Homosexual found guilty on 45 out of 48 counts!

[Codz]

Originally Posted by Skybird

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.

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

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

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.

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

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Codz

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

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.

[Codz]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

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

Do you actually know anyone who's gay? I have a gay uncle and he's none of the things that you listed. In fact, he's been with the same guy for longer than my parents have been married. He has no "agenda" other than being allowed to marry the consenting adult who he likes.

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.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Skybird

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.

I agree. My tolerance for religion stops when people try to infringe on other people's rights with nothing more for justification than a religious text. I am disgusted with the amount of intolerance for homosexuals, Muslims, and atheists that is somewhat prevalent here in the US. I also hate the fact that people are actually trying to fight evolution in favor of creationism in public schools.

[Sailor Steve]

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?

That sounds reasonable for someone not versed in bible history concerning two very important facts.

1.) The history of the ancient Jewish methods in making exact copies of
the Old Testament scriptures.

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?

2.)The huge number of original New Testament scriptures.

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.

Do you actually know anyone who's gay?

If you couple his nazi fetish with his public tirade about poofs and merge in his words about self control over urges of sexual gratification perhaps it means that he does know someone who is gay.
It could well be that poor Zeewolf is just a little Haggard

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Codz

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.

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.

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.

Don't forget Steve that the collection which yielded these early examples also shows his first claim to be thoroughly ridiculous, in fact it showed the diversity between Jewish texts to be far far greater than the huge gaping chasm they had already accepted existed.

[Codz]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

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.

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.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

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.

Wrong again there Sailor,
I think you would be wise to avoid showing me how much you do not know
about the bible Old or New Testament. You simply do not know the truth about
the manuscript evidence that the bible has behind it. You mention a few
references but there is much more that destroys the assertion that undermines the accuracy of the scriptures.

ZeeWolf

I think you would be wise to avoid showing me how much you do not know
about the bible Old or New Testament. You simply do not know the truth about
the manuscript evidence that the bible has behind it. You mention a few
references but there is much more that destroys the assertion that undermines the accuracy of the scriptures

Could anyone top that as an epic failure?
You really should quit while you are lying helpless in the gutter wolfie darling, you are getting more pitiful by the minute.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Codz

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.

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.

[Skybird]

"Accurate scripture."

That joke stands for itself.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Skybird

"Accurate scripture."

That joke stands for itself.

Skybird no matter how much "Go along to Get along" you do, they are still not going to like you!

ZeeWolf

[Codz]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

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.

The chances of enough people approving that are so ridiculously small, that it's not worth considering. 18 is the international standard for the age of consent, and that isn't changing. It's just as likely as murder suddenly becoming acceptable.