I knew a couple of gay Republicans who were millionaires, making a killing on feeding franchise frankfurters to obese, pre- or already diabetic hispanics, a racial tendency just like sickle cell anemia to blacks. They eventually sold or leased out their four or five local fast food joints to their managers and retired at about 50. I think gay men (and women, possibly) are GOP because it is an economic thing. They are pure capitalists; that is, they go in for the laissez-faire capitalism that infects the Republican Party. They want to be Mitt Romneys without the Mormonism. The couple I knew at least contributed (anonymously: everyone is closeted in my city) to some local gay charities, but that was the extent of their involvement. I broke off with them for various reasons. I always felt uncomfortable in their McMansion. Have no idea what they are doing in retirement. I am 71 and have not retired.
I think about that group sometimes. One sandwich was mis-named and should have been fellatio-fish. They wouldn't have picked that one even in a McMinute.
@James You know a couple of Gay Republicans so therefore all Gays are Republicans? That is very biased, since when is an entire group judged by the actions of a few.....We all know what happens when the majority turns on a minority because of this......Fact is, most Gays are Democrats, because the Republican platform is not accepting of Gays and are the ones supporting a ban on Gay marriage and Gay rights....
Ha Ha this video threw me for a while. I thought "why is there a woman in the video when a man is speaking"? Then I noticed that the audio / video were slightly out of sync, and it hit me that it WAS the woman speaking!
She is spot on though in that you have to go back in Romans to get the true context of verses 21-26. I think I'm going to start calling the ones that like to cherry pick the verses to make their point, quiptians. They only present the "good stuff", and leave out anything that could lead to intellectual debate as to the full context of the verse(s).
I can't seem to get the video to work (uploads too slowly).
I had posted about this part of the bible a while back, and am confused. My MIL says that she and her study group, along with the gay parishoner, discussed Romans, but she never summarized the discussion. But she's clearly very much opposed to the lifestyle.
So maybe one of you can explain? God made people gay on account of them already having these desires?? Guess I'll have to consult my SAB tonight.
Kind of irrational isn't it?
OK, I'm back to this one more time. So when did god "give them over?" Since he is all knowing he must have known they were like this ( or would do this) even before they were born. That would mean these people had no choice in the matter at all, and nobody has any precious "free will." Since they had therefore been "given over" from birth, why are we reading about this now form scripture? What point would it make? What threat of punishment could possibly be here with a predetermined event?
Maybe we could look at this differently and say god did not know what they were going to do, so what we are reading is his punishment then. The all powerful and jealous god did not know something, so in anger he punished these people with a gay curse by "giving them over." That's almost as bad as him not being able to find Adam and Eve after they had "sinned" and they hid behind a tree.
We see a small hint here that if humans will have sex with others of their own sex, then they are connected to animals and other creatures in some strange way. Rather than these humans starting to worship a horse, there is indication that they might also be having sex with it or anything else that comes their way.
My step-dad always says that he doesn't believe god would create people as gay or lesbian. It would make no sense and is a contradiction of god's character. Instead, the devil and demons entice people to be gay and lesbian. It's a choice they make.
Think a minute. God, the devil, demons. They all come out of the same bronze age book. Once you stop believing in that book and any creatures from within its pages the entire bizarre and absurd issue is totally solved.
Are there religions that accept that we humans are animals? The Abrahamic religions that many of us are familiar with insist, despite overwhelming evidence, that our distinction from other animals isn't a matter of degree but of an entirely different category, a special, different creation.
In a reply to "God, Darwin, and My Biology Class" Tom Sarbeck, raised in Roman Catholic schools, wrote: "In 1954 at the University of Florida I visited the natural history museum and saw the bone structure similarities between humans and other animals. Amazed, I asked myself 'How can we and other animals not be related?' "
You're right about this, GC. There's something about the fact that we are (just) another product of nature that they absolutely can't abide. It's sort of a "human exceptionalism" that's about as respectable and sensible and real as "American exceptionalism." Just ask Sarah Palin.
Excellent point GC.....Humans evolved from Apes or Chimpanzees as science has proven...Obviously they are animals ergo we are animals......Tell that to a Theist and they will deny it......They still believe we are all descendants of Adam and Eve.....LMAO