Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1900848)

Kneeling in front of the manual of a Harry Potter game and mumbling "Abrakadabra", doesn't make wizardy any more real, and the manual not any more holy. Even if it is a print from the first edition.

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo (Post 1900837)

It seriously saddens me when someone takes the tone of the OP. Especially when the OP can't even be correct in his title.

First of all, Sandusky has by his own actions demonstrated himself to be bisexual, not simply homosexual. He was after all married and the marriage was obviously consumated - as he has natural born children.

What is more important is that he is a pedophile. Regardless of the gender of his victims, he has been held accounable for his abuse of them because there was no consent. Even if his victims would have been "willing" - they were not able to give consent due to their age. Additionally, he purposely utilized his position to victimize them - adding another despicable facet to his actions.

As for all the judgementalism of the OP - do you really think your adding anything to any discussion here. Jerry Sandusky will answer for his crimes - not just here in this life - but in the one that matters. Berating him to generalize about an activity that you abhor is pointless. Yes, the Bible is clear on how we should view homosexuality - but Sandusky's crime would be no less had he molested young girls in the eyes of our society. Perhaps it would be to God, but we don't have the ability or the right to make that call since we don't know the full mind of God. We live in the world of man, and can only hearken to the Law of God as it is given to us. God condemns the rapist to death (see 2 Kings) and it condemns homosexuality with death. Either way - Sandusky will die in prison. So the Justice of the Lord is carried out in this life. As for the eternal - well that's up to God, and not us, so we don't need to worry about it.

So why, OP, are you all in a tizzy? Preaching to convienence does nothing to win a soul.

Originally Posted by Codz (Post 1900852)

I completely agree. Of course, everyone is allowed to have their opinion on such things.

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf (Post 1900856)

First of all these terms you and others who like to label this behavior is
an attempt to hide the true nature to the issue of sexual perversion.
The real issue here is the total lack of self control for all those how feed
their insatiable lust for sexual gratification. Those who let there depraved
sexual desires take control over their lives.

You also conveniently ignore the dishonorable conduct that must occur
prior to the victimization of their pry.
The dishonor brought to his family and his wife. The dishonor he brought
to all those who trusted him is immeasurable. But by those who have no
value for such things they are easily brushed aside.

The terms gay, homosexual, bisexual etc. are all meaningless when you see
what is really involved in these incredibly selfish and self centered sexual predators.
Do not be deceived by the hype campaign shoved down our
throats by those with a larger agenda. The true goal by those who find
no problem with the "gays" is to legalize all forms of sexual expression.
And I mean ALL FORMS!


ZeeWolf

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1900860)

Yes, as long as he does not try to change the world for the others as well, with nothing else but a Harry Potter spellbook as his justification, and as long as he does not abuse children to poisen their undefended minds with his stuff for the mere reason that they are young, and their minds not yet can weigh, judge and form an educated assessement of the matter themselves. Religions indoctrinating already small children and young teens, is one of he most cyncial and inhumane crimes I know of. I rate it the same like sexual abuse and rape, or genital mutilation.

Originally Posted by Codz (Post 1900863)

The problem with your slippery slope arguement is that homosexual men and women have the ability to consent to a relationship. Children, corpses, animals, and inanimate objects can not consent, and therefore wouldn't be legalized.

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf (Post 1900869)

That's not true all most anything can be legalized or criminalized. And consent
can be completely absent in the law. It can even be wrote as a fundamental
"Human Right" as to any form of sexual expression may not be infringed.
So, your wrong on that Codz.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 1900865)

I see you've avoided more and more of my points. Saying you know more about the Bible than someone else is simple diversion of discussion.

You started a thread based on hatred for all homosexuals, and used Sandusky as an example, yet you didn't disuss him at all, just the broad sweeping condemnation. You try to use the Bible to justify this hate, yet pure hate it is. This much is obvious. You try to dismiss anyone who points this out as not knowing as much as you do, yet you don't actually use biblical scripture at all. Anyone can make claims. Yes, the Old Testament condemns it. How do you know for absolute certain that was God's judgement and not some old preacher spouting his own hatred? Answer: You don't. You believe it and that's fine; for all I know you may be right. But you are so full of yourself and your belief you can't concieve of the idea that you may be wrong. This is what led to the slaughter of millions of innocent people by others who felt exactly the way you do. Which of the two has done more to hurt the world?


True, but that does't guarantee the authorship in the first place. You believe it comes from God. Fine. Where is the proof?

Also, the entire thing was written by Jews. So now they're the good guys?


There are no 'originals'. Not one. Every real Bible scholar in the world is agreed on this. The earliest copies of the Gospels date from at least seventy years after the fact. They don't even pretend to be eyewitness accounts; they just tell the stories. This ignores the other Gospels rejected by the early councils. After that, you "huge number" turns out to be less than two hundred fragments.

Paul's letters? More reliable, and it's possible that one or more of them may actually be original, but it's not possible to identify which ones, if any. And then there's the fact that Paul did not consider himself to be writing sacred scripture. He was writing letters of encouragement or admonishment to churches he had founded. There is nothing in them to indicate that it's anything more than his own personal belief.

Your 'scholarship' seems to be little more than faith, and it's preaching like yours that gives Christians a bad name.

Originally Posted by Codz (Post 1900873)

What? It would be more infringing on a non-consenting person's rights, so pedophilia would never be legalized. No one's rights are being infringed when gays have a relationship. Well, maybe except your right to be a bigot.

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1900890)

"Accurate scripture."

That joke stands for itself.

:har:

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf (Post 1900888)

Your premise is based on "consenting persons rights" as if there is something
sacred about them or like they are fixed and unalterable. There is nothing
sacred to those who wright our laws. You make a grave error when you assume there is.
And again you ignore reality when age of consent can be changed with the stroke of a pen child molesting is just another form of love. :haha: