Skip to comments.Obama: An Enemy Of Boy Scouts
Posted on 01/26/2009 5:03:57 AM PST by IbJensen
click here to read article
See. His moderate tone has fled. He realizes that he's not going to obtain any converts here, so he resorts to name calling.
How would anyone know that Scalia is his 'hero' thence the 'Nino' fan.
Nino could have meant 'little' something else.
In the past on FR I was very active on this topic and had a lot of “debates” with all kinds of pro-homosexual agenda people, and eventually the pro-agenda people would get banned. That’s the way it is on FR. If someone is a pro-homosexual agenda promoter, whether they themselves are homosexual or not, they will eventually get banned, if they keep at it.
I’ve had many private conversations on FR with people struggling with same sex attraction - who did not want to remain that way. I can think of two in particular who became healed. Just because someone experiences same sex desires doesn’t mean they have to always remain in the “gay life”. It is in many cases a treatable condition, and that is one of the main lies of the “gay” agenda that is so tragic, as it dooms many - especially very young kids - to a life of misery, sickness, loneliness, and death.
With all these “gay” high schools - and now a “gay” MIDDLE SCHOOL! This should be illegal as it is nothing more than child abuse.
Excuse me, sir. I am polite with anyone who is polite with me. My moderate tone did not go anywhere. DBeeers is the one whose own mind ‘went there’ in terms of my username.
BTW, it is considered proper FReeper etiquette to ping someone when you talk about them. Since you, IbJensen, are so new to this website, it is perhaps understandable that you are not aware of this.
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.
Nice try, but that has nothing to do with what I just posted. I was talking about the response and his choice to criticize me without pinging me, which is considered rude here on Free Republic. It’s clear you lack the ability to debate intelligently or even focus on the content of posts, so any further discussion with you is pointless.
Again, if you choose to harass me, I will hit abuse on you. Otherwise, we don’t have a problem. Now, I’m going to go back and enjoy Free Republic, as I have done for years. I wish you nothing but the best. God Bless.
What other posters do, in the field of rudeness, has nothing to do with me.
Meant to add - I am not on this thread to debate rudeness or lack of same by anyone, but about the inappropriateness of the promoting the homosexual agenda on FR.
Well, you chose to post it as a reply to the comment I made in response to his criticism, so the context made it seem that way. If I misunderstood your purpose, I apologize.
Just to make clear, I feel no ill will towards you. I’m sure you’re a nice person. And based on your profile page, it looks like you’re a fellow Christian, so that’s great. Even if you disagree with me strongly on the topic of this thread (and given the fact that I take the libertarian position that the Boy Scouts should be able to keep out whoever they want, we really don’t disagree on the conclusion, even if we disagree on homosexuality in general), I think it’s important that we at least acknowledge that we’re fighting against the same evil enemy when it comes to abortion mills, Islamic fascists, etc.
However, to be frank, I find it difficult to discuss things with you because I almost get the feeling that you’re trying to push buttons. I am here to discuss issues, not to create enemies, so I hope that I’m just being sensitive. The way I see it is that we’ve made our positions clear and we’ll both do what we think is best in the future. Perhaps it’s time to shake hands, agree that we’ll both do what we feel we need to do in the future with respect to this topic, and move on.
What stand does Jesus take on homosexuality (in your opinion)?
I’m sorry, but I’m not going to respond to someone who takes this tone and who said something like ‘perversion cheerleader alert’ when another poster (who was a physician in that case) simply posted some studies that discussed the issue of homosexuality and pedophilia. Reasonable discussion is fine, but if you’re looking for a fight, I’m not your man. Take care of yourself, and God Bless you and yours.
That states it quite succinctly.
Agree with your #93 completely.
I can see you're interested in the truth only if it fits your 'agenda.'
I am perfectly willing to treat you and any other members here with courtesy and try do to so, I don’t see that I haven’t (although I am far from perfect have had my “moments” and apologized a few times over the years).
But I will never tolerate the homosexual agenda, or other anti-Nature, anti-God and anti-moral absolute agendas here, and I may speak strongly against them.
People can change, I certainly am testimony to that. If I were to be condemned because of my many years previously habits, beliefs and actions, I’d be hell bound. We are all works in progress. (And many would not call me a Christian, I study the Bible and the Hindu scriptures - the Vedas. I prefer to consider myself an aspiring servant of God.)
With all due respect, I am not going to reply to you anymore, because you’re so focused on the NinoFan=gay thing that now you’re just posting random bits of posts from way earlier in the thread like you’re looking for a fight. Yes, I stand by what I said about the average homosexual not molesting children, but I also said in other replies in this thread that I don’t think the Boy Scouts should be forced to admit ANYONE they don’t want. Freedom of association and opposing leftist idiots who would get rid of it is not much of an evil ‘agenda’, I’m afraid. So best wishes to you, but as far as I’m concerned, there is no point in going back and forth here.
“But I will never tolerate the homosexual agenda, or other anti-Nature, anti-God and anti-moral absolute agendas here, and I may speak strongly against them.”
We disagree on homosexuality (though like this topic shows, we probably don’t always disagree on specific questions concerning it), but I’m sure we agree (or at least hope we agree) on abortion, adultery and a host of other moral issues. I have no desire to force you to change your stance on this or any other issue. I understand that you feel compelled to speak strongly against that which you disagree. That is your God-given right.
“And many would not call me a Christian, I study the Bible and the Hindu scriptures - the Vedas. I prefer to consider myself an aspiring servant of God.”
I must admit that I find the fact that you study Hinduism to be a little surprising*, but I respect your right to do so. I remember going through some years of religious exploration, but that was in my teens. For me, and I believe the world as a whole, Christianity is the answer.
*If you don’t mind me asking, did you grow up with that religion?
I see your buddy the good Dr (he posted he was a Dr on the internet so it must be a fact /sarc) hasn't answered his simple question either.
How childish. I explained the meaning of my username and it has to do with Justice Scalia (His first name being Antonin, his nickname is Nino). Grow up. This is not a playground.
Ive looked at your posting history and you're a one trick pony, sodomite advocating.
Your predilection for this topic is on par with the “gay” community's fascination/obsession with the Boy Scouts of America, Military, Churches or any other Group that has common sense enough to repel the diesease ridden pederast perverts.
Excuse me, I have been here for years and have posted on all kinds of topics. I’m far from a one trick pony. I am staunchly anti-abortion, pro-defense, you name the conservative issue, I’m it.
I am done debating with someone who acts like a child. Good day to you.
No, I converted many decades ago.
But I find truth is universally truth, whoever speaks it or writes it, and it never changes with the waves of time. And I agree with your points above.
The ultimate teaching of Jesus Christ is actually not different from the ultimate teachings of the Vedas - to love God with all of one’s being, and to respect and care for all living beings as much as one does for oneself. Anyway, I dont’ want to side track...
I’m certainly aware of the Court’s opinion in Dale. Though he joined it, he did not author the opinion.
But the main point is that nothing in the opinion suggests that there are no such thing as gays/homosexuals, so I don’t know where you get that from. The opinion does say that the Boy Scouts have a right to decide their membership and leadership. And two justices in the Dale majority, O’Connor and Kennedy, clearly do think that gays exist as a class (though whether it’ll be a protected class on the same level as race is something we’ll have to wait for a future case to know), so again, reading Dale as some major statement against ‘gay rights’ is a bit implausible.
Dale was about the 1st Amendment which is why it managed to get five votes. It tells us little about the Justices’ views on equal protection for homosexuals or substantive due process. And it certainly tells us nothing about their PRIVATE views, which is what I was really responding to when you asked about Justice Scalia and gays. Again, he may think it’s Constitutional for the Boy Scouts to ban homosexuals, but he may not agree with that policy. We simply do not know. That’s the beauty of an originalist justice.
“Again, he may think its Constitutional for the Boy Scouts to ban homosexuals,”
This part should read:
Again, he may think that the Boy Scouts have a Constitutional right to ban homosexuals,
Probably only learned the “let he whom is without sin cast the first stone” bit that homo-theologans teach them, to hit the phobe Christians over the head with....
“But the main point is that nothing in the opinion suggests that there are no such thing as gays/homosexuals, so I dont know where you get that from”
I lean on REALITY -show any scientific test that objectively identifies homosexual beings... There is no test hence there are none objectively...
When it comes to those claiming the existence of homosexual beings it is simply a matter of faith
By analogy -what about Vegetarians OR Golfers do they have special rights?
Very interesting :)
One thing, do you mean you converted to hinduism or to christianity years ago? I assume you mean the latter, but just want to make sure.
I have to be honest that the only time I’ve ever read any part of the Vedas was during a comparative religion course I took years ago. My knowledge on this issue is thus very limited.
Anyone who calls him/herself a “homosexual/gay” Christian, or “adulterer” Christian, or “porn afficiando” Christian, or “S&M/bondage” Christian, or “pederast” Christian, or “promiscuous” Christian, is fooling themselves and others (some others). No different than “any kind of sin” Christian. as in “thief” Christian, or “liar” Christian.
Or any sincere religious believer, for that matter. Every religion in the world (monotheist) teaches that if someone wants a relationship with God, they will (a) admit that I am sinful, lost and hopeless without His mercy and (b) vow to give up wrongdoing - there’s a lot of them, including sins like pride, greed, and so on - (c) when fallen down, repent sincerely and beg forgiveness, and (d) keep doing the first three. And (e) never promote sin as though it’s perfectly all right!!!
And one should see gradual progress - being less and less inclined to sin. A person can’t do the same sins over and over and over again and beg forgiveness over and over and over again.
You’re a father - you know what your attitude is when a kid says “Sorry!” and immediately goes and “does it again”.... Sincere sorrow means sincerely changing.
And since every religion in the world teaches the same sexual purity rules - meaning no adultery, no pre-marital sex, no masturbation, no homosexual acts, no bestiality, no incest, (I think that’s it!) - anyone who is sincere in his or her religious practice will abstain from those acts and not promote them as virtue. Doesn’t mean that if one occasionally errs or falls they are a total hypocrite. But such failures will cause the sincere believer to feel sorrow, beg God for forgiveness, and stive again to follow God’s laws.
Unfortunately you'll never change and neither will I.
“I'm a gay Christian”
You never hear others claim..
“I'm a prostitute Christian”
“I'm a alcoholic Christian”
Only the sodomites..
Like the US Constitution, the Bible, Nature, Anatomy, History, Reality (and every thing else under the sun) they see Christianity as something to bend and construct to fit their perverted idea of reality. Anyone that objects is a hateful nazi bigot...
The only way a person can know the Truth with a capital T or even relative truths, is by having a thirst for the Truth, and desiring not to be taken in by counterfeit, and the willingness to give up my own will and wrong ideas or beliefs in order to serve the Truth. If I want to cling onto my own ideas and beliefs and search for a “truth” that fits my own ideology and desires, I will be fooled and think that fool’s gold is real gold, thus missing the real treasure.