, whereas the Jewish leaders at the time needed Roman sanction to put Jesus to death, when they could have just stoned him. So, it doesn't appear clear. I also read the Hasmoneans ended capital punishment.

Interesting.  But I do remember a couple cities that didn't do so well....

That is interesting about the Adulterous woman.  Also creates some conflict OR further thought in John because the pharisees told Pilate that they came to him because they could not put Jesus to death.

Also the Jews in the temple in the book of John tried to stone him a couple times....  (If I remember correctly)  Obviously they had a mindset that they could...

Perhaps mob action was different... I don't know.... I mean, to be killed by a mob or government don't know if it matters much to the person getting killed.

[Kerdy]

Well you can't say gayness without anus

Lesbians say it all the time.

So do some gay men for that matter.

Oh do tell us the secret of your mind-reading.

No secret, no mind reading.  It is in your posts, clear as day.  

If you say so, but the reality is you just are not as complicated as you believe.

[Peter J]

Also, I wasn't understanding what another poster was getting at about "but they won't".   Very interesting response Peter J, and I honestly did not think of that when typing.

Well, alright. That's better than if you said "I realized that what I was saying was completely different from the apostles' approach, but I just didn't care." 

[Peter J]

I wonder. Did Paul have any notion of people who are 'born' with same-sex attractions? He seems to be criticizing here, people -- heterosexual -- whose extreme lust has taken them into 'vile affections', not people whose normal state of attraction is directed towards those of the same sex.

I'm not sure. It does appear that they were at least aware that some men are (naturally) not attracted to women.

[Papist]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

[Αριστοκλής]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

You dispute Deep Roots' s comments? Maybe not "always", but often enough.

[Romaios]

Interesting.  But I do remember a couple cities that didn't do so well....

That is interesting about the Adulterous woman.  Also creates some conflict OR further thought in John because the pharisees told Pilate that they came to him because they could not put Jesus to death.

Also the Jews in the temple in the book of John tried to stone him a couple times....  (If I remember correctly)  Obviously they had a mindset that they could...

Perhaps mob action was different... I don't know.... I mean, to be killed by a mob or government don't know if it matters much to the person getting killed.

The chapter on the adulterous woman didn't originally belong to John - ancient manuscripts sometimes omit it, give it as a separate item or include it in other gospels (Luke). So there's no way it could have influenced the plot of John. If you have a close look at the place where it is inserted and then skip it, you'll see that the text makes more sense without it.

Jews would have had the right to punish religious offences against Jewish Law, without the Romans interfering. That explains Pilate's initial reaction - Our Lord had broken no Roman law, so as far as the Roman governor was concerned, there was nothing to punish him for. But then the Jewish authorities tried to present him as a danger to Roman rule in Palestine and a rival of Caesar's. If he were condemned as a rebel against Rome, they wouldn't have innocent blood on their hands, thus avoiding the potential anger of the mobs/his followers. Pilate also washed his hands, and the mob gladly accepted the fault for it all. 

So Romans would not have cared much if a Jew was stoned to death by other Jews. If he also happened to be a Roman citizen (still a rare privilege in the 1st century), only then could he appeal to be judged by Roman authorities. This is what happened when St. Paul got in trouble with the Sanhedrin.           

[Shiny]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

You dispute Deep Roots' s comments? Maybe not "always", but often enough.

This happens often in Pittsburgh?

The gays here are mostly republican and harder to spot!

[Deep Roots]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

You dispute Deep Roots' s comments? Maybe not "always", but often enough.

Just so we're clear, my "sneaky gays" comment was sarcasm.

[Αριστοκλής]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

You dispute Deep Roots' s comments? Maybe not "always", but often enough.

This happens often in Pittsburgh?

The gays here are mostly republican and harder to spot!

You should know, I imagine.

[Peter J]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

You dispute Deep Roots' s comments? Maybe not "always", but often enough.

Just so we're clear, my "sneaky gays" comment was sarcasm.

I was just about to say to Papist "I guess I thought Deep Roots was being facetious." Then I saw ^^.

[Deep Roots]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

You dispute Deep Roots' s comments? Maybe not "always", but often enough.

Just so we're clear, my "sneaky gays" comment was sarcasm.

I was just about to say to Papist "I guess I thought Deep Roots was being facetious." Then I saw ^^.

[Papist]

I agree with Peter. It is one thing for gays to advocate for equal treatment under the law, it is another thing all together for them to (a) demand that no one criticize their immoral and sinful life style, (b) demand that society throw away the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman in the name of equality, and (c) demand that private individuals and organizations accept their demand that homosexual lifestyle is normal.  Those who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong have agreed to the decriminalization of homosexual conduct. Now, they are faced with a demand that they approve of homosexual conduct. That's cheeky, don't you think?

Sneaky gays.  Sneaky sneaky gays.  Always trying to feel you up when you don't wanna be felt up.

I honestly wonder if you guys have ever spent time around a group of gay guys.

You dispute Deep Roots' s comments? Maybe not "always", but often enough.

What I am saying is that I have had quite a few gay acquaintances and they are not as pure as you would like to think. The amount of time that most of them spend "perving" on straight guys is not negligible.

[Deep Roots]

haha oh man, you folks are rich.

I know a lot of gay folks and work with them too.  Look, here's the deal.  I get more embarrassed bu the pervy and inappropriate stuff my straight male friends say about women than anything else.

So let's get real here.  People in general are weird and pervy and insensitive and lusty about sex.  Or can be.  Gays are no more or no less so.

[orthonorm]

haha oh man, you folks are rich.

I know a lot of gay folks and work with them too.  Look, here's the deal.  I get more embarrassed bu the pervy and inappropriate stuff my straight male friends say about women than anything else.

So let's get real here.  People in general are weird and pervy and insensitive and lusty about sex.  Or can be.  Gays are no more or no less so.

Troof.

[Papist]

haha oh man, you folks are rich.

I know a lot of gay folks and work with them too.  Look, here's the deal.  I get more embarrassed bu the pervy and inappropriate stuff my straight male friends say about women than anything else.

So let's get real here.  People in general are weird and pervy and insensitive and lusty about sex.  Or can be.  Gays are no more or no less so.

I once pointed out, after a particularly pervish conversation that I over heard a friend of mine have, that this was the exact reason why so many straight guys end up afraid of gay guys. His response: "They should be afraid of us." This may not be a characteristic inherent in gay guys, but it is certainly a big part of gay culture.

[Deep Roots]

haha oh man, you folks are rich.

I know a lot of gay folks and work with them too.  Look, here's the deal.  I get more embarrassed bu the pervy and inappropriate stuff my straight male friends say about women than anything else.

So let's get real here.  People in general are weird and pervy and insensitive and lusty about sex.  Or can be.  Gays are no more or no less so.

I once pointed out, after a particularly pervish conversation that I over heard a friend of mine have, that this was the exact reason why so many straight guys end up afraid of gay guys. His response: "They should be afraid of us." This may not be a characteristic inherent in gay guys, but it is certainly a big part of gay culture.

#1, I've heard stuff like that too, but no more than with my straight friends.
#2, That is attitude is partly cultivated by straight culture.  That response is intentionally transgressive -- a reaction to the perceived homophobia of society and/or a particular group.  This happens all the time.  It's an aggressive attitude developed in response to something else.  We have seen this in society with all previously oppressed and/or minority groups.  It's a common sociological reaction.  Heck, I do something like it with people I perceive to be racist.  I will intentionally say something to rile up their racism out of pure, and sinful I admit, instigation.
#3, Straight men do the same thing with women.  "I'd tap that."  "She better git outta here before I jump her bones" etc. Etc.  There are immature people gay and straight who do these things.

[Papist]

haha oh man, you folks are rich.

I know a lot of gay folks and work with them too.  Look, here's the deal.  I get more embarrassed bu the pervy and inappropriate stuff my straight male friends say about women than anything else.

So let's get real here.  People in general are weird and pervy and insensitive and lusty about sex.  Or can be.  Gays are no more or no less so.

I once pointed out, after a particularly pervish conversation that I over heard a friend of mine have, that this was the exact reason why so many straight guys end up afraid of gay guys. His response: "They should be afraid of us." This may not be a characteristic inherent in gay guys, but it is certainly a big part of gay culture.

#1, I've heard stuff like that too, but no more than with my straight friends.
#2, That is attitude is partly cultivated by straight culture.  That response is intentionally transgressive -- a reaction to the perceived homophobia of society and/or a particular group.  This happens all the time.  It's an aggressive attitude developed in response to something else.  We have seen this in society with all previously oppressed and/or minority groups.  It's a common sociological reaction.  Heck, I do something like it with people I perceive to be racist.  I will intentionally say something to rile up their racism out of pure, and sinful I admit, instigation.
#3, Straight men do the same thing with women.  "I'd tap that."  "She better git outta here before I jump her bones" etc. Etc.  There are immature people gay and straight who do these things.

Well then gay men are not doing anything to forward the cause of "equality" by behaving this way.

[Deep Roots]

Well that's a complicated issue.  Every equality movement has its various components, each viewed differently by one another and "outsiders."  As far as black equality, you can look at some of the major figures throughout history: Du Bois, Booker T., Douglass, MLK, Malcolm X, Black Panthers, etc., etc.  I mean, that's a diverse group of ideology and tactic.

NOw you might look at the Black Panthers or X and say "they didn't do much to further their cause"...but by whose standards?

Either way, I suspect you're right.  They aren't furthering their cause by being lewd and in-your-face in that particular instance.  But until I see an equal emphasis on getting straight men to stop disrespecting women with their lewdness and suggestive comments, I honestly don't care if a gay man does the same to other men.

I'm an adult.  If I get hit on by a man, and I have and do, I don't need to say anything else but, "Thanks, I'm flattered, but I'm straight and married.  Have a good one, man."

[ialmisry]

haha oh man, you folks are rich.

I know a lot of gay folks and work with them too.  Look, here's the deal.  I get more embarrassed bu the pervy and inappropriate stuff my straight male friends say about women than anything else.

So let's get real here.  People in general are weird and pervy and insensitive and lusty about sex.  Or can be.  Gays are no more or no less so.

I once pointed out, after a particularly pervish conversation that I over heard a friend of mine have, that this was the exact reason why so many straight guys end up afraid of gay guys. His response: "They should be afraid of us." This may not be a characteristic inherent in gay guys, but it is certainly a big part of gay culture.

#1, I've heard stuff like that too, but no more than with my straight friends.
#2, That is attitude is partly cultivated by straight culture.  That response is intentionally transgressive -- a reaction to the perceived homophobia of society and/or a particular group.  This happens all the time.  It's an aggressive attitude developed in response to something else.  We have seen this in society with all previously oppressed and/or minority groups.  It's a common sociological reaction.  Heck, I do something like it with people I perceive to be racist.  I will intentionally say something to rile up their racism out of pure, and sinful I admit, instigation.
#3, Straight men do the same thing with women.  "I'd tap that."  "She better git outta here before I jump her bones" etc. Etc.  There are immature people gay and straight who do these things.

A woman suing for sexism/sexual harrassment is encouraged and applauded (I can name a glaring exception, but that might be seen as political).  A man trying to sue for sexual harrassment from a homosexual, not so much.  In fact, he first has to pass the hurdle of it thrown out of court without a first hearing.

[orthonorm]

haha oh man, you folks are rich.

I know a lot of gay folks and work with them too.  Look, here's the deal.  I get more embarrassed bu the pervy and inappropriate stuff my straight male friends say about women than anything else.

So let's get real here.  People in general are weird and pervy and insensitive and lusty about sex.  Or can be.  Gays are no more or no less so.

I once pointed out, after a particularly pervish conversation that I over heard a friend of mine have, that this was the exact reason why so many straight guys end up afraid of gay guys. His response: "They should be afraid of us." This may not be a characteristic inherent in gay guys, but it is certainly a big part of gay culture.

#1, I've heard stuff like that too, but no more than with my straight friends.
#2, That is attitude is partly cultivated by straight culture.  That response is intentionally transgressive -- a reaction to the perceived homophobia of society and/or a particular group.  This happens all the time.  It's an aggressive attitude developed in response to something else.  We have seen this in society with all previously oppressed and/or minority groups.  It's a common sociological reaction.  Heck, I do something like it with people I perceive to be racist.  I will intentionally say something to rile up their racism out of pure, and sinful I admit, instigation.
#3, Straight men do the same thing with women.  "I'd tap that."  "She better git outta here before I jump her bones" etc. Etc.  There are immature people gay and straight who do these things.

Well then gay men are not doing anything to forward the cause of "equality" by behaving this way.

Think this through.

Gay men are acting like straight men.

[orthonorm]

Well that's a complicated issue.  Every equality movement has its various components, each viewed differently by one another and "outsiders."  As far as black equality, you can look at some of the major figures throughout history: Du Bois, Booker T., Douglass, MLK, Malcolm X, Black Panthers, etc., etc.  I mean, that's a diverse group of ideology and tactic.

NOw you might look at the Black Panthers or X and say "they didn't do much to further their cause"...but by whose standards?

Either way, I suspect you're right.  They aren't furthering their cause by being lewd and in-your-face in that particular instance.  But until I see an equal emphasis on getting straight men to stop disrespecting women with their lewdness and suggestive comments, I honestly don't care if a gay man does the same to other men.

I'm an adult.  If I get hit on by a man, and I have and do, I don't need to say anything else but, "Thanks, I'm flattered, but I'm straight and married.  Have a good one, man."

Your sanity is rather bothersome. I need more people to laugh at.