"Homosexuals can wed a person of the opposite sex just as anyone else can."

THIS is what you call an example of conservative humor ... always guaranteed to get a knowing chuckle, wink, and a nudge nudge at the Sean Hannity Comedy Club.

Yes, I'm sure there are plenty of high-fives going around at the offices of the American Family Association, the Family Research Council, and all the other usual suspects. So congratulations, you issued Gay couples in New York a setback ... for now. I still take comfort in knowing that sooner or later Gay and Straight couples in the U.S. will be treated equally.

Exactly how is allowing Gay couples the exact same legal benefits and responsibilities that Straight couples have always taken for granted going to affect 'traditional marriage?" Marriage equality for Gay couples will have precisely ZERO impact on your life, your marriage, your church, and your children. Your church will never be forced to marry Gay couples, any more than it is forced to marry non-Christian couples. Public schools will not be forced to “teach” about Gay marriage, any more than they are forced to teach about Straight marriage.

Instead you should ask yourself why law-abiding, taxpaying Gay Americans should be forced to subsidize all the legal benefits and responsibilities that Straight couples enjoy, when we are unable to take advantage of those same incentives to marry? And since when do voters get to decide that the rights that apply to them DO NOT apply to minorities?

In addition, I'm getting extremely tired of the "slippery slope" argument. I've heard it time and time again - "Homosexual rights? That's just a step away from bestiality and pedophile rights!" For one thing, the idea of a slippery slope is one of the supreme fallacies of human reasoning. The smallest of investigations into the field of statistics proves that such slopes do not actually exist in the world. More specific to this issue, though, there is no logic to the argument that allowing two people of the same sex to marry will inevitably open a can of worms of social evils. Such an argument has been used time and time again by those opposed to giving groups new rights, whether they be racial, ethnic, or gender groups, and whether those rights concern freedom, voting, marriage, or anything else. Rights *flew* throughout the twentieth century, and our society is still standing strong. Furthermore, no one today would dare support removing any of the rights that were given in the last century. The slippery slope argument is such an easy thing to say before the fact, but after the fact, nothing terrible ever happens, and it becomes socially (and sometimes legally) criminal to crave the past. This has been proven time and time again, and yet traditionalists still cling to their argument, petrified of the inevitability of social change. If it makes you feel better, by all means, believe in it. But mark my words: Marriage - in the true, complete definition of the word - will come to be, and society will survive to become stronger than ever before. It has happened before, and it will happen again.

"Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?"

The best way to bring the c0ckroaches out from the woodwork is to spray around the baseboards with insecticide. The New York State Senate has just sprayed the baseboards. You can see the roaches scramble by reading the above posts.

This post is a second application of the insecticide. Watch the roaches scramble now!

Mike A, it's hard to take seriously such a dishonest post. You know as does everyone else that any definition of marriage involving ANY two people is a recent one driven by the homo lobby. You know as does everyone else that marriage was always understood for the last 2000 years of Western civilization to mean one man, one woman. The only exception to this (outside the West) was polygamy. It has a historical precedent. Same-sex pretend marriage does not.

With these United States is NOT cultural, NOT intellectual. The problem is SPIRITUAL!! The comments made by every single one of the fools above (with the exception of rprew who, as usual, is 100% correct) is proof positive of darknened mentalities and spiritual death, all signs of a collapsing, decaying, rotting culture. As usual, Mr. Duke has hit the nail right squarely on the head, as evidenced by the howls of the dogs in the pack who have been hit dead on.

Is Duke married? Makes me wonder.

Makes no difference about Selwyn's marital status. His position on this subject is right
on.Duke surely hit a tender nerve but wait till the LORD GOD renders HIS judgment;there will be no rejecting PERFECT justice. However HE is forgiving when sinners repent of their wicked way and will save their souls.If they die without repentance HELL awaits.

The argument stated in public by the h-crowd usually centers around "equal rights," but as you, Mr. Duke, point out correctly they already have "equal rights" before the law.

All men are created equal in two areas- equal before the law and equal in the protection of their rights. In their delusional state of interpreting the law they want to also be lawgivers. But the "Lawgiver"- God - already defined marriage at creation.

Here the h-crowd's argument goes like this: "we don't accept religious definitons and we don't believe in God." Since they don't believe in God they want to play god and reshape our lives by redefining our laws. They want to go beyond "equal rights" and have double equal rights. They have a right to marry, but they want to have special rights to "union" with a person of the same sex and that translates into providing extra-legal "rights" to a special or priveleged class.

A court house marriage is not sanctioned by the Catholic church. If you are Catholic and want to receive communion you are forbidden to do so. You have to go by the rules of the Church and not the rules of the state. The church says you aren't married and therefore you can't receive holy communion. Is that fair? Yes, if you want to be a Catholic you play by the rules of the lawgiver who instituted marriage at creation. He also turned the water into wine at a wedding between a man and a woman. That is a beautiful thing to watch. Those who gather to celebrate true marriage have the hope that the two families will be given the opportunity to be blessed with children. Mothers and fathers of the bride and groom hope to someday adore and hold their grandchildren in their arms. The grandparents will tell their grandchildren stories of their parents and grandparents and how they are direct decendants of the men who fought in the War for Independence. Without decendants America would cease to be and that is one of the arguments that the H-crowd won't speak of in public.

it amazes me that in a country that is run by rule of law where there is seperation of CHURCH and state, equal protection is still decided by voters referendum. maybe now, there will be a common awareness of how homophobic this american culture is.

in english culture, the roots of this goes all the way back to henry the eighth, another head of the church( no seperation of church and state) who instituted a law (1500's) that punished homosexual sex with hanging. it remained on the books for 300 years( the age of this country). in the victorian age(1800's), an age known for its sexually repressive attitudes, under the reign of another head of the church, queen victoria, the word homosexual was fraudlently transposed into the epistles, to make it a sin thru an attempt of reinstituting the old covenant relationship to god thru regulation as in deut28. it was done without an written explanation. the transposition was done for kjv's translation "defiling oneself with mankind" and wycliffe's translation "lechery with mankind"(lechery being a sin even among heterosexual believers).

english settlers who came to this country, immediately passed laws about this same issue with different punishments. its only been 10 years, since those laws have been nullified.

society is the church and the church is society, no one lives in a spiritual vacuum.

why would we think that there could be a referendum, that would reflect anything other than the culture of the last 500 years.

"the word homosexual was fraudlently transposed into the epistles"

Now isn't that odd. The world "homosexual" does not occur ANYWHERE in the KJV. Looks like john r is making claims on a subject about which he knows nothing. The Bible, however, DOES define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The Bible, both Old and New Testaments, DO condemn unnatural sexual relations, and "man on man" or "woman on woman" IS unnatural, according to the Bible, not that there haven't been weak attempts to "explain away" Biblical fact.

In addition, john r shows a typical TOTAL misunderstanding of the First Amendment and its intent.

Is extremely ignorant, is stumbling around in total darkness and is as wrong as wrong can be. He is so wrong that it's not even worth arguing.
The Lord Jesus Christ is still in the business of cleansing, forgiving and saving. Here are His own words:
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, the whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16
And:
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me: and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. John 6:37
That includes homosexuals.

Posted comments by the contrarians:
Jill's post is a personal attack upon the author and is she, (him, it?)is just blowing smoke.

Shelly Carmical is a Christian hater. what can you say about heters. They hate the truth.

Mike A is lost in sematics space. He is lying or too stupid to see that marriage is defined as "between a man and a woman" even by the nuvo lexicographers at the online websters/Merriam. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/MARRIAGE

Mike A, if it makes you "feel better" that they have thrown you a bone and included the fraudulent queer version go ahead and believe it.

The nuvo-definers also changed the word inflation and turned it upside down as well. Before google, inflation was classically defined as an increase in the supply of money and credit which caused a general increase in prices and wages. The nuvo-lexicographers define inflation exactly opposite. They are hiding something and that something is the truth. You are hiding something and can't admit it. Changing the definiton in an online or hard copy dictionary isn't going to elevate queerdom one iota. All the laws passed in the world won't make faux marriage, "in the true- complete definition of the word." You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
And, no Mike A, society will not survive to become stronger than ever before if the queer form dominates." Who will be your heirs? How will you procreate? There is no guarantee that the New World Order will allow you to adopt or to shop for your test tube heir. You'll never be able to rule on this world because nature and nature's God won't allow it.

The first amendment is intended to keep the state out of the Church, not the Church out of the state. The phrase "separation of Church and state" is nowhere in the Constitution. The confusion on this point is caused by the shameful ignorance of the majority.

Chuck Anziulewicz, What does Shawn Hannity have to do with the Author's blog? And demeaning Christian groups won't strenghten an argument.

Chuck:"Exactly how is allowing Gay couples the exact same legal benefits and responsibilities that Straight couples have"

We don't want sodomites to burn in hell. As much as we despise the sin we love the sinner.

Chuck says: "Your church will never be forced to marry Gay couples,...Public schools will not be forced to “teach” about Gay marriage,"

What! You haven't been in a public school lately have you,Chuck?

Have you ever heard of "hate crime" laws, Chuck? The lavendar lobby is in partnership with those in government who are building a police state. In Canada priests and preachers are forbidden by "hate crime" laws to preach against homosexuality. The next logical step is force churchs to perform these faux "marriages." After that the perversion of the law will escalate. We won't let polluters do this to the law.

Another of Chuck's ridiculous statements:"Instead you should ask yourself why law-abiding, taxpaying Gay Americans should be forced to subsidize all the legal benefits and responsibilities that Straight couples enjoy, when we are unable to take advantage of those same incentives to marry? And since when do voters get to decide that the rights that apply to them DO NOT apply to minorities?"

Chuck the voters are just defending themselves from you. The Constitution is the law of the land and most laws reside within the individual states. The constitutions of the various states and the laws passed by the state legislatures are the laws that we live by. Once laws forbidding homosexuals acts were knocked down by the stupid Supreme Court judges this whole homosexual onslaught has come bearing down on the states. The states need to reaffirm the 10th amendment and congress needs to use its power under the constitution under article 3 to rein in the courts.

http://www.biblegateway.com/pa...ersion=NIV

verse XXI: "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him,... Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools...

"Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, ...

"Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

"Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

"The slippery slope argument is such an easy thing to say before the fact, but after the fact, nothing terrible ever happens,..."---Mike A

The Supreme Court began to meddle in the states jurisdiction by using a hammer on the Constitution and remolding it to their heart's desire. They ruled states' sodomy laws as unconstitutional. The court opened the door and out poured the sodomites from their closets demanding that we redefine marriage to suit their perversities. If that isn't a "slippery slope" then what is?

Now do you want a definition of "terrible?" It's two sodomites play pretending at "marriage."

HEY! You guys stole my thunder! But that's okay... you haven't said a thing with which I (and a great many other good, moral Americans) don't wholeheartedly AGREE!

An excellent paper, "The Bible, the Church & Homosexuality: Exposing the 'Gay' Theology" by Timothy J. Dailey, is available in pdf form at:
downloads.frc.org/EF/EF05K11.pdf

This paper is good for sifting through and discovering the truth concerning many of the 'gay' attempts to reinterpret the Bible in their own perverted terms. The paper is about 40 pages and well researched.

If you think our society is strong, you're only fooling yourself. Our society has sunk low. The real question is why hasn't it fallen already, not when will it fall. God judges sin: He judged it in the Garden of Eden, He judged it at Sodom and Gomorrah, He judged it at the Flood and He will judge these United States unless the people repent. God is not ever mocked.

In Sodom Abraham intervened on behalf of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. He asked God to spare the cities if he could find 10 people who were worthy to be spared. He looked and could not find any except the family of Lot. How many do you suppose are worthy of being spared in America? I don't know the answer but surely there are more than 10.

"Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?"

The LORD said, "If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake."

Then Abraham spoke up again: "Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city because of five people?"
"If I find forty-five there," he said, "I will not destroy it."

Once again he spoke to him, "What if only forty are found there?"
He said, "For the sake of forty, I will not do it."

Then he said, "May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?"
He answered, "I will not do it if I find thirty there."

Abraham said, "Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?"
He said, "For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it."

Then he said, "May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?"
He answered, "For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it."

When the LORD had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.

Many homosexuals try to explain away the story of Sodom by claiming that the sin was one of "inhospitality" and not homosexuality. The argument is that in verse 5 where it says "that we may know them", the Hebrew word yada' can be interpreted as "get acquainted with". The problem is that yada' is used again in verse 8 where it says (speaking of Lot's daughters) "which have not known man". There can be no argument about the meaning (sexually knowing) of the second instance. It is not logical that the same word would be used with two different meanings that close to each other.

In addition, if the intent was just to become better acquainted, why would Lot shelter the two messengers, shut the door to prevent the men of Sodom from entering, implore them "do not so wickedly", and then offer his two virgin daughters in place of the two messengers? Sexual intent is crystal clear.

Further evidence of the sin of Sodom can be found in Ezekiel 16:49-50:
"Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good."

The word "abomination" is the Hebrew to'ebah, which is the strongest possible moral condemnation. Nowhere in scripture will you find "inhospitality" to be called an abomination.

Additional condemnation of Sodom can be found in the New Testament. "Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." - Jude 1:7

Also see Leviticus 18:22:
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

The wonder of the Bible is the way it is self-supporting. When you take any verse, place in in context, and then examine other verses in different locations referring to the same subject matter, you arrive at a meaning which is clear as day. The "inhospitality" argument has less of a chance than a snowball in Hades.

"Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female"

by your adding the word "only" to this scripture you are adding your own stroke to the law, which comes against christ's own words about the importance of each stroke.

christ did not say you would know them by the way they abide by regulation. he said you would know them "by their fruit"...............by the fruit of the spirit that is in their lives.


in regards to all new covenant law, romans and galations says that it is summed up in the 2nd commandment(love your neighbor.............) what is it about the essence of being gay that it would make it come against the 2nd commandment.

homosexuals bond in the same way as heterosexuals, out of mutual love, respect,affection, devotion, and trust for a shared committed life together.

homosexuals have never been found wanting in any sector of society compared to heterosexuials. they are not less a neighbor, friend, engineer, soldier, doctor, teacher, administrator, brother, father, etc.

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

not all prohibitions of lev are of themselves sins.

num15: 32 While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. 33 Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, 34 and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. 35 Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp." 36 So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the LORD commanded Moses.

and lev directs to do things such as slavery which are an untolerable evil under the new covenant.

"take slaves for life from the surrounding countries and pass them on as inheritance to your children"(lev)

jews historically have been known for their disdain for gentiles, and have been known for having a double standard compared to how they treat their fellow jews.

"Even their women exchanged natural relations"

homosexuals have never had women, not from their earliest sexual memory, that is why they are called homosexual.

how can homosexuals abandon something they never had.

"26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations........."

homosexuals dont bond out of lust or shame but in the same way as heterosexuals, out of mutual love, respect, affection, devotion, and trust for a shared committed life together.

john r - "by your adding the word "only" to this scripture..."
"If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:"

Be very careful about adding to the scripture that which isn't there, john r.

"if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life"

Be equally cautious about taking away from what IS in scripture, john r.

john r - "know them "by their fruit"...............by the fruit of the spirit that is in their lives."

When you say "spirit" (lower case 's'), you are referencing the human spirit. When the Bible talks about fruit of the Spirit (upper case 'S'), it is referencing the Holy Spirit, the third Person of the Triune God. The fruits of the unrepentent human spirit are polar opposite to the fruits of the Holy Spirit of God.

john r - "love your neighbor"

Does loving your neighbor equate to condoning his lifestyle or actions? No. If you love your neighbor, you will try to help and guide him when he goes astray.

john r - "homosexuals bond in the same way as heterosexuals"

You know very well that that is not only NOT true, but is IMPOSSIBLE. You deceive only yourself.

john r - " they are not less a neighbor, friend, engineer, soldier, doctor, teacher, administrator, brother, father, etc."

Which proves nothing. The same could be said (and has been said) of many who have lead "double lives". A typical reaction after some sudden arrest for a heinous crime: "I am shocked. I can't believe he would do such a thing. He seemed so NORMAL!"

john r - "not all prohibitions of lev are of themselves sins"

Sin is a transgression of a religious or moral law. Laws are generally prohibitions. So are you saying that the breaking of some laws is permissible? Some laws in the Old Testament are no longer in force today. The New Testament makes it abundently clear that Old Testament prohibitions on sodomy have never been repealed.

john r - "jews historically have been known for their disdain for gentiles"

Yeah. So? The same can be said for Muslims and countless other groups throughout the ages. It is a part of the unrepentant human spirit and is called sin. That is why God gave us his Holy Word, so that we can distinguish between the desires of the spirit and the desires of the Spirit.

john r - "Even their women exchanged natural relations"

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet." The condemnation of homosexuality applies to beoth men and women.

john r - "how can homosexuals abandon something they never had."

Not a rational question, john r. God has offered salvation to all mankind. A great many people have abandoned any hope of salvation simply by not accepting that which was freely offered.

God IS a God of love. He is not willing that ANY should perish. God is also a God of justice and righteousness. Man has sinned and God in turn offed Jesus as a propitiation for sin as an alternative to the eternal d*mnation that justice and righteousness demand. God also gave men a free will and will not force us to accept redemption. He WANTS you to repent and be saved, but he won't twist your arm. The door is open, but at some point it will be closing for each and every individual. That point may be at the sinner's death, or perhaps earlier in some instances. If you DEMAND of God that He just leave you alone, He will respect your wishes, close the door, and walk away.

I would hope, john r, that the door has not been closed for you. I pray that you would come to the realization that homosexuality IS a sin, that God hates ALL sin, and that God is not willing that you should perish. I pray that you would see the open door, turn from your sin, enter and bow down before the Most High

Preflood people ". ... changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26. "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27. "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28. "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;" (Romans 1:25-28)

Because of the sin of Adam people are born sinners and when children reach the age of accountability if they desire to go their own way and are persistent eventually God will turn them over to their sinful desires. The result is they will become drunks, Homos, outlaws etc., or which ever one they desire or maybe all the above.

"know them "by their fruit"...............by the fruit of the spirit that is in their lives."

i was reffering to gal5 and matt7 and 12

Matthew 7:16
By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

Matthew 7:20
Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

Matthew 12:33
"Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit.


gal5:22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

"If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:"

apart form my intent being not to add or take away anything from scripture,my understanding is that each book of the bible was written seperately, apart from each other, therefore what is written in revelation applies only to revelation.

my understanding of sin is that it pervades into all aspects of a persons life. there are countless testimonies of those having fallen into sin, have lost their family, their business, and their friends.

i have never encountered any sin that would effect only one part of persons life and not all of his life.

if you have attended any 12 step programs you know what i am talking about.

"The New Testament makes it abundently clear that Old Testament prohibitions on sodomy have never been repealed."

please explain how the words of the verses of scripture that you have assigned meaning to say that homosexuality is a sin. so far you havent.

reprew

you tiptoe around my points like a man walking thru a minefield, because of the possiblity by stepping on my points will show how unreasoned your understanding is, and how much your theology is not supported by scripture.

using scripture is much more than assigning reason, it requires honoring each stroke of the law, honoring each and every word.

you have still not shown how there was abandonment of relationship where there is "no their women" and there is no relationship to abandon.

john r - every one of your "points" has already been sufficiently covered. Because you do not like the answers, you reject them. There is no need to rehash. Your last post begins by casting insults, which is typical tactic used by people who have nothing else worthwhile to say. You end with a statement to which I have already clearly responded. Again, it was not the answer you wanted to hear, so it was rejected.

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

I am afraid I'm not one of the "teachers" you are looking for.

May God have mercy upon you.

given a response is one thing, actually answering the question, and addressing all my pointing is definitely something else.

" Your last post begins by casting insults".....................really................." You know very well that that is not only NOT true, but is IMPOSSIBLE. You deceive only yourself."

i deceive myself because my understanding is not the same as yours? yet i offer explanation and reason for my understanding.

while you appear to offer only mindset and belief system that assigns meaning to verses in spite of their words.

Don't bother to argue with a fool. The homosexual mind is locked in darkness and confusion. Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still. Just stae God's Word and let it go. Do not argue with fools. Gods Word say it is an abomination and a sin, and that is that.

I don't know if you're homosexual or not and couldn't care less. I do know that you're defending a vile and destructive sin and I do know that you are misrepresenting God's Word because of Biblical ignorance and the darkness and confusion of you mind. Misrepresenting God's Word is a very serious thing. Psalm 138:2b clearly states that God places His Word above His very name. I would be very, very careful in the future were I you. That is all I have to say to you.

more mindset and belief system.

is it safe to say that neither of you have ever had a personnal relationhip with anyone gay, whether neighbor, family member or work associate.

a belief system that is not substantiated by personnal witness remains just that .................an unsubsantiated belief.

1john 1: 1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4We write this to make our[a] joy complete.

accusation is no substitute for witness thru fellowship of walking in the light.

this is proactive and is not conditonal according to beliefs about sinning.

1john1:7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all[b] sin.

again what is it that about being gay that would make it come against the fruit of the spirit and the 2nd commndment(love your neighbor..)

romans1: 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

if your answer is solely according to the law, then that would mean before the law there was an excuse.

consider the scriptures that direct believers to test:

Romans 12:2
Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to TEST and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

2 Corinthians 13:5
Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?( eph 2:8-9)

1 Thessalonians 5:21
Test everything. Hold on to the good.

You poor pitiful, wretched creature. You don't have the faintest idea how wrong you are on ALL counts. I do hope you come to the light. Good bye.

accusation and not one point addressed.