Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  180s

Gay Mormon Ty Mansfield Is Getting Married! To a Woman

Ty Mansfield is the gay Mormon behind In Quiet Desperation, the 2004 book, written at the request of the LDS Church, that he co-authored with the parents of Stuart Matis, the 32-year-old “same-gender attracted” Mormon who killed himself, telling his family in a suicide note that he took his own life because of his struggle rectifying his sexuality and faith. “Even if I don’t marry … I feel there’s still a definite place for me,” Mansfield told a reporter (see above video) several years ago. Well a congratulations is in order, because Mansfield is getting married. To a woman.

Mansfield, a family therapist and doctoral student in Marriage and Family Therapy at Texas Tech University, is engaged to Danielle Palmer. They will wed May 22. They met at Brigham Young, and reconnected on Facebook.

But those who’ve listened to Mansfield speak in the past might raise an eyebrow about this gay man marrying a woman. From a 2005 Desert News article:

[Mansfield] said he would never suggest marriage as a way of trying to banish same-sex attraction. “I know some individuals who feel they have overcome the attraction, have married, and it’s not a problem for them anymore. . . . I know many more who have the type of life they want — married with a family. They still experience the attraction, but that’s all they see it as.” Though he understands his own dynamics, he says he’s not sure if his attractions will ever leave him entirely. He has only a smile and a polite “no” for fellow Latter-day Saints who try to line him up with women, and no definitive answer for those who ask if he’ll ever marry. Some he knows have left the church and are living a homosexual lifestyle. When they ask why he doesn’t just give in, he answers, “I feel I’m being true to my eternal self.”

But in just over a month, he’ll be walking down the aisle with a lady. On their wedding page’s “Our Story” section, Mansfield’s sexuality and his struggles with it are not discussed, so it remains unclear how he went from being attracted to dudes and unmotivated to marry a woman to, well, doing exactly that.

[photo via Yan Photography]

By:           editor editor
On:           Apr 15, 2010
Tagged: , , , ,

  • 475 Comments
    • David Ehrenstein
      David Ehrenstein

      “The grave’s a fine and private place, but none I think do there embrace.”

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben

      As a fellow gay (ex-)Mormon, I really hope he finds happiness and peace with himself. I just don’t think it’s going to happen by going down this road.

      I know too many gay Mormons who have tried to straighten themselves out or to have families and end up hurting both themselves and their loved ones in the process. Did he learn nothing from seeing the despair of someone who killed himself over this?

      The sad thing is that the Church tries to coerce you into believing that you’re making a choice – perhaps not a choice to be gay, but a choice to accept it – and now he’s the one making a conscious decision to betray himself and involve a young woman in his struggle. Very sad.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rf
      rf

      Well, she’s been warned.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChicagoJimmy
      ChicagoJimmy

      I did that once. Stood there at the alter, saying those vows, while thinking how it was all a terrible mistake and wishing I had the courage to stop it right there and be true to my man-loving ways.

      I wasted several years of my life trying to live a lie. My advice would be not to go through with it. The wasted time, hurt feelings, and self-hatred are much worse than the reaction I would have gotten had I just told the truth.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • niles
      niles

      If it makes him happy, go for it. He will certainly receive more societal support and approval. This is very important to some people, and can be a huge motivational force to reckon with.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sh2478
      sh2478

      Amen to those who’ve said it before me. I too was a member of the church, born and raised. I was married to my high school sweetheart in the Salt Lake Temple. I stayed married for 7 years before living the lie, was too much. I’ve been through their social services counseling, I’ve lived trying to overcome my desires, and in the end, no matter the prayer, the fasting, the counseling, those same sex attractions never once lessened. Never once went away. I came out to my wife, she accepted me for who I am. Meanwhile, my family disowned me, the church suddenly wanted nothing to do with me. But now 5 years later my ex wife and I have found love with other men and are for the first time truly happy.
      I feel for them both, they’re outcome usually ends in hurt, resentment, and pain.
      And more than likely he’ll join the ranks of Mormon men looking for sex daily on Craigslist.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Wade MacMorrighan
      Wade MacMorrighan

      How sad that he would betray himself in this way. More people should know–indeed, it should be common knowledge–that Gay people once held a position of religious and civil authority! Were were greatly revered and venerated!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      gay mormon dudes are really hot. and that picture of that couple, well, they make a very cute couple.

      why does the cover of that book have the dude’s picture and then a black box over his eyes, saying “in quiet desperation”? Is it to say the dude was blind to Christ, the church, his feelings? Is it to make him seem ashamed and cover his eyes? I find that cover very strange.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • delurker again
      delurker again

      cute couple

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"
      Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"

      To each his own: But respect the rest of us for own ways too.

      Whether its some sort of trial to see what will happen or whether he was just a confused straight boy returning to his natural desires, makes no matter. And the wife-to-be is making her own decisions about what will be her relationship with her husband. Irrespective of what happens down the road, why not wish them both well SO LONG AS THEY OFFER US LGBTs THE SAME RESPECT TO LIVE OUR LIVES OUR WAY.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Oscar
      Oscar

      Maybe he’s bi. Maybe she’s asexual. They’re adults and they both know the score.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      This is the perfect example of the Mormon Church. “The truth doesn’t matter, as long as you put up a good front.

      So it doesn’t matter that he has convinced this woman that she will be special and a focus of his life. He hasn’t let her know that she is merely a front to help him get by the fact that he can’t come to grips with reality and he is willing to risk ruining her life and lying to her, because in that church, no amount of honesty is as important as appearing to fit the mold. I really hope that his finacee gets a wake up call and finds herself a nice straight Mormon boy to settle down with.

      That being said, another likely possibility is that he went and found himself a Mormon Lesbian and both of them are willing to lie about who they are so as not to “Color outside the lines”. This whole article is just so sad.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Disgusted American
      Disgusted American

      well I wish him well..but I fear after a time ( a yr or two or so) he’ll be “seeking” out….some same sex SEX..it’s ONLY a matter of time..and by announcing it like this…he’s only gonna make his fall harder to deal with….sad…unless his new wifey said she’d wear a “strap on” from time to time.??? (which lets face it – is nothing compared to REAL COCK)

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      Offensive. I have no respect for a religious fool who knows very well that “god” does not change homosexual orientation.Period. This old straightening out lie of all religion needs to be blasted and called out for what it is: evil bullshit.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lamar
      Lamar

      She must be blond, how will she be able to sleep at night with the thoughts at the back of her head that she is being used. Things like this have happened for centuries. I personally don’t think they are a cute couple, she might love him but sexual orientation isn’t something you can just swap if it is inconvenient or incompatible with societal ideals.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Donkeytrot69
      Donkeytrot69

      I would like to mount Ty’s face and rape his mouth. Just sayin’.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 12:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • spiritedrandy
      spiritedrandy

      When I saw the posting about Ty’s wedding, I had a lot of fear that the comments would be mean-spirited. I haven’t seen much of that and I’m grateful.

      I’ve known Ty for five years and consider him a friend. We met when we were initiated into the Mankind Project through its New Warrior Training. http://www.mkp.org. We have had many discussions about queerness and religious faith so I am very confident I can give you a true sense of Ty. Before I do that, I want to correct the statement that Ty co-wrote Quiet Desperation “written at the request of the LDS Church”; that’s not true.

      So, with that background, let me tell you about my friend Ty, whom I love like a brother.

      Ty is fully honest with himself that he is attracted to men. He is making a choice not to act on that attraction out of his deep religious faith in full consciousness of its costs and promises. I know that because a big part of my Mankind Project work is knowing myself and my shadows, that which I hide, repress, and deny. I lived the life of some of the commenters, shoving my sexuality into shadow. I was in complete denial of my same sex attraction and thought I was asexual. I married a woman, adopted her son and had a daughter with her, and endured and lost a horrible custody fight. I came out after all that. I’m frustrated and sad that I still haven’t found Mr. Right and I’m happier than I’ve ever been. Ty and I have discussed what we shove into shadow a lot. Ty is probably more aware of his sexuality than most, because he’s thought about it a lot.

      Ty is fully accepting of my and others’ queerness. He listens when I talk about my attractions and my efforts to finds Mr. Right and is fully supportive. If I marry, I’m confident that he will be there if he can.

      Ty is fully accepting of others’ religious viewpoints. I started as an atheist (growing up in the Ethical Culture [religious humanist] movement) and am now a faithful Episcopalian. My faith and Ty’s Mormon faith are very different in general and around sexuality. Unlike Ty, I believe that God created me as gay and wants me to find Mr. Right. We discuss our faiths, including our differences, in love and respect. Ty hears my truth in love and explains his truth in love. Indeed, a peak experience of my life was visiting Ty in Texas and reading his book while he did his homework. After I read some, we’d discuss what he wrote and why. I learned so much.

      I close with a broader point. I experience many viewing the world as involving clearly right/good and clearly wrong/bad choices. I just disagree with that world view. Important things are mixtures of good and bad, right and wrong. There is no perfection. Ty is making a faithful choice to be the most authentic man he can be. It’s not neat, it’s maybe not satisfying, and it’s certainly harder to understand and explain. It’s not the choice I’d make. But it is right for him and I give him my loving support.

      Thanks for listening.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 12:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brown Gay Al
      Brown Gay Al

      Why are Mormons so hot?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 12:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Amnesia
      Amnesia

      If he’s going to be a good Mormon shouldn’t he get at least 5 or 6 wives? Why stop at marrying just one woman?

      Sounds like he is a bit lazy.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 12:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • social justice
      social justice

      I think it’s ironic for so many of the posters on this site to be so f**king dogmatic about how someone else should live their life. What the hell do you people want? Have you learned NOTHING from your own struggle to live as you choose? This is a man who has been excruciatingly honest with himself, his community, and his future wife. This is a woman who is not being lied to or tricked about anything. They have the prerogative to live according to their personal value system. How ANY gay person could deny them this liberty is so intensely hypocritical that it is beyond me.

      Ty and Danielle, all the best wishes for you to craft a life of peace, contentment, and happiness together. This is a strange journey, this life.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 12:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RUSerious
      RUSerious

      @spiritedrandy: He’s so authentic! I hope young LGBTQs begin to look up to this authentic man whom loves himself so dearly.

      Not.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 12:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 20 · social justice
      I think it’s ironic for so many of the posters on this site to be so f**king dogmatic about how someone else should live their life.
      ___________

      Yeah, but it isn’t his life anymore, he is tricking this poor young girl into a life half lived. If she is a “Good Mormon” she doesn’t have real world relationship experience, and the church teaches that prayer etc… will cure all the ills. So his choice, isn’t just his choice, but also the choice to impose a life of not a full marriage onto this poor girl. It’s one of the most selfish acts he can do since he is fully aware of his sexuality.
      ———-

      And No. 17 · spiritedrandy .

      Ty is fully honest with himself that he is attracted to men.

      Is he fully honest with this girl. Has he told her that with her love he can give her a full marriage (Meaning that it’s her fault if it doesn’t work..she just didn’t love him enough). Or has he honestly told her that he will always be closing his eyes and thinking of men. That she will not get the self esteem and feeling of closeness that comes from a spouse knowing that their other half is attracted to them. That she instead will be getting the equivilent of a gay best friend that will…if necessary close his eyes and go through the motions of sex. How little he must think of her to see her only has a tool for him to live out the lifestyle of straight. He doesn’t see her as a real person deserving of the full spectrum of a relationship that he can never give to her. What a selfish Selfish man he is.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 12:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay
      AlwaysGay

      He will have sex with men. He can’t deny who he is. They never do. Be on the look out for Ty. If you have any information about him messing around with men post it online in a public area. The water carriers of heterosexual prejudices have got to be brought down.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      I really don’t understand gay men who get so worked up over the way someone else lives their life. I will be the first to admit that many gay men who enter heterosexual relationships are not able to make those marriages work. However, just becuase some men can’t doesn’t mean that no men can. Some men can’t run a mile in under 5 minutes. It seems pretty ridiculous that I would claim that anyone trying to get his time under 5 min is wasting his life or attemptingthe impossible.

      I am a gay man in a heterosexual marriage. My wife knows about my attractions to men, but in the end there is a lot more to a marriage than sex. (Don’t get me wrong, we have a very fulfilling sex life) I chose to get married to my wife because I loved her. That didn’t mean that I wasn’t attracted to other people once we tied the knot. But I made a commitment to her to stay with her and build our marriage. We’ve had our share of struggles and I’ve made my share of mistakes, but we are still totally in love with each other. We are so tightly connected. And guess what? I’m really, really happy. I’ve got no complaints about my life right now. Sure, I believed some people who said that God was real and that He has a plan for each of us to be happy. I believed that. I chose to follow that plan. And it worked. I’m happy. I wouldn’t trade my life for anything.

      I get really tired of the way some people try to portray sexual orientation as distict groups. It’s absurd. All people or capable of develping romantic and sexual feelings for any other individual or object. Study learning psychology. It happens. It’s not always something a person chooses (in fact it rarely is). Those feelings come more naturally toward some people than others, and are definitely genetic predispositions built into each of us. But the idea that sexual orientation is something we are just born with is not only ridiculous, it’s been proven incorrect by science time and time again.

      Maybe this guy is really able to feel a deep love and compassion for his fiancee. Maybe he loves spending time withher and being close to her. Maybe he still finds some guys attractive. Who can really know what’s going on? I know that I really don’t like people to force their values on me, and I sure as hell don’t want to force my values on someone else.

      It seems like a common courtesy.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @ No. 24 · Kevin

      You sure said “I” a lot in your screed. Also, it’s funny how you try to tell us to “Study Learning Psychology” and that anybody can develope sexual feelings for anybody else. WEll I’d be curious about where you studied psychology because that is absolutly not what the accepted thought is throughout the profession. But then again, you’ve lied to yourself about your marriage, so I suppose inventing phony psychology isn’t that big a deal to you.

      Your poor poor wife, how nice for you that you do not care about how much more diificult you have made life for her.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George
      George

      I believe that a person has the right to choose what direction in life he desires. This includes sexual preference. Yes, some have changed their minds and gone back to the lifestyle, but not all have. What many don’t realize is that the Savior can assist us in our important life decisions if we live worthily of His help.

      Ty and his fiance are to be admired. He is choosing to move on with his life in a heterosexual direction. I admire his personal integrity and willingness to withstand the hurricane of criticism.
      Time will affirm whether or not the union can endure. I, for one,
      am inspired by his choice and wish his marriage all the best.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Adam
      Adam

      I don’t see why any two people who are honest with themselves and one another about their feelings, goals and expectations shouldn’t be allowed to make a personal choice to share their lives together. I don’t think I am in any position to tell them what they do and do not feel for one another. I have to believe this is not a decision they have taken lightly, especially given the controversy surrounding the issue and the criticism they knew they would have to endure. I don’t see anything objectionable about what they are doing, which is to do what they determine is best for them despite what others may think. Besides, have you ever seen a more dashing couple? I wish them the best.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      If you have brown hair you can dye your hair blonde..but in reality your roots will still be brown.

      I buddy of mine did that. One of the infrequent times they had sex she became pregnant with TWINS! The results were disastrous. He finally left after six years and now is in a relationship with a guy. The kids are BAD..one dropped out of school…drugs..you name it.

      My advice to this guy: Be who you are-the way you were created. Life is so short..living a lie is horrible…

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • john
      john

      Those of you supporting this type of marriage are pathetic. How self loathing can you be?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jimmy
      Jimmy

      Congratulations Ty and Danielle!

      Ty is one of my personal heroes. I have lived with this attraction for 34 years. I spent the 22 years trying to live a double life. I was molested by a lesbian at a young age and then partly raised by her and her abuse to control me. I have been attracted to both men and women, but never felt comfortable intimately with women. Recently, I finally decided to stop hiding. I told my family and friends, all have accepted me.

      I have learned that I cannot tell God what to do, or his leaders. Conversely, I found comfort in the LDS Church Leadership and their comments regarding my situation. Even those who were less tolerant, taught me how to become more like Christ. If that is the intention of the Church, then they have accomplished their work. I have learned to forgive my perpetrator. I have learned that if Christ can raise the dead, he can mold me into the person he wants me to be.

      The lesbian of whom I spoke earlier, is a close family member. She and her partners have been warmly welcomed into our family for years. When she found out that I had homosexual feelings she was elated. When she recently found out that I was no longer pursuing the gay lifestyle, she became violently angry. It saddens me to think that the anyone gay or straight would turn to violence, intimidation, or even ridicule in order to make a point. I celebrate everyones right to be who they are and follow the dictates of their own conscience. Otherwise, we in our hearts would be no better than a terrorist.

      That may seem like a harsh statement, but think of every gay man or woman who has suffered at the hands of a basher. Now think of the case in Washington, D.C.ex-gay man who lost his job because the gay boss considered him a homophobe. He won in the court of the land, but in this court of opinion, Ty and every other man or woman who experiences unwanted same sex attraction may not win. The important thing is that he is true to himself and others. That to me is more honorable than all the ridicule in the world.

      You Go TY!!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 1:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 30 · Jimmy

      That may seem like a harsh statement, but think of every gay man or woman who has suffered at the hands of a basher.
      ___________________________

      What a snivleing little coward you are. Oh gee, so gay men should lie and pretend to be straight, and ruin some poor woman’s life by marrying them because some people out there don’t like gay people. Well I suppose it just fits with the Mormon religeons history of thinking that Bigotry is ok. Everybody remembers that this is the church that would not allow Blacks full membership until around 1980. Would you also suggest to black people that since there are racists out there they should wear light make-up and pretend to be white? What a sad, sad, wasted life you have lived. Lastly, you say that Ty is “True to himself”. No he admits he is attracted to men, so what he is doing is the opposit of being “True to himself” He is not being true to himself so he can try to live by the dictaits of a bigoted religeon. Both of you are only worthy of our pity.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChicagoJimmy
      ChicagoJimmy

      Some of the comments of support for these two are quite ridiculous. I don’t see anyone posting that their marriage should be denied. I don’t see anyone calling for a law to be passed making their marriage illegal. I simply see folks here expressing their opinions, often backed up by personal stories.

      Also, @Kevin, you’re thoughts about psychology reflect that you don’t know what you’re talking about on that subject and your assertion that “the idea that sexual orientation is something we are just born with is not only ridiculous, it’s been proven incorrect by science time and time again” is simply false. While there is certainly no conclusive evidence, scientists who study sexual orientation agree that there are many factors and biology is one of them.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George
      George [Different person #1 using similar name]

      The only thing this guy is living is a lie! Pure and simple. Spin this any way you want, embellish it with your psychobabble, he is living a lie and will end up being nothing but miserable. Watch for such stories about him in next couple of years. Maybe sooner.

      Just learn to love yourselves as you are! Anyone or anything, including faith, who tries to change you does not have your best interests at heart. As far as faith is concerned, its all about control, make no mistake. Wait till you’ve lived as long as I have (75) and you’ll understand what I’m saying. Love yourselves as you are! Period! Anyone who tries to change you should be avoided at all costs!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Artist
      The Artist

      Shouldn’t this kid do whatever he wants? He should be free to marry whomever. PEACELUVNBWILD!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      The attacks on Ty are absolutely pathetic and a cowardice act. I have much respect for him because unlike those that have been weakened over time so much by their same-sex attractions that they would rather follow their own will rather than the will of God, he is doing exactly what Heavenly Father commanded him.

      Shame on those of you for attacking his religious beliefs and his passion for following what he believes is right.

      You have your agency too. If you want to indulge in homosexual attractions, go right ahead. No one’s stopping you. But attacking a man who is following his faith and has proved that “homosexuality” can be overcome is just childish, selfish, mean-spirited, worldy, and the most pathetic, inexcusable act one could ever do.

      Furthermore, it is incredibly arrogant and cold-hearted to wish for his marriage to fail just because you may be too weak to go through the challenges he has.

      At the age of 12, I was exposed to same-sex attractions when I began engaging in sexual activities with my older brother. And it continued on a regular basis for the next 14-15 years. Some of us do not choose these attractions. We do, however, choose our actions and behaviors. Some of us our very devout in our faiths, and shame on you people who allow calumny to defame the hearts of the righteous because of your own zeal and pride. For Ty and myself and the many other Christians like us, at least we try to follow our Heavenly Father’s commandments. At least we try. For those that are slaves to homosexuality, they can’t even say they try. And they rebuke those people that would see so much more joy and hope than being a continued slave to homosexuality, and wishing and hoping for all perils and damnation upon them like you guys are doing in wishing for Ty’s marriage to fail is a cowardice, insensitive, and hateful act.

      I love it when people of the pro-homosexual agenda cry that people of faith are bigoted and intolerant, yet they show their own true colors when their rainbow pride is stained crimson with the blood of the Savior and all men they rebuke. You want to see intolerance. Look at all the hate and intolerance toward those of religious faith by those of the pro-homosexual agenda. Look at the complete and total lack of respect and love toward thy neighbor. Look at the name-calling, the evil speech, the evil acts of hate.

      God help us if every person in this world ever became so selfish and intolerant. Thank God for people like Ty who knows deep down that there is more than what is in this world.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeff K.
      Jeff K.

      Ten bucks says we’ll be saying “I told you so!” within the next five years.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George
      George [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Scotty: The simple fact that you have used the words “pro-homosexual” tells us all we need to know about you. And none of it is good!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      @spiritedrandy
      I am confident you will find Mr. Right someday. There are sooo many lonely gay men out there that feel that gay relationships are just one night stands and are afraid to even go out and “check the water.”
      My partner and I have been together for nearly 20 years monogamously now. I cannot tell you how he has changed my life. We have shared so much happiness. I truly wish that what we have could be had by everyone.
      But-Prince Charming is not going to come knocking on your door. It takes work on your part too.
      I really truly hope your friend is happy. I personally could not do it. Trying to be something that I am not just doesn’t seem right-especially if a “supposedly” religious person or doctrine tells you so.
      I think we should all learn a lesson from the American Indians. They accepted and honored gay people in their society because it has always existed in nature. It is the white man and his twisted version of Christianity that has caused so much grief for gay people.
      All the best-good luck!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brennan
      Brennan

      I have lived my life feeling attracted to men, yet I have spent the last two years married to a woman. I know that two years isn’t a lot…but give me a few years and it should be more. My wife and I are both happy with our choice to get married.

      There have been some rough times over the last couple of years… and times when I’ve wondered what the hell I must have been thinking in getting married. However, the majority of our problems do not stem from me being gay and are similar to problems that other couples would face.

      I am actually the second gay man with whom my wife has entered into a sexual relationship. The first broke her heart–I don’t know if the reason had anything to do with being gay or not, but he did come out to her as a gay man before their relationship turned sexual. So she had a little bit of experience that maybe should’ve deterred her from our relationship. But with full-knowledge that I felt this way, she has entered into a relationship with me because she loved me and she could feel that I loved her.

      Sexually, it’s hard sometimes. I would be lying to say that it wasn’t. But it would be ridiculous to say that things aren’t good just because it’s hard. Our sexual relationship has flourished as we have used it as an opportunity to serve each other and to show love and commitment to one another.

      Being married to a woman is not the answer for everyone who likes dudes. There have been many relationships ruined over the years and many people who have come out hurt. However, as long as people maintain a reason to be married to one another, be that faith in family, faith in God, faith in each other, I see no reason why people who feel attracted to their own sex can’t create a wonderful marriage with those of the opposite sex.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Anonymous
      Anonymous

      Will they wed in their magic Mormon underpants? I hear those give you superpowers.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Casper
      Casper

      This has really got to be a joke……..Right?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Just what we need, another salvo for the ex-gays to aim at us and NOM who say we’re not denied marriage because we can marry the opposite sex. Thanks for nothing, Ty Mansfield!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Truly and honestly, this blog shouldn’t have been posted. Some people need to mind their own business. Don’t you find it so ironic that you are crying “foul” over Proposition 8 and yet are so enticingly intolerant and willing to make every Mormon’s life your business and to be so intolerant yourselves?

      Pot, meet Kettle.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Scotty No 35, but its ok when religious cults promote hatred and discrimination by saying a lot of things that just aren’t true about us, denigrate our lives and in the process, dehumanize us. A bit rich I think and a classic example of how the majority of the cults practice the doublestandard. Its beyond hypocrisy or bigotry for that matter.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Furthermore, I find it not ironic at all, that this website just so happens to be decorated with soft-porn of half-naked men. It really is about sex, isn’t it? Now, who’s living the lie?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Scotty No. 43, you need to be reminded that it was the Mormon cult that you love so much that donated $22 million to make Prop. 8 succeed in reversing our rights in California. If that’s not hatred and bigotry, I don’t know what is. You’re damn right we’ll push back, every time. It was this cult that promoted polygamy in the 19th century, the very thing that Huckabee claims will re-emerge if we’re allowed to marry. I suppose you support that view too.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Robert, NYC:

      Anymore hateful words you wish to share? Anymore expressions of religious bigotry and intolerance that you wish to share? Thankfully, Ty and people like myself (a recent convert to the church) need only worry about what God thinks of us.

      I’m thankful to be a member of this Church. I used to be a Southern Baptist. I can’t tell you how many times I heard a sermon that said people like yourself were going to burn for eternity. At least I’m not going to be so quick to condemn you to hell like the people in the Bible Belt who rejoiced when Matthew Shepherd was brutally murdered.

      At least I’m not going to rebuke you and tell you how awful you are delighting in your misery like the evil Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka.

      Thankfully, I can live my life in a way that is in accordance to God because He grants me that agency. Those conformed to this world will always find a reason to persecute a follower of Christ. They will always have a reason not to have faith. That’s just how it is. We just have to live with that.

      I would also encourage you to view Julie Herran’s work. Is very informative, and it certainly speaks to me. You should see her lecture at http://www.homosexuality101.com. It’s worth it.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 2:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dude
      Dude

      Here! Here! Robert, NYC. I praise your response!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rf
      rf

      @Scotty: “At least I’m not going to be so quick to condemn you to hell like the people in the Bible Belt who rejoiced when Matthew Shepherd was brutally murdered.”

      Thanks for your compassion, asshole.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @rf:

      I didn’t rejoice when Matthew Shepherd was killed. I found the act appalling, evil, and most certainly driven by Satan himself. In fact, I cried when I heard about it. He did not deserve that. It also shows you that Satan is willingly to play both sides of the field. He wants homosexuals to think that the entire world is against them and hopefully Christians will be the target. He wants Christians to think that those with same-sex attractions are evil, disgusting people worthy of hatred.

      God does not desire us to hate people. We are all sons and daughters of our divine Creator. The worth of one soul is great in the eyes of God.

      I do not wish perils and great pain upon those that support homosexuality. I solemnly pray. In my heart through the power of the Spirit, I believe the act of homosexuality to be wrong. God set the standard by creating a man and woman to be together. I want to follow that standard. I believe that not following that standard sets us up for more pain than we should ask for.

      I have many friends who are strongly-professed homosexuals. Yet, they understand my position because they know I’m not out to get them.

      Westboro is out to get them. All those hellfire/damnation preachers you see on TV are out to get them. They personalize the description and forget that those with same-sex attractions are still created in our Heavenly Father’s image just as they are, and they we are to love and have compassion for all people.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lamar
      Lamar [Different person #1 using similar name]

      How can you bless a relationship not founded on love. No matter how much he claims to “love” her it will not be TRUE love. I am not judging Ty but as a previous poster states this will only hinder gay acceptance because it reinforces the it’s a “choice” crap when it comes to attraction. And in regards to Scotty no one is being intolerant of Ty what he does with his life is obviously his choice but are allowed to criticize or support this act if he want to just like how people like you criticize us.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • asm82
      asm82

      Ty is an acquaintance of mine from years ago when I was just graduating from high school. He may never know that he was my first man crush but best of luck to him! To those of you who have posted rudeness about him and/or his situation, you are as bad as the side that you so vehemently hate. You are not aware of his situation nor his heart. Every person is unique and their journey here on earth will be unique as well. You may not understand nor agree with the decisions he has made but to wish ill or negativity on anyone will do nothing but bring bad karma back to yourself. The world needs a little more tolerance and love, let is begin with us. Best of luck to Ty and everyone else in the world seeking to find love and happiness.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      SCOTTY, you are full of deluded, unspiritual shit. You religous people are 100% cause of homosexual suffering and you don’t have any other interpretation other than homo condemnation. Clearly, you are a biased, straight christian man, typical. And wrong.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopSnap
      PopSnap

      Its his life, and he knows what he’s doing. It may even be his mistake. Maybe he is bi and is honestly in love with her- who knows, I don’t know his heart.

      But if he’s lieing, then I’ll take solace in knowing I am twenty times the man he’ll ever be because I don’t lie about who I truly am and hide behind dusty old cavepeople books & fairy tales.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @nikko:

      I haven’t used any swear words yet. I see no glory in using vain, mean-spirited speech. Such an example, I believe, would question what is good. No judging you, but do you realize that you are only an example to others like you who share the same hate-driven speech? For those that waver, who should they side with? One who is driven to hate his neighbor and use evil speech so quick to pass judgment on his neighbor and collectively stereotype those of faith? Or someone of faith who refrains from speech that is vain, is openly honest, shows no ill-will toward PEOPLE with same-sex attractions?

      Think about that one.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason
      Jason

      That’s gay.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopSnap
      PopSnap

      @Scotty

      You are the agitator, NOT us. You and your Christian friends have hung, murdered, maimed, assaulted, harrased, mocked, stripped us of our rights. We have never done the same to you, ever. What have we done? Been ourselves. We could marry women and cheat on them behind their backs like Christians want us to.

      I for one literally ignore people who try to shove their religion on me in public. But if they’d come into a private discussion between me and other gays, I’d probably tell them right off like I am doing now.

      I do not care for your beliefs, or your bible, or your Jesus, or anything else you have to sell me. You are being rude and no I do not want to donate any money to your particular cult.

      Which is, really, what you’ve fallen for hook, line and sinker. A giant money scheme perpetuated by a schizophrenic nutjob. Tell me, where *are* the quakers on the moon? And what about those portions of the Book of Mormon that are ripped literally from the King James Bible?

      Furthermore, did Egyptians say “thou” or “thee” or “thine”? Joseph Smith says he did a literal translation, word for word, of what the tablets said. So tell me, why did he write it as it were the King James Bible? Maybe because he was trying to mimic the writing style?

      Weak minded fool.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Thankfully, Ty can rest now. Look how silly and hateful you people act. Ty shouldn’t get worked up over the hateful and intolerant words of a few radical self-centered homosexuals that truly don’t represent the entire homosexual population of America. I know plenty of professed homosexuals that would never act as childish as you people hiding behind your computers spewing your nonsense and bigotry.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay
      AlwaysGay

      Someone block Scotty. I am sick of haterosexuals spewing their hate to intimidate gay people. You are not gay people’s authority. You are ignorant. I know you think because you are haterosexual that you know everything about sexuality especially homosexuality but you are wrong.

      Ty was told explicitly and implicitly from day one of his life that haterosexuality is the only way to live. Every gay person has. We have to fight that haterosexual supremacist ideology. This decision by Ty is the result of that peer presure and socialization.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lamar
      Lamar [Different person #1 using similar name]

      “You people” has just confirmed your bigotry Scott. I bet you refered to us as that without even thinking about, right. How can you call yourself a Christian and refer to a minority as if they are some underdeveloped species?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopSnap
      PopSnap

      @Scotty

      WAHHH YOU AREN’T TOLERANT OF MY BIGOTRY! WAH!

      You’re right, I AM intolerant of your bigotry. Spot-on.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @Scotty: Scotty, your name should be Snotty!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • j4k
      j4k

      Great for Ty. He has been a great support to so many Mormons who are gay. I’m glad he has found what he wanted. The marriage may fail, fifty percent do, but I applaud him for not letting fear keep him from living the life he wants to live. There is so much more to marriage than sex. I pray for the best for this great man and his beautiful bride.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David in Houston
      David in Houston

      THIS IS EXACTLY WHY RELIGION DESTROYS PEOPLE’S LIVES.

      Had Ty not been indoctrinated by the church as a child, and if it wasn’t drilled into his head over and over again that being gay is immoral and a sin and an abomination, he’d be living with a man right now. I guarantee it. Of course, he’s free to do whatever he wants with his life. But what he’s doing is living a lie (regardless if he acknowledges his sexuality), and now he is destroying another person’s life. That woman DESERVES to be married to a heterosexual. She deserves a spouse that is attracted to her… sexually. I think it’s incredibly sad that she would willingly waste her life to live a sham of a marriage with a gay man. I’m not sure which one of them is more pathetic. They are the poster children for what is wrong with religion. Did it ever cross his mind that God may have made him that way? Why would a loving and caring God make him gay, and want him to pretend to be straight? It makes no sense… because it’s a lie.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @spiritedrandy: Why would you want to be friends with someone like that in the first place?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @Jimmy: Jimmy, are you sure you are not making that story up?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DSNX
      DSNX

      Mormons scare me.
      It takes a lot to scare me…I grew up Catholic.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      This is sad. It’s not sad because he’s going to marry a woman. That’s probably ill-advised but time will tell. And, well, it used to be the only socially acceptable option available to gay men and somehow the ex-gays have discovered it and are pushing it as the “cure”. Someday he’ll probably find the right guy and he’ll be in the wrong place. Hey, it happens to straight people who marry ill-advisedly, too.

      The reason it’s sad because he’s rearranging his life in order to make it fit with superstition–or in this case, maybe science fiction. We give entirely too much credence to religion in this country and by “religion”. If some pulls the faith card, for some reason, we’re all just supposed to give beliefs that have no evidence whatsoever, respect.

      Mormons present a good case in point. Mormon doctrine holds that God was a human at one time, just like us, who passed his God’s tests and was therefore deemed worthy to become a God in his own right. He enjoys some kind of immortal corporeal/incorporeal existence. He lives on Kolob. He has a wife (at least one) and together they had many “spirit” children, us.

      In order to mature, we must go through the same process he did. We willingly passed through a “veil of ignorance” causing us to forget our true nature, knowing that because we have free will, based on our actions, we may never see our “Heavenly” Father again. This particular plan was thought up by our eldest brother, Jesus. One of our other brothers, Lucifer, had a different plan that involved no free will…everyone would be forced to follow the rules. That plan was rejected and there was literally a war in heaven. Because the Father and Jesus knew that we would ultimately fail to follow the rules, Jesus offered to sacrifice himself to redeem his siblings (under certain conditions).

      There are three heavens. The gold ring is the Celestial kingdom. If you make it there, you’re reunited with the Father, you get to be a God yourself, go off and make spirit children and repeat the process. The silver ring is the Telestial Kingdom…I can never remember what you get to do there but you don’t ever get to see the Father, only Jesus. If you’re really bad, you go to Hell…but only for a while…then you go to the Terrestial Kingdom where you’re visited by the Holy Spirit but not the Father or Jesus.

      Now you can sort of see why most “Christian” faiths do not see Mormons as Christians. This story also completely sidesteps Joseph Smith, the origin of the Book of Mormon, etc., Brigham Young, etc.

      So now people who believe this story I just related are the same people who are giving out pamphlets to 14 year old boys in sunday school explaining how homosexuality is the worst sin ever (masturbation is #2). These are the people who coerce college students at Church universities into electroshock therapy if they’re not simply expelled. These are the people who collectively contributed millions of dollars to influence public policy to keep in line with their fictions.

      They’re people like a good friend from high school who left his partner of many years to live a celibate, “holy” life in keeping with his faith. They’re like the young man who killed himself. They’re like this man who is going to marry a woman even though he’s gay. And somehow we just sort of all go “well, that’s his faith. That’s his religion.”

      And yet we laugh at the people who are depressed because they’re not Na’avi and Pandorra isn’t real. If one person believes that he’s the son of an alien, we call it a psychosis, if millions of people do, we call it a religion…and they get free rein.

      The worst part is that many Mormons don’t even know these are the church teachings. Those nice looking missionaries who knock on your door don’t tell you. We had a friend of the family who was raised Mormon and had never heard the whole story until her 60s…she said “screw that” and quit…and this is after her husband, a long standing non-member, had finally converted!

      How do I know these things? I was there and I escaped. You can, too. It isn’t always going to be easy but when you do finally meet your match, it is definitely worth it. And if you don’t, you were too picky.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason Gagnon
      Jason Gagnon

      It has been spoken of time and time again – NOT to use marriage as a method or form of overcoming homosexuality. Are we not supposed to LISTEN to the Prophets??? Faith moves mountains as they say; some may marry and be able to have a meaningful relationship. Others who try it fail and then wonder what went wrong and then begin to questioin their own faith – but not the faith they practice; and yes even sometimes both. I’m 37 and would never put a woman through that kind of life. There’s a lot to go through and personally speaking I don’t think it’s fair to either of them. Try as they may and do, some will fail miserably at marriage; and if there are kids involved – double the misery.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kent
      Kent

      @Scotty: Hey Scotty: You are an idiot! Geez – Don’t you understand that you give up the power of free thinking when you give yourself up to these delusional cults? I am an ex-Mormon gay – and the Mormon church has done more damage to gay people in the United States than anyone! They are behind all of the anti-gay initiatives and I am sick of their bullshit!

      I won’t even visit my family in salt Lake as I do not want to support the Moron church in any way. I am sooo glad that you are happy as a little Mormon robot.

      Good luck – PAY LAY ALE!!!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steven
      Steven

      I find it quite ironic that those who seek acceptance of their chosen lifestyle are so quick to show their intolerance toward others.

      I am a gay Mormon married man of 25 years. I am attracted to men physically and emotionally. However, I chose to marry a woman to whom I am attracted and with whom I enjoy a wonderful relationship. Has it always been easy? No. Has it been worth it? Absolutely. For us it works and we are grateful.

      Neither the LDS Church nor Ty nor I teach that one should marry as a means of overcoming one’s homosexuality. I personally feel no need to change my sexuality. I also have a gay brother who has been with his partner for 11 years. I respect their and anyone’s right to marry whomever they choose.

      When people scoff at a gay individual marrying a straight individual, I think they are being very narrow minded, assuming that everyone fits a cookie cutter mold of some sort. We all have varying degrees of sexuality, spirituality, and a host of other defining characteristics that may or may not make such a marriage work.

      I know it is possible for a homosexual to live happily married to a heterosexual woman because I’m doing it.

      I believe we should all show the tolerance towards others that we seek.

      I wish Ty and his fiance all the best.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 43 · Scotty
      Truly and honestly, this blog shouldn’t have been posted. Some people need to mind their own business. Don’t you find it so ironic that you are crying “foul” over Proposition 8 and yet are so enticingly intolerant and willing to make every Mormon’s life your business and to be so intolerant yourselves?

      Pot, meet Kettle.
      ______________________-

      Ahhh, and there we have the Mormon, Cry me a river victimolgy machine in action. Isn’t it funny how this person writes a book and gives interviews about this topic, and yet somehow it is invading his privacy to talk about it. What you Mormons REALLY want is an echo chamber, that is silent unless somebody agrees with you. Well that is no surprise, all the cult, like you and Scientolgy all thrive on group thought and secrecy.

      SO lets see, by your rules
      1. Mormons can try to impose their beliefs on the rest of the country and do whatever they want to interfere in everybody else’s lives

      but…

      2. If anybody says anything that disagrees with a Mormons point of view they are somehow interfering with their privacy and should mind their own business, even though the Mormon has written a book and gone on TV and exposed themselves to the public.

      Your hypocricy is so typical of the Mormons.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 71 · Steven
      I find it quite ironic that those who seek acceptance of their chosen lifestyle are so quick to show their intolerance toward others.
      ___________________

      ANOTHER example of the Mormon victimolgy cult. They are SO used to always trying to pretend that they are the poor underdogs, that they don’t get that they are trying to get a group of people they are being bigoted towards to feel sorry for them.

      Steven, what you are ACTUALLY saying is “How dare you not be accepting of my hatred and bigotry?!?”

      Well sorry Steven, but wanting acceptance for our right to exist, and your wanting acceptance for your hatred, bigtry and hypocricy are two totally different things. You, are a bigot, just like your minority hating church.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      @j4k:

      Ugh…”There is more to marriage than sex.”

      There is more to every relationship than sex…but the one thing that many people find most dissatisfying about their marriages is the sex. Why stack the deck against yourself?

      Why does “same sex attraction” always get reduced to a quickie in the parking lot? Same sex attraction includes romance, it includes that certain spark…and marriage includes mutual support, friendship, and sometimes a lot of yelling and screaming. But my husband and I work, we pay the bills, we keep up the yard, we watch TV, we cook, eat and do the dishes. He does the laundry. We’re not rutting around 24/7 like minxes (fortunately? unfortunately?).

      If you want to be roommates with someone, be roommates. If you want to move in with your best friend, do it. If you’re gay and you want to marry a woman, and she knows about it, go for it. That hasn’t traditionally worked out very well but you might be the exception. But do it because you want to do it. Don’t do anything to appease an imaginary invisible man invented by a bunch of shepherds roaming in the desert thousands of years ago to explain things they didn’t understand.

      I’m sorry I’ve completely lost it with religious people. It’s time to call a spade a spade.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason Matthews
      Jason Matthews

      I went to Evergreen, and have met Ty Mansfield. I wish people really understood the kind of hypocricy that he spewed out in his book “Quiet Desparation”. Sure, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and he is certainly in charge of his own destiny.

      Ty Manfield was dating a man (or, “just hanging out” as most mormons in evergreen put it) while writing his part of “In Quiet Desparation”. This is what disgusts me the most: hypocracy is what Christ loathed the most. And Ty Mansfield gave hundreds of Mormon families struggling with their son/daughter HYPOCRATIC HOPE. Had the Mormon readers known the man who wrote what they were reading was in bed with another man while he authored those pages, they would have NEVER picked up the book.

      I hope Ty’s wife knows what she’s in for. We heard horror stories about gay men (or men suffering from same-gender-attraction as we mormons put it) who think they’ve put their issues behind them, wanting the “idea” they love of a family, and years down the road, either (or both) the wife or husband realizes they are never fulfilled in their marriage.

      SHAME on you Ty. And I am praying for your wife to find a much more suitable man to share her life with, and isn’t proscribed by doctrine. The moment you treat same-gender-attraction as a reality, and not an illness or disease or sinful desire, that will be the moment you have my respect again.

      -Jason
      From Evergreen
      Provo, UT

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      @Cam:

      I’m sorry but it doesn’t work that way. The two are simply not the same.

      Here is claim #1. “Homosexuality is just fine.”

      We have a lot of evidence for this. After overcoming some initial bad studies, we find that gay men are not stunted emotionally, can form lasting relationships, pay their taxes, etc.

      The *only* condemnation of homosexuality whatsoever comes from religious sources. There is no secular basis to criticize homosexuality. There’s always a sort of fallacy of composition argument (what if everyone did it?) which is easily dismissed because it *isn’t* a lifestyle but an inclination that occurs in a relatively small number of people. And I think that evolution, of necessity, made it that way.

      Now, whether or not there are certain lifestyles that some gay men engage in (a lifestyle being something like “The lifestyles of the rich and famous” as opposed to a “blue collar lifestyle” or “NASCAR lifestyle”), that might be destructive. That is quite possibly an open question and we can examine evidence for this, both for and against.

      But there is no evidence against every possible gay lifestyle.

      Here’s claim #2. “There is a God.”

      There is no evidence whatsoever. Worse, the arguments put forth for Yahweh, Jehovah, or Allah are exactly the same. I can’t even begin to adjudicate which claim can possibly be true. Each believer will say to me, “you have to take it on faith, you have to open your heart. Yahweh, Jehovah, Alah, Zeus, Thor, Odin will make themselves known to you”.

      You don’t believe in Zeus, I imagine. How dare you. Have you tried?

      Do not misunderstand me. You are free to believe what you want to believe. You are free to have whatever opinions you have. But in the sphere of public debate and public policy, opinions that lack evidence do not carry the same weight as beliefs that have evidence. Opinions that have no evidence should not be given a free ride because they are “religious”.

      And so when I see someone tortured over what is a natural inclination for them (same sex attraction) because their beliefs, I can’t help but suggest that perhaps they should consider jettisoning their beliefs, which are just that, and lack evidence. Assuming there is a God, there is no evidence that God really cares what we do when we’re in love or we’re naked. I was merely explaining why *I* thought the story was sad. I didn’t say you had to believe me.

      We have finally entered an age where I think we can safely say that the persecution of homosexuals is wrong, preventing them from participating in society and its secular institutions is unsupportable and religious belief to the contrary does not give you a free ride.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      @Cam:

      Sorry, Cam, I meant to reply to Scotty. :)

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hephaestion
      hephaestion

      I’m sure his wife will be very happy when she finds the gay porn hidden under the mattress.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 4:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      SCOTTY, you do mean ill- will when you claim our homsexuality is
      sinful.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gabriel Carling
      Gabriel Carling

      I am an active Mormon that is attracted to the same sex. I am in the same boat (minus the marriage) as Ty Mansfield. I have met him and have only the deepest respect for him. I do not think for a second that he is trying to “straighten out” by getting married. I don’t think he’s trying to “straighten out” at all. Nor is that our goal. That is not the church’s goal. I will likely be attracted to other men for the rest of my life. I do not hope or care to be “straightened out.” I know several righteous married men who have the attractions–including my best friend. They have lasting, meaningful relationships. It works just like any other relationship–through hard work.

      I am proud of Ty for remaining solid in his faith. I know that he is getting married for the right reasons: love–for both his future wife and for God.

      There are many that might say that Ty is struggling, or that he’s making his life harder, or more full of sorrow because of his decisions. I can tell you that this is not true. Happiness does not come from self-satisfaction or from public acceptance. It comes from faithfully serving Jesus Christ, which I know Ty Mansfield has done.

      This marriage should be a cause for celebration. Two children of God are going to be sealed for all time. They are preparing to spend the rest of their lives together. Not because he has somehow “proved everybody wrong” or because he’s “proving himself” or trying to make his attractions go away. These are all things an outsider might think, and are in no way true.

      There are many who can not even imagine living their life the way God intended them to, like Ty has done. I can imagine. I’m living a similar life. I am happy. I know that I am happy because I am doing what God expects from me.

      Ty, have an amazing life. Many of these men have criticized you for your happiness. Remember that persecution lasts through all times and has many victims. Everybody likes bashing on the Mormons. Do not allow their words to tarnish what should be a happy, exciting time for you. Rejoice in your prosperity. Rejoice that you have found your eternal companion.

      —gabriel

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 80 · Gabriel Carling
      I am an active Mormon that is attracted to the same sex. I am in the same boat (minus the marriage) as Ty Mansfield.

      There are many who can not even imagine living their life the way God intended them to, like Ty has done. I can imagine. I’m living a similar life. I am happy. I know that I am happy because I am doing what God expects from me.
      _________

      Gabriel,

      Can you remind me, just when was it that God changed his mind and decided that Polygomy wasn’t they way he wanted marriage to be lived?

      Oh, and when was it that God decided it was ok to allow blacks full membership in your church? In 1980 did God just suddenly say “Hey, stop being bigots now, I have decided that blacks are ok.”

      And lastly, can you please explain to me why your wards are divided by race? Of course your church tries to claim that it is because other people don’t speak English, but you know, the funny thing is, even people that are second and third generation Americans are “Encouraged” to go to the “Hispanic Ward” or the “Samoan Ward”. Funny how when it comes to Mormonism behaviors it seems that in your view, God must be a bigot.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George B.
      George B.

      I deal with same sex attraction feelings at times, and plan to marry in the next year. Why is it so difficult for many to accept that people can have those feelings and still build a healthy relationship with a woman? Face it, there are many happy, heterosexual men who have formerly in the gay lifestyle. They just aren’t as vocal or marching in parades.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 82 · George B.
      I deal with same sex attraction feelings at times, and plan to marry in the next year. Why is it so difficult for many to accept that people can have those feelings and still build a healthy relationship with a woman?
      ___________________________

      Because you are a selfish cruel individual that worries more about your own acceptance into your church driven world then you do about the feelings of the person you will be marrying. you know, the person who in the RIGHT situation would become your partner in life, the most important person in the world to you, and that is what she should expect. However, in your case, she is just a pawn or a tool to get you selfishly to the social acceptance you crave in your community. She would be nothing more to you than a convienience. The fact that so many Mormon men are coming on here and talking about how they are married or plan to marry gives a frightening insite into what a low value your religeon places on integrity and valuing other peoples feelings. The fact that you care nothing for the false life you will be forcing on this girl, all for the sake of your own convienience shows that you are truly a frightening cold sociopathic individual.

      At least when other gays make this mistake, they are in complete denial..but you know exactly what you are doing. And what you are doing is the worst form of abuse…you will be slowly stripping away her self esteem, humanity, and joy over the course of your marriage, until one day, she’ll walk in on you having sex with a neighbor, or the cable guy and the last shreds of her self esteem will crash. But then again, none of that is your concern is it?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Prof
      Prof

      @Steve: Um, if you were raised Mormon and paid attention at all in Sunday School, you’ve heard this over and over again–they call it the “Plan of Salvation.” If you didn’t “get it” until in your 60′s that’s your own damn fault.

      Question: Why are there so many Mormons reading Queerty?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Kent:

      Just because the LDS church was too hard for you, doesn’t mean it’s not too hard for me. I like how you result to name-calling to make your point. You are such a bigoted, intolerant human being.

      This is the example of homosexual hypocrisy. Religious hatred and intolerance at its finest. God will not be kind to you on judgment day, my friend. He will not be kind to you at all. He will judge you as harshly as you judge me, Ty, and those of us that actually TRY to be good unlike you.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rf
      rf

      @George B.: Sorry George, if you deal with same sex attraction feelings at times, you are not heterosexual. Happy, heterosexual men who have formerly (been) in the gay lifestyle are also not heterosexual. They are either gay and denying it, or some sort of bisexual (50/50, 90/10, whatever) and denying or suppressing it. Many a fag would be content to marry his hag. some will cheat, some will deny themselves happiness, some will fill their heads with religion to drown out their despair. in any case, not being true to yourself is the surest way to a dismal existence.

      I hope you tell your future wife about those attractions, otherwise, how can you build a healthy relationship with her?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 5:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • james_cambridge
      james_cambridge

      Where’s Terrwill?? I know he’d figure out that at least one poster above calling himself Kevin is Michael Letterman…he’s back in the speedo boy thread too. What I thought was a sudden invasion of right-wing tools here in the last few days is probably Michael posting under different names. Fuckwit.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SmartVac
      SmartVac

      “not being true to yourself is the surest way to a dismal existence.”

      Word.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 85 · Scotty
      @Kent:

      Just because the LDS church was too hard for you, doesn’t mean it’s not too hard for me. I like how you result to name-calling to make your point. You are such a bigoted, intolerant human being.

      This is the example of homosexual hypocrisy. Religious hatred and intolerance at its finest. God will not be kind to you on judgment day, my friend. He will not be kind to you at all. He will judge you as harshly as you judge me, Ty, and those of us that actually TRY to be good unlike you.
      ______________-

      Ohhh, YAY! More of the phony Mormon victimology. Sorry “Scotty” but if you punch me, my pushing you away is not being “Intolerant”. You Mormons and your church punch gays, we push you away and you scream and cry like children that we are being intolerant. Sorry, but racists, and bigots, do not get to weep and cry for tolerance.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopSnap
      PopSnap

      Whatever happened to “turn the other cheek”? If you feel insulted then don’t read our blogs. I don’t troll Mormon message boards or blogs and tell them how wrong THEY are.

      It’s obvious our two communities will never get along. Prop 8 changed that- I think that in the future after we have achieved equality there will still be huge rifts between us and we will be known for that.

      Let’s just stop salting the wounds, okay?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AxelDC
      AxelDC

      I was friends with Stuart Matis in college, and I’ve known several gay Mormons who get married. The main excuses are family pressure, or “to have a normal life”.

      The LDS Church has no place for gays, even if they claim that celibacy is an option. You have to be married with children to be considered a real person in the LDS faith.

      At least Ty’s fiancee knows that she is getting a gay man. Most of the ones I’ve known lie to their families and spouses. They then carry on adulterous activities on the side. Going on manhunt in Utah is like visiting a country club: just a bunch of married men trying to get away from their wives.

      I’m so glad I left that screwed up cult-ure behind.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Omiyauski
      Omiyauski

      @hephaestion: I’m sure his wife will be surprised when she checks his browsing history and e-mails lol

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      I don’t believe Ty was ever exclusively same-sex oriented. My view is that he was bisexually oriented.

      It’s very common for bisexually oriented men to marry women. The reason some of these men might previously have referred to themselves as “gay” can be due to the overwhelming nature of same-sex attrattion – even a little of it – in terms of how a person might perceive themselves.

      Therefore, a man who has a mix of same-sex and opposite-sex attractions may call himself “gay” as a means of coping with the overwhelming nature of something that contradicts his religious upbringing, for instance. It seems paradoxical but it’s a means of coping with something that is considered massive in terms of self-perception.

      On the other hand, some bisexually oriented men will call themsleves straight, especially if they consider their same-sex attractions to be “not much of a big deal”. This often happens in liberal men with less severe religious upbringings.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Omiyauski
      Omiyauski

      I am a gay man myself, who was Mormon for about 2 years before I finally said fuck it. When I was first visited by the missionaries, I was lonely, depressed and bored, and wanting a sense of community. These feelings can play against someone, even someone intelligent and normally a free thinker.

      So, I started going to the local branch. The people seemed really nice, and to this day there are still people from there I like. Some were, well, shady and questionable. I finally became baptised, and this is where things started going downhill for me. The branch president kept harassing me to get my family involved in the church, and i kept telling him that they were not intereted in joing the LDS, that they were happy with the religions they already were, but he kept on and on until one day I couldn’t be nice about it anymore, and I blew up at him.

      There was never a moments rest in the church. Every day, or every other day, something church related was going on; There was never any time to just kick back and take a breather before something else was happening. I am a smoker, and I love drinking tea, and of course, I had to give those up completely to be able to go into the temple. The lifestyle is too straight laced for me, and personally, I think it is a waste of a life to devote every waking second to your religion and not stop and actually experience what life has to offer.

      Now, the fact that I was gay, no one knew about until I told a friend I was close to in the church. He offered me websites on places that could “straighten me out”, and told me about the ex gay movement, etc. I wasn’t interested in that, quite frankly, because I was at a point in my life (I was 24 to 26 in those years, as of this writing, i am 33)where I understood that there was no turning straight, it wasn’t a choice, and I had heard about the things some of the ex-gay organizations did to gays, like electroshock therapy, etc. I told him thanks, but no thanks. From then on, I stopped going to church as much, then stopped altogether, and rediscovered paganism. I’m happy now to be in a place where I can fully be myself, and not have to worry about eternal consequences for being something I had no say in being.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason Gagnon
      Jason Gagnon

      @AxelDC:

      I have a place in my ward within the church – thankfully!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 6:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      When I hear stories like this I thank my lucky stars that I did not grow up in a fanatic religious household-raised Catholic here but I feel much closer to God taking a walk in the woods!

      It never ceases to amaze me what human beings do for “religious sake!” Whether it be flying jets into buildings for Allah..or drinking Kool-Aid laced with arsenic for Rev. Jim Jones..or in this case..marrying a woman that you are not sexually attracted to because a panel of old men or a thousand year old book tells you to! How sad!!! I cannot even imagine marrying someone that I was not attracted to..and on the other side of the fence..I would not want anyone to marry me if they were not sexually attracted to me. As I stated before..my partner and I have been together for nearly 20 years..we have had a blast..and yes..I am still attracted to him (he has Italian heritage-GREAT hairy chest!! lol)

      God gave us a beautiful gift. It is called a BRAIN!! It is such a shame more people don’t use it and question. Blind faith is dangerous!! Jim

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 212
      212

      Well, as with the new U.S. Government, “top-dollar” bribes seem to be the main incentive. Along with wondering where your tax dollars end up, (no pun intended), ever wonder where your tithe dollars go?

      A guess wagered — the Mormon church now has even more ammunition to wage the battle against same-sex attraction; therefore curable. Now they can garner even more support for it to be stricken from society and even carry that further to the battle against marriage for every human.

      And, oh boy, it sure helps the naysayers that he’s a psych doctoral major. Woohoo.

      Ty is forever tied to the suspicion of bribery and a religion’s “testament” that homosexuality is “curable.”

      I give the marriage 2-3 years…long enough for all the court pro-gay court battles and elections to come and go; long enough for the church to use his story to shore up the militia for their anti-gay support.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Omiyauski
      Omiyauski

      Since then, I have had a wonderful relationship with a wonderful guy. I also discovered quite a few shocking things about Moronism, such as the horrible atrocities they committed to the Native Americans when they invaded Utah, the fact that black men could not hold the priesthood up until about 1979, the fact that they believed, and probably still believe, that black people are black because they are cursed by the curse of Ham. Of course, I already knew about the polygamy. Then of course, their monetary support of the bill that got rid of gay marriage in California.

      The whole religion is a clusterfuck, and I don’t think it deserves any respect. I like a few of the people I met in the religion, but as for the religion itself, i hope it suffers and dies a thousand deaths.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeff K.
      Jeff K.

      Let’s just hope they don’t have kids. They’d be the REAL victims when he eventually goes astray.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alan brickman
      alan brickman

      will be probably caught in a gay bar in the next year…bet on it…

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Noah
      Noah

      Poor little Mormon boy. He has same-sex attraction disorder! Maybe he should take some aspirin or vitamins?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      There is no such thing as converting from gay to straight. Most men who claim to have converted from gay to straight have always had a mix of same-sex and oppostie-sex attractions. They were never exclusively one product and then suddenly became a completely different product.

      However, in terms of behavior, it is perfectly possible to make choices that reflect your set of values, whatever they may be. I don’t think we in the GLBT community should be afraid of this notion. It doesn’t mean that our attractions (ie orientations) change, it simply means that behavioral choices are possible based on a set of values, good or otherwise.

      Let’s embrace Ty. Let’s congratulate him. It doesn’t mean we’re embracing gay-to-straight conversion. It simply means we’re respecting his choice based on his set of values.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian
      Brian

      Why is it that a group that feels so picked on and unaccepted feels the compulsion to a guy who has chosen to follow his religion and tried to manage his attractions. Seems like you guys should be a little more compassionate about guys who don’t fit the “norm.”

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lucas
      Lucas

      @Prof: Question: Why are there so many Mormons reading Queerty?

      Answer: Really?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @Noah: I think a hot protein injection is just what he needs to get himself sorted out.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J,
      J,

      #102 Jason,

      Congratulate him on what? Making a horrible mistake? Do you not think that the gay people on queerty have good perspective on this? Do you know how many gay people have straight relationships before they finally accept themselves?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 7:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • cat walker
      cat walker

      he’s a mormon and a retard.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 8:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      J,

      Don’t get me wrong. I’m completely against these hideous ex-gay therapies. They are based on the notion that a person’s orientation (ie innate gender attractions) can be altered by intervention. This notion is completely wrong and can lead to some awful psychological damage to the person.

      I’m simply saying that, in Ty’s case, he was and is bisexually oriented but has now decided to pursue a marriage to a woman. I don’t consider that a threat to me as a gay person. I embrace his decision based on his set of values.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 8:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      @Jason But is he really bisexual..or is that something that he calls himself to make him feel better because of his religion? I certainly would not want my hetero sister to marry a sexually confused man..would you? As human beings I think we all want our prospective partners to be COMPLETELY into us-not someone of the opposite sex or of the same sex if that applies. How would you feel if you were being intimate with another guy and he secretly was fantasizing about a woman?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 8:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      You guys are great! You perfectly correct. I also want you to know that your opinions mean absolutely nothing to me. Especially when I can scroll to the near top of this blog and see men without their shirts on. I’m not into a sect that is all about sexual attraction which is what your extremist version of homosexuality is all about.

      Lastly, Ty at least now knows that he has people he can rely on. The pro-homosexual agenda is filled with hypocrisy. You say, “let’s love and let’s marry.” Well, you apparently can’t even fathom what true love is. It’s just more confusion coming from the gender-confused.

      P.S. I’m glad Prop 8 passed. Next time, I will strike harder to make sure gay marriages are never legal in California or any other state in the union. You will not corrupt society with your sin.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 8:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @nikko:

      Leviticus 20:13

      Of course, most homosexuals are atheist or agnostic which is no surprise. To actually live by a standard rather than giving into every temptation that comes your way! What a novel concept! I see it in the homosexual agenda.

      I’d like to see you refrain from doing something you actually love. Self-control is something homosexuals are foreign to much like true love.

      If it weren’t for heterosexual couples, none of you would be here.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @Scotty: Scotty, why must you be so snotty?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @J,:

      Correct. The people on “Queerty” have no knowledge or clue whatsoever of the heart of a person. You don’t know. You are just passing judgment and many of you wish for the very worst for Ty which is pathetic. I say again, NONE of you would be alive if it weren’t for loving heterosexual people. And the world would eventually fall and way and die if every person on this planet were just like you all! There’d be no new children because you guys can’t reproduce children in your relationships (a symbol of the highest form of love). So yes, if every person on the planet became flaming homosexuals like the people of “Queerty” then the entire planet would be emptied within 100 years.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @cat walker:

      “He’s a Mormon and a retard.”

      And he’s more of a man then you’ll ever be. LITERALLY!

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Scotty:

      LOL! It’s funny how you can put a negative remark on ABSOLUTE TRUTH. Do you deny that your existence pended on the conception between a man and woman? An egg and sperm? You guys are just too much. You guys are living in a pink-frilled fantasy world. Do you deny the fact that the world would be vacated of ALL human beings if everyone on the planet were homosexuals? If we all went for members of the same sex, how would the Earth be replenished. You guys are incredibly hypocritical.

      I’m glad your voices don’t represent the majority of America. Shoot, you don’t even represent the majority of predominately homosexual state in California. Just keep on spewing your venom. Your hatred, intolerance, and pride will be your downfall.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J,
      J,

      Scotty,

      I wonder what wickedness lies in your heart.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ScottDC
      ScottDC

      No. 115 · Scotty
      @Scotty:

      LOL! It’s funny how you can put a negative remark on ABSOLUTE TRUTH. Do you deny that your existence pended on the conception between a man and woman? An egg and sperm? You guys are just too much. You guys are living in a pink-frilled fantasy world.
      ___________-

      Do you deny that your church prohibited blacks from full membership until around 1980, and only then because the publicity was getting to be too much, especially since Standford University was leading the charge to have all schools boycott playing against BYU? So your Church never actually changed their racist opinions. They were just forced to stop their racist practices because of bad P.R.

      Do you deny that your church only ended OFFICIALLY sanctioning polygomy because the United States would not grant Statehood to Utah if that practice was still legal?

      Do you deny that your church STILL trumpets it’s being an intergral part of the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendment?

      So Scotty, do you DENY, that every single opportunity your church has had to NOT act in a racist or bigoted manner, it has failed to do the right thing, and only changed it’s practices when forced to by self interest or bad P.R.?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @Scotty: Couldn’t artificail insemination be used?

      Apr 15, 2010 at 9:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      Hasn’t anybody learned anything from watching Disney’s Ratatouille? Seriously. Little kids get the movie’s message, but we adults are a little thick skulled and slow to learn. Allow me to draw some parallels from that movie to this situation and this conversation; kindly entertain me. Thanks.

      Remember how the food critic guy – Anton Ego – tasted food made by a rat? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJqfP_vZBfw). And remember how we all feel about rats? They are incapable of producing anything tasty, carry diseases, and look best dead in a garbage can. It didn’t matter how good the food tasted; once people heard rats made the food, the restaurant was shut down. Similarly, a lot of people view gay people like rats — incapable of producing real love, carry diseases, and look best dying in a hospital bed. (Some of the comments here are evidence of this). It doesn’t matter how good we gays are; we are shut down, rejected, despised, fired from our jobs, etc when people “find out”.

      And so the battles goes on and on and on between gays and straights, casualties here, progress there, a few steps back, a few steps forward, but no real progress made. That is, until someone like Anton Ego steps up. He risks his place as a critic in his community, tastes the food of the rat, and realizes its not too different from the food he’s tasted before. Actually, it’s much better than anything he’s tasted.

      Most of us here reading and writing know what gay people are capable of. We can produce good things. We are good people. But few people allow themselves to taste of the goodness we produce. How happy we are when someone does, though. It feels good. It feels spectacular. We heart acceptance.

      How do we pay it forward? We don’t. We turn around, demonize, and stigmatize others who are different from ourselves (just as we’ve been demonized and stigmatized). Why? Probably because people with similar feelings as us challenge us when they decide to live differently than we choose to live.

      So… maybe we can be more kind to Ty and Danielle if it’s kindness we expect from the world. Just a thought. Just a suggestion. I’ll now wait here while the noose is prepared for my lynching (how dare I suggest we be kind to others…)

      **sits down calmly, clasps hands together, places clasped hands gently in lap, taps foot, glances at watch, looks off into the horizon at the angry mob of gay activists with their torches and pitchforks…**

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Bisexual orientation is not sexual confusion. It simply means you are oriented to both genders in various proportions from small to large.

      Why wouldn’t a woman want to be married to a bisexually oriented man? As long as he’s faithful to her, that’s all that matters. I don’t see any difference between this scenario and one where a woman is married to an exclusively heterosexually oriented man. He might have feelings for other women but as long as he’s faithful to her, that’s all that matters.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 10:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J.
      J.

      Ryan,

      Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Noah
      Noah

      Jason, Jason Jason, you and your bisexual drivel are tiresome.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @ J

      J, that’s an interesting thing to say. Please explain.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • bom1830
      bom1830

      I am convert to the LDS Church and in a relationship with man for 18 years. Of those 18 years 12 have been celibate and going on 13 years now. We both turn our lives over to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

      We have full support from our Bishop, our Ward and Stake Presidency. He is my brother in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and I love him as Jesus Christ would. We both have Temple Recommends and attend at Temple Services here in California.

      Gays have a place in the LDS Church if you follow the commandments and understand them. You gotta to want to live within the Laws of Heaven to obtain that desire of being Christ like.

      Most gays do not understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ for they do not see with Spiritual Eyes like the Lord does. There is a lack of understanding in the Church when they hear about SSA or SGA.

      I long to be married to woman too but I have AIDS and the women I have discussed marriage with said why would I marry someone with a death sentence ? AIDS is an ugly part of the gay community that no one likes you are tainted goods by all accounts.

      Ty deserves all the happiness he can have for obeying his Heavenly Fathers commandments and being married in a LDS Temple. Where it is for all time and Eernity not just until death til you part like most marriages. Celestial Marriage is the best you can have in life and it gets better in the Eternities with your Loved ones by the Power of the Priesthood.

      I have been healed by the Priesthood and it is real and tangible to the senses and miracles happen everyday. You just have to be intuned with the Holy Spirit to see them in your life.

      I will continue to Pray for understanding on the Gay community to understand the Laws of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what it means to be married to a woman and not a man.

      Every culture since the beginning of time it has been between one man and one woman for traditional marriage. History shows that to be true. Every society that has Homosexuality as their core is no longer here i.e Romans and Greeks. It is just a matter of time until the Good Lord comes again and sets the world straight about homosexuality once and for all.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J.
      J.

      Ryan,

      What I think is interesting is that you think that gay people are the ones who need to start being more loving and kind.

      Apr 15, 2010 at 11:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      J, let me clarify. I’m not suggesting that kindness starts with gay people (nor am I suggesting that gay people deserve less kindness) – and let me point out that I am gay (the way I’m talking sounds as if I’m not). What I want to point out is that on one hand we ask for kindness and understanding from others, but on the other we are not very kind either.

      Take the situation with Ty, for example. We ask people to be tolerant of us, but we (many of us posting here) are not being very tolerant of him and what he chooses to do. Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with what he’s decided to do, I wish he would be given the benefit of the doubt, treated more kindly, and offered more support. It won’t be easy and people here certainly aren’t making it any easier.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 12:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jones
      Jones

      Wait and see, he’ll end up doing gay porn soon…

      Apr 16, 2010 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Omiyauski
      Omiyauski

      @Scotty: I think most of us can fathom what true love is. I am sure quite a few of us have been there, in loving gay relationships. The fact that most gay men are comfortable with their sexuality, and comfortable expressing it, seems to distress you. Maybe if you got your head out of your mormon hole in the ground, you would see that there is nothing wrong with expressing your sexuality. What is wrong is pretending that there is something wrong with it.

      And the pro-homosexual agenda? What, like we all get together and synchronize our schedules, we meet up in a secret warehouse and plan world domination? What kind of paranoid idiocy are you parroting here? Who are you hearing this from, because i have heard the same rhetoric before, and usually it is people like Rush Limbaugh or, oh, i don’t know Fred and Shirley Phelps that say it.

      How about next time I vote, I write in how Mormonism is a cult that should be attacked and firebombed by the ATF? And make no mistake, it IS a cult, and apparently you have been brainwashed very well.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 12:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Omiyauski
      Omiyauski

      @Ryan :): Actually, Ryan, I agree with you. We should live and let live, and let people make their own decisions.

      However, I still hate the Mormon church and what it does to homosexuals who are a part of it. It’s blatant disregard for anything but it’s own agenda, etc. I know, personally, what it is like to be gay in a religion like the Latter Day Saints, because I was one. And, at one point I contemplated marrying a woman, and hoping that would make things ok, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that no, that would be a living hell for me as well as whoever “she” turned out to be. I am sure a lot of gay men have gone through this before, and I can understand the anger at seeing someone who is obviously gay bow down to bigotry and completely, as some have put it, turn against themselves. All for acceptance, and the promise of eternal salvation that no one really knows is even real. You can’t live your life by what if’s, or your life is meaningless.

      So, while I can see people’s anger, I do think people should focus their hate on the institution and what it has done, and not so much on the people who’s faith resides there. Just my opinion.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J.
      J.

      Ryan,

      Ty is doing something that the enemies of people like us want him to do: marry a woman. You can not rationally ask a gay person to tolerate something that goes against the very tolerance they seek. It’s like asking a black person to be tolerant of the KKK.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cinaed
      Cinaed

      It’s really sad when even a gay website is so biased that it chooses to delete somones comment simply because it is different than their own opinion. What happened to the comment from BOM1830? If nothing else is was facinating…..someone gay their whole life CONVERTS to the LDS church WITH his partner!! Talk about closed minded!

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @Omiyauski

      I’m sorry to hear about your experiences with the LDS Church. It sounds like you went through some rough times. And I agree – living with what ifs probably does create a meaningless life. It’s important to be open to the fact that, for other people, being LDS and gay may not be a completely negative thing.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @J.:

      You make an interesting point, but I’m not sure I understand what you’re getting at. Who exactly are you comparing to the KKK? And what aspects of the KKK? If we’re talking about organized crime, violence, terrorism, and murder, I would agree – that shouldn’t be tolerated at all. I’m not sure any of the parties involved are guilty of organizing a group of extremists comparable to the KKK. I suspect comparing whoever you’re comparing to the KKK is erroneous. Can you provide a more appropriate example to illustrate your point?

      What I hoped to point out is that we should be willing to tolerate other people, like Ty, who choose to participate in mixed orientation marriages. So long as he is not taking away my human rights, I cannot argue or complain with him. And because I expect love and support from others for things they do not understand about my life, I offer Ty and Danielle my support for the things I do not understand about their lives. They have my love and support.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George B.
      George B.

      @rf: @rf: I would have no hesitancy discussing my SSA feelings with her. To do less would be dishonest.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 2:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George B.
      George B.

      @Lucas: So many Mormons are reading Queerty because of their support of Ty Mansfield. The article itself on Ty and Danielle was relatively factual and unbiased. Many of the responses however sadly reflect the hypocrisy that only gay people have the right to affirm their sexual determination. The bigotry and twisted logic are disturbing.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 2:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @bom1830: Now that is one fucked up story!

      Apr 16, 2010 at 3:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Omiyauski
      Omiyauski

      @Ryan :): My point was that, once you get inside the church, and especially if you are born into it, you can easily be manipulated into thinking in ways you wouldn’t normally. People put on a happy face, when in fact they feel spiritually dead inside. Not just spiritually, but it kind of starts to strip your humanity away, because they of course teach that being human is sinful.

      I think the reason I was able to get out of the clutches of it was because, for one, naturally I have a rebellious and inquisitive mind, and this way did not jibe with my nature, and for another, I had the support of my family who were not Mormons, and who could see what a cult it was. There was no intervention by them or anything, but with their support I was able not to be taken in quite like I would have been if I didn’t have their support. When I was Mormon, I did want to believe I was on the right path, but i knew in my heart it wasn’t. They are a very life denying cult, much like the evangelicals are.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 3:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zach
      Zach

      @Scotty: Scotty,

      I am from Utah I and I know that there is a HUGE gay population here. So California and Utah have that in common.
      Most of the gay people here are coming from devout Mormon families. Being gay IS part of nature many mammals (including us) exhibit that behavior. So, saying that it is unnatural and the best form of love not what love is about.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 4:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zach
      Zach

      What I meant to say above was that saying that procreation was the best form was of love was not was love is about.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 4:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 109, JamesStone….Ricky Martin at one time claimed he was bisexual and now he has come out as gay. A lot of so called “bisexual” men use that label to hide the gay side in relationships with the opposite sex, very few are upfront about it and many of them marry the opposite gender to cover it up. Most straight women wouldn’t marry a “bisexual” male for obvious reasons. Many bisexuals do indulge in extramarital sex with the same gender while married. I find it hard to believe that anyone claiming to be bi and in a marriage with the opposite sex doesn’t fantasize about someone of the same sex. Many cheat too and conceal it from their partners throughout their entire lives. I’ve met several men in that situation. They claim they genuinely love their wives but the longing to be with a male is something they just can’t shake off, a need if you will. I can’t imagine how emotionally unhappy some of them must be.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 8:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ScottDC
      ScottDC

      No. 135 · George B.
      @Lucas: So many Mormons are reading Queerty because of their support of Ty Mansfield. The article itself on Ty and Danielle was relatively factual and unbiased. Many of the responses however sadly reflect the hypocrisy that only gay people have the right to affirm their sexual determination. The bigotry and twisted logic are disturbing.

      @@@@@@@@@@@@

      George, no, the bigotry and twisted logic is that of you Mormons who attack gays, try to legally force gays into substandard levels of citizenship, and then put on your passive-agressive little Mormon tsk tsk faces and say oh my goodness gracious, look at how nasty those gays are, they are attacking us for no reason!!

      You Mormons are so ridiculous, that your responses would be the same as if the Taliban in Afghanistan said “Oh My, why does the U.S. treat us so badly?”

      Mormons lash out and attack, then try to run away crying and acting as though you are innocent bystanders. If you don’t want gays to speak poorly of you, the don’t have your church spend massive amounts of money fighting for bigoted legislation.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 8:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @Scotty: Hateful words? You think denigrating an entire group of people as the Mormon cult and virtually every religious cult has and continues to do isn’t hateful? Donating $22 million to overturn our rights in California wasn’t about hate and reinforcing discrimination? What world are you living in? Why should a religious cult have a say as to who is entitled to rights? Next time you consult your bible, you would do well to view http://www.falwell.com and tell me if you live by the scriptural references, it not all, then why? If you reject any of it why do most of you conveniently and singularly use the quote in Leviticus to justify discrimination (hate) towards an entire group of people? To believe in the scripture, you either believe it all or you don’t believe at all,you cannot cherry pick this or that because it doesn’t fit in with one’s religious lifestyle or is too incompatible with modern 21st century living. Jesus Christ didn’t mention homosexuality once let alone condemn it or judge us as most cults do including yours.

      Another thing, I do NOT live in misery. You don’t know me so you have no right to assume that about me or anyone. I’m thoroughly happy, married to a wonderful man for the past four years and in the same monogamous relationship for 17 years. If anything, I’m angry at the hypocrisy and double standard of the majority of religious cults, “christian”, jewish, islamic among others all of which “judge” gay people as if they had any moral authority which they most certainly do NOT. If anything, they are no better than hypocrites and bigots, masters of the double-standard.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 8:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeff
      Jeff

      I believe that we are defined by more than the gender of our attractions, and that the most enduring and meaningful attractions are not confined to gender.
      Growing up, I knew two things. (1) I was sexually attracted to me, and (2) I wanted to have a wife and children, not because my family, society, or my religion wanted me to, but because *I* wanted to.
      I am so glad that I didn’t listen to the voices shouting at me in the world, and more importantly, inside my head, telling me that this was an impossible dream. For a long time, it was just that, a dream. And yet now here I am, happily married, with a relationship fulfilling to both of us, in every aspect, including sexually. And to get there, it doesn’t require me to engage in any mental gymnastics or fantasies.
      I do not know whether this is possible for everyone like me; I only know that for me, what once seemed impossible, almost a joke, is now joyously part of my everyday life.
      There are some naysayers who will insist (just as they once insisted that I never even try, but just accept being a slave to my sexual attractions, even if it meant going against everything else I believed in) that this is a facade, that I am fooling myself, in denial, that I am only making myself and my wife miserable, that it is only a matter of time before it fails spectacularly.
      Maybe so, but I would also point out that underlying this wish, this perverse hope in my (and Ty’s) doom, is a profound insecurity. Those confident and secure in their own life choices would only feel to wish Ty and his fianceé well, as a few enlightened commenters here have done. If looking at that picture of the happy and beautiful couple elicits something other than positive feelings and best wishes to them, then the place to look further is inside yourself. What is it about your own life that has you so unsettled, so unhappy, so easily threatened?
      Truly, there is a world of possibilities out there, and you need not be prisoner to something that keeps you so miserable. Might be worth exploring further. For as Socrates said, “the unexamined life is not worth living.”

      Apr 16, 2010 at 8:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 143 · Jeff
      I believe that we are defined by more than the gender of our attractions, and that the most enduring and meaningful attractions are not confined to gender.
      Growing up, I knew two things. (1) I was sexually attracted to me, and (2) I wanted to have a wife and children, not because my family, society, or my religion wanted me to, but because *I* wanted to.
      __________________

      And why did you want to? Because your church let you know in no uncertain terms that being attracted to men was not an option, that you would be turned away, that people like that were evil on the inside and should be cast out, and that the highest life a person could aspire to was to be married and a parent. Gee, wonder why you wanted to get married.

      That said, once again, we have a poster on here that constantly uses the word “I” in all of his postings. It’s nice to see that you take your wife into so much consideration. I hope you are as concerned for her feelings when the inevitable happens and you either leave her for a man, or she catches you fooling around with another “Great Husband” who just happens to live with his wife on the same block.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 9:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • spiritedrandy
      spiritedrandy

      I have been sad reading all the venom going both ways and the comments — virtually all by people who don’t know Ty — purporting to describe Ty, Danielle, and their relationship.

      Several have stated — as truth — that Danielle knows nothing about Ty’s sexuality. Of course, that’s silly, since Ty has written a book about his same sex attraction. Whatever your truth about the wisdom of their marrying, know that they are doing it with their eyes open.

      Ty is attracted to Danielle as a total person. Because I admire and like Ty, it does not surprise me that Danielle wants to marry him. Because they are honest with each other, I’m confident they will figure out how make their sex life work for them (they don’t have to make it work for US).

      Apr 16, 2010 at 10:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @Omiyauski:

      I agree with some of what you’re saying. I would use the word dogma to describe what you’re saying. Unfortunately, Mormons can be dogmatic. But show me a group of people where there is no dogma. From my own observations, dogma is not something unique in Evangelical or Mormon culture; it also exists in Latino culture, European culture, and yes, even gay culture.

      One of the beautiful things about Mormon culture, IMO, is the “find out for yourself” programmed into the faith. I don’t know of many other churches (or cultures for that matter) that put so much emphasis on challenging dogma.

      And I would like to point out again that although your experience with the Mormon church is on one hand, there are others having a remarkable experience with it. Be careful not to color their experiences incorrectly based on your own experience. And be careful of speaking for the whole, or authoritatively about the whole – all you have produced and used for evidence is your own personal experience and observation. That certainly is not a representative sample of Mormon and non-Mormon nor is it unbiased observation.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 10:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      Not shocking. Perhaps they can have all the “ex gays” be the ushers.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 10:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Scotty: You are a nut. Go climb back into some shell and stay there.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 10:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Prof
      Prof

      @George B.: Really? Did the church machine spring into action and let members know they should read Queerty and comment in this thread because one of their own was being discussed? Or is it because so many of you are closeted homosexuals (ooh–scary word, but I’m not going to sugarcoat it and label it “same-gender attraction”) who feel the need to vehemently defend your choice to be untrue to yourselves at the same time as you indulge yourselves by trolling a GLBT blog?

      Apr 16, 2010 at 10:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      @Prof: Yeah, that is a good point, what the fuck are all these ex-gays here for anyway? Aren’t they supposed to avoid websites that might lead them into temptation? Maybe we should find a way to report them to their pastors so they can be punished accordingly!

      Apr 16, 2010 at 11:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J
      J

      Ryan, I gues I don’t see this the same way as you do. This is not a healthy relationsip these two have. It never will be. He hates that he’s attracted to men and she’s engaged to a man she’s only known for three months. He’s not going to love her they way she should be loved. People can do what they want but that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. I pray they don’t have kids.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 11:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 146 · Ryan :)
      @Omiyauski:

      One of the beautiful things about Mormon culture, IMO, is the “find out for yourself” programmed into the faith. I don’t know of many other churches (or cultures for that matter) that put so much emphasis on challenging dogma.
      _________________

      That isn’t true, just how open is the church to somebody who finds that gays should be allowed in? The church only bent on allowing blacks in because of bad P.R. The church doesn’t bend on Dogma. At a recent conference, the church was railing about Pornography and Divorce. Totally missing that right now in this country there are issues such as health Care, two wars, etc… The church hides itselfe behind the believe that it is 1950, which isn’t surprising since the council of leaders has an average age that would have meant most of them graduated high school in the 1940′s. This man is taking advantage of a naive girl, or he has found a lesbian who is just as wrapped up in shame and self hatred as he is.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 12:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @Cam:

      Please read again. I’m not talking about the Church “bending”; I’m talking about the fact that leaders of the LDS Church emphasize to members not to do things simply because leaders are telling them to do it. They emphasize “find out for yourself”, ask God whether what is taught is true or false, and then act. This is what I meant by challenging dogma.

      It seems that people here are incredibly biased and presumptuous.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 12:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @J:

      What is the source of your information on 1) their relationship is unhealthy and 2) he hates that he’s attracted to men and 3) he’s not going to love her the way she should be loved?

      If this is based on personal correspondence you’ve had with them or if you can produce direct quotes on these 3 things from either Ty or Danielle, then I’ll leave you alone. However, the information you’ve presented contrasts significantly to personal interaction I’ve had with Ty. I’m left, therefore, feeling highly skeptical of your diagnosis, and ready to assume this is based on either your personal experience with marriage or hearsay from others who have participated in or continue to participate in mixed-orientation marriages.

      Based on my observations of Mormons in healthy and unhealthy mixed-orientation marriages, what defines the level of health in the relationship is NOT the homosexual feelings (meaning that it is erroneous to assume that because some/most mixed-orientation marriages fail or continue unhealthily ALL mixed-orientation marriages fail or continue unhealthily). It is the level of honesty and communication, IMO (observation, not opinion), that determines whether a marriage is successful and healthy.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 12:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 153 · Ryan :)
      @Cam:

      Please read again. I’m not talking about the Church “bending”; I’m talking about the fact that leaders of the LDS Church emphasize to members not to do things simply because leaders are telling them to do it. They emphasize “find out for yourself”, ask God whether what is taught is true or false, and then act. This is what I meant by challenging dogma.

      It seems that people here are incredibly biased and presumptuous.
      ___________________

      I know what you said and I am telling you it is untrue. And yet once again, you get to play your little victim card (Anybody who diesn’t agree with the Mormon is biased.) The problem that you Mormons face when you try to lie, is that since your religeon excommunicates or otherwise isolates gays if they refuse to pretend to be straight, is that there are a hell of a lot of ex Mormons out here. Please don’t try to tell me that there is a back and forth going on in the church. You are not told to challange authority. The entire culture of your religeon is built on monolithic adhearence. Your church leaders sent out a memo to the Catholic church years ago agreeing to fight against the advance of gay rights. I’m curious, was there an open discussion in the wards about that? Were people encouraged to challange that? Oh wait, thats right, it was done without any notice to anybody. The church just arbitrarily made that decisions…as it makes all decisions. Say what you want, but too many people know too much about your church.

      I know you Mormons still labor under the missconception that people don’t know anything about you, and you are isolated, but that if people DID know more about you everybody would be rushing to join your church. Sorry, the fact is, people DO know about you, they learn more and more every year, as your falling conversion and recruitment numbers should make perfectly clear to you.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J
      J

      He isn’t straight and never will be. He is using this girl to ease his conscious. He needs to be helped by a real psycologist.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • enrev
      enrev

      @Prof: Question: Why are there so many Mormons reading Queerty? Answer: Because there are so many gay Mormons, ex-gay Mormons, and gay ex-Mormons, of which I am the “Latter” (pun intended).

      Apr 16, 2010 at 1:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Prof
      Prof

      @enrev: So am I! It’s very hard to convey sarcasm over the Interwebs. And to Cam (No. 155): very well said. Mormons talk a lot about “finding out for yourself” but the reality is, anyone who reaches a different conclusion than the GA’s in Salt Lake on any matter of importance is “corrected,” sooner or later, by their local priesthood authorities. Dissension weakens hierarchical order, and thus is not tolerated.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 4:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      There is a lot of vitrial about this man’s freedom of choice.

      It’s almost to say that, “Just because he’s still attracted to men he’ll end up leaving her or cheating on her.”

      Considering he’s been up front with her and everyone else… Seems like a consenting adult issue to me.

      “Just because I’m still attracted to women I’ll end up leaving or cheating on my future wife?”

      I’ve been married once before and though I was attracted to a lot of other women, I was never once unfaithful to her.

      Sexual attraction, regardless of what it is of is no excuse for infidelity, which so many here seem to deem okay.

      It’s pretty pathetic really.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 4:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 159 · Joseph
      There is a lot of vitrial about this man’s freedom of choice.
      It’s almost to say that, “Just because he’s still attracted to men he’ll end up leaving her or cheating on her.”

      Considering he’s been up front with her and everyone else… Seems like a consenting adult issue to me.

      “Just because I’m still attracted to women I’ll end up leaving or cheating on my future wife?”

      I’ve been married once before and though I was attracted to a lot of other women, I was never once unfaithful to her.
      __________________

      What I wonder is this…do schools in Utah not teach critical thinking.

      What you seem to miss joseph, is that, there is a difference in being sexually attrracted to your wife and still thinking other women are attractive, and in NOT being sexually attracted to women, and trying to go month after month pretending. You were getting an outlet at home that he will not be getting.

      As for freedom of choice, sorry, his freedom to choose ends when it comes to ruining somebody else’s life. What I’m seeing here from all the defenders, is that the Mormon religon doesn’t care about people as long as appearences are preserved. Hey, as long as this couple on the outside seems happy who cares that the wife is living an unfulfilled lie of existance. And the husband was obviously taught that the feelings of women do not matter because all that is important to him is providing his own cover. I see now why the church was able to discriminate against blacks for such a long period of time. Because people were turned inward only concerned about themselves and are not taught compassion for their fellow human beings. Not even for their spouse. What a sad empty existance for both of them, and for you too.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 5:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daniel
      Daniel

      She might be a lesbian trying to cover as well.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cam: Who are you to presume you know everything about his and her decision?

      How do you know that they are not actually happy?

      How do you know that by him abstaining that he is not happier?

      I love alcohol, I love to drink. I love to having sex with as many girls as possible. But in the end, I am a happier person when I abstain from those. I know that they are different, so don’t preach to me. I mentioned it because though I am very drawn to certain things, I am actually happy when I do not participate.

      Why are you asking me about schools in Utah? I live in California.

      What is it about their decision that you do not get?

      It’s funny, because there’s a risk of emotional pain in every relationship. Man + woman, man + man, woman + woman; all have the chance to happy or hurt.

      Now think outside your own bais and consider two adults, completely honest with each other, who choose to be together regardless of past histories or vices. Potential for one or both to be hurt? Yes. Potential for one or both to be happy? Yes.

      Is it really your place to condemn two people you don’t even know or to presume that you know what is best for either person? No.

      I’m not here to defend any faith; but I am defending their right to make a choice, especially if they can be honest about it.

      On what authority do you assume that there is no attraction between them at all?

      Consider this, I will admit that I am relatively shallow when it comes to physical appearance, primarily levels of fitness.

      I am not physically attracted to women who are not in shape and are obiese, I’m just not attracted to them.

      That doesn’t mean that if I have a spouse who becomes obiese that would no longer be sexually attracted to that I would simply leave her. Regardless of if there was sexual attraction in the beginning or not.

      Do you not see the fallacy you are spewing?

      You act as if you know what’s best for a couple you do not even know. Why not support people in their adult decisions, if they succeed, continue to support, if they fail, continue to support?

      Apr 16, 2010 at 6:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      What don’t you understand, JOSEPH? You’re straight. Are you going to marry a guy? No. Ty is 9probably0 gay. WhY would he marry a WOMAN? BECAUSE OF HIS RELIGION CONDEMNING HOMOSEXUALITY, JOSEPH,, THAT’S WHY.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 10:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      What don’t you understand, JOSEPH? You’re straight. Are you going to marry a guy? No. Ty is (probably) gay. Why would he marry a WOMAN? BECAUSE OF HIS RELIGION CONDEMNING HOMOSEXUALITY, JOSEPH,, THAT’S WHY.

      Apr 16, 2010 at 10:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      Maybe he wants to procreate and have a family with the woman who would give him children?

      I don’t know him, I don’t know the details.

      But neither do you!!!

      How do you know that he’ll be unhappy? You don’t know him, you don’t know her. You may have a different perception, but that doesn’t qualify you to condemn him for his decision.

      What don’t you understand about that?

      He admitted he’s still and will still be attracted men, that attraction is not a choice, but as soon as he makes a decision that goes against his natural desires he’s condemned and demonized? Good crap… Do you feel betrayed? Is that the real problem? Why do you have such a problem with him living his life the way he wants to?

      The funny thing is that he can choose the church, choose to do something else, but he is choosing something that you don’t want him to do.

      Just let the guy make his choices, right or wrong, in the end let him have his experience and stop crying about someone else that doesn’t directly effect you.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 12:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      Alot of you are misguided gays. You’ve become so politicized and indoctrinated in the gay cult, you fail to see human sexuality beyond the political prism. You’re basically prisoners of your own political causes.

      In a sense, you’ve become the new puritans. Narrow-minded, gay ghetto-centric, unable to accept that a man with same-sex attractions is not necessarily defined on the basis of these attractions…you name it. You truly are pathetic clowns.

      I yearn for the day when the current gay cult no longer exists and that you gay guys live up to the promise you made when fighting for your own liberation – ie. to break down the closet doors, not simply move them to another spot in your own psyche.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 1:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jeffree
      jeffree

      What do we know about this couple? What don’t we know?

      He has admitted he is attracted to men. We know that. We don’t know if he has any attraction to women. We also don’t know if his fiancee is str8, bi or lesbian.

      Look, my gut reaction says that their marriage is a *bad, even terrible idea* but we DO NOT KNOW what conversations they have had about what role sex/ procreation will play in their partnership.

      I know happy stable str8 couples in their 7th decade who have partnered up: one is incapable of sex (gee guess which one), the other is uninterested (hmmm who may that be?). They want someone to JUST BE THERE. To wake up next to, to talk about news with, to partner in bridge.

      I could not personally bear to be married to a woman, but hey I am not Ty ManishField. If they BOTH agree to settle on the realities of their marriage — not alot of sex, someone kind to spend time with, but possibly no kids without adoption, then FINE, get married. It’s a huge compromise for ANYONE tying the knot.

      We lgb’s don’t want other peoplle to determine our eligibility to marry who we want. i don’t want to scream ILLEGAL FOUL when a g/b guy marries a woman.

      I still think it’s probably a bad idea, but i won’t get in the way of a couple who enters into a partnership knowing *full well* the deck is stacked against them.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 2:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Noah
      Noah

      Jason,

      Wow! Just wow! I think you need a shovel for all that horse sh@T you’re throwing out.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 2:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Bom1830, thank you for your comments. Jason and SpiritEdRandy, thank you as well. It is so easy to hate than to love. One of Satan’s most powerful tools is to undermine truth with the use of humanistic secular intellect.

      Unless it can be seen, felt, or touched, no one can believe it. That’s where faith must be exercised. A predominate majority (though not all) that follow the GLBT movement have hardened their hearts to Christ and Heavenly Father.

      It is true that Christ died for the sins of all man, but you see the rejection of Christ who is the truth by far too many.

      Bom1830, I liked what you said of the Romans and Greeks. The Romans particularly embraced homosexuality. And in so embracing they also vehemently and viciously persecuted any professed Christian. Emperors Diocletian, Nero, Domitian, and the lot fell hard against the Christians having them all brutally murdered by the millions. And yet, they embraced homosexuality. They also embraced all forms of idolatry (which homosexuality is a form of) by worshipping false gods and their emperors. The males particularly worshipped the male body which drove the homosexual practices in Rome. Of course, we know what happened to Rome eventually and its mighty empire.

      Every time someone tries to persecute the Christians and seed of Abraham, the wrath of God crushed them. Sodom and Gomorrah, the Egyptians, the Romans, the Greeks, Nazi Germany.

      I loved that analogy, Bom1830. Proponents of gay marriage swore that no harm would ever come upon those of faith. That hasn’t happened. Churches in Europe, Canada, and Massachusetts are being sued by homosexual couples because they refuse to let them use their facilities. Marriages usually do take place in churches. With the exception of the Episcopal church, no other Christian branch of faith would support homosexuality itself. It would be unfair to ask a church to compromise their faith in order to follow a worldly decree.

      The fact is this: The U.S. government can’t protect religious freedom. And the majority of practicing homosexuals do not want to see religious freedom protected either. Most would want so much to see churches suffer. The delight of human suffering brings the absence of love. Satan drives contention. His craftiness bellows the flames of hate.

      In these last days, evil will be called good, and good will be called evil. It is now more prevalent than ever. But a friend made an excellent remark to me yesterday. ONLY the Spirit of God has the power to discern truth. Until one is willing to open his or her heart to the Spirit, they will always be filled with that contention that rebels against those things which are good.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 8:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      I’m not coming from a religious angle on this. I’m simply forming my opinions on the basis of research and fact. My opinions are informed by my experiences in this great big world.

      I think it’s terribly sad that the gay community has been hijacked by sleaze merchants peddling their wares under the noble “gay rights” notion. No wonder some of you are so desperate to keep the gay community segregated. It’s a means of cornering the market and maintaining the supply of useful idiots to buy your product.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 9:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David
      David

      Well Ty, welcome to Charlie Crist’s world. He’s got many more years of experience living the lie than you do. Next time you’re down Florida way ask him how growin’ a beard has made his life happier and more complete. Sad. And pathetic.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 11:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ScottDC
      ScottDC

      Jason, you are so desperate to prove your bisexuality that you are ignoring the facts here. REad this guys book, then get on your high horse. He is attracted to men, period.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 11:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Prof
      Prof

      @Scotty: Another classic example of a Mormon ignoring the truth to promote their own twisted worldview and revisionist history. Perhaps you missed the part where Constantine, emperor of Rome, converted to Christianity after a dramatic vision on the battlefield? And Christianity subsequently became the official religion of both the Eastern and Western empires? And various church councils met under the authority of the Roman emperor, including the Council of Nicaea, which gave us the Bible in its present-day form? Oh, right–you’ll say that by that time they had lost the “truth,” and you’ll fervently believe that because McConke and other general authorities wrote it, and they must be right because you feel good about it.

      I’ve worked for a lot of churches, including Episcopal, Methodist (where I, in fact, provided piano accompaniment for a gay wedding) and Lutheran (where partnered gays and lesbians are, since September, allowed to serve in the ministry). These branches of Christianity seem to be “support[ing] homosexuality itself,” and they have done it without any “worldly decree” dictating that. It is closed-minded, insular cults like Mormonism that resist embracing all of God’s children and point to inaccurate historical facts and outright lies to support themselves, before justifying themselves by turning to faith as a source of authority when the former fails. And that is why I left.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 12:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      One of the reasons why so many so called “bisexuals” marry the opposite gender is the “acceptance” factor, knowing that if they’re Mormon for example, their cult wouldn’t accept them unless they married to the opposite sex. Its more about denial than anything else and a lot of “bi’s” can’t accept the gay component side of their orientation as a result of centuries of religious brainwashing and societal stigmatization.

      Scotty, No. 169….”
      I loved that analogy, Bom1830. Proponents of gay marriage swore that no harm would ever come upon those of faith.”

      FYI, NO harm has come to those of faith or their cults. Nobody is preventing you or anybody from worshipping any way they choose. What right does the Mormon cult or any religious cult have to deny us the freedom to have a civil marriage? Religious cults do NOT own marriage, there IS a difference between a religious and a civil marriage. The states own marriage through the issuance of a marriage license, not cults which have absolutely NO business interfering in state matters that don’t concern them nor in the political process for which they are granted tax exemption, full representation without taxation. Wherease, gays have full taxation without representation and according to the 14th amendment of the constitution, the rights of the minority must be guaranteed and protected. Your cult deliberately set about defeating civil marriage equality in California, donating more than $22 million along with others. Now tell me, that has nothing to do with hate? How would you like it if we as a voting bloc decided to take away your right to worship and deny you a marriage license issued by the secular state government barring you from a religious marriage ceremony? We’re not that hateful nor do we support discrimination against any group let alone denying or taking away rights already gained. Nobody is preventing you from worshipping or what to believe in, least of all us. In a democracy, you expand rights, you don’t contract them and eliminate an entire group of people from the rest of society which is what Prop. 8 spearheaded by your cult did. That’s nothing more than pure hatred.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 1:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      The driving force of all of these religions is money. If I were the head of a religion or cult I would accept all people gay or straight. More members mean more money to “fuel the engine ” it is the same with politicians. Mike Huckabee Just made some horrible statements about gay people. What a dope! If you are running for office you don’t ostracise an entire group of people. In his case it is not Just money. ..it is votes.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Bom

      “I will continue to Pray for understanding on the Gay community to understand the Laws of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what it means to be married to a woman and not a man.”

      First off, Jesus Christ was very explicit about The Law – there are two: “love God with your entire self” and “love your neighbor as yourself”.

      Love-making between two people of the same gender does not violate either law, bom, but claiming that it does violates the second one. So, while homosexuals are not in violation of the law Christ gave, you and the Mormon church are.

      Next, your derogatory assumption that the “Gay community” doesn’t understand, is another violation of Christ’s law I mentioned above.

      Additionally, your implied assertion that Christ, and the Gospels, somewhere and somehow restrict marriage to “married to a woman and not a man” is false.

      Now, I realize that the LDS has a separate, uniquely created text with a questionable history, and yes, LDS members are entitled to the same level of respect for their beliefs as anyone else is – still, the Bible used by the majority of Christians does not contain any statement limiting marriage to heterosexual couples.

      And, the law Christ did gave, ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ intrinsically forbids denying some couples, like same-sex couples, any right, blessing, liberty, respect you want for your own relationship.

      “Every culture since the beginning of time it has been between one man and one woman for traditional marriage. History shows that to be true.”

      That is categorically false. For one thing, much of the OT text permits and even celebrates polygamous marriages. Many, many cultures have allowed and even celebrates a variety of forms of marriage, including between two people of the same gender.

      If you are simply uninformed, I recommend that you educate yourself on the history of human sexuality and marriage. If you knew the truth, but lied anyways, repentance is a good starting place for you.

      “Every society that has Homosexuality as their core is no longer here i.e Romans and Greeks.”

      Wrong again, and dishonest in many, many ways. The Romans are not gone, their culture changed, their government changed, but there are still people living in the city of Rome who are descended physically and culturally from the “ancient Romans”. The same is true of the Greeks – Athens is not uninhabited. Homosexuality was generally accepted/tolerated, and even sometimes celebrated, in China and Japan. Those cultures have changed in some ways, but the people living there are still culturally and genetically the descendants of the previous generations who were more accepting of homosexuality.

      There are, to this day and despite fundamentalist religionists, native people in the U.S. and Africa and South America, who accept homosexuality as part of the diversity of human experience.

      When you have to lie to defend your theology, there is something wrong with it.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 3:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      @Cassandra. Great point. I still say one of the biggest obstacles for gay rights in this country are these self loathing closet cases. I could care less about them but when they start using their money to take away my and my partners rights it Just is so wrong. We have been together for 20 years. A woman I work with has been married 3 times since we have been together. Now that is an example of the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman!

      Apr 17, 2010 at 4:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      Cassandra, thanks for bringing these points to the discussion. You’ve put some time and thought into your beliefs, which is appreciated. True and agreed, there are cultures, historically and modern, that allow various forms of same-sex partnerships. True and agreed, there are people living in Italy and Greece. True and agreed, marriage is not explicitly defined in the Bible. (Interestingly enough, marriage and its derivatives appear in the KJV Bible 11 times, and it becomes instantly apparent that not much can be defined or described about marriage with only 11 references. We likely need to turn to other sources to track the development and evolution of modern marriage. Furthermore, the word marriage is primarily used in the Bible in reference to “the marriage of the Lamb”. Another important consideration is the fact that Christian churches interpret these references so differently. Some claim celibacy, others plural marriage, and others someplace in the middle?).

      I want to point something out, and this is done with kind inquiry to spur discussion and not mean spirited to induce ill feelings, hurtful banter, or accusations. Moreover, please be careful about making assumptions of the beliefs I espouse as you read; I am simply asking you to consider things you did not address in your post. So, this is solicitation and kind inquiry for more information, not an assertion of my own beliefs, and not an argument against your beliefs.

      Here’s what I want to point out: BOM didn’t lie to defend his theology. He simply has a different theology that explains phenomenon contrastingly different than your system of beliefs, and to argue that he has lied is to suggest, quite possibly, that your belief system is founded on truth. In other words, to suggest that he is lying about something for which there is little tangible evidence is erroneous unless you can produce tangible evidence that his beliefs are false. He derives rule relationships with his environment based on his observation of the world (likely pulled from a knowledge base of other believers), which you have also done, and it could therefore be argued that you are also lying to defend your system of beliefs. But I don’t think either of you are lying. The pair of you really, truly believe what has been asserted.

      Consider these points:

      Christ was explicit about the laws you presented for discussion. Those two laws, however, and as far as I understand, replaced even more explicit laws contained in the Law of Moses. To my knowledge, which is limited on the subject so correct me if I’m wrong, people were put to death under the Old Law for engaging in homosexual acts (at least that is what the law required).

      Obviously, the counter to your argument deals with whether the the New Law did away with regulations and stipulations in the Old Law (the Law of Moses) OR provides a new system of belief but still founded on principles espoused within the Old Law.

      This, therefore, challenges the premise of the argument that “love-making between two people of the same gender does not violate either law”. And the topography of love-making certainly needs to be considered to know whether it violates law.

      In addition, the Old Law communicates how God himself views certain types of conduct. If God does not change, as he asserts in scripture, his views on conduct likely have not changed. And we also know that God is Love. If he loves homosexuals but does not condone any sexual conduct beyond the limitations he defines (as he did in the Old Law), does he really, honestly love homosexuals? And maybe, so we don’t get hung up on the example, it would be better to use the situation of bestiality. Does he really love a person with desires to engage animals sexually if he has asked that mortals not participate? (And I know right away you’re going to say that it’s much different when animals are involved because they are nonverbal, unable to consent, etc. That is not relevant for the point I’m trying to make. Put another way, can God really love the sinner but not the sin?).

      This is an important point to consider and has many implication for Christians.

      Let me illustrate with another example. Does the parent who asserts love with words of acceptance and affirmation truly love his/her child when he/she places restrictions on what the child consumes in his/her diet? Does the parent truly love the friends of his/her child when the parents requests that the child not engage those friends because of potential consequences (e.g., jail time for criminal activity)?

      If it is possible for God to hate the sin and love the sinner, it is quite possible he can teach his followers to love the sinner and hate the sin. The implication then is that, just like a child asked not to indulge in sweets before meal time, what may seem unkind may be an act of love.

      It is also possible that even with a profession of faith in God, people may still engage sinners in unkind ways, which has relevance when Christianity is attacked because Christian don’t live up to the Christian Code at all times.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 5:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • James George
      James George

      I find it so presumptuous and typical that so many of you are looking at someone else’s life and life choices and making the judgment that it is “wrong”. What is right for him is not anyone’s call (or business) but HIS! So many of you would take your own life experience and fears and throw it on someone else as if there was only ONE WAY! This is exactly the same as straight people judging me and saying my sexuality isn’t something I am equipped to decide. I don’t care if anyone is having sex with a man, woman, transsexual, or all of them. I only care if they are good people trying their best to follow the dictates of their hearts. If you have no allowance for someone else’s beliefs, you deserve non yourself.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 6:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Robert, NYC:

      If religious freedom was being protected then how come second-graders in Massachusetts are being forced to accept the ideologies and practices shared in the children’s book “King and King” without the parents even knowing about it?

      How come a Methodist-ran camping site in Massachusetts was able to be sued by a homosexual couple because the church there refused to let them use their grounds because their lifestyle violated the doctrinal teachings of that church?

      How come Catholic adoption agencies in Europe and Canada have been sued for refusing to allow a child to be put in a family of a same-sex couple? Are Catholics able to have their religious freedom?

      How come you are making your platform from a website that promotes pornography? All gender-attractions aside, do you think God finds pornography of any kind appealing, pleasing, or good?

      It is true that birds of a feather flock together.

      The GLBT organization swore that no religious entity would be subject to practices that were contrary to their doctrinal teachings. That hasn’t happened. The government assured us that nothing would be taught in schools in a way that was contrary to someone else’s beliefs. That has only happened for anti-Christians. That is why prayer and pledges of allegiance have been removed from school. However, teaching and promoting homosexuality over heterosexuality to grade-school children continues.

      Robert, I’m very certain if the United States had a vote that made it illegal for Christians to marry, then I’m certain that that churches would form their own structure apart from the United States in which to bind couples. The Christian churches already teach and adopt many practices that are contrary to U.S. government law.

      Here are example of a few things that are not illegal in the United States, but do go against the teachings of Christianity:

      –committing adultery
      –taking the Lord’s name in vain
      –bearing false witnesses against your neighbors
      –dishonoring mothers and fathers
      –coveting
      –worshipping other gods; idolatry
      –all manners of fornication which includes lude behavior, sexual promiscuity, pre-marital sex, and pornography

      The list goes on into eternity of things the United States government deems good, but the God of Christianity knows otherwise.

      If gay marriage were ever legalized nationwide, then it will only open the door more to the “marriage for any reason” principle in which ALL person’s rights must be observed, including multiple marriages, marriages to animals, or even marriages to inanimate objects. There will be people that demand those marriage rights. And then, what would be the importance of marriage? Everybody would be doing it. It would be casualized kinda’ like what America has done with the image of sex. Rather than being something sacred or meaningful, it loses it’s credence. It then becomes nearly impossible to teach your kids the importance and sacredness of it. All they see on TV or in magazines or learn in school is about a predominately liberal position where everything is casual and holds no real, significant meaning.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 10:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @J:

      Ryan, I guess I don’t see this the same way as you do. This is not a healthy relationship these two have. It never will be. He hates that he’s attracted to men and she’s engaged to a man she’s only known for three months. He’s not going to love her they way she should be loved. People can do what they want but that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. I pray they don’t have kids.

      J, did you know that Ty and Danielle have been very close friends since junior high school? How many years ago do you think that was? The self-righteous are always quick to judge the righteous. Did you know that Ty has been completely honest with his fiance’ since the very beginning? How could she not know? He co-authored a book about his life in which he has shared with her.

      Saying that Ty can’t love Danielle the way she should be loved is simply your opinion–and a judgmental one at that. Are you so quick to put restrictions on the power of God and the Spirit? God is all-powerful, my friend, and only God has the power to change hearts, minds, and lives. Who are we to say that God doesn’t have the power to change us, to complete us, or to mold us to meet the accords of His righteousness?

      What is it that Romans 12: 2 says?

      “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”

      Those conformed to this world are the very same that refuse to follow another spiritual commandment–to deny ourselves and take up our crosses and follow Him. Because when we deny ourselves we are removing the pride in ourselves. We are rendered into humility. Then can we feel the essence of our Heavenly Father’s love. God resists the proud. Refusing to deny self is extremely proud. J, are you so willing to deny yourself? Are you so willing to put aside your own zeal for others?

      The followers of Christ are not expected to adopt worldy decrees. He expects us to fight against those that deliver themselves unto pride and rebuke love which is God:

      1 Timothy says: “Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.”

      This was prophetic. He knew that the saints would have to fight the good fight of faith in a world that has lost truth.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 11:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      RYAN:), that you believe that god hates homosexual conduct and that it requires the death penalty in the Old Testament is proof positive for me that it’s foolish men that wrote this draconian offensive nonsense, not god.

      Apr 17, 2010 at 11:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      Why is this a religious debate and fomenting anger by both sides?

      Why can’t the homosexuals agree to disagree with his decision and still wish them luck in their marriage?

      Why do the religious persons Feel the need to push doctrinal issues?

      I can agree to disagree.

      There are churches that have openly gay clergy, don’t agree with it, but it’s their right just as much it is Ty’s right to marry a woman and feel the way he feels.

      Get over yourselves, both sides.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 12:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @nikko:
      Nikko, please read the preface to my previous comment again. You missed something…

      Apr 18, 2010 at 12:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • friendofthebride
      friendofthebride

      thank you! I so agree with what you said. I wish people would stop being so judgmental. More people should realize that it’s ok to not agree with what other people do and believe but it is so narrow minded to pass judgment so quickly and be so full of discrimination and hate towards those who choose a different path.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 2:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevinsister
      Kevinsister

      @Joseph: right on!

      Apr 18, 2010 at 2:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark
      Mark

      @sh2478: I know several men with same gender attraction who have been married to women for years are still extremely happy, and who don’t look for sex on craigs list. Why can’t people just be left alone to follow whatever they feel their hearts are telling them? Why can’t you people be open to the idea that by getting married Ty really IS being true to himself? I just don’t understand. I am attracted to guys and am a 15 year convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I DO NOT meet guys on Craig’s list, or anywhere else. I don’t feel disenfranchised or marginalized by the Church. I just graduated, at the age of 36, from BYU–Idaho where I have had discussions about homosexuality with many of the faculty, administration, and my closest friends and never EVER had a negative experience or had anything negative said to or about me.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 3:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark
      Mark

      @Cam: I have met Ty Mansfield and there is no dishonesty or deception in him. He is also not a fool. Neither is Danielle, although I have not met her personally. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in something bigger than self, it’s called FAITH IN GOD. Why isn’t it possible that a gay man can have a completely loving relationship with a woman. Doesn’t the bible say, “If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth;” and “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible”? (Matt 9: 23 and 19: 26)

      Apr 18, 2010 at 3:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Scotty, No. 180….

      “If gay marriage were ever legalized nationwide, then it will only open the door more to the “marriage for any reason” principle in which ALL person’s rights must be observed, including multiple marriages, marriages to animals, or even marriages to inanimate objects. There will be people that demand those marriage rights. And then, what would be the importance of marriage? Everybody would be doing it. It would be casualized kinda’ like what America has done with the image of sex. Rather than being something sacred or meaningful, it loses it’s credence. It then becomes nearly impossible to teach your kids the importance and sacredness of it. All they see on TV or in magazines or learn in school is about a predominately liberal position where everything is casual and holds no real, significant meaning.”

      Well now Scotty, there are now eight countries that allow us to enter into civil marriage (not religious marriage), in Holland its been almost ten years. Name one instance where people are asking to be married to their pets, their sisters, brothers, uncles, aunts, grandparents in any of those countries? Before YOU start judging us, you should look to your own disgusting cult that up until the tail-end of the 19th century allowed polygamy among heterosexual member cultists, ALL straight. That wasn’t the result of the existence of gays or the eventual introduction of same-sex marriage either. Not one gay person has been convicted of polygamy since same-sex marriage has been allowed nor have they demanded to marry inanimate objects. Amazing how the divorce rate, one in two straight marriages failing, has been an epidemic among straights long before gay equality issues were on the map, let alone same-sex civil marriage.

      The fact that your cult saw fit to discriminate against us in California is proof positive that it judges and condemns. YOU are nothing more than a total moron and a hypocrite just like the cult you believe in.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 8:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David in Houston
      David in Houston

      @Robert, NYC: Couldn’t have said it better myself, Robert. His feeble attempt at using such an inane slippery slope argument, “People will marry inanimate objects”, shows how this person is utterly devoid of logic or reason. Don’t bother trying to have a conversation with them, it is a complete waste of time.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 10:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      There are many gay people who think playing house the same way most of society does is the gig to follow. It will be a nightmare no doubt for the both of them.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 11:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      David in Houston, No. 190…exactly right about that and thank you. The bottom line is that most cults are businesses, its about the money and the power it brings. Without it, Prop.8 would have been defeated. These evil cults buy elections and politicians and mostly all vote republican. The catholic cult donated more than $1 million via the Knights of Columbus to make it succeed. They’re working in tandem with the Mormon cult of course, along with some of the repressive evangelical cults and other right wing groups such as NOM, Focus on the Family, the teabaggers et al. All a bunch of sick psycho talkers that have come to embody the GOP.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 11:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Robert, NYC: The truth is you have absolutely no interest in civil discourse or intellectual honesty.

      It’s your right, but it still makes you look as stupid the people you claim to be stupid.

      Constantly calling religions cults, though it may be a correct use of the work when the dictionary definition is understood, is a poor attempt to denigrate these groups.

      Also, calling someone is the TEA party movement a tea-bagger is completely stupid. Tea-bagging is the act of placing your scrotum on someone else, a tea-bagger is someone performing the act, so in context, who are they putting their balls on? Who are the tea-bagged?

      Now, onto the real discussion.

      The LGBT community has ran a horrible campaign to get marriage, let’s be completely honest. The issue is not the same as the civil rights movement. HOWEVER, before you start crying and calling me a bigot for no reason, I’m going to share a winning and intellectually honest strategy for you to use.

      All of these cults that you like to cry about, they are the key to allowing you to marry. It’s called the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

      There are churches that have openly service homosexual clergy, Gene Robinson is one who initially comes to mind. These churches have the right to support or condemn homosexuality as their doctrinal teachings. The Episcopal Church supports it. By not allowing the Episcopal Church to marry two persons of the same gender, their 1st Amendment right is being infringed upon. Just the same would be if someone sued the LDS church to marry them, it would be an infringement on their rights as well.

      Now, with that established, we need to be intellectually honest about the issue. Even if you abhor religion, as many seem to, this strategy is necessary if you actually want to win.

      I’ve shared this with one of my gay friends and he’s so stuck on, “It’s not about freedom of religion it’s about my freedom” crap that he refuses to see that the freedom of religion directly effects his personal freedom.

      It’s a matter of government being removed from control over our lives. Government really has no place regulating marriage anyway. And I could care less if you want to marry another guy or if two women want to marry the same guy.

      I’ve been married, it’s not easy and if some guy is dumb enough to live with two or more women then so be it, “Good luck jackass!” That’s how I fell.

      So here is the winning argument in bullet points:

      * Other churches 1st Amendment Right is being infringed, by baning same sex marriage
      * Other churches 1st Amendment Right won’t be infringed by refusing to perform same sex marriage
      * Government has no Constitutional authority to regulate marriage
      * Who gives a crap if two or more consenting adults want to marry ; orgies aren’t outlawed and people do them all the time; these people can simply just live together and still have the communal lifestyle they want
      * “Traditional marriage” is a nearer concept, if we want to really be traditional, then allow plural marriage and lower the age of consent since people married earlier when the life expectancy was “traditionally” much shorter

      I’m personally not a proponent of same sex marriage, I simply came to a conclusion that the argument against it is intellectually dishonest and I am an advocate for the Constitution, which is the reason for government to stop regulating it.

      Apr 18, 2010 at 12:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @David in Houston:

      David in Houston, God loves you! :)

      Apr 18, 2010 at 2:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Robert, NYC:

      Robert, NYC:

      God love you! :)

      Apr 18, 2010 at 2:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Men of Queerty,

      As I embrace this beautiful Sabbath Day, I wanted to let you all know that God loves each and every one of you unconditionally!

      :)

      “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

      Blessed are they that amourn: for they shall be comforted.

      Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

      Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

      Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

      Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

      Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

      Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

      Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

      Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.”

      Apr 18, 2010 at 2:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • EC
      EC

      I, too, am good friends with Ty. I do not wish to speak for him, but he is the person I communicated with often right around my coming out phase to my LDS family. He, along with that book, helped me through it. I appreciate his love and support and I congratulate him on his decision to get married.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 12:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gilber
      gilber

      they are deviants,not socially but physically, any sexually and dichotomous “couple” displaying sexual dimorphism instead of sexual monomorphism is inverted and a blatant sexual deviancy and inversion,try to increase the sexual dimorphism of two unlike “couple” and you will see into what kind of mess you get into.the physiological process of reproduction(insemination) takes sexual and reproductive deviancy,it is one of its many costs,that homosexuals have to pay in the demiurge’s putrid creation.it takes pseudohomosexuality,pseudobestiality,and pseudohermaphroditism.reproduction is a physiological process whereas sexuality is a psychological one,you do not need to do oral sex to someone that has a clear physical deformity in order to breed,nor a man needs to become a pseudolesbian,a pseudowoman or a psudohermaphrodite in order to inseminate,which is a biological function.it is the patwhay to the product ,not the product that gives the conditions. sexual deviancy occurs whenever two unlike non related structures pretend to belong as naturally and universally as only isomorphic couples really do.inventing and fabricating a sexual belonging that is never there is one of the sexual deviant best skills.therefore a pair of male reproduces with a pair of females ,two completely different species,one has one organ and the other has a totally different one,if there were a third sex to breed with ,but with higher sexual dimorphism, wouldn’t it be a putrid and disgusting sexual perversion to consume and be aroused with it? aren’t you ashamed of pretending that such a thing wrongly called heterosexuality even exist? don’t you want to realize that reproduction is occurring with someone you are not physically part of? keep playing and consuming HOMOSEXUALITY, in is two different versions,it is the only real and genetically made sexuality,!!!KEEP BEING MORE PROMISCUOUS THAT HOMOSEXUALS ,IT IS NOT US THE ONES WHO SMELL NOR SWALLOW DISGUSTING PUS AND SECRETIONS FROM OTHER SORT OF ORGANISMS NOT SEXUALLY RELATED TO OUR OWN SEX KIND.keep faking and pretending.this is the minimum let’s see the maximum!!!!!!homosexual don’t need higher levels of sexual dimorphism in order to realize that sexual deviancy and inversion is taking place ,and that sexual games with other unlike structures, be human ,animal or extraterrestrial is a putrid mental decease.or do you think it is hot having to see a disgusting uterus squirting blood ,pus and nasty uterine fart? should i allow myself to have such a nasty genetic condition on my partner? or should i dump her like a disgusting peace of garbage? or should i believe that a woman is not going to turn me into a pseudowoman? Is a woman really able to make a male feels masculine or rather feminine? of course feminine, no masculine male ever put his senses over a feminine nerve and pretend that he is not being turn into a lesbian,is sad that two lesbian really belong genetically but a poor heterosexual male can only adopt lesbianism, adopt someone’s sex and reject their very own. how disgusting and sick.machismo is a false social construction in order for masculine males to perform and consume femininity,and be active part of it, and not even feel like a hermaphrodite, while also imagining that they are a sexual extension of the other sex’s nervous and endocrine system.it allows them to bind ,absorb,feel and deposit sexual sensation from non related body parts that the very opposite sex acknowledge to be disgusting an sadly inferiorly ugly.hermaphroditism is not enjoyed by real sexual straights,the homosexuals. the good thing that real sexual straights have is that we totally agree that we are two completely DISTINCT and DISSIMILAR organisms apart,and that each sex has their OWN form,composition,behavior and therefore their own sexuality, being that of the females what is called lesbianism.this is what females are genetically made to give and make feel to any other sexually passive nervous system willing to absorb and feel sensory information from not related sexual systems, different than their own. expansion of lesbianism by physical means of mismatch and asymmetrical coupling with other sexual forms ,will not be tolerated by any means by authentic masculine homosexuals males.bonding and absorption to different energies ,can only turn a masculine male into a pseudowoman.after all aren’t those sexually deviant males able and willing to feel what a vagina feels like in spite of not being born with one? you can be certain that the highest physical probability of experiencing sexual deviancy,inversion,mismatch ,disparity,artificial sexual belonging ,sexual adoption instead of sexual belonging,and pseudohomosexuality, is only had by sexually dimorphic couples,not by isomorphic ones.isomorphism is always right ,disparity is always wrong !!!!! think long and hard about this one.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      GILBERT, what the fuck was that mess you just wrote??!! Did you forget to take your meds?! Good grief.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 12:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • George95121
      George95121

      Kent
      Dust off your Book of Mormon and read Alma 24:30. I sincerely hope your heart softens from the bitter comments you reflect. Leave the door open down the road. Circumstances in your life may change.
      Your brother,

      George

      Apr 19, 2010 at 1:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Joseph, No. 193….Actually, the day many of us stop denigrating these religious denominations or sects by calling them cults which is what they are, will be the day they stop denigrating people that produce psycho talkers who suggest that allowing same-sex marriage would herald the re-emergency of polygamy, incest and an increase in drug abuse. If that’s not denigration, I don’t know what is. I suppose you wouldn’t call that stupid? They can’t even produce the evidence of such an absurd and offensive statement to back up that assumption. The last time I checked, the Mormon cult at one time promoted polygamy, ALL straights, long before same-sex marriage was in our vocabulary.

      Thank you for the lesson in condescension. I do know the difference between “teabagger” and tea-partyer”. I use the former to piss the bastards off.

      As for government involvement in marriage, that will never change. I don’t know of any modern society where the government plays no part. What I object to are religious cults who seem to think they own civil marriage that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the religious component. States issue licenses, not religious cults. The sooner they learned that, the better. Let the cults issue their own and forego the benefits and privileges at the federal and state level. There is a conflict when states issue licenses that allow religious wackos to have a religious marriage as opposed to the civil vehicle. In France, the civil ceremony is the only legal one, the way it should be in every civilized society.

      Read more: http://www.queerty.com/gay-mormon-ty-mansfield-is-getting-married-to-a-woman-20100415/#ixzz0lYq9gaaS

      Apr 19, 2010 at 11:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Dear brothers and sisters!

      (And yes, I do consider each of you my siblings, both because God created all of us and because we share the challenge of figuring out the best response to homosexual feelings. We are family, more than you know.)

      I care about each person reading this. And although the view many faithful Christians, Jews, and Muslims have about homosexuality does not agree with the views that some of you embrace, I want you to know that I do understand your way of thinking to a large degree, and I know that you are sincere when you support the principles that are a part of gay-affirmative philosophies. I appreciate your efforts to make this a better world for all, and I join you in that desire.

      But the politically correct way of thinking about homosexuality that is gaining in popularity these days is not the only way of thinking about it that makes sense. There are other perfectly sane and quite healthy possibilities, and I hope that many of you will keep a truly open mind and realize that the millions of people who disagree with your views are not ignorant, closed-minded, behind the times, or bigoted just because they sincerely see things differently than you have.

      The typical gay perspective sees gayness as an intrinsic part of who we are if we recognize homosexual attractions at some point in our lives. That this is an unchangeable and a positive part of who we are. And for those who have adopted gay identities, it is often a threatening kind of feeling to realize that not everybody in this situation believes what they believe about it and that huge numbers of people make a different kind of choice for their lives. It can really rock some gay people’s boat to find out that some people who have felt strong attractions towards people of their own gender can actually find very fulfilling and healthy relationships and profound happiness in giving rebirth to their faith or in marrying an opposite-sex spouse and giving their children what a man and a woman together are designed to be for their children. Yes, this fulfilling and joyful situation can be developed for the person who is willing to work for such blessings and have faith in God’s timing.

      Some people, in justifying homosexual choices for their lives, use the term “mixed orientation marriage” for such unions. But in reality, we’re just talking about families that benefit from the unique gifts of both genders, the ideal kind of family, the kind of family that has existed from the beginning of time (in harmony with God’s loving plan for our eternal happiness).

      Are a man and a woman going to have to face challenges in their relationship if one of them is not strongly sexually attracted to the other? Of course. Is a marriage doomed in such circumstances? Of course not. Every marriage relationship faces difficult challenges at times; it’s part of the experience. And I’d be willing to bet that almost every marriage relationship has sexual challenges at certain points in time. Having experienced homosexual attractions and homosexual love in my life, I have great empathy for those who feel that homosexual relationships are the most natural to them. But I can also tell you that such sexual attractions do not have to limit what you choose for your life in the least.

      A wise friend has said that a man with same-gender attractions can still engage his wife as a woman, as a person with a unique set of gifts, strengths, beauties, weaknesses, and shortcomings while honestly acknowledging his own…including those homosexual feelings. By doing this in a healthy, realistic manner, he is not using her or masking his true feelings in the least. No marriage pairing is perfect. We just need to be healthy and conscious of our human weakness and honor the covenants we make in marriage to consecrate and to give and to receive. Sexual attractions and impulses are just that…attractions and impulses. Nobody should allow base instincts to make final decisions for our lives.

      Indeed, true love results from a decision — not simply a feeling — and is a divine capacity, the only capacity that can maintain and develop eternally lasting relationships. Popular culture nowadays doesn’t get that, which is why so many relationships fail. Some of the readers here may not appreciate what I’m saying, but I invite you to give it a chance and think about what this could mean for your own increased happiness. The key to a happy and successful relationship is found in a giving heart.

      And to those who feel to respond with scorn and criticism, I simply say that a loving and respectful way of treating each other is a much happier way to live. I understand your concerns, and yet I still choose a way that seems better. Perhaps you could benefit from pondering why we don’t all see things according to gay political correctness.

      YOU DO INDEED HAVE A CHOICE! That freedom to seek what brings true and lasting happiness is available to each one of us. Let’s honor the sincere choices of others and show each other that we truly care about our ultimate happiness, despite any differences of perspective while we’re learning during this mortal experience.

      Love to all,

      Steve
      LDS_SSA@yahoo.com

      Apr 19, 2010 at 1:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PaquitofromtheBlock
      PaquitofromtheBlock

      I banged him.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 3:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      Steve, your diatribe is classic, offensive, dismissive anti-gay lies. It doesn’t work. A homosexual cannot marry a woman he is not attracted to. Period. Stop trying to justify ugly anti-gay sentiment through religion as a means of trying to make homo feelings go away. It doesn’t. That is concrete reality.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 4:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      I wish only happiness for this couple and these readers. BUT this church has used their money politically to affect my happiness. My partner and I have been together for 20 years. Because we cannot legally marry we have to pay over 400 a month for his health insurance because he is self employed. If we were married he could be on my plan at work for almost nothing. Last year my appendix burst and ended up in the Icu He came very close to getting kicked out of my room because he wasn’t “family ”

      When I think of all of the good the money used by the Mormon and Catholic churches to defeat gay marriage it makes me sick. They are supposed to be Christian organizations. I think if Christ were alive today he would be appalled

      Apr 19, 2010 at 4:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      I do not wish anyone happiness who thinks my homosexuality to be evil and not god’s intent for creation. You don’t have my blessings. You have my condemnation for the suffering you have caused the world over.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 5:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joshua
      Joshua

      Ty was an inspiration to me. He was one of the first Mormons with same-sex attractions that I ever met. It took a lot of courage for him to stand up and be true to himself, and it saddens me that he is being punished for it. Thanks in part to his openness, I was able to follow suit and become open myself. I was able to become comfortable with who I am.

      That openness helped me to get married to a wonderful woman last year, and life couldn’t be better. There are difficulties associated with a mixed-orientation, one of the biggest being the opposition by the gay community, as evidenced by the strong opposition here. My hope is that one day the gay community could be more accepting of people who are a bit different. But despite the difficulties, my marriage to my wife has been my greatest blessings. I don’t think my marriage could have survived if I was still closeted.

      From what I hear what Ty is doing, he is on the right path. Openness and honesty are key in a good relationship, and he seems to have both of those down pat.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 7:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gilber
      gilber

      steve heterosexuality do not exist it is a physical and mental condition based upon the very HOMOSEXUALITY itself. if you don’t want the homosexuality of your own sex,then you will get to choose the HOMOSEXUALITY of any other dissimilar ALTERNATIVE structure. i’m a gnostic with years of studying demonics schemes. Get free and stop mistaking the LIGHT with the forces of DARNESS, you are inverting one with the other. you are BOUNDED TO DARKESS PUTRID “MAXIMA”.This “Maxima” or “Root” is strongly perverted, there’s no purity in it, AT ALL,only the “MAXIMA” that rule over the “head” of the HOMOSEXUALS, their “Ascendant” possess morality because it is symmetric and isomorphic, and can understand what is UNIVERSALLY good and what is not.Something is moral and good when under any condition or change it remains so.This is not the case with mixed sex couples.Homosexuals don’t need to see a maxima in order to understand the minima.The greater the sexual dimorphism and dichotomy in a anti-couple ,the greater the demonic forces operating in it.if only you knew how serious, spiritually and mentally, HETEROPHILIA IS!!!!!!! there cannot be authentic happiness in heterosexual relations because to begin with,they are INVENTING AND FAKING A SEXUAL BELONGING THAT IS NEVER THERE. a couple, in order to be a COUPLE and not an ANTI_COUPLE in this universe, must meet certain physical,physiological and psychological conditions in order to be truly NATURAL, such as isomorphism and mono-sexuality, which means that when a couple do not have the same structure,the same composition and the same physiological functions,then they are inverses of each other, in other words, sexual deviants.This is a dangerous situation, because the depravity and the disgusting aberrations that you get into, because of believing that you are “couple” made for “each other” when you are clearly NOT, are way too many and they have a mental weight, much heavier than homosexuality in its purest non-sexually inverted forms. Sexual “adoptionism” and pseudo-hermaphroditism is only found with the so called “heterosexuals”.They are many sexual acts that these perverts do that are not for the faint of heart,and which are all based upon one or the other form of Homosexuality and its fetishism, such as swallowing and smelling body part,limbs,appendages or internal secretions from NON-sexually related organisms not containing the same fluids or organs, all this with the purpose of experiencing “some” sexual belonging as naturally as homosexuals are designed to HAVE,physically and mentally.Heterophilia is pretty much an obsessive mental sickness.Human homosexuals haven’t seen the heterosexual “MAXIMA” yet!!!, but we are under the illusion of a “MINIMUM”, but you can visualize it by increasing the amount of sexual dimorphism of a putrid “she-male” anti-couple and resolve and magnify even more their condition.what is bad is going to get even worse and what is good and healthy will get healthier,this is why homosexuals MUST be trained into resolving and magnifying the Minimun, and mentally bind the perverts to their respective MAXIMA or ASCENDANT,which is CHAOS and DEFORMITY. One cannot fake a sexual relationship, or mistake a SOCIAL sexual relationship with a NATURAL sexual relationship, which occurs only when couples are built over the same conditions. Heterosexuals are bounded to their Maxima, it control them, but since this Maxima also has a Minima ,it is difficult to see what is what and who is who. it is after all the purpose of this creation ,only by recognizing the Minima and having the skill to magnify it, the homosexuals will be able to see the final state and the Maxima clearer and clearer, until they are able to get to the very source and stem of every putrid thought-form found in this dimension.it will purify homosexual consciousness and their thought-forms even more, because it is going to make them even more STRAIGHT while the sexual invert becomes less and less pseudomorphic.it is therefore not the “heterosexual “Minds” who are purifying and undergoing a cosmic process of cleansing,it is us the homosexual consciousness, that are experiencing a process of actual purification,and this process takes a great deal of energy specially high levels of sexual dimorphism in “heterogeneous anti-couples”, even inhabiting other realms in order to makes us even purer.This cannot be understood by most,because they are only around nine people in this world who posses the complete uncorrupted truth of what is going on. Sadly these poor souls with strong tendency to heterophila don’t know that they are feeding the “sharks”. they are on their way to be even more deceived by the putrid THOUGHT-FORMS of their “Maxima”, which is their root,nothing that they say is neither moral nor good ,it is sadly darkened and tainted by their “MAXIMA”.

      Apr 19, 2010 at 9:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      Stop promoting your Mormonism nonsense, you lying liar. You “now married same sex attracted guys” are either bi or gay. Stop lying like hetero bastards. It is we gay people who are the accepting ones, not you, the “straight’ world. We have been demonized throughout the ages, not you, religious fools.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 12:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      JamesStone, No. 205….exactly! Remember, the money the Mormon sect along with other cults use to defeat equality legislation is all tax free. They get a break by paying NO taxes but have full representation under the 14th amendment, whereas WE, get full taxation without full representation. Its time that changed, time to start a movement to remove tax-exempt status on all religious cults interfering and influencing the outcome of legislation to cause an adverse effect on our rights. Its time to draw a line in the sand. If these bastards want to call the shots, then they should be made to pay their full share. Hit them where it hurts, in their deep pockets. They’re not really christians when they rely on money to promote hatred and discrimination. They’re businesses more than anything else. they may dress like christians, but that’s where the similarity ends. Power (money) corrupts.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 8:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      @Robert NYC. Great point. Every month when I write that check for his health insurance it makes me sick. A female friend at work is on marriage number three. She is on our plan at work along with her new hubby and her kids and HIS kids. But I cannot include my partner of twenty years. Fair?

      Apr 20, 2010 at 12:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Disgusted American
      Disgusted American

      You Mormons and other religious freaks can SHOVE your VOODOO….There is NO God/Gawd/He/She/It Judging Us Humans and what we do with Our Hoo-hoos and Pee-pees…..it’s Man-Made BS, to Keep the Sheeple in Line,and the Coffers Full $$$……ZIn OUr Galaxy with 100′s of Billions of Stars/Suns..with Billions of planets that stretches 100,000 light yrs acorss..in a Universe with 1000′s of Billions of galaxies…..more stars/galaxies then ALl the grains of sand on the earty….we are NOT that Important in the scheme of the Universe, we are a mere Spec of nothingness….chk this out from youtube HUBBLE DEEP FEILD 3D

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAVjF_7ensg

      ..SO in the meantime, If you want to enter into a sham marriage to follow your guilty mind and what your religion says…more power to ya – brainwashed!

      Apr 20, 2010 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Disgusted American
      Disgusted American

      You Mormons and other religious freaks can SHOVE your VOODOO….There is NO God/Gawd/He/She/It Judging Us Humans and what we do with Our Hoo-hoos and Pee-pees…..it’s Man-Made BS, to Keep the Sheeple in Line,and the Coffers Full $$$……ZIn OUr Galaxy with 100′s of Billions of Stars/Suns..with Billions of planets that stretches 100,000 light yrs acorss..in a Universe with 1000′s of Billions of galaxies…..more stars/galaxies then ALl the grains of sand on the earth….we are NOT that Important in the scheme of the Universe, we are a mere Spec of nothingness….chk this out from youtube HUBBLE DEEP FEILD 3D

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAVjF_7ensg

      ..SO in the meantime, If you want to enter into a sham marriage to follow your guilty mind and what your religion says…more power to ya – brainwashed!

      Apr 20, 2010 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 211, JamesStone…actually James, that’s how they want it to remain. They don’t want us having any semblance of equality and believe that discrimination and disenfranchisement is perfectly fine and acceptable. Straight married couples also double dip, both having coverage on each other’s plans. I wonder what they’d all do if they had no coverage and couldn’t afford to buy it? Nobody asks them that.

      No. 212 & 213, I hear you and totally agree. Many of them actually believe that the world is only 6000 years old and are waiting for the rapture…go figure. Sick, insecure, frightened, fucked up people for sure.

      Apr 20, 2010 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lauren D
      Lauren D

      @gilber:

      WOW!
      Nothing says “crazy” like a nonsensical diatribe spewed with perfect certainty. And YOU’re giving psychological-spiritual advice???

      One question: do you talk like that on a first/last date?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 3:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lauren D
      Lauren D

      JUDGE NOT…. um, or something!

      Ok LGBT “family”, time for a talk: none of us can stand it when strangers decide for us which sorts of relationships are ‘healthy’ (or holy) for us. But here we are again, hypocritically deciding for this young couple whether or not they should even be together. Based on what? Consider these points:

      1. How many relationships are based on something OTHER than sexual attraction — probably more than would admit it. And many of them ‘work’ just fine.

      2. How many of us were TOTALLY revealing and honest when we entered into our relationships — this guy wrote a BOOK about his ‘issues’, so I’d say his fiancee is well-informed compared to most, wouldn’t you?

      3. Kinsey Study — if you accept that most of us are somewhere in the middle between ‘purely’ straight and ‘purely’ gay, then you’ll admit it’s possible he DOES find some small measure of sexual attraction for his spouse-to-be. And if so, maybe that can grow with time? It doesn’t mean he won’t also be attracted to men, but so what? Aren’t most married people attracted to others beyond their spouse at some point — this doesn’t mean they all act on it.

      4. Maybe she’s more ‘butch’ than she looks (SRS pending?)?

      5. WE’RE IGNORANT STRANGERS!!!! Get it? We don’t know them, or their needs, or their private satisfactions. In technical terms, some epistemic modesty is called for here. And if we don’t give it when faced with relationships that WE don’t understand, why should we expect it from those who don’t understand OUR relationships?

      Think about it. Ok, we’ve had our little talk, now be nice to mormons, they’ve got enough to deal with :)

      Apr 21, 2010 at 3:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 216, Lauren D, you make some cogent points. However, you begin your post with “JUDGE NOT…..um, or something.” You later say,….”now be nice to Mormons”.

      In case it slipped your memory, when the Mormon sect donated more than $22 million to make Prop. 8 succeed, that was a classic exercise in “judging” and “not being nice” to gays. In fact, it tranlates into hate when a religious cult purposely throws obscene amounts of money to legislate for discrimination to uphold its religious beliefs and to have a say as to who is entitle to a right or privilege. Since when in a supposedly secular state with a clear line between separation of church and state does a religious cult trump and trample on the rights of others? If you can’t discern any of that, then you don’t know what hate is, let alone judging others. Not one alledged mormon apologist or ex-gay who has posted here has condemned any of it, not even you.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Milesius
      Milesius

      I am a Californian from a long line of Californians and I voted for both Prop 8 and Prop 22 and will continue to vote against gay “marriage.” I appreciate the work of the Mormons on behalf of traditional marriage even though I think their religion is a transparent fraud.

      @Robert NYC: What someone from NYC thinks about CA legislation is completely irrelevant. Besides which, you are a pretentious moron.

      @Disgusted American: Lay off the chronic.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 12:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lauren D
      Lauren D

      @Robert, NYC:

      @ ROBERT:
      I’m well aware of the hateful, bigoted attitude of many Mormons, and I’m even aware that they threw money in support of Prop 8 (not nice). And I’m no Mormon apologist. But the question becomes, how do we in “the community” respond? We could act just like them, or we could do better. I simply propose the latter. Part of what it MEANS to “do better” is to recognize that not ALL Mormons are hateful, or ugly human beings. We can choose to assume the best in each individual case, until shown otherwise. In short, we can treat individual people as people.
      Let me explain: my first real girlfriend was a Mormon (yeah, she didn’t bring me home to meet the family). For a time she threw off their cultish control, and she paid for it. She wasn’t strong enough to handle the ostracism at school, from friends, neighbors, and particularly family. She got married off and had two kids by the age of 19, and I felt so sorry for her. I wished she’d been stronger, for her sake, if not mine.
      Sorry about the run-on personal trivia, but here’s the point: how would you treat her? With anger and ugliness, or kindness and sympathy? That’s what I meant when I said, “they’ve got enough to deal with”.
      Maybe the best you can do is condescending pity — that’s ok, it’s still better than stooping to the level of those who throw stones. And if you’re not moved by the moral plea here, consider a more self-serving one: we do better politically when we “rise above” — MLK showed that.
      Whadd’ya think?

      Apr 22, 2010 at 2:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David in Houston
      David in Houston

      @Robert, NYC: Yet again. Couldn’t agree more.

      I think Lauren D actually sums it up best, “…She wasn’t strong enough to handle the ostracism at school, from friends, neighbors, and particularly family.”

      You’ve got these people that are indoctrinated as children, and their entire world is the Mormon (or any other) religion. If they are gay, they are ostracized by everyone they know. Very few people are strong enough to withstand that kind of treatment. Then they pressure people like Lauren’s ex-girlfriend to get married, because that will conveniently “cure” her. (Sound familiar, Ty?)

      So yeah, “condescending pity” is about the best result you should ever expect from the gay community. Tack on the churches involvement in Prop. 8, and what once was pity is now anger at an institution that isn’t satisfied keeping their religious beliefs to themselves. Now we are talking about an enemy that is attacking our very freedoms, solely based on their CHOSEN religious beliefs. This is simply unacceptable, and won’t be tolerated.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 9:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @David in Houston: I have to raise the bullshit flag now.

      There is hardly anything but hate being spewed here and it’s far from productive.

      Check out the message I wrote Robert earlier, it lays out an intellectually honest argument for your cause.

      If anyone thinks that homosexuals will receive marriage rights by simply bitching about and complaining about Mormon’s they’re full of crap and need to grow up.

      The No on Prop 8 campaign was garbage and there was no merits being pushed.

      Many people in California were pissed off that a judge over turned Prop 22 and the media circus it created. That was the real push for Prop 8, not the money, of course money helps, but don’t be foolish about why and how Prop 8 came about.

      I also know a lot of churches didn’t want lawsuits attempting to force the marry two persons of the same sex or go bankrupt defending themselves. Unfortunately, there’s that attitude in California to directly mock religion and sue anyone for anything.

      There were ZERO counter propositions on the ballot.

      There was one that didn’t get enough signatures for the next election to repeal Prop 8 bu included specific language to protect religions right to refuse or admit persons into marriage. If it can make it onto the ballot, I’M MORMON AND I WILL VOTE FOR IT.

      It’s funny how so many are saying, “Mormon’s are bigots!” Yet, whenever I explain my reasoning for government to get out of regulating marriage with the 1st Amendment as my case, even those “bigoted Mormon’s” are much more understanding and agreeable.

      Try using the right argument and maybe you’ll get better results.

      I had an email exchange with the director of 8: The Mormon Proposition, unfortunately after I proposed the argument of Freedom of Religion as the angle to remove government from regulating marriage, which would allow homosexuals to marry because there are churches that do support it, the conversation ended because there was an honest solution that didn’t involve being victimized.

      “If someone is gay they’re ostracized by everyone they know.”

      Not so, I know two gay men in the Ward in my home town. They have always been accepted as our brothers. Can they perform certain rituals? Not if they’re practicing, but I can’t either because of things I do from time to time.

      I really have to say stop playing the victim and become the leader.

      Stop trying to use emotion as the driving reason to get something done and use rational and reasonable arguments founded in the Constitution and the correct reference.

      Gay marriage opposition is primarily based on emotion and when there are two emotional arguments fighting it’s never productive and never intellectually honest.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 10:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 221, Joseph.. you said…

      I also know a lot of churches didn’t want lawsuits attempting to force the marry two persons of the same sex or go bankrupt defending themselves. Unfortunately, there’s that attitude in California to directly mock religion and sue anyone for anything.”

      Point me to where in civil marriage equality in the five states that have it where it clearly states that churches are forced to marry same-sex couples? Show me. I’ve seen them all. Nowehre does it state that. Civil marriage is gender neutral in those states and is incoporated into the state law. All five states and in fact in eight countries that have same-sex marriage, no religious cult is compelled to marry a gay couple, in fact they are exempt, period. That was nothing more than a red herring the Mormons and other cults used to make sure Prop. 8 succeeded. None of those cults could produce the proof when asked. So that only proves it was bull-shit to begin with and they knew it to instill fear in people.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 12:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Robert, NYC:

      Right and the two drag queens who showed up to take communion at a Catholic Church in Frisco in no way demonstrates the hostility towards religion in my state and the multiple lawsuits to repeal Prop 22 than Prop 8 rather than appealing to the California voters through reason and fair discussion?

      BOTH ARE EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS, ESPECIALLY YOURS

      What don’t you get?

      Stop with the emotional bullshit and the name calling.

      Work on leadership and integrity to get people to follow your cause.

      You don’t use the fact that in other states there hasn’t been lawsuits as your argument, you use it to support your argument that it is Unconstitutional for government to regulate marriage period.

      This is the kind of crap I can’t stand.

      I offer reasonable and rational arguments that would help your cause and the only feedback I get is emotional tangents similar to that of a child.

      And it’s those types of outbursts that cripple the progress for your cause, rather than showing leadership on the issue.

      But I must be a bigot because I say your tactics suck right?

      It’s funny, the conclusion I came to that banning homosexuals from marrying is Unconstitutional is one that I came to when talking to my dad about Prop 8 and we both ended up agreeing. He must be another bigot Mormon since he agreed with me that it’s Unconstitutional.

      All of the crying, whining, bitching and name calling only re-enforces your oppositions equally emotional argument. Every time I hear the nonsensical rants it turns me off from any support, but when I hear honest dialog about the Constitution I am supportive of it.

      Get it or are you going to continue to bitch and complain which won’t help you in the long run?

      Apr 22, 2010 at 1:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 218, Milesius…….time is on our side, you’ll be with the losers sooner or later. You can call me what you want. I think the shoe is on the other foot, pal. Expect more Mormon and other cult bashing from hereon in. You bash us, we’ll bash you back with impunity. We’ll win eventually, that’s what you’re all afraid of because deep down, you know we will hence the resistance to it. There are now eight countries, two South American cities with same-sex civil marriage on the books. Its coming whether you like it or not. Setbacks are always part of the struggle for equality, we’re only more emboldened in spite of them.

      Now, how about if we gays started a similar hate movement to remove the tax exempt status of your vile cult or whatever cult you have succumbed to, learned behavior? How would you like that? You’re so immature, you stoop to childish behavior calling people names when you can’t win an argument. Your level and quality of education are deeply suspect, a definite clearance sale in the cranial department.

      No. 219, Lauren D…. some of what you say I’ll agree with, but when you say that not all Mormons are hateful, do you really believe in your heart of hearts that the “nicer” ones who vote to ban same-sex CIVIL marriage, based on their cultist beliefs aren’t complict in legislationg for discrimination, leaving their cultist beliefs aside? When you remove the rights of a minority already gained, you don’t contract them, you expand them in a democracy and under the 14th amendment of the constitution, those rights must be guaranteed and protected. Clearly, Prop. 8 was unconsitutional and a violation thereof. How would these nicer and the majority not so nice Mormons, among others, like it if we started a ballot initiative to ban them from worshipping?. We could use the same lame argument that it wouldn’t be about hate but about what WE believe in.

      No. 220, David…. right on!

      Apr 22, 2010 at 1:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 223, Joseph, just get off it, trying to turn it around on me and others here to win the argument. That pie in the sky bullshit about government not being involved in marriage is just that. You must be delusional along with the equally delusional libertarians who think that’s going to change. As long as the federal and state governments confer benefits and privileges through marriage, both religious and civil, the government will continue to issue licenses. I don’t know of one western country that doesn’t. We’re not that progressive of a society to even conceive of it.

      You STILL HAVE NOT responded to your own statement I posted when I opened post 222. Point me to the evidence for that statement.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 1:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Robert, NYC: Hah hah, you’re a joke of a person if you think acting like a teenager who’s not getting his way is the most effective way to get what you want.

      I don’t have to respond to your asinine point again because I already mentioned it is not the argument to use, support for an argument yes, but not the direct argument.

      Again, you don’t want to listen to reason. “Time is on our side, it’s going to change whether you like it or not.” Yeah, that’s a good way to get support.

      You honestly think that being an asshole is the best angle?

      It’s not about being libertarian, it’s about bringing people together and using reason to pursuade them to not necessarily become an advocate for you, but to be an advocate for the Constitution which would in turn help you.

      Getting the government out of marriage isn’t a progressive issue and progressivism isn’t what’s needed.

      I’m not trying to win an argument here, there’s no need to even try. Your arguments are so full of anger and holes that they will never win when you continue to insult and piss of the very people you need support from.

      As for the benefits comment, here’s why you again prove yourself inept of winning a debate.

      Not all persons will be married in a church numbnuts. Removing government from REGULATING marriage in no way removes it from offering civil marriage licenses. If the Episcopal Church wants to marry two men then by that merit the government would be required to be non-bias and do the same.

      But no, you want to rant and rave to get your point across when that hardly ever works and is no where near as effective as reasonable discussion.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 2:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Ok Joseph, I’m done with your nonsense, your name calling and childish pranks. You can’t even back up with evidence the statement you made that I posted in 222. You deliberately avoid responding to it because, in essence, you can’t. I’m done!

      Apr 22, 2010 at 2:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Robert, NYC: Wow… class act Robert. You can rant and rave and insult people all day but when you get called out on it and are told how to get what you want you turn tail and run because like I said in my first post to you, you are not interested in civil discourse.

      You want “evidence” in an attempt to undermine my argument.

      I agreed with you that there was no direct evidence that it would happen, but the fear was there and I also pointed out that the lack of evidence isn’t good enough to be an argument itself, but rather support a much more reasonable argument.

      I addressed it more than once, you simply refuse to listen because you’re so caught up in emotion that it’s not about being able to marry for you, it’s about pissing and moaning until you get your way. It’s an outlet to cry and complain to be the victim rather than actually changing the situation.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 2:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Milesius
      Milesius [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Robert NYC: I have no doubt that my intellectual and scholarly achievements outshine yours, your delusions of adequacy notwithstanding. (No doubt you think you are sophisticated because you are gay and a New Yorker but it just ain’t so, sorry.) While it is true that there is broad support for gay “marriage” among the vapid 18-29 demographic in the U.S., nothing is written in stone. Besides which, there is a whole world out there where gay “marriage” is not remotely on the table and I am no so provincial or intellectually circumscribed as you to think that the universe consists of the U.S. or even the West.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 2:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Milesius: Milesius, I’m curious, aside from Robert yelling like a little child. What do you think of what I have proposed? I haven’t read anything you wrote until now, so I don’t know any of your opinions or bias.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 2:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Ryan:)

      I’d considered this thread dead, and only today discovered your disreputable remarks.

      “Here’s what I want to point out: BOM didn’t lie to defend his theology.”

      BOM made false claims about the contents of the Bible. Further, I used the word lie in one explicit circumstance – the history of marriage in human culture. So you are chastising me for a point I did not make. I cannot help but feel that this false accusation by implication of yours is just a manipulative ad hominem.

      “Christ was explicit about the laws you presented for discussion. Those two laws, however, and as far as I understand, replaced even more explicit laws contained in the Law of Moses. To my knowledge, which is limited on the subject so correct me if I’m wrong, people were put to death under the Old Law for engaging in homosexual acts (at least that is what the law required).”

      I’m glad that you acknowledge that your knowledge of the subject is limited.

      First, the Levitical text used to construct ‘homosexuality is sin’ are hardly explicit. The reference to “a woman’s bed” or “as with a woman” or “wife’s bed” create tremendous doubt about the nature of the relationship being prohibited. Homosexuals do not, as a rule, have sex with other men:
      “as if with a woman”
      “in a woman’s bed”
      “in their wife’s bed”

      The two parallel passages in Leviticus, in the original Hebrew, use two different words for male in each passage; first a word that indicates husband, and then a word that indicates priest. The concept actually communicated in both passages is a condemnation of husbands cheating on their wives by having sex with priests. And the term of judgment that appears in both passages is not the word for sin, but the word for ‘ritual impurity’ with strong associations to idolatry. Both passages come in the context of prohibitions of fertility rituals practiced in other religions.

      Neither is about homosexuality in general, just as the many more passages that condemn specific instances of heterosexual intercourse condemn heterosexuality in general.

      Second, your argument fails to consider the nature of Christ as the earthly (at that time) incarnation of God. So when a Levitical law appears contradicts either clause of the Law of Love Christ gave, it indicates that the Levitical law is wrong – incorrectly heard or incorrectly understood, or fabricated.

      “Obviously, the counter to your argument . . .”

      No. Your missing the intrinsic cognitive dissonance involved. Homophobes declare that Leviticus 20:13 is still valid, it demands that who is ever being judged there (a matter of dispute) is to be murdered. Jesus, the physical manifestation of God says ‘treat others as you wish to be treated’ (love your neighbor as yourself’.

      The two laws: ‘death to homosexuals’ and ‘love your neighbor as your self’ are intrinsically contradictory, it is not rationally possible to follow both.

      It is not possible to even accept the idea of killing people over the gender of who they make love to and at the same time still love those people as one’s self – since self-preservation is the strongest drive in life.

      The Levitical alleged prohibition against homosexuality itself violates the Law Christ asserted – any person of faith who endorses Levitical law regarding homosexuality intrinsically rejects Jesus Christ (for that subject at least).

      “And the topography of love-making certainly needs to be considered to know whether it violates law.”

      Nonsense.

      “In addition, the Old Law communicates how God himself views certain types of conduct.”

      In theory. Yet Christ, the Word of God made flesh, repeatedly rebuked those who enforced the letter of the Old Law to the detriment of others, and set that Old Law aside whenever it violated ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ or ‘love God with your entire self’. In Christ’s repeated rebuke of legalism we have God communicating directly through a physical body God’s view of “certain types of conduct”.

      “If he loves homosexuals but does not condone any sexual conduct beyond the limitations he defines (as he did in the Old Law), does he really, honestly love homosexuals?”

      This is what happens when people who have little knowledge of a subject opine about it. You assume that the “old law” as understood today accurately reflects God’s will. That is foolish at best.

      Since God does love homosexuals, and heterosexuals, can God have honestly barred homosexuals from loving, consensual relationships, and limited them to the kind of farce that Ty is about to undertake?

      No. A perfect and just God cannot create injustice.

      Th is another cognitive dissonance issue, with homophobes chosing a text over the very nature of God. It is a case of bibliolatry – worshipping the text rather than the deity. The nature of God contradicts their interpretation of the text, yet they hold their interpretation above God.

      “And maybe, so we don’t get hung up on the example, it would be better to use the situation of bestiality.”

      Anyone who compares homosexuality with bestiality has no valid opinion to offer about this subject – their perspective is intrinsically contaminated with overt malice. You’ve outed yourself as a bigot and homophobe.

      The decent, rational and sane comparison would have been with heterosexuality. But using that as an example would not have worked so well for your defense of anti-gay theology:

      “Does he really love heterosexuals if God has asked that mortals not participate?”

      The answer any heterosexual would see is that if God forbid them to express their sexuality, it would mean that God does not love them. Framed that way, heterosexual Christians, believing that God loves all human beings, have good reason to reject ‘homosexuality is sin’. And since you have tried to defend anti-gay theology you could not use the accurate comparison, for it invalidates anti-gay theology and affirms the larger point I have been making.

      “Put another way, can God really love the sinner but not the sin?”

      The meme ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’ is a concoction with no direct Biblical basis. Further, the ‘sin’ in this issue is an intrinsic component of the ‘sinner’. The idea ‘God loves homosexuals but hates homosexuality’ is as irrational as saying ‘God loves women but hates their genitals’ or ‘God loves people with perfect pitch but hates their sense of pitch’.

      “This is an important point to consider and has many implication for Christians.’

      No, because it is an irrational construct with no true basis in Christ’s teachings.

      Further, anyone who equates homosexuality with bestiality, as you did, has nothing of importance for anyone to consider. That comparison indicates a complete and utter lack of any moral or ethical code. By making that comparison, you demonstrate you have no understand, whatsoever, of right and wrong, harmless and harmful, consent and rape.

      “It is also possible that even with a profession of faith in God, people may still engage sinners in unkind ways,”

      However, such unkind ways are explicitly sin, violation of Christ’s command. Therefore, homophobes act out spiritual dissonance by committing sin by labeling homosexuality sin. Since sin is ‘missing the mark’, the homophobe who labels same-sex lovemaking sin is missing the mark, wrong, sinning, disobeying God.

      If you, Ryan:) are a Christian or a Mormon, you have a need for repentance for equating same-sex lovemaking with raping animals.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 4:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: I wanted to say this just for fun.

      Jesus never said He was the Father incarnate in the flesh.

      He explicilty referred to the Father as His God and our God, His Father and our Father.

      If your argument is primarily based off of what Jesus in fact said as opposed to other Biblical writers, then His word carries more weight as to His relationship with the Father than John ;^)

      Considering Jesus never preached Trinitarian doctrine, you can’t really count that as part of your argument.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 4:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Milesius
      Milesius

      @Cassandra: You are full of excrement. You may be able to dupe others with cut-and-paste pseudoscholarship but I know better, having studied Attic and Koine Greek and being very well read in Biblical scholarship. (Although, my advanced degree is in the mathematical sciences.) Homoerotic acts are condemned in both the Old and New Testaments, and no amount of desperate gay apologia is going to change that.

      Incidentally, there are no such things as “memes.” Apparently, you are intoxicated with pseudoscholarship of all stripes, whether it comes from gay apologists or mediocre biologists with anemic research output.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 4:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Milesius

      “You may be able to dupe others with cut-and-paste pseudoscholarship but I know better, having studied Attic and Koine Greek and being very well read in Biblical scholarship. (Although, my advanced degree is in the mathematical sciences.) Homoerotic acts are condemned in both the Old and New Testaments, and no amount of desperate gay apologia is going to change that. ”

      Oh, if that were true, Milesius, you would not have had to resort to name-calling. You have sinned against me and I asked you to repent of that sin as publicly as you committed it.

      You dismissed my detailed arguments as ‘full of excrement’ precisely because you could not refute my position any other way.

      Your accusation ‘cut-n-paste’ is also sin, and you need to repent, and ask me to forgive you.

      Whenever you are ready . . .

      Apr 22, 2010 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Joseph

      I happen to come from a Trinitarian background (Lutheran), which is not a minor view by the way, and argue within that context. It also aligns with my own experiences of the Divine. It would be dishonest of me to argue from any other framework. There is already more than enough dishonesty from fundamentalist Christians and atheists on this issue, don’t you think?

      Trinitarianism is the most common perspective about the nature of Christ among dominationist/fundamentalist Christians who advocate discrimination against GLBTQ people, and so it is helpful to argue within the context they use.

      Of course, your post does illustrate that Christianity is not a monolith that speaks with a single opinion on all subjects – there is considerable debate about the nature of God and Christ and other fundamentals, as well as incidentals like sexuality.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: I can tell you were coming from a Trinitarian background.

      I’m simply playing devils advocate in pointing out the context of your argument in regards to a doctrinal discussion based off of what Jesus said versus what writers of the Bible said.

      I believe people are free to worship and act as they seem fit as long as it does not impede on any of my rights to do the same.

      I don’t believe at all that arguing doctrine is effective if supporting gay marriage is your goal.

      That’s why I had such a heated argument with Robert, it wasn’t his end goal that I argued about with him, but his delivery and tactics.

      If you want to debate theology with Milesius, go for it.

      I might throw something into the conversation once in a while for either of you to chew on.

      Have a good day!

      Apr 22, 2010 at 5:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      Cassandra, thanks again for adding additional thought and perspective to the discussion. No doubt, you are well read on the topic of the two laws discussed — better read than I. I can see where some of my statements, due to poor grammar/syntax and uses of a poor examples or nonexamples probably caused you some grief. For starters, I should have known using the example of bestiality would lead someone to believe I was making a direct comparison of homosexuality and bestiality, suggesting I equated same-sex lovemaking with raping animals. Let me clarify that these things are not comparable, in my mind, and my intent was not to draw that conclusion. Will you forgive my poor use of grammar/sytax and examples/nonexamples?

      Regarding lying/false claims — I had intended to point out that lying is making a deliberately false statement. For example, if your partner asks if you mailed the tax forms and you say “Yes” (even though you didn’t), that is a lie. I do not personally think many on this forum, especially BOM, are lying. Let me illustrate with an example, which may be a poor example, but please read intently and give me the benefit of the doubt. Two people are asked, “Is there a book on the floor?” The person standing next to the book will say, “Yes”. The person whose vision is obstructed by say, a couch, will probably say “No” or “I don’t know”. When I, according to the implications of your accusation against BOM, suggested others might say you are lying, I was pointing out the fact that both you and BOM are discussing things from different perspectives — both of you are really experiencing, hearing, seeing, believing, etc the things you’re talking about. Just because one disagrees with the other does not mean one is lying and the other is telling the truth. A more appropriate word than lying MIGHT be rationalizing? I’m not sure, but I personally don’t think either of you are guilty of lying.

      A better way of discussing this MIGHT be a more direct discussion of how vision (here referring to perspective and understanding of the world) is obstructed by peers, culture, institutions, etc. Or the phenomenon of confirmation bias — people typically pay attention to information that confirms their beliefs rather than synthesize information that contradicts their beliefs (stereotypes often used to illustrate this phenomenon). On one hand, Mormons pay attention to to information that confirms they are right and justified in the points they make here. On the other hand, “others” (for lack of a better word) pay attention to the information that confirms they are right and justified. So it goes back and forth, and not much information is synthesized, and the only thing that seems to be accomplished is exacerbation of unkind feelings toward the opposing group.

      Please also remember what I stated in the preface to the comment to which you are replying — I was not asserting my beliefs, but presenting before you what I perceived the counter arguers might present to oppose. I did so to solicit more information from you (especially since I thought you had more knowledge to offer), which you have provided, but it came with labels and name calling (e.g., bigot, homophobe). I am not okay with name calling. Like you pointed out to Milsesius, let’s not resort to name calling. I kindly demand your respect.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 7:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      Oh, and just thought I’d throw this out there. When I said “the topography of love-making certainly needs to be considered, you replied, “Nonsense”, suggesting you disagreed (or the statement made no sense). However, earlier you pointed out the following: “The concept actually communicated in both passages is a condemnation of husbands cheating on their wives by having sex with priests.”

      I assume you misunderstood the statement, or maybe I used the word topography incorrectly. Whatever the case, if I understand your argument correctly, we agree more than we might first have realized. The “topography” (i.e., a detailed description of configurations) has significant implications. Homosexual acts, in a very general sense, refers in part to male-male or female-female sexual contact. As you pointed out, sexual relations topographically described as “husbands cheating on their wives by having sex with priests” suggesting “ritual impurity [and] idolatry” is topographically different from love-making between two same-sex, unmarried, consenting adults.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 7:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandar
      Cassandar

      “That’s why I had such a heated argument with Robert,”

      I was wondering if you were the same person who verbally abused Robert.

      “I don’t believe at all that arguing doctrine is effective if supporting gay marriage is your goal.”

      Then you are out of touch with this situation and have little to contribute except ‘playing devils advocate”.

      The battle for civil equality for GLBTQ people is not between Christians and Atheists, or believers and unbelievers. It is a conflict between two perspectives on Christianity (in the U.S. and Europe): fundamentalist theology and liberation theology.

      “as long as it does not impede on any of my rights”

      Fundamentalist theology, also called dominionism or dominationism, doesn’t recognize your rights to anything, including freedom of religion. Liberation theology does recognize your rights, including your right to have no religious beliefs at all.

      Because the overwhelming majority of people in the U.S. consider themselves to be Christians, win support for same-sex marriage is very dependent on the success of liberation theology.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 7:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandar: First off, I never “verbally abused” Robert. I put him in his place. Get off your emotional soapbox of victimization if you think he was “abused.” He was spewing nothing but hate and contempt and swearing quite visciously about other people.

      Maybe you should go back and read what I was saying.

      This isn’t a theological issue, please don’t be so naive.

      It’s very commonsense and rational.

      If churches are free to marry or not marry based on their doctrines than the government must ablige both opposing religious view points per the 1st Amendment in regards to issuing marriage liscences.

      It doens’t get much simpler than that.

      I presented that argument to a redneck I work with today and he agreed because it’s commonsense, rational and founded in the Constitution, not emotional banterings.

      You’re trying to make it way more complicated than it should be or really is.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 7:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandar
      Cassandar

      Ryan:)

      “For starters, I should have known using the example of bestiality would lead someone to believe I was making a direct comparison of homosexuality and bestiality, suggesting I equated same-sex lovemaking with raping animals. Let me clarify that these things are not comparable, in my mind, and my intent was not to draw that conclusion. Will you forgive my poor use of grammar/sytax and examples/nonexamples?”

      You know, when some homophobe asks to be forgiven for being overheard saying something repulsive, or being caught doing something wrong, folks around here tend to immediately get that they are apologizing for the wrong thing.

      I remain convinced that you deliberately chose that particular comparison, used it as a carefully constructed comparison, and did so in place of the one truly accurate comparison available.

      Dismissing it as poor use of syntax etc doesn’t change the fact that when you were formulating your remarks, you thought ‘what would be comparable to same-sex relationships?’ or something like that, and you thought of raping animals. Clearly, you see GLBTQ people in a very derogatory and demeaning way.

      Will you unconditionally and without excuses apologize for equating my loving, unitive relationship with raping animals?

      “As you pointed out, sexual relations topographically described as “husbands cheating on their wives by having sex with priests” suggesting “ritual impurity [and] idolatry” is topographically different from love-making between two same-sex, unmarried, consenting adults.”

      Regarding ‘topography’ – the word expresses the surface configuration, the physical structure of something. The parameters defining the difference between adultery and monogamy have nothing to do with topography in general. Yeah, if a man cheats on his flat chested wife with a woman with huge breasts, a certain topological influence is involved.

      But your use of the word topography invokes the traditional homophobic argument ‘the pieces don’t fit’. Personally, I do not think that was an accidental mistake.

      “Homosexual acts, . . . ”
      There is no such thing, and the phrase and meaning you used are constructs used primarily by homophobes in support of anti-gay bias. I don’t think it is a coincidence that you employ such terminology. There are sexual acts engaged in by human beings, between people of the same gender, or between people of different genders.

      The difference between adultery and monogamy is a matter of emotional and often legal dynamics. Adultery violates the emotional contract between the parties in couple, and carries a variable risk of material and legal loss or liability. Adultery is less about sex, less about sex and topography and physical bodies, than it is about breaking trust, violating an agreement, shattering a promise, and exposing someone against their will to risk. There is a level of harm, variable yes, but harm nonetheless, intrinsic to adultery. It so tends to be selfish that it is almost defined by selfishness.

      Monogamy, regardless of the gender of those involved, is about establishing and affirming a relationship, trust, promise, rather than breaking it.

      That is the terrible irony of homophobes who are divorced and remarried, committing adultery according to Jesus, opposing marriage and monogamy for same-sex couples.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 7:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandar: You say divorcing and remarrying is adultery according to Jesus.

      Prove it.

      You are using a generalization once again and making a large assumption not based in scripture.

      Jesus said, “What God has joined together let no man put asunder.”

      That would be a reference to divorce yes.

      Are you admitting when governments issue marriage licences that they are acting for or in place of God?

      There’s also the pesky argument as to the proper authority to act in God’s name. According to the Catholic Church, it’s only them, therefor the only divorce that would matter to them is from a marriage performed under Catholic supervision and direction.

      Adultery isn’t simply about trust. Though trust is violated when it occurs, many many many many many many people commit it simply for the sex without regard to their partners trust. I’m in the military, I see it all too often.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 9:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “That is the terrible irony of homophobes who are divorced and remarried, committing adultery according to Jesus, opposing marriage and monogamy for same-sex couples.”

      From Matthew 19

      8Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

      Also, regarding name calling (“you’re a joke of a person”, “Robert yelling like a little child”, etc):

      Matthew 5:22 (New International Version)

      22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother[a]will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,[b]‘ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 9:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Milesius
      Milesius [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Joseph:

      I’m not sure to what you are referring.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 10:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: Thank you for providing reference material ;^)

      I only said that so you would do so to support your argument.

      One caveat though, there is a clause with what Jesus said. You are generalizing and assuming that many divorces are not due to adultery or unfaithfulness.

      I never said I didn’t call him out on his behavior.

      You said “verbally abused” like he’s defenseless and needs protection.

      Read the filth that has come out of his mouth in his previous posts.

      I’m a very brunt person, act like a child and it will be pointed out.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 10:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Milesius: I’ll shorten what I was saying to Robert.

      The argument for allowing same-sex marriage has had terrible tactics and is primarily based on emotion.

      I can’t support banning same-sex marriage because of the 1st Amendment.

      If a church wants to marry or deny marriage to people of the same or opposite sex due to their doctrinal views, then the government cannot regulate that. Therefor, the government must also offer non-bias civil marriage licenses for same or opposite sex couples for those who do not ascribe to religion. If the government sided with one church’s view on marriage, it would be in violation of the 1st Amendment.

      This goes for legally consenting adults.

      Obviously someone claiming their religion would allow them to marry little children would be refused, that’s commonsense.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 10:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      brunt:
      –noun
      the main force or impact, as of an attack or blow: His arm took the brunt of the blow.

      Origin:
      1275–1325; ME; perh. orig. sexual assault; akin to ON brundr, G Brunft heat, ruttish state, OE brunetha heat, itching; c. OHG bronado. See burn1

      —Synonyms
      thrust, stress, burden.

      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/brunt

      Freud’s birthday is May 6th, by the way.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 11:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David in Houston
      David in Houston

      @Joseph: “If someone is gay they’re ostracized by everyone they know.”
      Not so, I know two gay men in the Ward in my home town. They have always been accepted as our brothers. Can they perform certain rituals? Not if they’re practicing, but I can’t either because of things I do from time to time.
      ——————————
      Certain rituals? Such as being intimate with other men? You mean the things gay couples do when they are living an open and honest life; and not being controlled by a religious entity?

      Churches have NEVER been forced to marry anyone. They have ALWAYS had that protection. Yet another lie that the Yes on 8 side used to manipulate the citizens.

      “There were ZERO counter propositions on the ballot.”
      Why would there need to be any other propositions? Gay couples want and deserve marriage equality. Anything else falls under the category of second-class citizenship. Why would anyone accept that? Interracial couples didn’t propose an alternative to marriage. Nor were they able to convince the populace to take their side. The courts did their job, and overturned all of the discriminatory laws that were in place. Sound familiar?

      “I have to raise the bullshit flag now.”
      I’m not sure what I said to merit this opinion. The only thing you took issue with was my statement regarding Mormons being ostracized. We’ve ALL heard the stories about churches and families disowning gay people. There really isn’t any point in disputing that. Knowing a couple of gay men that are basically church-forced lifetime virgins, hardly refutes what I’ve said.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 11:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: What’re you trying to prove?

      I know the definition and in the context in which I used it, your definition is correct.

      I don’t simply say things for my own entertainment. I will make an impact with words because being PC is a regressive posture when trying to take a stand.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 11:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @David in Houston: “Certain rituals? Such as being intimate with other men? You mean the things gay couples do when they are living an open and honest life; and not being controlled by a religious entity?”

      Come on David, seriously?

      I hadn’t realized that Mormon’s participated in fertility rituals…

      That’s me being sarcastic and extreme to your extreme comments.

      Rituals like baptizing someone, administering a blessing, going to the temple.

      I’m not gay and I can’t do most of those things right now because I continue to do things and have certain habits, but I’m not blaming my religion.

      You’re missing the point David… By not having an alternative for the voters to choose from they were left with a yes or no decision on something they may have been unsure of or simply reacted when they voted.

      Let me make this very clear… I SUPPORT REPEALING PROP 8 AND I’M MORMON!!!

      Not because I’m an advocate for gay marriage, but because I believe it is Unconstitutional and the government needs to get out of regulating marriage, period. Caveat: issuing marriage licenses does not equate to regulating marriage because non-religious persons would be required the same right to marry outside of a religious institution.

      The bullshit flag wasn’t so much directly towards you, but found it’s way onto the tail end of the conversation you were having.

      I’m just sick of hearing emotional arguments that refuse to use reason to persuade people to the cause.

      I’m sick of hearing people cry “bigot!” then turn around and be “bigots” towards a different group of people.

      I’ve talked to a few people who voted for Prop 8 and after I explain my reasoning that it is Unconstitutional to ban forms of marriage between consenting adults when there are religions that support it, they agree with me. Which in turn means they are more supportive of your cause and it seems like every time I try to get that through the heads of the homosexuals I talk to, they give me a ration of shit and even though it may be a different approach, it achieves the same end state in a much more civil manner.

      Crap, I’m almost ready to start showing up to gay rallies just to explain the more effective and civil approach, but I highly doubt I’d be listened to considering it seems like only heterosexuals tend to agree with me and yet they’re the ones who could easily resolve this matter at the ballot box…

      Apr 23, 2010 at 12:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @David in Houston: Never said they were church forced virgins. That sir is your false assumption.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 12:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      David in Houston

      Joseph is playing games here. In that post you mentioned he writes

      “I have to raise the bullshit flag now.

      There is hardly anything but hate being spewed here and it’s far from productive.”

      His own statement is bs, and it indicates the typical homophobic prejudice – anything GLBTQ people do is wrong, anything homophobes like the Mormon Church do, is justifiable, any criticism of homophobes is hate.

      “The No on Prop 8 campaign was garbage and there was no merits being pushed.”

      This is a mix of half truths and outright lies. The official No on 8 campaign was poorly run, and I say that as a Californian. However, throughout the campaign, opponents of Prop 8 who were not part of the political elite running the campaign consistently pushed the merits of opposing prop 8. And we pushed the negatives of passing it, not just for ourselves, but for every other minority. Including the fact that Prop 8 made Mormons look hostile and abusive, like fat-cat bullies seeking to install theocracy.

      “Many people in California were pissed off that a judge over turned Prop 22 and the media circus it created. That was the real push for Prop 8, not the money, of course money helps, but don’t be foolish about why and how Prop 8 came about.”

      That’s bullshit. The only people who objected to the CA Supreme Court’s decision – not ‘a judge’ but the highest judges in CA – were the homophobes. And they created the media circus. Prop 8 came about because the Mormon Church, which provided the bulk of funding for Prop 22, funded Prop 8. And the Mormon church should lose its tax exempt status permanently, grandfathered back to its campaign for Prop 22.

      “Unfortunately, there’s that attitude in California to directly mock religion and sue anyone for anything.”

      This is pure bullshit. It tells us that Joseph is utterly dishonest, and will make up anything out of thin air to make his denomination appear to be the victims.

      “It’s funny how so many are saying, “Mormon’s are bigots!” Yet, whenever I explain my reasoning for government to get out of regulating marriage with the 1st Amendment as my case, even those “bigoted Mormon’s” are much more understanding and agreeable.”

      The Mormon church has been encouraging its members to act out bigotry, and has consistently vilified and libeled people solely on the grounds that they are homosexuals. Joseph has demonstrated the same behavior here.

      The premise ‘get the Government out of marriage’ is ignorant and self-serving. Marriage is a civil legal contract, it is the purpose of government to regulate legal contracts. The people who are imposing religion onto marriage are fundamentalist Christians and the LDS, by using their theology and their congregations and organization to write religious laws into civil legal code. Joseph’s ploy is sad attempt to conceal the abusive role his denomination has had in severing the civil rights of real human beings.

      It’s a smokescreen, and the fuel is smoldering bullshit.

      This next bit is funny in a sad way. Responding to a quote
      “If someone is gay they’re ostracized by everyone they know.”

      Joseph replied:
      “Not so, I know two gay men in the Ward in my home town. They have always been accepted as our brothers. Can they perform certain rituals? Not if they’re practicing, but I can’t either because of things I do from time to time.”

      Of course, what he is describing is a low-level form of ostracism – gay men in his ward can participate in some of the rituals of their religious community, but not all. They are ostracized from some community events.

      The more insulting part though is his insistence that he knows better than GLBTQ people what our experiences of our lives are, when he says that it is not so, in response to our real experiences of ostracism.

      “Right and the two drag queens who showed up to take communion at a Catholic Church in Frisco in no way demonstrates the hostility towards religion in my state”

      Here we find Joseph pretending to know the emotions, the innermost feelings, of two people he can’t even name by name, in a city he calls by a nickname that people from San Francisco find offensive and belittling. This is not an honest argument, it is a low-level derogatory libel.

      Of course, Joseph is completely concerned about even the illusion of hostility toward religion, but dismissive, abusive and oblivious to the hostility that his faith, and other dominationist faiths have cultured against homosexuals.

      And then, after interpretting any comment from GLBTQ or GLBTQ supportive people in derogatory, emotionally abusive terms, he makes a pretense of innocence and victimhood.

      Joseph’s posts are just an ugly and vicious game.

      and the multiple lawsuits to repeal Prop 22 than Prop 8 rather than appealing to the California voters through reason and fair discussion?

      Apr 23, 2010 at 12:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Missed this quote from Joseph that I meant to address in my prior post:

      “and the multiple lawsuits to repeal Prop 22 than Prop 8 rather than appealing to the California voters through reason and fair discussion?”

      This complaint ignores the purpose of the court system in general, and of the Supreme courts in specific. It also is disingenuous, ignoring that GLBTQ people are the targets of extensive, culturally ingrained prejudice that make ‘appealing to the voters’ a case of appealing to oppressors. And it demonstrates bias on Joseph’s part – for his complaint is predicated on the notion that GLBTQ are only entitled to rights if heterosexuals give them those rights.

      One of the purposes of the court system is to protect the victims of wrongdoing from those who wronged them – to create justice from injustice. Prop 22 was a violation of the state Constitution, and taking that to the court was the reasonable and fair thing to do. Making a persecuted, suspect minority of 10% plus allies appeal to their oppressors is neither reasonable nor fair.

      Joseph was trying make wrong right and right wrong. It is a standard, almost diagnostical trait in members of oppressor classes.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 12:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      This simple fact is this: christianity is our enemy,gays who defend christianity are ultimately hurting their own community.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 1:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra:

      Cassandra,

      Your last post was quite sad and revealing.

      There was no outrage over Prop 22 being repealed by judges?

      Maybe no in San Francisco or Hillcrest but I’ve lived throughout California most of my life and people were plenty pissed off.

      “This is a mix of half truths and outright lies”

      No, it’s not mix of half truths and outright lies. You may perceive it that way because you were around the ones who you say were pushing on the merits but the truth is, the merits were never advocated at a state wide level. Everyone would have heard about it and there would have been much more dialog.

      “The only people who objected to the CA Supreme Court’s decision – not ‘a judge’ but the highest judges in CA – were the homophobes”

      You’re generalizing and making the bias remarks.

      “This is pure bullshit. It tells us that Joseph is utterly dishonest, and will make up anything out of thin air to make his denomination appear to be the victims.”

      You assume I’m dishonest because of your unfounded bias. My church isn’t a victim, though I know pastors of small churches who had that fear because any lawsuit would bankrupt them, but nice try twisting the truth.

      “The Mormon church has been encouraging its members to act out bigotry, and has consistently vilified and libeled people solely on the grounds that they are homosexuals. Joseph has demonstrated the same behavior here.”

      Oh have I? By saying I support repealing Prop 8? Are you that narrow minded and bitter of a person that you have to constantly be in attack mode?

      “The premise ‘get the Government out of marriage’ is ignorant and self-serving. Marriage is a civil legal contract, it is the purpose of government to regulate legal contracts. The people who are imposing religion onto marriage are fundamentalist Christians and the LDS, by using their theology and their congregations and organization to write religious laws into civil legal code. Joseph’s ploy is sad attempt to conceal the abusive role his denomination has had in severing the civil rights of real human beings.”

      The majority of people do not support gay marriage.

      http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm

      But even though I support repealing Prop 8 I’m a lying bigot because I’m Mormon. You’re a tool and you have no concept of reality.

      I NEVER SAID I know better on your experiences.

      But there’s one thing I do know how to do and that’s LEAD & PERSUADE people. Gee, thought by going out of my way to offer advice and arguments to use to win support you’d appreciate it. But I guess you’re too full of yourself to get beyond your own prejudices huh?

      “Here we find Joseph pretending to know the emotions, the innermost feelings, of two people he can’t even name by name, in a city he calls by a nickname that people from San Francisco find offensive and belittling. This is not an honest argument, it is a low-level derogatory libel.”

      Yes, because two grown men dressing up like nuns and going into a Catholic Church is such a heart felt and spiritual experience. I MUST empathize with them because they’re gay? I could care less if they’re homosexual or not. That was not a good strategy to bolster support for your cause.

      “Joseph’s posts are just an ugly and vicious game.”

      I don’t know what the crap you’re talking about, I’ve spent plenty of time on here arguing for a way to “win the hearts and minds” of the people who voted for Prop 8 to your cause but you can’t seem to stand the idea of it.

      Why Cassandra? What are you afraid of?

      “This complaint ignores the purpose of the court system in general, and of the Supreme courts in specific. It also is disingenuous, ignoring that GLBTQ people are the targets of extensive, culturally ingrained prejudice that make ‘appealing to the voters’ a case of appealing to oppressors. And it demonstrates bias on Joseph’s part – for his complaint is predicated on the notion that GLBTQ are only entitled to rights if heterosexuals give them those rights.

      One of the purposes of the court system is to protect the victims of wrongdoing from those who wronged them – to create justice from injustice. Prop 22 was a violation of the state Constitution, and taking that to the court was the reasonable and fair thing to do. Making a persecuted, suspect minority of 10% plus allies appeal to their oppressors is neither reasonable nor fair.”

      YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT…

      Holy crap woman, how arrogant/ignorant can you be?

      The courts are required to protect the citizenry, I agree.

      HOWEVER, your cause of wanting marriage would be much more effective and accepted if the populous is persuaded to change the law rather than a simple court ruling.

      What’s the better support?

      A decision by a court of 9 judges or a decision by millions of voters?

      “Joseph was trying make wrong right and right wrong. It is a standard, almost diagnostical trait in members of oppressor classes.”

      I’ll be direct here.

      You’re an idiot.

      I’ve made the case to support repealing Prop 8 and you do nothing more than attack and twist in an attempt to get your way.

      I asked it before, what are you afraid of? Are you afraid of the citizenry agreeing that you should not be withheld marriage?

      Help me understand because your arguments are emotional crap while you ignore what I’ve said multiple times, I support repealing Prop 8.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 1:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 247, David in Houston…..”Churches have NEVER been forced to marry anyone. They have ALWAYS had that protection. Yet another lie that the Yes on 8 side used to manipulate the citizens.”

      Exactly right! That’s part of what I had posted in a previous post but Joseph has stated earlier on that there were churches that would be forced to marry us. I asked him to point to the evidence in civil marriage gender netural laws in eight countries and two international cities that allow us to marry. He NEVER responded and could NOT admit he was wrong but went off on a tangent to avoid responding or taking responsibility for his statement, charging me with ranting like a child and calling me a “moron”, “numbnuts” and other derogatory things. Bullies always resort to that kind of verbal abuse when they can’t get their own way or get a point across. He askes for a reasonable discussion, yet he’s dishonest in his statement I posted, in fact lies about it in his failure to respond to or address it. I don’t think that’s unreasonable do you?

      Apr 23, 2010 at 8:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Robert, NYC:

      Robert, I NEVER SAID CHURCHES WERE FORCED TO MARRY.

      Try reading what I wrote, not what you want to read.

      I said there WAS A FEAR that it could happen through litigation. Founded or not in what has or has not happened people have had that fear. Does it make it right? No. But that doesn’t mean that there has never been reactionary decisions made upon that fear.

      You are stuck on something I never said and are assuming that it makes some special case and point for you when it doesn’t.

      I also never called you a moron.

      You did call someone a moron in your post 188.

      “YOU are nothing more than a total moron and a hypocrite just like the cult you believe in.”

      Stop being so hypocritical.

      I did call you a numbnuts and an idiot, that is true. I will admit when I said something. What’s your excuse for excessively swearing and calling all religions cults? It’s obvious you hate religion but then you act high and mighty when you get called out?

      I’m far from dishonest about your statement because you are attempting to get me to reply to something I never said.

      I raised the intensity of our discussion because you were refusing to read what was written and would not stop blaming me for something I never did.

      How will you try to spin this last post?

      It’s easy to search for what I have said, it’s called Control – F

      Apr 23, 2010 at 11:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cinaed
      Cinaed

      @Ogre Magi: Hey ogre magi-
      You have got to be THE most sophomoric, narrow-minded, bigoted, hateful excuse of a human being I have had the displeasure of observing. You have spouted some of the most asinine rhetoric I’ve ever heard. How old are you dude? 12? 18? 20? If you’re any older than that I would sorely disappointed and surprised! Grow the hell up…get your head out of your pants….and SEE the people that are around you! You live in the most sex-tainted warp mind….it’s a wonder you’ve made it this far in life! Grow up…your just a waste of skin at this point!!!!!

      Apr 23, 2010 at 2:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Christoffer
      Christoffer

      you know, some people that are gay actually go straight. some people that until their mid-thirties have considered themselves straight suddenly starts chasing for the same genitals they have. for a queer news site, you’re terribly narrow minded.

      May 3, 2010 at 7:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @Cassandar:

      My apologies for coming back to this conversation late. I only want to point out two things: 1) it is apparent to me that you only hear what you want to hear, and 2) this is clearly demonstrated by your definition ‘topography’ and the conclusions you drew based on *your* definition. Fortunately, ‘topography’ as you defined it is the stander, conventional definition.

      To pull these two points together, I will provide a different definition of ‘topography’ as it is used in my field of study — I am not a cartographer. ‘Topography’ is also used in the field of behavior analysis to distinguish between between the ‘function’ and ‘form’ of behavior. Functional descriptions of behavior include descriptions of antecedent and consequent events and their controlling effects on behavior. The ‘topography’ of behavior is simply a description of the form or appearance the behavior takes.

      My remarks about considering the ‘topography’ of sexual contact between two of the same gender referred to the *type* of contact. As I pointed out, sexual contact between two consenting adult males is very different than other types of sexual contact. As you pointed out, sexual contact between a priest and married man is also very different than other types of sexual contact.

      Let’s agree that the implication between “the pieces don’t fit” and the word “topography” was not an accidental mistake: it was the result of *you* intentionally twisting words. Such implications were so far from what I had intended to communicate that it is actually a *little* amusing you drew that conclusion.

      As the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, I anticipate you will again creatively twist my words and derive a very different meaning than what I intend to communicate (that is, if you are still reading this blog).

      May 13, 2010 at 7:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ogre Magi
      Ogre Magi

      Well, all I can say is: So many Christians, so few lions!

      May 13, 2010 at 9:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cinaed
      Cinaed [Different person #1 using similar name]

      …so many gamers without enough education….

      May 13, 2010 at 10:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Poor Joseph.

      “Your last post was quite sad and revealing.”

      The standard empty dismisal trick.

      “There was no outrage over Prop 22 being repealed by judges?”

      Followed by a strawman. Wait though, later Joseph accuses me of twisting, though he starts by doing that very thing.

      “No, it’s not mix of half truths and outright lies.”

      Actually, it was a mix of half truths and outright lies that he supported with more falsehoods.

      “You may perceive it that way because you were around the ones who you say were pushing on the merits.”

      Poor Joseph doesn’t realize how this statement confirms that his prior claim was a mix of half truths and outright lies.

      “You’re generalizing and making the bias remarks.”

      No, you are using an empty dismissal to discard the facts. People who support GLBTQ equality did not complain about the failure of the CA Supreme Court to uphold Prop 22, only people who endorse discrimination against GLBTQ people did, i.e., homophobes.

      “You assume I’m dishonest because of your unfounded bias.”

      No, I conclude that you are dishonest because of the large amount of false material in your posts.

      “My church isn’t a victim,”

      Poor Joseph, there is a difference between really being a victim, and you attempting to create the false impression that your church is victimized. The fact is that the LDS consistently portrays itself as the victim even as it deliberately and purposefully persecutes GLBTQ people.

      At least you admit that your church is not the victim, but the oppressor.

      “but nice try twisting the truth.”

      From the guy, supposedly religious, who has repeatedly distorted my post.

      “Oh have I? By saying I support repealing Prop 8? Are you that narrow minded and bitter of a person that you have to constantly be in attack mode?”

      Oh, now we get the ad hominem as a dismissal.

      “The majority of people do not support gay marriage.”

      So? The majority once supported slavery, barred women from voting. This country is not a pure democracy where the majority rules.

      “But even though I support repealing Prop 8 I’m a lying bigot because I’m Mormon.”

      If you say so, Joseph. However, I pointed out specific lies you have told and specific ways you have demonstrated bigotry and prejudice.

      “You’re a tool and you have no concept of reality.”

      Personal attack in place of a reasoned and accurate rebuttal is symptomatic of prejudice.

      “I NEVER SAID I know better on your experiences.”

      Actually, Joseph, you did, I even carefully quoted where you decided that you knew better than real GLBTQ people what we experience.

      “But there’s one thing I do know how to do and that’s LEAD & PERSUADE people.”

      A comedic interlude Joseph, at this point? Well, you if you do either of the above, you must be consciously deciding not to demonstrate either ability in your posts.

      “But I guess you’re too full of yourself to get beyond your own prejudices huh?”

      Are these insulting and false assertions about my character what you consider ‘persuading’ – looks more like coercive and intimidation.

      “Yes, because two grown men dressing up like nuns and going into a Catholic Church is such a heart felt and spiritual experience.”

      How do you know that they were not expressing a heart felt and sincere spiritual experience? Because of their attire? How superficial and judgemental. It is almost as if you think you are a god, Joseph, capable of reading the hearts and minds of people you don’t know, don’t even know their names. Of course, your argument is one entirely composed of arrogance and homophobia. See, Joseph, you assumed that because of who the two men were, they were insincere.

      “I don’t know what the crap you’re talking about, I’ve spent plenty of time on here arguing for a way to “win the hearts and minds” of the people who voted for Prop 8 to your cause but you can’t seem to stand the idea of it.”

      You’ve spent time vilifying other people and advocating for tactics that have proven to be worthless and self-defeating. You tried to convince GLBTQ people to sabotage their quest for the equality your church denies them.

      “Why Cassandra? What are you afraid of?”

      More pointless game playing.

      “YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT…”

      I’m not the one screaming and shouting, and certainly not the one dismissing reality.

      “Holy crap woman, how arrogant/ignorant can you be?”
      Gee, another case of Joseph assuming all kinds of ugly things about someone.

      “The courts are required to protect the citizenry, I agree.

      HOWEVER, your cause of wanting marriage would be much more effective and accepted if the populous is persuaded to change the law rather than a simple court ruling.”

      Bullshit Joseph. We’re talking about a basic human right, and GLBTQ people should not have to convince anyone, particularly religious people, that we are entitled to equality.

      “A decision by a court of 9 judges or a decision by millions of voters?”

      Which ever achieves equality faster, so that fewer people are harmed during the wait. Getting all the hate-filled people to change their minds will take years, if not generations. In the meantime, real people experience real harm because they are not allowed to marry.

      If you and your church had and taught compassion, you’d see that.

      I wrote: “Joseph was trying make wrong right and right wrong. It is a standard, almost diagnostical trait in members of oppressor classes.”

      Joseph replied: “I’ll be direct here.

      You’re an idiot.”

      Which just substantiates my point.

      “I asked it before, what are you afraid of? Are you afraid of the citizenry agreeing that you should not be withheld marriage?

      Help me understand because your arguments are emotional crap while you ignore what I’ve said multiple times, I support repealing Prop 8.”

      And more personal attack in place of actually addressing what I wrote. This is homophobia in action folks.

      I’m sorry I didn’t get back earlier to take you to task for being abusive and homophobic, Joseph.

      May 13, 2010 at 11:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Ryan:)

      Imagine, you went to all the effort to reply long after the fact, (though that did bring Joseph’s bs to my attention to too), only to say nothing of substance.

      “I only want to point out two things: 1) it is apparent to me that you only hear what you want to hear, and 2) this is clearly demonstrated by your definition ‘topography’ and the conclusions you drew based on *your* definition. Fortunately, ‘topography’ as you defined it is the stander, conventional definition.”

      So you trotted back all this time later, resurrecting a dead thread, to insult me. Bizarrely, you fabricate one insult from the fact that I used the accurate definition of a word, rather than your imaginary one.

      “To pull these two points together, I will provide a different definition of ‘topography’ as it is used in my field of study ”

      If only you’d provided a citation to back you up.

      “My remarks about considering the ‘topography’ of sexual contact between two of the same gender referred to the *type* of contact.”

      And that is not rational or accurate.

      “As I pointed out, sexual contact between two consenting adult males is very different than other types of sexual contact.”

      Only it is not. How is kissing “very different” when two males do it, vs two females or a male and a female? How is a blow job “very different” when a male receives it from another male, vs a female? And while coitus and anal intercourse are not exact analogues, they are very similar, particularly in the potential emotional and unitive experience.

      “As you pointed out, sexual contact between a priest and married man is also very different than other types of sexual contact.”

      Wrong again. You are defining sexual contact in terms of its context, which is convenient for vilifying GLBTQ people, but that is not accurate. The circumstance, the context, of a priest and married having sex is different from the circumstance of two men who are committed to each other, or a man and a woman who are committed to each other, and so on.

      “Let’s agree that the implication between “the pieces don’t fit” and the word “topography” was not an accidental mistake: it was the result of *you* intentionally twisting words.”

      Sorry, but the meaning of your words is your responsiblity. You admit it was not a mistake, you chose to invoke “the pieces don’t fit” argument by using a bizarre usage of the word topography. Take responsibility for your poor communication skill.

      Now, I would have accept that it was an accident, if you’d just said “I didn’t mean that at all” or something similar. But instead you used the issue as the launch pad for derogatory remarks about me – which indicates guilt on your part.

      “As the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, I anticipate you will again creatively twist my words and derive a very different meaning than what I intend to communicate (that is, if you are still reading this blog).”

      Ah, the pre-emptive strike. Which only means that I was correct in all of my assessments, and your only recourse is to try to discredit my rebuttal in advance, rather than even attempt to demonstrate any errors in my post directly.

      I think you waited a month to reply, digging up a dead thread, so you could have the last word, and have it all be ugly and degrading and dishonest, hoping it would go unrebutted, and just to clinch the deal, figured that a pre-emptive dismissal would work for you.

      But then, that’s the kind of thing one expects from anyone malicious enough to equate same-sex lovemaking with raping animals, as you did.

      May 14, 2010 at 12:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      CASSANDRA, you are right on! Thank you for your pwerful engagement and reasoning skills!

      May 14, 2010 at 12:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @a href=”#comment-292122″>George: @Scotty: @Cassandra: @Cassandar: @Christoffer: @Milesius: Why are we suddenly plagued by this highly organized clique of professional christers trying to spread their wretched anti-GLBT hatred and proselytize.

      We’re not having it.

      Go back to the sky pixie cult that sent you and tell them you’re not up to the job.

      [img]http://www.nerditry.com/images/tent-revival.JPG [/img]

      May 14, 2010 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: I’ll write more later, I’m going to sleep early tonight so I can get up tomorrow.

      But I will say that all of your arguments are riddled with fallacies considering you have nothing to back up anything you say.

      Simply brushing off a statement as a “lie or untruth” without proving it to be such is quite a lazy and pious attempt to salvage a losing argument.

      I can’t wait to show my homosexual friends the ignorance and bigotry that you spew.

      I’m such a “homophobe” considering one of my best friends in my unit is a lesbian and she’s one of my favorite people on the planet. Yes, I’m a complete “homophobe” for never even considering her to be anything but a great person. Or the gay Soldier who is in my squad, the one that everyone in our platoon respects and we would all stand up for if a real homophobe were to attempt to insult or assault him. That’s why Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is pretty irrelevant and doesn’t need to continue either, we all know if someone in our unit is a homosexual and we Don’t Care.

      As for the guys dressed like nuns, if you can’t see through it and want to sympathize for someone for no reason, you seriously need to rejoin the real world possibly seek some profession help.

      This is all for tonight.

      Goodnight

      May 14, 2010 at 12:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • counterpoll
      counterpoll

      Mormons are NOT Christians! They have supplemented the inerrant WORD OF GOD and the story of JESUS with their murderous polygymous founder’s BOOK OF MORMON.

      EXAMPLE: Jesus Christ turned WATER into WINE. He did not turn WINE into H2O!
      Mormons forbid members of their faith from alcohol. Therefore they REJECT the actions of JESUS in favor of their own satanic inspired texts. They also permit divorce — something Jesus was very clearly against. The words of Joseph Smith were NOT predicted or foretold in the Bible, unlike how the JESUS the Lamb of God was clearly tied to prophesy in the Old Testament. After the Word of God in the New Testament, there was No need for further prophesy.

      Therefore, their teachings on the REAL Bible are FALSE. Thus they are to be castigated from the Kingdom of Heaven, to burn evermore in the fires of Hell.

      Repent, Sinners.

      May 14, 2010 at 1:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Cassandra:

      You said, “Wrong again. You are defining sexual contact in terms of its context…” but earlier you used context to argue your point when you said:

      “The two parallel passages in Leviticus, in the original Hebrew, use two different words for male in each passage; first a word that indicates husband, and then a word that indicates priest. The concept actually communicated in both passages is a condemnation of husbands cheating on their wives by having sex with priests. And the term of judgment that appears in both passages is not the word for sin, but the word for ‘ritual impurity’ with strong associations to idolatry. Both passages come in the context of prohibitions of fertility rituals practiced in other religions.”

      “Neither is about homosexuality in general, just as the many more passages that condemn specific instances of heterosexual intercourse condemn heterosexuality in general.”

      I’m sorry, but I have to side with Ryan :) on this one – you do twist words, and you do it quite well. Get over it, please. Not everyone is out to vilify us GLBTQ people, but you’re doing a great job vilifying those who disagree with you/us. Get over yourself.

      May 14, 2010 at 2:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “I’ll write more later, I’m going to sleep early tonight so I can get up tomorrow.”

      You could take time to post derogatory dismissals and insults, but not a sensible, fact-based rebuttal. Perhaps your priorities are a bit skewed toward the abusive.

      ‘But I will say that all of your arguments are riddled with fallacies considering you have nothing to back up anything you say.

      Simply brushing off a statement as a “lie or untruth” without proving it to be such is quite a lazy and pious attempt to salvage a losing argument.”

      Of course, I forgot, it is better to brush off statements as “riddled with fallacies” and “lazy and pious” and name-calling like “You’re an idiot”. Do you really not see the irony – your second paragraph quoted above perfectly describes and your post from 4/23.

      Admittedly, because I quoted you extensively, and those quotations generally were fallacious, there were a lot of fallacies contained in my post – but all were yours to begin with.

      “I can’t wait to show my homosexual friends the ignorance and bigotry that you spew.”

      Should you ever have any, use the words gay or lesbian instead of homosexual. Homosexual is a clinical term and most GLBTQ people find it insulting since it carries a certain medical stigma.

      “I’m such a “homophobe” considering one of my best friends in my unit is a lesbian and she’s one of my favorite people on the planet.”

      Every homophobe claims to have a token gay or lesbian friend. And your unsubstantiatable claim to being in the military is empty posturing.

      “Yes, I’m a complete “homophobe” for never even considering her ”

      It is such a transparent dodge, Joseph, to defend yourself against self-created reasons that were not raised rather than those that actually have been raised and documented.

      The basis for pointing out homophobia in your posts, Joseph, comes from your posts, and other people have pointed those homophobic elements out to you beside me. But, it is easier to be outraged over how you treat someone you claim you know, but whose existence cannot be verified.

      Frankly, you raise the issue of your homophobia more than anyone else has. Clearly, you are confessing by accusing others of accusing you.

      “As for the guys dressed like nuns, if you can’t see through it and want to sympathize for someone for no reason, you seriously need to rejoin the real world possibly seek some profession help.”

      So, in your opinion, guys dressed like nuns are intrinsically and automatically incapable of sincere religious experiences. And you pretend you are not a homophobe.

      Joseph, I have known many members of the Sisters of perpetual Indulgence over the years, most were better Catholics, in terms of following Christ, than the Pope seems to be. I’m talking about folks who donated considerable amounts of their free time to raise funds for HIV Hospice and victims of hate crimes, in one of the very few organizations were 100% of the proceeds of a fundraiser go to the cause.

      You are judging people you don’t know in a very personal and derogatory way, impugning their character and spirituality, solely because you associate the way they dress with homosexuality, and therefore, whatever they do is wrong.

      And while you claim you are not a homophobe, you’ve repeatedly cast aspersions on my mental health (instead of actually addressing my positions) – mirroring standard homophobic position that homosexuals are mentally ill. Your posts shout to the world that see us as sick in the head.

      The homophobia in your posts is not in doubt here, but inquiring minds would like to know:

      who is lifting your luggage?

      I mean, what are the odds that an upstanding, allegedly military heterosexual like you would just happen to be here on Queerty, a gay website, only 30 minutes after I find, and respond to, a post of yours that is 3 weeks old?

      Did you enjoy the photo set of Noah Mills?

      May 14, 2010 at 3:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Cassandra:

      “I mean, what are the odds that an upstanding, allegedly military heterosexual like you would just happen to be here on Queerty, a gay website, only 30 minutes after I find, and respond to, a post of yours that is 3 weeks old?”

      Your comment is offensively subjective. Do you not know about the subscribe option? Or did you deliberately ignore this fact? Inquiring minds would like to know.

      May 14, 2010 at 10:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Cassandra:,do you know one of your fellow missionaries named getreal?

      May 14, 2010 at 10:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cam: Cam, you probably shouldn’t waste your time pointing out facts to Cassandra, she’ll quote you then dismiss you without any facts of her own and then claim she completely refuted you because of her quotes.

      Here’s a silly fact, why would I, a heterosexual Mormon Soldier even read this article? Because Google sends me news updates on certain topics, keyword Mormon being one of them, which is how I found this article. And yes, I subscribed to the article so I could read comment updates. Technology is an amazing convenience to ignore when you want to accuse someone of being in the closet for simply posting comments on a website.

      May 14, 2010 at 11:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      @Cassandra: You are a good thinker, and I’ve enjoyed following your rhetorical flourish on many topics on this site. However, I must ask, why are you wasting so much time with these mormon trolls? These “happy face” nazis aren’t worth your time.

      May 14, 2010 at 12:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 271 · Joseph
      @Cam:
      Here’s a silly fact, why would I, a heterosexual Mormon Soldier even read this article? Because Google sends me news updates on certain topics, keyword Mormon being one of them, which is how I found this article. And yes, I subscribed to the article so I could read comment updates. Technology is an amazing convenience to ignore when you want to accuse someone of being in the closet for simply posting comments on a website.
      _____________________

      So you are a “Hetrosexual” Mormon Soldier, and yet you purport to know so much about what your homosexual brethren think and are going through. Sure, keep telling yourself that.

      May 14, 2010 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cam: I never purported to know what my homosexual brethren think and are going through, using your words. Can you actually show with my words and referense which post I made such claims to know what people are going through?

      The example of the guys dressed as nuns who went to that Catholic Church does not count as such a claim, their behavior was quite obvious and their tactic was not effective in garnering support for their cause.

      I support repealing Prop 8.

      What I do not support is a losing strategy to accomplish such things.

      I’ll admit that at one point, I supported the ban, but then I had an intellectually honest conversation with myself and I came to the simple conclusion that it is Unconstituional and something I could no longer consider supporting it. And I came to this conclusion before the election.

      May 14, 2010 at 12:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Bill Perdue:

      Haven’t been here in a while. Just wanted to let ya’ll know that Ty and Danielle are married. They had a very beautiful reception which I happily drove 10 hours to attend.

      Their marriage will last as long as they keep the commandments of God and leave Him first in their lives. You guys are ALL talk and no action. Leave it to a few disgruntled flaming homosexuals to only hope and wish for a man’s failure because he saw fit to leave a very sinful, God-detested lifestyle.

      It takes a lot of courage to confess to the world about such a plight, but it takes more courage to admit being wrong by living a slave to an unholy Narcissus-type lifestyle and by the power of the Holy Ghost to try with all your might to follow the instruction of the Most High God.

      Because God’s love is not in you, true love will never exist within you, for GOD IS LOVE.

      Happy Mormon-bashing, my gender-confused friends! May God forgive you for your inane pride and religious bigotry.

      May 24, 2010 at 12:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @PaquitofromtheBlock:

      said “I banged him.”

      Because homosexuality really is all about the sex, isn’t it? You can’t love beyond the physical, can you? Of course, you have to have God in your life to know what TRUE love looks like rather than the carnal artificial construct of a hate-driven, free-for-all world that rejects holy truths for temporal satisfactions.

      Then, again, you showed me more proof beyond the sexually explicit photos that adorn this blog that homosexuality is first and foremost a sexual experience rather than a loving one.

      May 24, 2010 at 1:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      AxelDC,

      I really feel sorry for you. I got a chance to meet Stuart Matis’ dad for the first time this past Friday. Great man. He loved his son. The church cared for his son.

      I have never been a part of a church that makes a conscious effort to help those that suffer from homosexual attractions as the LDS Church. Now there are other religions that embrace homosexuality: the Wiccans, the Pagans, the atheists, agnostics, and Episcopalians to name a few.

      These religious factions preach tolerance of homosexuality and lifestyle, thereof. They preach tolerance, yes, and they do so at the expense of holy direction. Plenty of place in scriptures condemn homosexuality. No where, is it lifted up or encouraged. None of righteous people in any written scripture were practicing homosexuals. None.

      I feel bad for you because you think it’s the Church fault for Stuart’s death. Stuart had to find the strength within himself. I’ve met some of Stuart’s friends too. From their accounts, he never blamed the Church or his parents for failing to accept him. So why are you?

      May 24, 2010 at 1:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 277, Scotty, so in your distored view of human sexuality and behavior, straight people who divorce, on average one in two straight marriages fail, implies that sex is the overwhelming reason as to the break up. Why do so many straight married people commit adultery if its not about sex? Its a bit rich for you to say that homosexuality is about sex. As a so called “christian”, you shouldn’t be judging others let alone condemning them. Your imaginary deity didn’t mention homosexuality once, nor did the radical Jesus Christ. Why aren’t you going after your own kind (assuming you’re not one of those self loathing closet cases trolling gay blogsites out of prurient interest)? I know many straight single men and women who sleep around, but I don’t see you making any derogatory comments about them. Clean up your own house before you start denigrating others over the actions of a few who do not represent us. The problem with idiots like you is you don’t know any gay people to have made such an asinine statement.

      May 24, 2010 at 8:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David in Houston
      David in Houston

      Nicely said, as usual, Robert, NYC. Scotty sounds like one of the most un-religious people I’ve heard in a long time. Condemning and judgmental… he continues to paint all gay people with the same broad brush. We’re all basically sex-crazed deviants that are incapable of REAL love, unlike those God-loving folk that have the power to change their sexual orientation at will. Dr. Rekers would be SO proud of them.

      As for the gay “sexually explicit photos”, I’d wager that straight porn outnumbers gay porn 1,000 to 1. Secondly, I’d hardly call scantily clad men “sexually explicit”. Finally, whoever said that you can’t be in a loving long-term monogamous relationship and still admire the beauty and sexuality of the human body? That’s nothing to be ashamed about.

      “Leave it to a few disgruntled flaming homosexuals to only hope and wish for a man’s failure because he saw fit to leave a very sinful, God-detested lifestyle.”

      Doesn’t God also detest adultery and divorce? Yet those “sins” get a free pass in our society. Why is that? I’m guessing that half the churches in the country would be empty if they didn’t look the other way. We can’t have the churches pissing off their (paying) parishioners, can we? See where I’m going with this?

      What this all comes down to is Ty is “pretending to be straight” because his religious beliefs tell him he has to, to please his God. I hardly think “living your entire life lying to yourself” is anything to aspire to.

      May 24, 2010 at 10:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      David in Houston, No. 280, thank you. Scotty and all of those GOP lovers and tea baggers/partiers dismiss or totally ignore the sexual depravities of Mark Sanford, John Edwards, Vito Fossella, Newt Gingrich, the late Henry Hyde, the litany is endless, all straight married philanderers and not a peep of condemnation from the GOP, the Democrats or the religious cults. Now, Scotty in his delusional thinking probably wouldn’t equate that with an obsession with sex. This kind of deviancy is rampant among straights. The number of straight whore houses and female whores and call girls by far outnumber their gay counterparts per capita. Now Scotty wouldn’t equate the straight component with sex now would he? Look at the porn industry, overwhelmingly straight and its a known fact that many of the red states have a far higher rate of straight porn subscribers than those in the blue states. He hasn’t done his homework. Isn’t it revealing to see these religious cultists obsess about the sex lives of gay people but ignore the straights?

      May 24, 2010 at 11:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      @Scotty
      Scotty…I take GREAT offense about what you said about gay relationships!! All about sex…really? My partner and I have been together MONOGAMOUSLY for 20 years. I did not come out until I was thirty because of my own internal homophobia and Catholic upbringing. Thank God I did!!! My partner and I have had sooo much fun together! Those years before I came out were very lonely. I cannot imagine taking the closet to the grave. As far as marrying a woman just to make it “look right”..that would be so unfair not just to the woman but also to yourself. And..I am sorry…my God would consider that a sin. It is a lie. A buddy of mine did that and the results were disastrous. They are now divorced and he is living with his partner of eight years in Florida.
      I am sorry..but your Mormon friend who committed suicide because he was gay would still be alive today if it weren’t for the prejudicial teachings of the church. I am so sick of people “cherry picking” verses in the Old Testament. Yes..we all know about Leviticus. In that same book Lev25:44 states it is quite alright to possess slaves. Do you follow that one? Or..how about Exodus35:2 which clearly states that people who work on the Sabbath should be put to death. It is in the bible..do the Mormons believe that as well? If not..why..it is the word of God..right?
      God gave us all a brain..and I think it is a sin not to use it.
      Blindly following a religion without questioning is destructive. The terrorists who flew planes into buildings on Sept. 11 were doing this for Allah.
      You know as well as I that sexual orientation is not a choice. I hope you find your way someday. The only way you can find complete happiness is by being yourself..the way you were created. I sincerely wish that for you..life is too short.
      Peace!
      Jim

      May 24, 2010 at 11:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      SCOTTY, same sex love is very godly and never have I truly believed God detests it-that is your straight brainwashed offensive opinion. As you know, straight men are the the most evil influence on this world and the bible condemns their actions, yet not a peep from you as to how sinful the common straight man is. Pure heteroshit dogma. We eunuchs are special to god. Very special.Jesus said so, and I know it.

      May 24, 2010 at 1:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @nikko:

      Yeah, same sex love is so ordained of God? PROVE IT!!! Fact is, you can’t. None of the righteous people of the Old Testament, New Testament, Jewish Torah, the Holy Qu’ran, the Book of Mormon, or any special religious writing where Adam and Eve were the first parents engaged in homosexual activity. You will never be able to show many any written scriptures of a righteous homosexual anywhere in any written scriptures.

      And thank you for your foul language. You only prove that the queer agenda which this blog so eloquently promotes is one of pure sexual love, with very little emotional connection, and absolutely NO spiritual connection.

      May 24, 2010 at 4:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @JamesStone:

      Take offense all you want. The grass withers and flowers fade, but the Word of God shall stand forever and so shall His standard. One man. . . .one woman. Show me in the scriptures where your type of relationship was approved and ordained of God. SHOW ME!!

      What? You mean you can’t? I’m not surprised. By their works ye shall know them. You can have the physical and even a little bit of emotional connection with your same sex love, but of the spiritual for you there is no love save it only be of false gods and the “angel of light” as is written in scriptures. But then, this kind of “spiritual love” is not of the Most High God, nor is it eternal.

      I don’t care if you accuse me of judging you. You have first falsely accused and judged Ty Mansfield, me, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. You and your kind have every intentions of promoting and encouraging your lifestyle in public schools, polluting the minds of the youth and transforming them to be as unholy and far from God as you are. And you do so under the false guise of “tolerance.”

      Don’t worry. Before Christ comes again, your kind will be dealt with in a manner most deserving.

      For example, what did the foolish man build his house on? Sand. What is an example of building your house on sand here in America? How about building your house on a loose tectonic plate west of the ever-so weakening San Andreas fault line? What cities lie west of the San Andreas? San Francisco (the homosexual capital of the world), and cities that embrace homosexuality and the liberal agenda that wishes to do away with our Heavenly Father from their midst are also west of the San Andreas. Hollywood, Los Angeles, Fresno, San Diego, Oakland, San Jose, Anaheim–all cities built on sand (a loose tectonic plate).

      These cities gave rise to Californication and so embrace Californication. The judgment of Sodom will be upon these cities and it will be an example for the ignorant and faithless anti-Christian liberals of the 21st Century. So you need proof to believe? You will receive your proof, but then it’ll be too late for you.

      May 24, 2010 at 5:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :) [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Scotty, I agree that unkind things have been said about Ty and Danielle and broad generalizations have been made about LDS people and the LDS church. I also agree that you are making broad generalizations about gay relationships and that you have made some rather unkind statements.

      May 24, 2010 at 6:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      Scotty -beware of internal homophobia! It can kill you. I know because I lived with it until I was thirty
      I wish you the best. I really do…

      May 24, 2010 at 6:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty, Bill Perdue

      Since Josesph apparently lacks the integrity to address anything I actually post, and simply posts lies and ad hominem instead, the only left to say at the moment is this:

      The two of you are kindred spirits, peers, comrades in contempt, soulmates of hate.

      Each of you abuses other humans beings for your own delight and ego, without a shred of decency or humanity. Bill hungers for a world without people of faith, Scotty hungers for a world without gays and lesbians, both would destroy others to make themselves feel superior and right.

      Atheism is a prejudice just like homophobia, and neither is excusable or acceptable or just.

      May 24, 2010 at 7:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge
      james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge

      Are you all aware (or do you even care) that you’re spending all this time and effort talking about fictional beings in the sky that don’t exist, like the Stars Wars geeks in their fan forums (which are infinitely more entertaining and rational?) Of course you do, deep down inside but something has to fill the emptiness I suppose…

      May 24, 2010 at 7:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge

      Fictional beings – how fictional are you? For all anyone here can know, james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge may be a fictional sockpuppet for Bill Perdue, which could easily be a sockpuppet for any of the other fundamentalist atheists who fill Queerty with hate speech.

      Just because you have not experienced something doesn’t make it fiction. That holds true whether the something is God, or genuine love between two people of the same gender.

      When you dismiss religious people’s experiences as “fictional beings in the sky that don’t exist” – you are doing the exact same thing that homophobes do to homosexuals.

      You are no better than Scotty, and just as abusive.

      As for your abusive guess about our lives “filling the emptiness” – foul claims like that are like farts – whoever smelt it, dealt it. Kindly refrain from projecting the conditions of your own life on to us.

      May 24, 2010 at 7:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge
      james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge

      @Cassandra: You just like to hear the sound of your own voice. Typical religious nut. Hate thy neighbor because a fictional sky-being is telling you to hate the unbelievers…idiots all of you. Stop worrying about what’s above you (nothing) and worry about making your world a better place. You have proof we all exist so worry about your fellow man, not magical pixie-man in the sky.

      May 24, 2010 at 8:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Cassandra: didn’t get any last night – again – because his/her pretend lover, jebuz, isn’t real.

      That’s why Cassandra is so crabby all the time. And bothers sane people with his/her drivel. Face it, C, you’re not going to recruit anyone here. Do your missionary work somewhere else.

      Really, C, there is no jebuz, no sky pixies, no sky thunderer. That’s just more howling madness from the Dark Ages. If you want real relief just purchase a nice penile substitute. And some lithium. Actually, lots of lithium.

      And then leave the humans alone.

      May 24, 2010 at 9:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      SCOTTY, David and Jonathan.
      Me.
      And Jesus never married. Why would he not have married if it was so holy?
      You are just vile, you hateroshit. All great civilizations owe much to male love-the highest of culture and progress, not one-sided stiffnecks like you straight guys. Ugh.

      May 24, 2010 at 10:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      JAMES and BILL, why are you two against CASSANDRA,she is on our side??!

      May 24, 2010 at 10:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      These closeted motherfuckers need to grow the fuck up. Wow, are we supposed to be impressed that a self hating gay man is marrying a woman? Gee, is this a first or what? NO IT IS NOT. He is just a queen with a lot of baggae he prefers to collect.

      May 24, 2010 at 10:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      I should invent a dildo in the form of a cross that little miss muffie and chip can praise for the cure. You mean if you get hard and stick in in her, you are a straight boy? NO. you are just a stupid self hating gay closeted idiot. Grow the fuck up. i cant stand these stupid shitheads.

      May 24, 2010 at 10:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Scotty, No. 284…you are aware of course that Adam & Eve, the so called first parents of the human race (long been debunked by science) were proponents of incest? They allegedly had several children but can you tell all of us how the planet became populated? In order for that to have occurred, their children would have had to have committed incest many times with one another and perhaps with their parents. No wonder there are so many brain-damaged people like you in the world. Your lifestyle (religious cultism) is NOT immutable. You did NOT come into this world religion addicted, its all learned behavior taught by your equally brain-damaged parents, much like the hate you’re espousing, devolved brains at best.

      May 25, 2010 at 8:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge
      james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge

      @nikko: Not really she’s not. Plus she’s a religious wack-job on the level of one of those guys you see with a sign that says “the end is near: repent!” on the street. These people are all a part of the religious zealotry that’s held back social and scientific progress throughout the ages, including now.

      May 25, 2010 at 8:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: Oh Cassandra…

      “You could take time to post derogatory dismissals and insults, but not a sensible, fact-based rebuttal. Perhaps your priorities are a bit skewed toward the abusive.”

      I would have written you back much earlier, but I had to go TDY. It’s a military abbreviation for Temporary Duty. I had to spend time at my Company Minus. Which is my Company Headquarters, the term “minus” is used when a company has detachments in other locations, we have two detachments. So it is the Company HQ “minus” the detachments.

      On top of that, I’ve been sick and helping my friend and his family move into my house to help him since he just got a new job and has to relocate.

      So I’m sorry my reply hasn’t been as prompt as you would like.

      “Of course, I forgot, it is better to brush off statements as “riddled with fallacies” and “lazy and pious” and name-calling like “You’re an idiot”. Do you really not see the irony – your second paragraph quoted above perfectly describes and your post from 4/23.”

      Why don’t you try to provide actual information that proves I lie, rather than making a claim that I’m a liar and a homophobe with nothing to support your claims other than your own ignorant accusations?

      When you make claims with no evidence that I am a liar, then it is obvious that such claims are riddled with fallacies because you provide nothing to support anything you say.

      I have a low tolerance for ignorance and stupidity. I will openly admit that. I can also offend people at any given moment because I refuse to be “politically correct.”

      What you may not ever experience is that though I am a very harsh person because pretending to play nice only perpetuates ignorance and self diluted ideas of superiority, I am one of the most generous people around. I will bend over backwards for people I care about and even compromise my own well being for someone in need who I might not know. And this includes people of all backgrounds, races, ethnicities, religions, political views and orientations.

      But you can feel free to brush it aside like you do everything else.

      As for your abusive claim…

      If I point out an obvious observation, such as a stupid remark or an action that would qualify someone as an idiot, then you may actually need some therapy if you think that is real abuse. That’s not an insult, it is a recommendation for professional assistance in understanding the real world and accepting the truth that life is not a sugar coated candy store with all things sensitive.

      People are murdered/tortured in many parts of the world simply for what they say, think, or believe.

      A statement that may hurt overly sensitive feelings is not liked, but is no way comparable to true victims of abuse. You belittle real victims by making such asinine claims.

      “Should you ever have any, use the words gay or lesbian instead of homosexual. Homosexual is a clinical term and most GLBTQ people find it insulting since it carries a certain medical stigma.”

      Let’s see, I’ve served with three gay men and one lesbian. I’ve also had two gay friends over the years, one I went to high school with and other one of my male friends from high school is bisexual. I also have a friend I went to high school with who left her husband for another woman a few years ago. If you prefer the words gay or lesbian, that’s fine, I’ll use them. I only use them because it gets old being called a bigot for saying gay or lesbian. By the way, did you know the Island of Lesbos is not happy about the term Lesbian being associated homosexual women? I’m serious, it’s an actual island in the Mediterranean and Lesbians are inhabitants of said island. Look it up.

      “It is such a transparent dodge, Joseph, to defend yourself against self-created reasons that were not raised rather than those that actually have been raised and documented.
      The basis for pointing out homophobia in your posts, Joseph, comes from your posts, and other people have pointed those homophobic elements out to you beside me. But, it is easier to be outraged over how you treat someone you claim you know, but whose existence cannot be verified.
      Frankly, you raise the issue of your homophobia more than anyone else has. Clearly, you are confessing by accusing others of accusing you.”

      Nice try, but you failed to twist my words into a self-accusation because I have never done such a thing.

      You are again claiming something without providing any support. This is one of those fallacy moments I mentioned before.

      It was never a dodge, it’s called sarcasm.

      Homophobia is documented where and how?

      An accusation without establishing factual support is not documented proof.

      The verification of my gay and lesbian friends is a mute point. They can easily be found on Facebook or Myspace, but I would never give out their names out of respect for their privacy.

      The problem isn’t with their existence, it is with your own insecurities or trust issues or arrogance. If their existence is an issue to your argument, then they must simply be discarded in order in attempt to legitimize your argument.

      “So, in your opinion, guys dressed like nuns are intrinsically and automatically incapable of sincere religious experiences. And you pretend you are not a homophobe.”

      I have never made a claim that the men are incapable of sincere religious experiences.

      Let me elaborate more on what I said.

      Two gay men walk into a Catholic church dressed as nuns during a very political election with Proposition 8 on the ballot and you claim they were motivated by religious conviction? That really is naivety at its best or worse or a poor attempt to once against legitimize your argument.

      It was a blatant insult to that church because of its support for Prop 8. An insult in which you have every right to agree or disagree with.

      Pointing out the obvious does not make one a homophobe.

      “Joseph, I have known many members of the Sisters of perpetual Indulgence over the years, most were better Catholics, in terms of following Christ, than the Pope seems to be. I’m talking about folks who donated considerable amounts of their free time to raise funds for HIV Hospice and victims of hate crimes, in one of the very few organizations were 100% of the proceeds of a fundraiser go to the cause.”

      This question does not belittle the people you say you know who are so generous, BUT, so what?

      I never said being gay or lesbian made you a bad person or that you would be incapable of doing good things.

      When it comes to fund-raising and organizing things, I haven’t seen many better organized or committed than the LGBT organizations. And if they apply those talents to do good things, then that is commendable.

      The great intentions of these people have nothing to do with the topic of our conversation. I could simply be like you and dismiss them because I cannot verify to myself that they exist, but why would I need to do that? I believe you that they exist and that they are good people who do good things. I have no reason to discount what they do or their existence, but I do not see the relevance of you bringing them up in this conversation.

      If mentioning their efforts are truly relevant, please explain how. It seems the conversation turned into you attacking me because of assumptions you have made without any factual information to support these claims. The previous conversation was my harsh critique of the strategies used to over turn Prop 8 because they are strategies based on emotion and a controlled environment of people who all think the same. It is a group think scenario which will not produce the positive results you want because it does not appeal to changing the hearts/minds of the people who voted for Prop 22 and Prop 8.

      California is a ballot initiative state that can amend its constitution through initiatives as well as legislative bills. This creates a scenario in which the population, if over turned in the courts, can simply change the constitution again as a result of populous rage. This is what happened with Prop 8 and if you think the state supreme court over turning Prop 8 is the best way to go because they may say it is unconstitutional, you are naive to think that another ballot initiative can’t be submitted to change the conflicting part of the constitution as well as restore the verbiage that Prop 8 had. That is why I advocated an angle to where the people repeal Prop 8 instead of the courts. That saves a lot of time, money and social backlash.

      “You are judging people you don’t know in a very personal and derogatory way, impugning their character and spirituality, solely because you associate the way they dress with homosexuality, and therefore, whatever they do is wrong.”

      Prove it.

      I have stated the reasons why I did not condone their actions. Drawing attention to themselves by deliberately insulting a church, even though it was an opposition church with Prop 8, was never a good way to win support for their cause outside their inner circles. You may have thought it was “brave” and “wonderful” but it pissed a lot of voters off.

      Also, I don’t know everything they do; therefor, I have never said everything they do is wrong. Personally, I don’t care what else they do.

      “And while you claim you are not a homophobe, you’ve repeatedly cast aspersions on my mental health (instead of actually addressing my positions) – mirroring standard homophobic position that homosexuals are mentally ill. Your posts shout to the world that see us as sick in the head.”

      No… I never said you are mentally ill for being a lesbian. I have made the case for your touchy feel good crap that has no basis in reality. That again is once of your fallacies and assumptions. Those comments are focused on your accusations of calling me abusive because you are demeaning victims of real abuse by comparing my blunt verbiage to abuse. Your refusal to use facts or provide support for arguments are also part of my call for professional help. Though it may be more of an education in debate and critical thinking since you simply refuse to do so. Hell, I could care less about “professional help” if you’d simply take the time to realize the complex hard truths that make up this world and stop making things up about what I am saying.

      “The homophobia in your posts is not in doubt here, but inquiring minds would like to know:
      who is lifting your luggage?”

      So my non-existing homophobia that you’ve made up is not in doubt? Well I’m glad to know that you don’t doubt your own false accusations. How about coming back to reality?

      So you want to know if I’m in the closet? I must disappoint you, I am neither in nor out. I am engaged to a beautiful woman who I look forward to having a family with.

      “I mean, what are the odds that an upstanding, allegedly military heterosexual like you would just happen to be here on Queerty, a gay website, only 30 minutes after I find, and respond to, a post of yours that is 3 weeks old?”

      I’ve told you before, I get Google updates in my email that pertain to the keyword Mormon. That is how I found this article. I was disgusted by the comments on this page because we are all free to live our own lives and Ty was being condemned with people acting just as bigoted as the “bigots” they so hate. Plus, there’s this ability to subscribe to the comments section, so I get an email whenever someone makes a post. Are you behind the technology curve or should I explain it again and type slower?

      “Did you enjoy the photo set of Noah Mills?”

      No idea who you’re talking about.

      “Since Josesph apparently lacks the integrity to address anything I actually post, and simply posts lies and ad hominem instead, the only left to say at the moment is this:”

      Where’s the lack of integrity to address anything you actually post?

      I addressed everything in your comment that I said I would, it simply took me longer to get around to it than you seem to have liked.

      So… are you going to revert to brushing off everything and calling me a liar because you have no real arguments?

      As for claiming I might not be in the military, that’s a joke. Anyone who has ever served can spot a faker very easily. If you’d like me to describe things about my job in military lingo so anyone who has served would easily notice it, I can.

      I’ll simply say my PED is 08SEP00, I enlisted as an E-2, 12B1O, my TIS is approx 9 years 9 months, my TIG at E-6 is approx 1 year 10 months with a RYE of 07SEP20. I’m Title 32 AGR for the CAARNG with the current MOS of 88M38.

      That’s enough information for anyone who might be in the California Army National Guard who might be reading this to find me personally and can call me at work.

      But I must be making all that up right?

      May 25, 2010 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @ewe:

      By their works ye shall know them.

      Suffer the little children to be taught the ways of man and be shown to neglect those things which are good, holy, and righteous.

      Suffer the little children to be like unto those that lift up a highly liberal agenda that includes corruption of the sanctity of human life (abortion), corruption of communication and loving speech (freedom of speech never protected the right to use offensive and obscene speech), and corruption of the family (which homosexuality has every intention of doing).

      Suffer the little children that they should be spared condemnation for those things they were taught in their liberal schools to embrace killing babies, to embrace homosexuality, to embrace all those things the scriptures have condemned over and over and over again. Suffer the children for they are the victims of a Godless society.

      By the way, you STILL haven’t shown me proof of a righteous homosexual in scriptures.

      Just admit this thing and ALL of you must admit it, and I will never have anything to do with you guys anymore. . .

      Admit you are not Christians and that you hate Jesus Christ, that you reject the Holy Spirit and have no intentions of following the directions of God.

      You cannot behave the way that you do, curse like you do, promote your speech from a pornographic website like you do, claim there is no gay agenda even though the banner of Queerty.com says otherwise, and then say “I’m a Christian.”

      None of you who lift up and glorify homosexuality are Christians. And you need to admit that.

      May 25, 2010 at 3:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @ewe:

      Furthermore, you don’t know Ty. You can’t speak for him. And you don’t know what “gay” is truly beyond your version of it. No person chooses to have same-sex attractions, but you do choose to act on those attractions.

      And the Most High God is a very POWERFUL God capable of change. HOW DARE YOU mock His holy name by telling the world God is too weak to change the hearts of men. Thou art a fool! And you will be judged for the ignorant fool you are.

      May 25, 2010 at 3:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Scotty: Actually you are wrong. Freedom of speech is designed to protect unpopular speech, be it offensive or obscene because those two things are perspective. No one needs to protect nice speech because it is that, nice.

      You are offensive to some people just as others are offensive to you; therefor, both of you have protected speech in which you may have discourse without one of you or both of you being arrested.

      As far as your argument with others here, have at it and do your thing, I don’t care, but I had to point out your error on freedom of speech.

      May 25, 2010 at 3:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      To :james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge

      @Cassandra: You just like to hear the sound of your own voice.”

      I see letters on a screen that are assembled into words, like everyone else. While your derogatory remark may inflate your ego, it doesn’t negate anything I stated.

      “Typical religious nut.”

      That’s two hateful insults in two sentences.

      “Hate thy neighbor because a fictional sky-being is telling you to hate the unbelievers…idiots all of you.”

      You seem a bit confused, or just dishonest. Christianity doesn’t teach “hate thy neighbor”, but, as an atheist who hates people of faith, you are in the position of hating just about everyone around you, and the slurs in your posts affirm that.

      “Stop worrying about what’s above you (nothing) and worry about making your world a better place.”

      Guess who does the least to make the world a better place? Bigots, including atheists like you. Meanwhile, it is people of faith, from all faiths, who are generation by generation making the world a more compassionate place. You though, just post abusive slanders about 99% of humanity.

      “You have proof we all exist so worry about your fellow man, not magical pixie-man in the sky.”

      There’s no proof here that you exist, your posts, to be truthful, would not pass the Turing test, in other words, your posts could easily be written by a software program, a ‘bot.

      Bill Perdue:

      “@Cassandra: didn’t get any last night – again – because his/her pretend lover, jebuz, isn’t real.”

      Once again, Bill relies on derogatory and abusive fantasy in place of decency and reason.

      “That’s why Cassandra is so crabby all the time.”

      The persona who vilifies 99% of humanity thinks I’m crabby. Talk about an inverted and irrational perspective on life.

      And bothers sane people with his/her drivel. Face it, C, you’re not going to recruit anyone here. Do your missionary work somewhere else.

      “Really, C, there is no jebuz, no sky pixies, no sky thunderer. That’s just more howling madness from the Dark Ages”

      One of the key elements of prejudice is that those who are caught in it argue with strawman fabrications. Bill cannot even bring himself to be decent enough to represent accurately what people of faith believe in – he has to rail against his own fantasy.

      This validates my theory that fundamentalist atheists are in denial, like ex-gays, who also fabricate outlandish and fantastical, unreal visions of what gay life is, to rail and screech about.

      “If you want real relief just purchase a nice penile substitute. And some lithium. Actually, lots of lithium.”

      And here’s the other standard insult from bigots – the attack on the mental health of his target. How arrogant and abusive. Bill assumes here that anyone who doesn’t share his malicious prejudice and viewpoint is mentally ill. Let’s remember then that homophobes consistently state that homosexuality is a mental illness, and recognize that Bill and his peers are playing exactly the same vicious and anti-social game that homophobes play.

      “And then leave the humans alone.”

      And if you needed any further proof that Bill’s goal was to dehumanize people of faith, and me, in his statement above he asserts by implication that that people of faith, and I, are not humans, we’re excluded from his vision of humanity.

      Anyone who isn’t lost to prejudice can see how sadly similar Bill’s statements, and those of his fundamentalist peers here, are to those made by the same homophobe GLBTQ people complain about, criticize and rebuke.

      Atheism is just a prejudice like homophobia. That’s why it consistently is expressed in all the same slurs, insults, dismissals, degradations and threats.

      Scotty and Bill of two of a kind, the only difference is in who each has targeted for his hate.

      May 25, 2010 at 3:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      nikko

      You asked:
      “JAMES and BILL, why are you two against CASSANDRA,she is on our side??!”

      Nikko, James and Bill are really on Scotty’s side – the side of prejudice, inhumanity, abuse and degradation for their own gain. They are not really on the side of civil equality for anyone other than themselves.

      They are angry for the same reason that homophobes get angry when I, or anyone else, call them out over the abusive and degrading, vicious things that they say about GLBTQ people.

      James and Bill, and their friends, are angry for the same reason that racists get angry when rebuked over racist behavior, or that anti-Semites get angry when rebuked, or that misogynists get angry when rebuked, and so.

      They are doing something anti-social, abusive and wrong for their own gain, and will not stand to be criticized for it. Doesn’t matter if they are targeting GLBTQ people, or people of faith, or women, or racial minorities – in all cases, their goal is to gain socially or materially by tearing down others.

      Bill and James are not here to communicate or dialogue or discuss, they’re here to be abusive. That’s all.

      Fortunately, but unpleasantly, with each post they provide confirmation about the nature of atheism itself, about prejudice. The GLBTQ community is very committed to fighting anti-gay prejudice, more or less committed to fighting racial and gender prejudice, but has been blind, and often a participant, in another kind of prejudice. Some in our community (maybe that includes Bill and James – maybe they’re het atheists exploiting this situation) have taken the appropriate and authentic anger and rejection of certain religious ideas and inflated it into a burning hatred for all religious people.

      But they forget, when they don’t lie about it, that most of our support comes from people of faith. The demographics alone prove that – with gay rights splitting around 50/50 in the U.S, while atheists make up at most 7 to 10%, it means most of our support is from people of faith.

      It is important to realize as well that while atheism teaches nothing other than the rejection of other people’s spiritual experiences based on who is having those experiences, most religions teach compassion, honesty, selflessness, and so on. Yes, religious people and institutions often fail to practice those virtues fully or appropriately – but – Atheism teaches no virtues at all.

      And if you only went by the posts of atheists on the internet, and the works of professional atheists like Dawkins, one could conclude that the only things atheism teaches are malice, contempt, abuse and degradation, arrogance and an anti-social malevolence.

      Nikko, some people are on the side of prejudice, like Bill, and Scotty, Joseph and James_from_Cambridge. They may make a token outcry about a prejudice that targets them, but they spend the bulk of their energy promoting the prejudice that makes them feel good about themselves. They are so committed to promoting the prejudice they love, that they will ignore the fact that they are also, intrinsically, reinforcing every other prejudice, including any they may experience.

      Bill and Joseph and james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge and all of the other fundamentalist atheists here – they are not really on the side of GLBTQ people, or any other people other than themselves. They are on the side of prejudice.

      And it makes them very angry when people point out, as I do, that all prejudice is the same weapon, only the target varies.

      As for me, well, I’m opposed to all prejudice, not just that which targets GLBTQ people. I cannot, in good conscience, rebuke anti-gay prejudice and then be silent about anti-religious prejudice, or any other prejudice.

      May 25, 2010 at 4:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: You are a propagandist and a liar.

      But thanks for including me as one of the atheists since I’m Mormon.

      Why don’t you reply to my previous post before continue to defame me. You might learn something if you take the blinders off and actually read my post.

      You’re such a self-righteous zealot that you can’t do anything but call me a bigot because you have no foundation in reality to make an argument against me. Any rational person can read the exchanges and point to the multiple occasions on which you refuse to accept things that I have said over and over and then continue to lie to the opposite, claiming I am saying or doing something that I am not.

      But then if you are called out, you say it is abuse.

      What is it Cassandra?

      You claim to be standing up for truth and injustice, yet you continue to lie about my positions and falsely accuse me of being a liar and a bigot.

      If you’re trying to be an honest person you should actually read what I’ve said, stop pretending to read things I never said and admit you were either intentionally or unintentionally distorting the truth.

      You can’t have it both ways.

      I will admit I’m an asshole, but I liar I am not.

      May 25, 2010 at 5:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: Also, I’m not going to hold a grudge and beat you up if you actually read my posts and stop distorting what I say.

      If you admit you were wrong about my positions, then you can still disagree about strategy.

      I’m not asking for an apology, but I would appreciate it if you’d take the blinders off and stop lying about me.

      May 25, 2010 at 5:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      This reply to Joseph will be long. I apologize in advance to everyone else, but, since he repeatedly libels me with false accusations of brushing off, I attempted to cover as much of his material as possible.

      I admit to getting sick and tired of it at the end, and quit before covering any single thing. But I faithfully covered the major themes, and since his last post is all empty dismissal and “Oh, I must be accurate, I claim to be in the military” posturing, I hope my choice to stop when I did can at least be understood.

      Part 1

      Joseph wrote:
      “I would have written you back much earlier, but I had to go TDY. It’s a military abbreviation for Temporary Duty. I had to spend time at my Company Minus. Which is my Company Headquarters, the term “minus” is used when a company has detachments in other locations, we have two detachments. So it is the Company HQ “minus” the detachments.”
      There’s always an excuse, isn’t there? Of course, your excuse is a classic internet fallacy: “Centurion tries to gain tactical advantage in battle by asserting that he is, or was at one time, in the military. He affects the brusque demeanor and clipped style of a drill sergeant, and intimidates opponents by sprinkling his messages with military verbiage and obscure acronyms. He reinforces weak arguments by constantly reminding other Warriors that he has “done his duty”, or “served his country”. Sometimes Centurion may even post pictures of military hardware or images of himself in fatigues brandishing a weapon. Centurion may actually have a military background, or he may just be a nut case – no one really knows.”
      Your alleged military experience is irrelevant Joseph.
      I wrote: “Of course, I forgot, it is better to brush off statements as “riddled with fallacies” and “lazy and pious” and name-calling like “You’re an idiot”. Do you really not see the irony – your second paragraph quoted above perfectly describes and your post from 4/23.”
      And Joseph replied: “Why don’t you try to provide actual information that proves I lie, rather than making a claim that I’m a liar and a homophobe with nothing to support your claims other than your own ignorant accusations?””
      Nice spin, Joseph. Instead of addressing the actual point I made – that you accuse of “brushing off”, (though I’ve generally answered your posts in detail and at length,) while your own accusation was itself an empty brush off. Now you raise another red herring to brush off yet another point I made.
      Joseph wrote: “When you make claims with no evidence that I am a liar, then it is obvious that such claims are riddled with fallacies because you provide nothing to support anything you say.”
      Let’s take your own logic and apply it to your own post, Joseph. You haven’t provided any evidence so far that I have called you are liar, have you? By your logic, your claims are riddled with fallacies, etc.
      But that’s not all Joseph, here’s another level for you. In post 265 you wrote: “But I will say that all of your arguments are riddled with fallacies considering you have nothing to back up anything you say.”

      But you provided nothing to substantiate your claim that my posts are riddled with fallacies. All you did was make an unsubstantiated accusation. And considering that you have not provided anything to back up your own claims . . .
      So, how about a list of some of your lies:
      Post 238
      “First off, I never “verbally abused” Robert. I put him in his place. Get off your emotional soapbox of victimization if you think he was “abused.” He was spewing nothing but hate and contempt and swearing quite visciously(sic) about other people.”
      From Post 244:
      “The argument for allowing same-sex marriage has had terrible tactics and is primarily based on emotion.”
      “One caveat though, there is a clause with what Jesus said. You are generalizing and assuming that many divorces are not due to adultery or unfaithfulness.

      A few from post 253
      “You’re a tool and you have no concept of reality.”
      “the merits were never advocated at a state wide level”
      “You’re generalizing and making the bias remarks.”
      “You assume I’m dishonest because of your unfounded bias”.

      The harder task, actually, Joseph, is find statements you make that are accurate.

      May 25, 2010 at 5:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Part II

      Joseph wrote:“I have a low tolerance for ignorance and stupidity. I will openly admit that. I can also offend people at any given moment because I refuse to be “politically correct.”

      What arrogance. Essentially, you’ve dismissed everyone who disagrees with you shoddy arguments as ignorant and stupid, and dismissed common decency as being ‘politically correct’.

      Joseph:“What you may not ever experience is that though I am a very harsh person because pretending to play nice only perpetuates ignorance and self diluted ideas of superiority, I am one of the most generous people around.”

      Actually, Joseph, the last clause is intrinsically inconsistent with the first. There is no generosity in concluding that anyone who displeases you is ignorant and self-diluted (sic). If the first is true, and your posts do give that impression of how you see yourself, the second is impossible.

      “I will bend over backwards for people I care about and even compromise my own well being for someone in need who I might not know. And this includes people of all backgrounds, races, ethnicities, religions, political views and orientations.”

      Maybe you’ll do that online someday, but your posts here show no indication of the above. In fact, you played ‘the devils advocate’ just for you own entertainment.

      Joseph wrote:“But you can feel free to brush it aside like you do everything else.”

      So here we have the pre-emptive attack on my character, from someone claiming all kinds of virtues. Sorry Joseph, but the virtues you claim to possess are not appearing, at all, in your posts.

      Joseph: “If I point out an obvious observation, such as a stupid remark or an action that would qualify someone as an idiot, then you may actually need some therapy if you think that is real abuse. That’s not an insult, it is a recommendation for professional assistance in understanding the real world and accepting the truth that life is not a sugar coated candy store with all things sensitive.”

      This is called justification, when someone engages in wrong behavior but makes an excuse for it. So now it isn’t your fault that your insult and malign people, Joseph, they asked for it by displeasing you. Frankly, you can flatter yourself all you want, your post demonstrates a completely lack of regard for anyone else other than yourself.

      I wrote: “Should you ever have any, use the words gay or lesbian instead of homosexual. Homosexual is a clinical term and most GLBTQ people find it insulting since it carries a certain medical stigma.”

      And Joseph replied: “Let’s see, I’ve served with three gay men and one lesbian. . . .”

      What we get is another excuse coupled with another unsubstantiated claim about completely unsubstantiated military service that has no bearing on anything. And it is offered as a rebuttal to being told by a real live GLBTQ person that the word ‘homosexual’ still carries a strong stigma. Again, Joseph, you are trying to tell GLBTQ people what we really experience, feel, like, rather than actually listening to us.

      It it is a manifestation o heterosexism.

      Joseph wrote: “Nice try, but you failed to twist my words into a self-accusation because I have never done such a thing.”

      Joseph, you have repeatedly complained that you are being called a homophobe, but you are the one raising the issue. You have repeatedly made homophobic assertions, but rather than address those specifically, you make an exaggerated accusation that is really a confession, and complain about it.

      Joseph: “You are again claiming something without providing any support. This is one of those fallacy moments I mentioned before.”

      And you are not being honest or accurate, Joseph, since in the post you quoted from, I quoted exactly what I was responding to – your own complaint about being called a homophobe..

      Joseph:“It was never a dodge, it’s called sarcasm.”

      LOL. One of the purposes of sarcasm is to dodge.

      May 25, 2010 at 6:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Post III

      Joseph wrote: “Homophobia is documented where and how?”

      Without any context, it is difficult to know what you are responding to, or trying to say. I would hope that you are not suggesting that there is no documentation of homophobia at all, because anti-gay prejudice is extremely well documented.
      Perhaps though you are simply trying to dismiss what I actually wrote:
      “You are judging people you don’t know in a very personal and derogatory way, impugning their character and spirituality, solely because you associate the way they dress with homosexuality, and therefore, whatever they do is wrong.
      And while you claim you are not a homophobe, you’ve repeatedly cast aspersions on my mental health (instead of actually addressing my positions) – mirroring standard homophobic position that homosexuals are mentally ill. Your posts shout to the world that see us as sick in the head.
      The homophobia in your posts is not in doubt here,”

      Joseph: “An accusation without establishing factual support is not documented proof.”

      The ironic part, Joseph, is that you haven’t provided factual support for any of your claims.. Face it, Joseph, your posts have been nothing but accusations and declarations, assertions and accusations, insults and snark without any factual support to back any of it up.

      “The verification of my gay and lesbian friends is a mute point. “
      So, you don’t need to support your facts. Got it. Everyone else is automatically wrong if they don’t provide outside sources for every thing they post, but you don’t need to back up anything at all.

      Let’s get to some real meat:

      I wrote: “So, in your opinion, guys dressed like nuns are intrinsically and automatically incapable of sincere religious experiences. And you pretend you are not a homophobe.”

      And before we examine Joseph’s reply, the context:

      Post 221: “Right and the two drag queens who showed up to take communion at a Catholic Church in Frisco in no way demonstrates the hostility towards religion in my state”
      Post 253: “Yes, because two grown men dressing up like nuns and going into a Catholic Church is such a heart felt and spiritual experience. I MUST empathize with them because they’re gay? I could care less if they’re homosexual or not. That was not a good strategy to bolster support for your cause.”
      Post 265: “As for the guys dressed like nuns, if you can’t see through it and want to sympathize for someone for no reason, you seriously need to rejoin the real world possibly seek some profession help.”

      So the two men, whose existence and act Joseph did not even provide evidence for, are first ‘demonstrating hostility toward religion’. Then, through sarcasm, Joseph tells us that they were not ‘heart felt and spiritual’. Finally, anyone who doesn’t interpret their alleged act as hostile to religion ‘needs to rejoin the real world – seek professional help’.

      Onto to Joseph’s reply:
      “I have never made a claim that the men are incapable of sincere religious experiences.”

      Your quotes above make it very clear that you have decided, without any evidence except for the clothing they were allegedly wearing, the two men in question were hostile to religion and insincere.

      Joseph writes: “Let me elaborate more on what I said.
      Two gay men walk into a Catholic church dressed as nuns during a very political election with Proposition 8 on the ballot and you claim they were motivated by religious conviction? That really is naivety at its best or worse or a poor attempt to once against legitimize your argument.”

      This doesn’t make things better, Joseph. You are concluding, from appearance alone, the motives and emotions of these two people, in a story you haven’t even substantiated.
      And your assumption about me – naivety or fraud – also reflects an innate bias against me.

      See Joseph, for many people, gay and straight, the call for social justice is a crucial religious conviction. This alleged event is in the same class as Luther’s posting of ninety five theses to the door of Castle Church. He was calling the church to a higher standard as an expression of his spiritual convictions, and the men you have vilified could very easily have been doing the same, especially because of the political context.

      But you conclude, because they are gay men in drag, that their motives are suspect. That, Joseph, is homophobia at work.

      Joseph: “It was a blatant insult to that church because of its support for Prop 8. An insult in which you have every right to agree or disagree with.”

      You see insult because of how you see GLBTQ people. I see a call for spiritual change because of how I see people of faith.

      May 25, 2010 at 6:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Part IV

      Joseph: “Pointing out the obvious does not make one a homophobe.”

      But consistently interpreting anything GLBTQ people do or say in a negative way does, and that, Joseph, is what you’ve done in post after post after post.

      “I never said being gay or lesbian made you a bad person or that you would be incapable of doing good things.”

      Joseph, over and over again, you have assumed, without evidence, derogatory and abusive things about the motives, mental health, spirituality, integrity and character of people you know only one thing about: that they are gay or lesbian.

      Joseph wrote: “I could simply be like you and dismiss them”

      Another crass insult with no basis in reality.

      I wrote: “You are judging people you don’t know in a very personal and derogatory way, impugning their character and spirituality, solely because you associate the way they dress with homosexuality, and therefore, whatever they do is wrong.”

      Joseph replied: “Prove it.”

      I think I’ve done a good job of that all along, and reiterated the point in these four posts. So the interesting there here is, Joseph, is that you have yet again relied on an empty dismissal, even though you’ve repeatedly maligned me and dismissed me by accusing me of ‘brushing off’ your remarks.

      There is a message in your posts, Joseph, and it is crystal clear: You think we GLBTQ people are intrinsically inferior to you. You can dismiss us out of hand, lie about our lives, our words, our spirituality, our history, demand levels of proof you never hold yourself to, libel and malign, and we’re supposed to just believe every little dribble of sputum you fling at us.

      I wrote: “And while you claim you are not a homophobe, you’ve repeatedly cast aspersions on my mental health (instead of actually addressing my positions) – mirroring standard homophobic position that homosexuals are mentally ill. Your posts shout to the world that see us as sick in the head.”

      Joseph replied: “No… I never said you are mentally ill for being a lesbian.”

      You are denying a different statement than the one I made. It is not a very clever way of telling lies Joseph. Do I really have to re-quote all of the times you have made slurs about my mental health and intelligence?

      Dismissing the arguments that GLBTQ people make about the ban on same-sex marriage, as you did in post 221 “All of the crying, whining, bitching and name calling” is an attack on our state of mind. Dismissing my rebuttal as “because of your unfounded bias” (in post 253) instead of addressing what I actually wrote, is an attack on my state of mind. Of course, there’s some sexism involved too, Joseph. You’ve assumed from my pen name that I’m female, and treated me with the contempt and condescension that misogynists inflict on women: “Holy crap woman, how arrogant/ignorant can you be?” Post 253. And GLBTQ people know that sexism, the idea that the female is inferior is a component of homophobia.

      I’ll skip the rest of that paragraph of ad hominem, Joseph, since it has no bearing on reality, and it only substantiates the very claim you are trying to challenge.

      “So you want to know if I’m in the closet? I must disappoint you, I am neither in nor out. I am engaged to a beautiful woman who I look forward to having a family with.”

      Ah, like Ty Mansfield, and Alan Rekers, and many other people who condemn homosexuality, perceive homosexuals as inferior, and so on.

      “Ty was being condemned with people acting just as bigoted as the “bigots” they so hate.”

      Trouble is, most are not, and even those who have been crass, have a sound foundation for their criticism: over and over again, consistently, homosexuals who marry heterosexually only end up hurting themselves and those around them.

      I am convinced that you maligned people on this board because you automatically interpret everything that GLBTQ people do or say as negative, wrong, bad. In your mind, I am convinced, we can’t ever by right, can’t ever be speaking from experience, can’t ever be sincere, can’t ever be religious.

      And that in a nutshell is homophobia, Joseph, the assumption that GLBTQ people are just intrinsically wrong in everything they do and say and feel. Your posts are overflowing with it.

      And Joseph, you have repeatedly accused me without so much as a single relevant quote, all the while complaining at me, though I quote you extensively and demonstrate, with care, each claim you make that is false.

      May 25, 2010 at 6:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Qwerty
      Qwerty

      Hey Scotty and Casandra

      WHERE IS GOD COME FROM?

      May 25, 2010 at 6:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Update:

      Joseph wrote: “But thanks for including me as one of the atheists since I’m Mormon.”

      Of course that is not what I wrote or expressed. Very creative, but not very honest.

      But Mormon church has engaged in a deliberate program of overt, systemic oppression against GLBTQ people, and as an organization, has tried to define itself, and mormon belief, by that deliberate oppression of GLBTQ people.

      The fact is that the organization, the Church of Latter Day Saints, has been waging a war of persecution against millions of people, and its actions opposing civil equality for GLBTQ have been entirely evil.

      I haven’t studied Mormon theology enough to know if this systemic evil truly reflects mormon theology. And I recognize that it doesn’t reflect the lives of all Mormons, though it does reflect the lives and character of the leadership of the Mormon church.

      It simply is inescapable that the Mormon church as an organization has consistently vilified GLBTQ people and treated us as inferior and less than human, and that Joseph has done the same here.

      “Why don’t you reply to my previous post”

      All in good time, as you can now see. And lastly

      “Also, I’m not going to hold a grudge and beat you up if you actually read my posts and stop distorting what I say”

      This appears to be a threat as well as yet another unsubstantiated derogatory claim.

      May 25, 2010 at 6:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Qwerty:

      Where does God come from? Easy. A place you would never believe in or comprehend.

      Shoot, you’re confused about your own gender taking upon yourself an improper gender role. You defy the gender role the Heavenly Father expected you to fulfill.

      You’re asking the wrong questions. You need to start small and comprehend the basics before you can understand the meat and complexity of who God is. You’re trying to pass up Chapters 1-30 of life comprehension and go straight to Chapter 31.

      First off, you need to figure out that if you’re a man then you need to act like a man and exhibit masculine traits and desires. If you’re a woman, you need to act like a woman and exhibit those feminine traits you deny. This is a basic fundamental area of human development that comes in the first 6-8 years of development. Understand the basics before tackling the tough stuff.

      Until then, I will not answer any question apart from the fact that you deny God’s standard of Creation. You reject Creation and you reject the Heavenly Father and His Spirit. Of this sin, there is no forgiveness. Woe unto you.

      May 25, 2010 at 7:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “By their works ye shall know them.”

      It is ironic that someone who is promoting anti-gay prejudice should reference, if less than fully, this particular saying from Jesus. It’s a loose paraphrase from Matthew 7.

      http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%207&version=NIV

      This chapter starts out with a statement that homophobes routinely ignore: 1″Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

      Shortly there after, we get something else that homophobes do not practice when it comes to glbtq people: 112So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

      In fact, any Mormon or Catholic, (or Baptist, Protestant, etc) who wishes to get married, or is married, but votes to prevent same-sex marriage, is not treating GLBTQ people the way they want to be treated.

      There’s more. 15″Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

      21″Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

      Here, Christ gives a test for spiritual leaders, like Joseph Smith for an example, and in principle, for spiritual teaching.

      Good teachers, good teaching, bears good fruit. Bad teachers, bad teaching, bears evil fruit.

      So Scottt posts as if his teaching ‘homosexuality is sin’ is good teaching. But all of the fruit, the consequences, the results of ‘homosexuality is sin’ are evil.

      The reality is that ‘homosexuality is sin’ has only evil consequences, from the obvious hate in Scotty’s post to hate crimes against GLBTQ people to bullying of gay kids to laws like Prop 8. Every direct consequence of ‘homosexuality is sin’ is evil.

      And that’s not all. This belief ‘homosexuality is sin’ is one of the reasons, or excuses, that some people give for leaving religion, or for rejecting religion and religious people in total. So not only has ‘homosexuality is sin’ nurtured prejudice and oppression of GLBTQ people, it also bears fruit in the form of anti-Christian hate speech and prejudice.

      Historically, the condemnation of homosexuality also played a role in the war between the organizations representing Christianity and Islam, as each accused the other of being corrupted by homosexuals.

      And of course, we have the Mormon church and the Catholic church violating and suppressing the civil liberties, including freedom of religion, for everyone in California through props 22 and 8, and in other states as well. Both are viper swift to protest anything that even appears to require them to acknowledge other religious points of view, but, through the anti-same-sex marriage laws, they have forced millions of people to live by a religious belief (homosexuality is sin) that they do not believe or value or agree with.

      Jesus’s statement in Matthew 7 15-23 is a test that ‘homosexuality is sin’ completely fails, and therefore, for those who believe Jesus as a source of spiritual truth, ‘homosexuality is sin’ is false, does not come from God, and has no place in any Christian congregation.

      Another interesting point – the last phrase of the portion I quoted “Away from me, you evildoers!” – what the NIV translates as evil doers used to be translated as ‘workers of iniquity’ and the word iniquity has its root in the word inequality.

      Delving into the whole issue of what is righteousness, what is lawful, the core is the notion of justice.

      And so, those who work to create inequality, who work to create injustice, to deprive some of what it granted to everyone else, are the people to whom Christ will say, “It doesn’t matter that you called me lord, I never knew you”.

      In other words, the very passage Scotty quoted rebukes and refutes his condemnation of GLBTQ people.

      May 25, 2010 at 7:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Vman455
      Vman455

      @Scotty:

      “Admit you are not Christians and that you hate Jesus Christ, that you reject the Holy Spirit and have no intentions of following the directions of God.”

      OK, I’ll admit it. I don’t believe Jesus Christ was even a real person (based on the fact that there has yet to be discovered ANY contemporary evidence for his existence), and I certainly don’t intend to follow any directives written down by a bunch of desert-dwelling nomads thousands of years ago, or a small-town farmer 200 years ago, claiming to speak for a deity for whom they have never produced one shred of evidence. Happy?

      “First off, you need to figure out that if you’re a man then you need to act like a man and exhibit masculine traits and desires. If you’re a woman, you need to act like a woman and exhibit those feminine traits you deny.”

      So, would these “feminine traits” include looking forward to an unfulfilling life of submission to patriarchal authority, spent at home rearing children and never realizing her full potential as a human being? Because, you know, when Ezra Taft Benson said, “In the beginning, Adam was instructed to earn the bread by the sweat of his brow—not Eve. Contrary to conventional wisdom, a mother’s place is in the home!”, that’s what it means.

      May 25, 2010 at 8:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • qwerty
      qwerty

      @Scotty:

      hmmm thanks Scotty but is molesting young boys a way of showing wat Christianity is about?

      btw if God creating us then who created God?

      May 25, 2010 at 9:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Cassandra:

      The NIV version of the scriptures is an abomination of the Holy Word of God. Why don’t you read the original Hebrew and Greek texts of the Old and New Testament before you try spewing garbage pro ported by a bunch of fascists evangelicals who are trying to speak for God without possessing the proper priesthood authority to do so and by using an extremely flawed version of the Holy Bible.

      Read the account of Sodom and Gomorrah from the Jewish Torah translation Book of Bereishith Chapters 18-19.

      It says the men of Sodom wanted to be intimate with Lot’s visitors. Great were the sins of Sodom says the scriptures. Sodom’s sins were reminded to us in the New Testament including the sexual explicit nature of Sodom’s sins in the New Testament Book of Jude verse 7 of the King James Version.

      It said Sodom’s sin included fornication for they “went after strange flesh.” Yes, when a man has sex with another man, to them this was STRANGE. Very queer don’t ya’ think? Oh, and you thought the word “queer” was your word without origin. Think about that one.

      In the meantime I have my own agenda, and I am bringing down a hammer of legal fury on Queerty.com. My promise to God!

      May 25, 2010 at 11:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @qwerty:

      Who are accusing of molesting young boys? Don’t you know that the majority of boys sexually assaulted in this country are coming from men who are professed homosexuals?

      You want to talk about the best homosexuals out there, then let’s talk in detail more about what Jeffery Dahmer and Gordon Northcott did their boy victims before they brutally murdered them!

      You have no platform to accuse people of raping boys when those of your agenda have done much more damage in that area.

      May 25, 2010 at 11:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      Jesus, the foundation of your scriptures, was an openly gay man crucified by people like you. That is why you are a sinner and gay people are not. There’s your proof FOOL. Now shut the fuck up. You and your regurgitating recitations are no match for people who use their minds to think.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “The NIV version of the scriptures is an abomination of the Holy Word of God. Why don’t you read the original Hebrew and Greek texts of the Old and New Testament”

      I call your bluff, Scotty. Go through Matthew 7:15-23 word for word, from the original Greek to English, and prove that the NIV translation is incorrect.

      “Read the account of Sodom and Gomorrah from the Jewish Torah translation Book of Bereishith Chapters 18-19.

      It says the men of Sodom wanted to be intimate with Lot’s visitors.”

      No. Though you use the term “Bereishith” a bit carelessly, you reference to Genesis 18 and 19 was clear. And the verse you appear to be referencing, without be direct about it, is Genesis 19:5

      “And they called4 unto Lot, and said4 unto him, Where [are] the men which came in1 to thee this night? bring them out54 unto us, that we may know4 them.”

      The word ‘know’ is yada in Hebrew, and it does not mean what you think it means. The euphemistic meaning of sexual knowledge is the least used, least likely of meanings, and when it is used in that manner, is made clear with subordinate clauses. Yada means to acquire knowledge, and is used to describe many, many circumstances in which people acquire knowledge, including one’s relationship with God. You can find a whole list of OT passages using the word yada, here: http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/CONHEB304.htm#S3045

      And if you are honest, you’ll recognize that most, 920 some of 930 some, have nothing to do with sex. Your assertion is made out of bias and prejudice, not fact or reason.

      You start in the middle of the story, but prior chapters of Genesis tell how the city of Sodom lost a rebellion against an overlord and was sacked. In that context, yada in verse 5 rationally indicates interrogation, and Jewish scholars have a long history of acknowledging that very thing. http://www.iwgonline.org/docs/sodom.html

      Further, Ezekiel made it very clear about the sin of Sodom, and never mentioned homosexuality. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+16&version=NIV

      Ezekiel 16 is a lengthy rebuke of Israel and the people of Jerusalem. After a lengthy passage that accuses Israel of cheating on God, using adultery and prostitution as a metaphor, and including accusations that the people sacrificed their children to false gods,
      “20 ” ‘And you took your sons and daughters whom you bore to me and sacrificed them as food to the idols. Was your prostitution not enough? 21 You slaughtered my children and sacrificed them [e] to the idols. 22 In all your detestable practices and your prostitution you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, kicking about in your blood. ”

      Ezekiel states:
      49 ” ‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.”

      The phrase ‘detestable things’ is the same wording used, in Hebrew, in vs 22 to describe the human sacrifice the people of Israel were accused of. No where in Ezekiel’s description of the sin of Sodom does he even hint at homosexuality or homosexuals.

      The terrible part for you Scotty, is that homophobes like you have been sacrificing other humans, GLBTQ humans, including your own children, to your false god of hate and malice.

      “It said Sodom’s sin included fornication for they “went after strange flesh.” Yes, when a man has sex with another man, to them this was STRANGE.”

      No, you’ve got this a bit twisted. The NT passage you are referring to, again with actually citing the book, chapter and verse, is Jude 1:7, and it references an OT myth about the days before the flood, when women gave themselves sexually to angels, bearing children (which would make it heterosexual intercourse by the way), those children being giants and monsters. The phrase ‘strange flesh’ in the greek uses the word hetera – from which we get the word

      heterosexual.

      See, Scotty, gay men have sex with someone whose flesh is like their own, rather than strange, different, and lesbians do not go after strange flesh, but someone whose genitals are the same as theirs.

      Of course, all of your post completely ignores the point I made. Jesus was very clear; false teaching is revealed by its destructive consequences, and the consequences of ‘homosexuality is sin’ are all, entirely, completely destructive.

      Sorry Scotty, but ‘homosexuality is sin’ does not come from God. It is an evil, destructive and abusive belief that only bears evil fruit, and so, it is evil itself.

      So, Scotty, it doesn’t matter how you pick and chose between meanings and words, the fact that the belief you teach destroys other people proves, according to Jesus, that the belief is evil and does not come from or serve God.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Scotty, there is a gay agenda. It is called Equality. Straight people choose to act on their attractions too you twisted ugly hearted cunt. Go burn your cross elsewhere. I don’t need to believe like you to live this life you narrow minded ignorant worm. You Scotty MOCK THE HOLY SPIRIT INSIDE EVERY GAY PERSON AND YOU ARE THE RANCID DISGRACE FUCK THAT IS GOING TO BE JUDGED. Go perform your voodoo tricks on someone else.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Cassandra:

      “If you love me, keep my commandments.”

      Cassandra, you have a sense of godliness but you deny the power thereof. Every bit of scriptural reference you have quoted, I can refute with relative ease.

      The fact is, I think homosexual marriages will be legalized. And then much will be the face of America men marrying men and women marrying women.

      “And as were the days of Noah, so shall be the coming of the Son of man. For as in those days which were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and they knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall be the coming of the Son of man.”

      Jude 1:7

      “Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, 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.”

      2 Peter 2 also gives an account of Sodom and Gomorrah and its wickedness which did include homosexuality.

      Let us turn our attention to the new Sodom and cites of the plain located in the Pacific Coast of California. Despite the fact that San Francisco, Hollywood, and Los Angeles possess every wicked attribute of the Cities of the Plain, let us consider also the fact that the cities are on a very loose tectonic plate west of the San Andreas fault line.

      Consider also that those cities are within striking distance of monster volcanoes along the Ring of Fire including a megavolcano which sleeps under California’s northern border.

      Consider the fact the these Pacific Coast cities rest along the shores of a body of salt water as did Sodom and the cities of the plain.

      Consider the fact that God reigned down pure sulfur on Sodom and the Cities of the Plain, and for hundreds of years the cities lay beneath the Dead Sea until only the last 30 or so years.

      #1. San Francisco embraces all the sins of Sodom and is currently the homosexual capital of the world, home to more open homosexuals per capita than any other city in the world.

      #2. San Francisco is in the shadows of sleeping killer volcanoes, and is very capable of being covered with the sulfur and ash that these volcanoes can produce.

      #3. Massive simultaneous volcanic explosions would be enough to break the San Andreas fault line and shift the entire Pacific Coast sending the cities of L.A., San Francisco, and Hollywood into the depths of the Pacific Ocean. This was also the fate of Sodom and Cities of the Plain as they sank into the Dead Sea after they were overthrown by the Most High God.

      Yes, you will continue to embrace homosexuality. America will embrace it. You will drift further and further from a loving Heavenly Father. Then He’ll look away when the demise of the latter-day Cities on the Plain comes to fruition. And it will come.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Don’t you know the majority of pedophiles are heterosexual males? Apparently you just like to obsess on little boys yourself.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @ewe:

      Poor whelp. You can’t even use clean speech. How pathetic. There are so many other choice words to use, but you choose to use idolatrous speech, and for what? You think anyone’s impressed because you know how to use hateful speech to pro port your religious bigotry and intolerance? Maybe your friends here are impressed, but they are easily amused. The sight of penis going in a butt thrills them. But no sensible person would be impressed.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @ewe:

      You wish I was a pedophile. You just think the worst, don’t you? It’s all about sex with you, isn’t it? It’s ALWAYS been about sex with the homosexual agenda.

      You hope the worst. Well, son of Perdition, you have no power over me. Be gone, whelp!

      May 26, 2010 at 12:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Scotty, You are no Nostradamus. You are a seriously disturbed person obsessed with the sexual orientation of people you do not know.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “Don’t you know that the majority of boys sexually assaulted in this country are coming from men who are professed homosexuals?”

      No Scotty, study after study has shown that majority of all child molesters self-identify as heterosexual, including those who target boys.

      In fact, studies have shown sexual predation is more about access and vulnerability than gender, that most pedophiles molest children of either gender. And for those who do target boys, not only do they tend to identify as heterosexual, they admit that they are attracted to boys who have not reached puberty – boys that are feminine, lacking the secondary sex characteristics that accentuate the differences between the genders.

      Pedophilia is primarily a heterosexual illness, only rarely do homosexuals commit it. Dahmer is a rare exception to the rule, the overwhelming majority of pedophiles are heterosexual men, and usually they come from conservative, dogmatic backgrounds. In fact, the Mormons have had quite a problem with heterosexual men molesting boys, and girls, over the years.

      You are tossing boulders you cannot lift from the roof of your glass house.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Cassandra:

      I have nothing to say to you. God help the people that believe your words and accept them as fact. You, sister, do not possess the priesthood, therefore, you do not have the authority to translate and interpret on behalf of the Great Jehovah.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: No. You need to tell your words to yourself because that is who you really are speaking to. You don’t effect me bitch. I like myself. I love myself. I always have. I never had a closet to come out of. You will just find another victim. You are one emotionally sick and stuck creature who thinks you are better than openly gay people because you surround yourself with those like you who step on the vulnerable to lift your ego. It isn’t me. Go bury your head in your evil religion and stay out of the secular public square.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Scotty, newsflash PLANK. you have no authority either.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @ewe: Scooty goes around attacking other human beings and dresses it up in his delusional head as love and assistance. You are not helping anyone. You are a tortured little man.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      SCOTTY, your fruit is cancer to my soul. CASSANDRA, you’re awesome! EWE, I like your posts!

      May 26, 2010 at 12:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @ewe:

      Ewe, I feel sorry for you. I’m sorry that I allowed your sin and your pride to harden my heart. I’m stepping away now. But I will not let up on Queety.com until they abide by federal laws like the rest of us. This includes misuse of copyrighted material which Queerty.com is guilty of doing. Until Queerty.com apologizes to Yan Photography and KSL 5 News for displaying their materials on a pro-gay pornographic website and removes them, I will not let up on this website.

      My first move has been made. My next one will much worse for Queerty.com.

      As for you, Ewe, I have nothing to say to you. You’re just an angry, bitter homosexual. I’m not changing your mind, and you aren’t changing mine.

      The federal government and the LGBT is powerless against the religious entities that crushed gay marriage in California, so there is no worry about anything happening from that. No one’s going to get taxed even if a million queers chant in unison. All your chanting is in vain much like your lifestyle.

      You are nothing to me, so I worry not about you.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @nikko: Thank you Nikko. I think Cassandras posts are awesome too. I just don’t care as much as she does to inform people who are stupid and are not open to the diversity of mankind. I think it is great she has such patience.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Tell it to the dirt scotty. I don’t give a fuck what you think of me and i don’t feel bad at all hating you and your rotten filth. I am grateful you are stepping away because you and i are at war and i am going to win. You got some nerve telling people they don’t know Ty Mansfield out one side of your ass while screaming about me being a bitter angry homosexual. You are just another spiteful hyprocrite who runs the minute you see no one is gonna take your crap. Print this out and take it to your ugly temple. You damn right we are gonna meet up again and your dipicable religion will be put aside in a court of law.

      May 26, 2010 at 12:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @ewe:

      LOL! R.I.P. Ewe!

      May 26, 2010 at 1:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy
      Andy

      @Scotty

      Just curious, I know God created us in his image, so what does that mean for females who are born female but are genetically XY? Surely they aren’t fulfilling God’s design for procreation, they are both genetically male and can never produce offspring. As for your astounding wit about where God came from: “Where does God come from? Easy. A place you would never believe in or comprehend.” You can just as easily argue that gays have a purpose in this life that you cannot possibly understand either. Ah but before you start quoting scripture, consider the following: people of African decent were not allowed to hold the priesthood originally and “revelation” was given reversing that restriction, and the Hebrew people were a race dependent on pro-creation so it was understandable for same sex relationships to be prohibited at that time.

      So, please explain God’s “plan” for these physically male (XX males, XXY males, etc.), female (XY females, X females, etc.), who are rendered infertile and on a genetic level are committing homosexual acts or in the case of inter-sexed individuals forced to choose a gender role. I’m eagerly awaiting you explanation, with the assumption that you’re not a high ranking official in the church of course.

      May 26, 2010 at 1:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty:

      You wrote: “Cassandra, you have a sense of godliness but you deny the power thereof.”
      Please do not bear false witness. At no point have I denied the power of God.

      “Every bit of scriptural reference you have quoted, I can refute with relative ease.”

      And yet, you haven’t. I specifically and in detailed explained how Christ’s own statement in Matthew 7:15-23, indicates that ‘homosexuality is sin’ is a false teaching.

      Any fabrication you come with from other Bible verses, attributed to anyone other than Jesus, cannot supercede what Christ said. Your teaching ‘homosexuality is sin’ bears evil fruit, therefore it is evil and does not come from God.

      “And as were the days of Noah, so shall be the coming of the Son of man. For as in those days which were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and they knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall be the coming of the Son of man.”

      So you admit that this describes heterosexual marriage in the days before the flood. It comes from Matthew 24, by the way. It would be helpful, and demonstrate integrity, if you were more careful to cite book, chapter and verse when you quote Scripture.

      However, it indicates nothing about homosexuality.

      Jude 1:7

      “Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, 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.”

      I’ve covered this. The reference to strange flesh has nothing to do with homosexuality. The greek root ‘homo’ means same or like, the greek root for strange is hetera/hetero – as in heterosexual. Heterosexuals go after flesh that is different/strange – someone of the opposite gender. Homosexuals are attracted to someone of the same gender as themselves.

      “2 Peter 2 also gives an account of Sodom and Gomorrah and its wickedness which did include homosexuality.””

      No. Sodom’s sins were not about homosexuality, but about abuse of others, crimes of injustice. The truth is that homophobes today are the true heirs of Sodom, not homosexuals. Ezekiel was explicit.

      Your shoddy geology report is not theology, Scotty. The middle east, including Israel and Jerusalem, also lie on very active and destructive fault lines.

      “#1. San Francisco embraces all the sins of Sodom”

      You are simply reviling millions of people without cause or fact, bearing false witness. That is sin, Scotty, and it requires repentance on your part.

      Ironically, when SF was last struck by an earthquake, the Castro was one of the areas least damaged, as was the tenderloin, while those parts of SF favored by the wealthy conservatives suffered the most damage.

      “#3. Massive simultaneous volcanic explosions would be enough to break the San Andreas fault line and shift the entire Pacific Coast sending the cities of L.A., San Francisco, and Hollywood into the depths of the Pacific Ocean.”

      No. That is not how the earth works. Are you a child, or just a bad deceiver?

      “You will drift further and further from a loving Heavenly Father.”

      Your personal attack is a sin against me, Scotty. Please show genuine faith in God and repent. After all, you are the one who is endorsing the abuse and oppression of millions of human beings, you are the one defending the wickedness of discrimination, you are the one libeling vilifying millions of human beings who have never harmed you, solely to make your own imperfections stink less in your own nostrils.

      Scotty, all of the abusiveness you can muster up will not change the fact that the belief you teach – that homosexuality is sin – destroys people, it only bears evil fruit.

      Jesus was clear, evil fruit is proof of an evil tree. What you teach only bears evil fruit.

      May 26, 2010 at 1:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty

      “I have nothing to say to you.”

      So, were you telling lies when you claimed “Every bit of scriptural reference you have quoted, I can refute with relative ease.”, or was it just empty boasting? Either is sin in some interpretations of the Bible.

      “God help the people that believe your words and accept them as fact.”

      God will help all those who ask for it, for all kinds of reasons. God has even helped homophobes nastier than you are being to find Him, repent, and embrace justice and human dignity.

      “You, sister, do not possess the priesthood, therefore, you do not have the authority to translate and interpret on behalf of the Great Jehovah.”

      In other words, you cannot refute anything that I’ve posted, so you are trying to simply dismiss me, using one of the other old and terrible hatreds in the world, misogyny. But bear in mind, Christ’s statement ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ – treat others as you want to be treated, also applies to how men treat women, and vice versa. Men who dismiss women because of their gender are sinning.

      Bear in mind as well, that the first disciple Jesus appeared to after the resurrection was a woman, and he told her to go and tell. Jesus did not discriminate against women, anyone who is truly following Him must not either.

      Lastly, the fallacy that ‘priestly authority’ equals accuracy has been the downfall of many religions and many religious people. The Bible study group I attend has been reading Jeremiah, and seeing first hand how the people’s reliance on ‘priestly authority’ led them into idolatry and destruction.

      May 26, 2010 at 1:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Just another lie from the lying Scotty. I thought you left in sorrow with your tail between your legs you lyin dog. You are already dead inside yourself Scotty. You just don’t know it. It was Ghandi who said somehting like “first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you and then you win.” Keep laughing.

      May 26, 2010 at 1:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Cassandra: You have won the debate Cassandra. When someone like Scotty states he has nothing to say to you that means he knows he is without merit. Congratulations. Your deeds are very noble. Oh and by the way, i lived in San Francisco and the earthquake on October 17, 1989 at 5:04 pm was all my doing. Scotty and his trolls can blame me.

      May 26, 2010 at 1:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Qwerty
      Qwerty

      Hey Scotty you havnt answer my question who created god? So what your saying is most priests are homosexuals?

      May 26, 2010 at 1:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Cassandra:

      LOL! R.I.P. Cassandra!

      May 26, 2010 at 2:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “Oh and by the way, i lived in San Francisco and the earthquake on October 17, 1989 at 5:04 pm was all my doing.”

      I was in SF at that time too. I remember that one wealthy, particularly anti-gay church suffered enormous structural damage to their relatively new building, while a very poor, gay welcoming church in the heart of tenderloin didn’t get even a crack.

      Of course, if we’re going to look at natural disasters, which reflect the downside of the same laws of physics we depend on for life itself, to determine who God loves and who God hates -

      The Bible belt experiences horrific tornadoes, several a year, every year. This stronghold of homophobia is flooded on a regular basis, despite all of the best efforts of the army corp of engineers to tame the Mississippi. Florida, another anti-gay stronghold, has had nothing but trouble since Anita Bryant, from severe hurricanes and floods, to terrible droughts. Now oil from a manifestation of greed and carelessness threatens not only homophobic states like Mississippi and Louisiana, but Florida as well.

      It is mostly anti-gay politicians and clergy who get caught in adultery, and fraud, and graft. Heterosexual males, not homosexual males, are the most frequent offenders in nearly every class of crime, and white-collar crime, in particular, tends to correlate with conservative beliefs.

      And back to earthquakes, Utah has its share of geological risks:
      http://geology.utah.gov/utahgeo/hazards/eqfault/index.htm

      The Wasatch Fault runs right through Salt Lake City.

      The Salt Lake city metropolitan area is one of the most seismically hazardous urban areas in the interior of the western United States.http://geology.utah.gov/online/pdf/pi-76.pdf

      It is also a high risk zone if the Yellowstone super-volcano blows, and lies on an ancient ash bed laid down by that volcano in the past.

      May 26, 2010 at 2:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty

      Your “RIP” posts will not work in your favor should you pursue legal action against this website. Any competent attorney will interpret those for a judge or jury as death threats.

      Those posts are simply more destructive, poisonous fruit proving that your belief ‘homosexuality is sin’ does not come from God.

      May 26, 2010 at 2:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Please, Cassandra. The fact is, I’m exerting freedom of speech. I’m not using anything of Queerty.com’s on any website of mine. Why can’t Queerty.com obey the law and learn how to ask for permission to use things that don’t belong to them.

      Futhermore, you are supporting a website that has several pornographic images of young men who are half-naked on the front of its website. What do you say to that? It if isn’t about sex, then why aren’t the men dressed?

      May 26, 2010 at 2:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Cassandra

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “The fact is, I’m exerting freedom of speech.”

      Actually, no. Death threats are not considered protected speech. Nor do free speech laws apply to privately own media like this website.

      I guess you were lying when you said you had nothing to say to me.

      I don’t even need to address your Rekersesque fascination and condemnation of attractive men. It isn’t my place to judge what lifts your luggage.

      May 26, 2010 at 2:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      1

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      2

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      3

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      4

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      5

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      6

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      7

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      8

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      9

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      10

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      11

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      12

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      13

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      14

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      15

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      16

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      17

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      18

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      19

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      20

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      21

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      22

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      23

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      24

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      25

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      26

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      27

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      28

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      29

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      30

      Leviticus 20:13

      May 26, 2010 at 2:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”

      May 26, 2010 at 2:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      If

      May 26, 2010 at 2:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      a man

      May 26, 2010 at 2:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      also

      May 26, 2010 at 2:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      lie

      May 26, 2010 at 2:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      with mankind

      May 26, 2010 at 2:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      as

      May 26, 2010 at 2:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Leviticus 20:13.

      How kind of you, Scotty, another death threat. By citing that passage as relevant to homosexuality, you are embracing the death sentence it contains as well. You are saying you are fine, happy even, with the idea of murdering ten percent of humanity.

      There are several problems for you, Scotty. The first is that you have now bound yourself under all of the Levitical laws. You must keep kosher, you must celebrate the Jubilee, you must not trim the edges of your beard, you must tithe, you must make all of the sacrifices listed, you cannot pay or charge interest, etc.

      The standard you use on GLBTQ people is the standard you will be judged by.

      Of course, the passage you quoted is not really about homosexuals, when it is translated accurately. Actually, even in the English of the KJV, it is clearly not about homosexuals.

      Gay men do not lie with other men as if with a woman. Gay men have sex with other men as with a man – that’s the whole point of male sexuality – men with men, not men with women as if they were women. Male homosexuality responds to masculinity and the physical indicators.

      Furthermore, anyone with a functioning ethical/moral sense would recognize that putting people to death because of the gender of person they have sex with, is evil. Your death threat is another evil fruit of your theology.

      Of course, there’s the translation issue. Leviticus 20:13, and its parallel in Leviticus 18, share the same pattern of concepts.

      Each uses two different words for male, one that carries the connotation of husband, and one that connotes priest. Both also introduce the concept of a woman’s bed (which gets translated as ‘as with a woman’ – not very accurate), a concept that simply doesn’t apply to the average homosexual male. And both use the word “to’ebah” (there are several allowed transliterations, I think that is the most accurate), and it means ritual impurity.

      It doesn’t mean abomination, and it doesn’t mean sin.

      So what we have in both verses is: a husband who lies with a priest in his wife’s bed is unclean.

      The context for both passages is a lengthy denunciation of the fertility practices of other people’s religions. It contains many specific, explicit condemnations of specific circumstances of heterosexual intercourse.

      If one were dishonest enough or irrational enough to conclude that Lev 20:13 creates some universal condemnation of homosexuality by condemning a form of adultery, then all of the hundreds of verses and laws that condemn specific circumstances of heterosexual sex create an even stronger condemnation of heterosexuality.

      And we should not forget that the very first curse in the Bible directed at any human being, (in Genesis 3) specifically and explicitly targets the physical purpose of heterosexual sex – reproduction. Heterosexual reproduction is cursed by God in the third chapter of the Bible:

      16 To the woman he said,
      “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
      with pain you will give birth to children.
      Your desire will be for your husband,
      and he will rule over you.”

      And of course, citing Leviticus 20:13, besides being a death threat and intellectual fraud, does nothing to refute Christ’s commands and his test for false teaching.

      May 26, 2010 at 2:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      he

      May 26, 2010 at 2:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      lieth

      May 26, 2010 at 2:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      with a woman

      May 26, 2010 at 2:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      both

      May 26, 2010 at 2:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      of them

      May 26, 2010 at 2:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      have

      May 26, 2010 at 2:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      committed

      May 26, 2010 at 2:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      an abomination

      May 26, 2010 at 2:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      they

      May 26, 2010 at 2:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      shall

      May 26, 2010 at 2:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      surely

      May 26, 2010 at 2:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      be

      May 26, 2010 at 2:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      put

      May 26, 2010 at 2:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      to death

      May 26, 2010 at 2:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      their

      May 26, 2010 at 2:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      blood

      May 26, 2010 at 2:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      shall be

      May 26, 2010 at 2:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      upon

      May 26, 2010 at 2:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      them!

      May 26, 2010 at 2:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Cassandra, the death spoken of in Leviticus 20:13 in that day was of physical and spiritual.

      Today, we don’t kill for the sake of killing. They do in Uganda, and many nations in the Middle East.

      The homosexuals today will face spiritual death for the sin of their lifestyles. And you, whore, will also face such death for encouraging, promoting, and lifting this idolatrous lifestyle.

      God have mercy on you.

      May 26, 2010 at 2:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Futhermore, Cassandra–foolish whore–you do not possess the priesthood passed on by Peter, James, and John nor the order of King Melchizedek possessed by the Son of Man.

      Know your place, woman! You have not the authority. You are an unclean spirit whoring the testaments of the written Word claiming yourself to be a seer and revelator of gospel truths. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Because ye are not of one faith, having one Lord, one baptism, and one God to be Father of all, thou art a whore lifted up unto the spirit of contention.

      Because you seek to evoke anger in others through your own zeal, thou art a whore.

      Because you seek to rape the innocent mind and force your agenda against the will of man, thou art a whore.

      Because you have made your bed with the Sons of Perdition and rebuke the promptings of the Spirit, thou art a whore.

      Silence, whore! For you know not!

      May 26, 2010 at 3:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty

      “Cassandra, the death spoken of in Leviticus 20:13 in that day was of physical and spiritual.

      Today, we don’t kill for the sake of killing. They do in Uganda, and many nations in the Middle East.”

      Sorry, but the exemption for today you imagine isn’t in the text. You are embracing murdering millions of human beings as a sacrifice to your vision of god.

      “The homosexuals today will face spiritual death for the sin of their lifestyles. ”

      Sadly, the people who most demonstrate the symptoms of spiritual death are bigots like yourself – those who celebrate oppression and destruction, abuse and cruelty.

      And the whole ‘sin of their lifestyle’ is so disconnected from the reality of anyone’s life, including GLBTQ people, that it makes your spam posts almost rational.

      “And you, whore, will also face such death for encouraging, promoting, and lifting this idolatrous lifestyle.’

      Scotty, no matter how insulting you are, no matter how vicious your posts are, it doesn’t change the fact that what you teach destroys other people’s lives. It inspires hate crimes, it drives people to suicide, it drives people away from God. Your belief only bears evil fruit.

      Jesus was clear – evil fruit is proof of an evil tree.

      “God have mercy on you.”

      Every day, even without your permission, God is merciful to me, blessing me with a loving and gracious partner, good friends, meaningful employment, a grace-filled, Spirit led congregation to worship with, loving family and the promise of salvation by grace through faith.

      If you repent, Scotty, God will even have mercy on you and forgive you for making death threats against millions of people He loves just as He made them. You can be forgiven for persecuting people, for libeling them, for abusing and vilifying your neighbors. If you repent.

      At least learn this one thing: You haven’t the authority to take my faith from me, nor to separate me from God, nor can you make me hate myself or any other person. You are not God, you never will be. And no self-respecting person, gay or straight, will ever make you their god.

      You have nothing to offer but an evil tree that bears only evil fruit, and no matter how imperiously you coil about it and flick your tongue, I’m not eating of your fruit.

      May 26, 2010 at 3:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Cassandra:

      Forgive me for not reading your long-winded speech, whore. You need to try to use shorter phrases. Get to the point, whore!

      May 26, 2010 at 3:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Calling me names, Scotty, will neither make me angry, nor disprove anything I have written.

      Every ugly thing you say about me is fruit of your belief ‘homosexuality is sin’ – evil fruit, horrific, sinful, destructive fruit. Each insult proves that your belief does not come from God, but from your own heart.

      Look at what is coming out of your heart, Scotty, nasty, petty little name-calling that is offensive on every level.

      Matthew 15
      1Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2″Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”

      3Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[a] and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’[b] 5But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ 6he is not to ‘honor his father[c]‘ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
      8″ ‘These people honor me with their lips,
      but their hearts are far from me.
      9They worship me in vain;
      their teachings are but rules taught by men.’[d]”

      10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’ ”

      12Then the disciples came to him and asked, “Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?”

      13He replied, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14Leave them; they are blind guides.[e] If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”

      15Peter said, “Explain the parable to us.”

      16″Are you still so dull?” Jesus asked them. 17″Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean.’ 19For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20These are what make a man ‘unclean’; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him ‘unclean.’ ”

      While ‘sexual immorality’ does not intrinsically equate to homosexuality, Luther said that speaking words of harm, like your death threats Scotty, are a violation of Thou Shalt Not Kill as much as physically killing someone. In other words, Scotty, you committed murder in spirit, you committed the sin of murder in your heart, the moment you posted Leviticus 20:13.

      You’ve given false testimony and voiced truly evil thoughts, you’ve slandered millions of people.

      What comes out of your keyboard, your mouth on the internet, comes from your heart, and it has all been unclean.

      May 26, 2010 at 3:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty

      You ask for forgiveness for the wrong thing. You have sinned against me repeatedly, please repent.

      May 26, 2010 at 3:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Yeah, I can’t view this website. I’m flagging it to no longer be viewed. When the hateful, disrespectful comments of people bring the worst out of me, it’s time to step away.

      May 26, 2010 at 3:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Vman455
      Vman455

      @Scotty: “Yeah, I can’t view this website. I’m flagging it to no longer be viewed.”

      Flagging it to not be viewed by whom–you? Great! You are nothing but a spiteful, bilious individual who has now blamed his own vitriolic, childish comments on other posters bringing “the worst out of me.” Good riddance!

      May 26, 2010 at 4:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      And furthermore, Vpansy, I may not give a right’s behind about you, but my war with Queerty.com is far from over.

      That boy in San Antonio will rue the day he ever screwed with me.

      May 26, 2010 at 5:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      No. 341, Qwerty….his response to that question will be the universal mantra used by the religious cultists which is…god has always existed, eternal. Its nothing more than a copout because NONE of them know, nor can they prove its existence. They are perfect examples that devolution exists. Many of them can be found in the republican party too.

      May 26, 2010 at 8:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Vman455
      Vman455

      @Scotty: “And furthermore, Vpansy, I may not give a right’s behind about you, but my war with Queerty.com is far from over.”

      Now, there’s a very Christian sentiment if I ever heard one. You come on here (for whatever initial reason, I can only guess), try to push your crackhead Mormon agenda on this thread, eventually realize everyone here has brains and isn’t listening to you, and then devolve into a post ho who can’t think of anything more constructive to post than strung-out Bible verses and name-calling screeds. And now you have a “war” with this website. Go crawl back under your self-righteous rock. If the Celestial Kingdom is full of idiots like you (as I’m sure you firmly believe it is), you can keep it.

      May 26, 2010 at 9:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      Ha! Ha! SCOTTY, you’ve been owned by CASSANDRA, you arrogant wimp. You’re such a childish loser reposting that verse over and over again as if to convince yourself you’re right. But you’re wrong, detestable and arrogant. Repent, stupid man!

      May 26, 2010 at 10:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Cassandra: CUCKKOO FOR COCOA PUFFS. Scotty is cuckoo for all Puffs apparently. Welcome Scotty, this is the one place gay people will tell you that you are just a self hating homosexual.(hint: ty mansfield) This is also the place where we will tell you to shut your mouth and open your ears. You have nothing to offer. Everyone here is well ahead of you already so either ask questions and learn but do keep your tired outdated pack of biblical lies meant to control the masses of yesteryear to yourself. It is meaningless and if you notice all you do is use your religion as a weapon. (empty shell that it is). We all already innately know the message of spiriturality is just the opposite of your rambling judgemental hate. Pipe down you tired old Koont.

      May 26, 2010 at 11:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @ewe: Cassandra. i hope you realize that the above message is dierected at Scotty. I hit reply to your message however. I mean to clarify before Bozo uses his god fantasy to attempt sepearation of allies.

      May 26, 2010 at 11:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Re: Message 411- What boy in San Antonio Texas are you threatening? You are the same as every other religious terrorist. It has been said before and i will say it again. No one thinks what you said has any merit because you don’t have any merit. Get over it. Tough if you can’t control your ego. Your threats agaist queerty are documented. Now GO AWAY you evil queen.

      May 26, 2010 at 11:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      Wow..what we just saw with Scotty is a PERFECT example of self loathing internal homophobia! They either direct there loathing to themselves-like the poor young Mormon guy who committed suicide or they direct it to people who are gay and happy. Scotty (I think) is young so hopefully he will come to terms with it. I hope he doesn’t wait until he is thirty like I did! Scotty if you are reading this I still wish you well. I certainly cannot judge you because I did not grow up in your shoes.

      I think we all could learn a lesson from the people who lived in the US before we did. The American Indians accepted gay people. They not only accepted gay people..they were known as “special people.” Indians recognized homosexuality in nature..it was just “part of life.”

      I wonder how many young gay kids have to commit suicide or how many gay people have to turn to drugs and alcohol OR marry people of the opposite sex before they (the Church) take a different look at the issue. They took a different look on many social teachings of the Old Testament..lkie..owning of slaves..selling daughters into slavery..eating shellfish..getting your hair trimmed..working on the Sabbath and on and on. I am sorry but these churches have blood on their hands. They have caused so much misery and grief to so many FAMILIES!

      May 26, 2010 at 12:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @nikko:

      Nikko, God will judge me accordingly. What you have you done for Him? Nothing. You spew liberal, Episcopalian garbage. You pervert the Word of God to read what you want to rather than what is actually written.

      Cassandra is guilty of such perversion. She is too proud to admit that her interpretations are HER interpretations rather than God’s.

      There is only one interpretation that has it right, and it is the one that is the same yesterday, today, and forever. When a church splits, you know there’s something wrong with that faith. They are multi-faithed which rejects the gospel principle of one faith written in the Book of Ephesians.

      You don’t scare me. You are bitter, hateful, and religious bigot.

      The homosexual agenda will become a majority. And because the homosexual agenda is VERY anti-Christian, so will that agenda force it’s will on society, pro port tyrannous relativism, and usher in a socialist society where we are not allowed to think for ourselves. You agenda will rise like Caesar, Domitian, Nero, and evil wicked emperors of pro-homosexual Rome who forced millions to bow down to their will or face execution.

      You can kill me now. I will never bow down to the sin of homosexuality. Unlike you all, I will not make homosexuality my god. Homosexuality is your god.

      May 26, 2010 at 1:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Queerty.com is guilty of copyright infringement. It has committed a crime.

      May 26, 2010 at 1:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Torah, Sefer VaYikra (Leviticus in Christianity) Chapter 18 v. 22

      Molech: Sodomy and Bestiality

      “22 Ve’et zachar lo tishkav mishkevei ishah to’evah hi”

      Translated, “You shall not lie with a male [conjugally] as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination.”

      and Chapter 20, v. 13

      Punishments for Forbidden Relationships

      “13 Ve’ish asher yishkav et-zachar mishkevei ishah to’evah asu shneihem mot yumatu dmeihem bam”

      Translated, “A man who will lie [conjugally] with [another] man, in the same manner as with a woman; they both have committed an abominable act, they shall surely be put to death, their blood is on them.”

      Torah, Sefer Bereishit (Genesis in Christianity) Chapter 19, v. 5

      Sedem (the same is Sodom in English) Destroyed

      “5 Vayikre’u el-Lot vayomru lo ayeh ha’anashim asher-ba’u eleycha halailah hotzi’em eleynu venede’ah otam.”

      Translated, “They called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them.”

      May 26, 2010 at 2:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: “There’s always an excuse, isn’t there? Of course, your excuse is a classic internet fallacy: “Centurion tries to gain tactical advantage in battle by asserting that he is, or was at one time, in the military. He affects the brusque demeanor and clipped style of a drill sergeant, and intimidates opponents by sprinkling his messages with military verbiage and obscure acronyms. He reinforces weak arguments by constantly reminding other Warriors that he has “done his duty”, or “served his country”. Sometimes Centurion may even post pictures of military hardware or images of himself in fatigues brandishing a weapon. Centurion may actually have a military background, or he may just be a nut case – no one really knows.”

      Your alleged military experience is irrelevant Joseph.”

      This is funny. Considering none of my priorities are pandering to you, I must be making excuses as to my slow response time.

      My military experience is completely relevant because I have served with gay and lesbian Soldiers.

      I have made no claim to fame of my service, nor have I in any way acted like a Drill Sergeant. I have acted like myself and made mention of the service to demonstrate that you are in error in your accusations because if I were truly the homophobe that you so falsely claim me to be, than why wouldn’t I push the issue over those Soldiers being gay and lesbian? It’s because I value them as friends, people and Soldiers, plus I don’t care what their orientation is.

      This is where the argument becomes a joke.

      You belittle any real life experience I bring to the conversation by using the word, “alleged” in order to make it sound like I am lying.

      I have not degraded any of your personal experiences, yet you insist on degrading mine to boost your position.

      “You haven’t provided any evidence so far that I have called you are liar, have you?”

      Post 250 from you to David in Houston.

      “Joseph is playing games here.”

      “His own statement is bs, and it indicates the typical homophobic prejudice – anything GLBTQ people do is wrong, anything homophobes like the Mormon Church do, is justifiable, any criticism of homophobes is hate.”

      “This is a mix of half truths and outright lies. The official No on 8 campaign was poorly run, and I say that as a Californian.”

      “That’s bullshit. The only people who objected to the CA Supreme Court’s decision – not ‘a judge’ but the highest judges in CA – were the homophobes.”

      “This is pure bullshit. It tells us that Joseph is utterly dishonest, and will make up anything out of thin air to make his denomination appear to be the victims.”

      “It’s a smokescreen, and the fuel is smoldering bullshit.”

      “Here we find Joseph pretending to know the emotions, the innermost feelings, of two people he can’t even name by name, in a city he calls by a nickname that people from San Francisco find offensive and belittling. This is not an honest argument, it is a low-level derogatory libel.”

      “Joseph’s posts are just an ugly and vicious game.”

      Those are 8 quotes from just 1 of your posts.

      Let’s see… 2 statements saying I’m playing games, that would indicate I am being intentionally dishonest. 4 statements saying what I said was bullshit, which indicates I am lying or simply wrong. 1 statement where I am “pretending” to know something that I never claimed, that would indicate I am intentionally trying to deceive someone. And 1 statement where you say “outright lies.”

      Is that enough evidence for now?

      As for the incident that took place in Frisco, are you upset about the nickname of Frisco or drag queen?

      Frisco is a common nickname for those of us who live in Northern California, just as Sac Town is a nickname for Sacramento.

      But your claim to being a California resident can be verified how?

      You also throw around the phrase homophobe a lot.

      As for the incident, here is a link to an article about it, if it will allow me to post it. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/oct/07101004.html If the url doesn’t post, Google “San Francisco Archbishop Responds After Caught on Video Giving Communion to Gay Men Dressed as Nuns” and you will find the article.

      It is some Christian news site and the first response I found on Google that discusses it. Since you appear to be too lazy to do any research into it. I did not choose that article for it’s content covering the issue, merely to show documentation of the event that Cassandra loves to call into question of its reality.

      I am not worried about their spiritual intentions, any rational person can discern the appropriateness of their actions.

      My main objection to their actions were not their “spiritual devotion” as you claim, but the public relations it caused during a time when the topic of same-sex marriage was a social fire storm.

      If they want to protest the Catholic church for the sake of protesting it, I don’t care. But if they want to garner support for something such as marriage, then it’s a bad idea to do something like that because it further makes the “us versus them” case to the churches.

      Is anything sinking into your head yet?

      “So, how about a list of some of your lies:
      Post 238
      “First off, I never “verbally abused” Robert. I put him in his place. Get off your emotional soapbox of victimization if you think he was “abused.” He was spewing nothing but hate and contempt and swearing quite visciously(sic) about other people.”
      From Post 244:
      “The argument for allowing same-sex marriage has had terrible tactics and is primarily based on emotion.”
      “One caveat though, there is a clause with what Jesus said. You are generalizing and assuming that many divorces are not due to adultery or unfaithfulness.

      A few from post 253
      “You’re a tool and you have no concept of reality.”
      “the merits were never advocated at a state wide level”
      “You’re generalizing and making the bias remarks.”
      “You assume I’m dishonest because of your unfounded bias”.”

      What exactly are the lies?

      “First off, I never “verbally abused” Robert. I put him in his place. Get off your emotional soapbox of victimization if you think he was “abused.” He was spewing nothing but hate and contempt and swearing quite visciously(sic) about other people.”

      Robert said many vicious things that you seem to condone because you agree with him? Is that correct? I don’t see a lie in the position I took and I still support it. But if you think any time someone’s feelings are hurt in the slightest and it’s “verbal abuse,” then I suppose by your weak definition it could have been taken that way. I however, I have standards when it comes to real abuse. If someone can’t handle being called out for being a jerk, then they should keep their mouth shut and not welcome rebuttles.

      “The argument for allowing same-sex marriage has had terrible tactics and is primarily based on emotion.”

      Where’s the lie in this statement?

      Put two people in a room and tell them to debate each other on emotion and how a topic makes them feel and you really think anyone is going to win the debate honestly? You think observers are going to be persuaded beyond their previously held preconceived notions?

      Put two people in a room and tell them to have a rational discussion about a topic with plenty of shared ideas, expressly sharing the Constitution, would you believe that someone would come out ahead of the other? You think observers wouldn’t be potentially persuaded to a different position?

      “One caveat though, there is a clause with what Jesus said. You are generalizing and assuming that many divorces are not due to adultery or unfaithfulness.”

      Where’s the lie? I pointed out a vague point in your argument which you later gave more information on. Where’s the problem?

      “You’re a tool and you have no concept of reality.”

      Where’s the lie? True, it is an accusation that you have yet to disprove and I would be happy if you would do so in a rational and reasonable manner.

      “the merits were never advocated at a state wide level”

      I live in a small town in the North East part of California. I also lived in Chico before then and never heard media adds advocating the merits of the Constitutionality with the U.S. Constitution. Where is the lie? If it were really advocated to every person, shouldn’t I have heard these arguments?

      “You’re generalizing and making the bias remarks.”

      Again, where is the lie?

      “You assume I’m dishonest because of your unfounded bias”

      I’m pretty sure that is still an accurate statement. You assume I am lying about my service with gay and lesbian Soldiers, you assume I am a liar, you assume I am a homophobe and I have yet to see the reason be anything but an unfounded bias on your part. So again… where is the lie?

      “The harder task, actually, Joseph, is find statements you make that are accurate.”

      It’s actually a lot easier when you step out of your comfort zone and take the blinders off.

      “What arrogance. Essentially, you’ve dismissed everyone who disagrees with you shoddy arguments as ignorant and stupid, and dismissed common decency as being ‘politically correct’.”

      I don’t dismiss anyone who disagrees with me while presenting a solid rebuttal. You haven’t done such a thing, which is why we’re still having this discussion. What is your interpretation of common decency? Not disagreeing with you on anything? You can call things I say “bullshit,” call me a “homophobe,” call me “dishonest,” say I “lie” yet you must be full of common decency right?

      “Actually, Joseph, the last clause is intrinsically inconsistent with the first. There is no generosity in concluding that anyone who displeases you is ignorant and self-diluted (sic). If the first is true, and your posts do give that impression of how you see yourself, the second is impossible.”

      I call things as I see them, I can be a real asshole, but I am also compassionate. It may seem odd to you, but it is not impossible. This is where my friends have been surprised before, they were in need and I happily gave them my time, money, whatever they needed and they were at first taken back because I was this “asshole friend” who always says what’s on his mind and is never worried about offending anyone. In time they’ve come to accept both extremes of my character.

      “Maybe you’ll do that online someday, but your posts here show no indication of the above. In fact, you played ‘the devils advocate’ just for you own entertainment.”

      I do often play devils advocate to further a debate or conversation. Let’s be honest, how can something grow if there is no opposition at all? Exercise is a perfect example. Do curls with a 5 pound weight with the same amount of repetitions for so long, the muscle growth will stop because there is not enough tension to strain the muscle. It’s not for entertainment that I do it, but because I would rather have a stimulated conversation where people are actually engaging productive dialog and not getting bogged down in group think.

      As for being “compassionate” in this type of setting, online forum, don’t count on it. My compassion extends to being able to actually reach out and help people in real life. However, the best way to mild me down is to have reasonable conversation. Something I thought we were going to have until I read your post to David where you started saying everything I was saying was bullshit, from that point, the tone of civility was lost. But if we agree to both be more civil, I’m not above returning to it.

      “So here we have the pre-emptive attack on my character, from someone claiming all kinds of virtues. Sorry Joseph, but the virtues you claim to possess are not appearing,”

      Yeah… because I never said I could be an asshole? Come on Cassandra, I’ve admitted a few of my flaws here. I have no misconception of my faults, there are many, nor do I believe I am superior to others. If I cast a big shadow, that’s because I believe in being honest, even it is it not easy, fun, or kind to hear/say.

      “This is called justification, when someone engages in wrong behavior but makes an excuse for it. So now it isn’t your fault that your insult and malign people, Joseph, they asked for it by displeasing you. Frankly, you can flatter yourself all you want, your post demonstrates a completely lack of regard for anyone else other than yourself.”

      This is a matter of perception. You believe I am engaging in wrong behavior. I do not believe I am. There is no excuse being made. Now you say I insult and malign people, I can only remember speaking directly to Robert and you in a fashion that could be characterized as such, yet you have not conducted yourself in a better manner. So are you justifying your own double standards now?

      “What we get is another excuse coupled with another unsubstantiated claim about completely unsubstantiated military service that has no bearing on anything. And it is offered as a rebuttal to being told by a real live GLBTQ person that the word ‘homosexual’ still carries a strong stigma. Again, Joseph, you are trying to tell GLBTQ people what we really experience, feel, like, rather than actually listening to us.

      It it is a manifestation o heterosexism.”

      You love putting words in other people’s mouths don’t you?

      So you are all GLBTQ in one or are you simply one of the abbreviated words?

      It’s very interesting how all of the unsubstantiated claims as to your personal experiences count for everything, even though they are just as unverifiable, in your words, as my enlistment. What makes your unsubstantiated claims as to any of your experiences more real than your dismissal of my experiences which you claim to be unsubstantiated?

      It’s not a word game, it’s called fair is fair. You claim things I say are untrue to do nothing than further your argument while claiming everything you say is true, with the respect to personal experiences/history. Simply because I do not claim to be part of your GLBTQ group, then everything else I must say is automatically unsubstantiated and a lie? It’s very hypocritical of you.

      Something I’ve actually said multiple times, I do not claim to know the experiences of others. But I can and do make observations based on previous experiences and/or conversations with others.

      What has you so pissed off when I say the strategy to oppose Prop 8 sucked?

      Prop 8 passed, therefor whatever strategy was used failed.

      Since it failed, the strategy, why are you clinging to it so strongly and bearing false witness against a straight guy who wants to see Prop 8 repealed?

      You’ve been constantly attacking me and bearing false witness against me. Something you are very sensitive about when someone comes here to preach doctrine at you. Why are you a hypocrite?

      “And you are not being honest or accurate, Joseph, since in the post you quoted from, I quoted exactly what I was responding to – your own complaint about being called a homophobe..”

      My actual complaints aren’t about being called a homophobe directly, so much as you falsely accusing me of lying and of being a homophobe or insinuating that I am a self-hating closet gay with no foundation to back up any of your claims.

      You do a lot of quoting and a lot of side stepping into unrelated conclusions.

      “LOL. One of the purposes of sarcasm is to dodge.”

      I can’t dodge a bullet if it was never accurately fired at me Cassandra, but nice try again.

      “Without any context, it is difficult to know what you are responding to, or trying to say. I would hope that you are not suggesting that there is no documentation of homophobia at all, because anti-gay prejudice is extremely well documented.
      Perhaps though you are simply trying to dismiss what I actually wrote:
      “You are judging people you don’t know in a very personal and derogatory way, impugning their character and spirituality, solely because you associate the way they dress with homosexuality, and therefore, whatever they do is wrong.
      And while you claim you are not a homophobe, you’ve repeatedly cast aspersions on my mental health (instead of actually addressing my positions) – mirroring standard homophobic position that homosexuals are mentally ill. Your posts shout to the world that see us as sick in the head.
      The homophobia in your posts is not in doubt here,””

      Let me type slower for you…

      There are merely claims and false accusations that I have said anything homophobic or anti-gay. I have in no way judged millions of people or attempted to make claim that I have shared experiences, those are your attacks, not mine.

      You honestly think me saying those guys taking communion was a bad way to win support to their cause is anti-gay or homophobic?

      Their actions enraged millions of people in the Catholic church. There were many news articles about and condemnations from Catholic leadership over the event.

      Now, unless those two men simply didn’t care about gaining any support, except from within their enclaves, then they were successful and chose a winning strategy. But if they wanted to garner more broad support, then they chose a bad way to go about it.

      You seem so stuck on the idea that they never meant to upset anyone because they are just honest gay Christians participating in a religious ceremony. How do you validate your claim? Grown men, dressed like pseudo-nuns take communion while being filmed in a church that has a very strong position against GLTBQ marriage is anything but an act done to draw attention to themselves? Try answering the question honestly without throwing your own bias into it.

      “The ironic part, Joseph, is that you haven’t provided factual support for any of your claims.. Face it, Joseph, your posts have been nothing but accusations and declarations, assertions and accusations, insults and snark without any factual support to back any of it up.”

      I’m so sorry, I haven’t provided documentation of me lying or being homophobic that you could actually document to substantiate your claims because they don’t exist. That’s like going into a court room and being found guilty because I could not provide evidence that I did not commit a crime when the prosecution has no evidence that a crime was ever committed.

      ““The verification of my gay and lesbian friends is a mute point.”

      So, you don’t need to support your facts. Got it. Everyone else is automatically wrong if they don’t provide outside sources for every thing they post, but you don’t need to back up anything at all.”

      Prove who you really are who you say you are then if you think that line is creditable.

      I have not once discounted who you claim to be, your experiences, nor the people you know. I see no reason for you to lie about that. But you insist that I must do so and potentially put people I know at risk of being harassed?

      Again, you are bearing false witness by saying that everyone else is automatically wrong if they don’t provide outside sources for everything they post. I never made that claim. When it comes to reference-able material I do insist that outside references should be used. Like when quoting scripture, using the book, chapter, verse; sourcing news articles, etc. When it comes to the identities of persons not directly involved in this conversation, that would be extremely irresponsible to say, “This person is a lesbian and these people are gay and they’re in the military!” on a publicly accessible forum.

      “So the two men, whose existence and act Joseph did not even provide evidence for, are first ‘demonstrating hostility toward religion’. Then, through sarcasm, Joseph tells us that they were not ‘heart felt and spiritual’. Finally, anyone who doesn’t interpret their alleged act as hostile to religion ‘needs to rejoin the real world – seek professional help’.”

      I put a link to a news article in earlier and if it is not allowed to be posted, I gave you the title of an article you can Google and see the “evidence” which you seem so desirable for.

      “Your quotes above make it very clear that you have decided, without any evidence except for the clothing they were allegedly wearing, the two men in question were hostile to religion and insincere.”

      Look up the article, see for yourself. Again, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to observe what happened and come to a simply conclusion.

      “And your assumption about me – naivety or fraud – also reflects an innate bias against me.”

      Considering you insist on defending something you know nothing about demonstrates naivety on your part.

      Cassandra, my bias is against your dishonest attempts to smear and libel me by lying about things that I have said. If that is the person that you are, it does not help your arguments of telling people to repent for bearing false witness against you when you are guilty of the same actions against another person.

      I’m not defending Scotty, the guy is off his rocker.

      “See Joseph, for many people, gay and straight, the call for social justice is a crucial religious conviction. This alleged event is in the same class as Luther’s posting of ninety five theses to the door of Castle Church. He was calling the church to a higher standard as an expression of his spiritual convictions, and the men you have vilified could very easily have been doing the same, especially because of the political context.

      But you conclude, because they are gay men in drag, that their motives are suspect. That, Joseph, is homophobia at work.”

      It’s really the same as Martin Luther’s protest? That’s a stretch.

      Like I’ve said too many times now, what they did was not a good or effective way of bolstering support outside their social cliques. I could care less if they want to protest the Catholic church in such a way and they don’t care if they only make people in their inner circle happy. BUT if they wanted anything beyond that, it wasn’t a good strategy.

      Cassandra, you conclude that because I am not gay and you falsely make assumptions about what I say that I am a homphobe. That, Cassandra, is ignorance at work.

      “You see insult because of how you see GLBTQ people. I see a call for spiritual change because of how I see people of faith.”

      I see insult because how it pissed off the Catholic church, not because of your false assumption of how I see GLBTQ people. If there was no harm intended, then they didn’t do a good job considering how much it angered the leadership of the Catholic church.

      “But consistently interpreting anything GLBTQ people do or say in a negative way does, and that, Joseph, is what you’ve done in post after post after post.”

      “Joseph, over and over again, you have assumed, without evidence, derogatory and abusive things about the motives, mental health, spirituality, integrity and character of people you know only one thing about: that they are gay or lesbian.”

      “Joseph wrote: “I could simply be like you and dismiss them”

      Another crass insult with no basis in reality.”

      You’re like a broken record that keeps skipping the over foundation of an argument.

      I don’t constantly interpret anything GLBTQ people do or say in negative ways. I have repeatedly stuck to my position that if they were not intending to piss off the Catholic church, which they did, then they did a very poor job at it. I saw the video, I saw the pictures, I read the articles which expressed the Catholic church being angry. They didn’t have to be gay to dress the way they did, but if I remember correctly, it was around the time of the Folsom Street Fair, I did not remember exactly when it took place before, but after thinking about it, I believe that is around the time it occurred. Sexual orientation isn’t a requirement to protest, but they made it part of their event. You seem to assume because I mentioned it, that makes something I did to be wrong.

      A crass insult huh? Considering you said, “Your alleged military experience is irrelevant Joseph.”

      That is in no way being dismissive? Riiiigggghhhhtttt….. So because you were dismissive, that is not the first or only time, calling you on it has no basis in reality because you are still dismissive.

      “I think I’ve done a good job of that all along, and reiterated the point in these four posts. So the interesting there here is, Joseph, is that you have yet again relied on an empty dismissal, even though you’ve repeatedly maligned me and dismissed me by accusing me of ‘brushing off’ your remarks.”

      That’s exactly the point, you THINK you’ve done a good job at proving something when you have made unsubstantiated claims about myself and about what I have said. This is the issue where I will not back down. Like I said, I can’t prove myself innocent with evidence if there is no evidence of a crime. Unfortunately I cannot miracle any “evidence” for you onto the forum so I may provide you said “evidence” for my defense.

      “There is a message in your posts, Joseph, and it is crystal clear: You think we GLBTQ people are intrinsically inferior to you. You can dismiss us out of hand, lie about our lives, our words, our spirituality, our history, demand levels of proof you never hold yourself to, libel and malign, and we’re supposed to just believe every little dribble of sputum you fling at us.”

      Really? That’s my “hidden message?” I think all GLBTQ are inferior because they “No on Prop 8” campaign sucked? NOOOOOOOO…. I in no what think/feel/believe such a thing. Are you that insecure that you have to stoop to such an exaggerated and unfounded claim?

      The No on Prop 8 campaign was primarily based on voters emotions. The, “Look how sad you make us” angle didn’t appeal to the opposition side who based their campaign also on emotions. This is not homophobic or anti-gay. That’s what happened and if the No on Prop 8 campaign was more solidly rooted in the U.S. Constitution than it would have been more successful. But that is such a terrible thing to say because of what? Why?

      “You are denying a different statement than the one I made. It is not a very clever way of telling lies Joseph. Do I really have to re-quote all of the times you have made slurs about my mental health and intelligence?”

      This is entertaining.

      Post 306

      “And while you claim you are not a homophobe, you’ve repeatedly cast aspersions on my mental health (instead of actually addressing my positions) – mirroring standard homophobic position that homosexuals are mentally ill. Your posts shout to the world that see us as sick in the head.
      The homophobia in your posts is not in doubt here,”

      “mirroring standard homophobic position that homosexuals are mentally ill. Your posts shout to the world that see us as sick in the head.”

      It must have been a clever way to lie since you made the accusation that I am “mirroring standard homophobic positions that homosexuals are mentally ill.” That is your charge that I addressed, but you insist on falsely bearing witness against me that I am lying.

      I have asked about your mental health due to your lack of ability to respond to the real things that I have said, your consistent false accusations that I am lying or implying things I have never said and your touchy feely misconceptions of what abuse actually is. Your sexual orientation has nothing to do with those questions, no matter how hard you try to correlate the two.

      “Dismissing the arguments that GLBTQ people make about the ban on same-sex marriage, as you did in post 221 “All of the crying, whining, bitching and name calling” is an attack on our state of mind. Dismissing my rebuttal as “because of your unfounded bias” (in post 253) instead of addressing what I actually wrote, is an attack on my state of mind. Of course, there’s some sexism involved too, Joseph. You’ve assumed from my pen name that I’m female, and treated me with the contempt and condescension that misogynists inflict on women: “Holy crap woman, how arrogant/ignorant can you be?” Post 253. And GLBTQ people know that sexism, the idea that the female is inferior is a component of homophobia.”

      That’s because “crying, whining, bitching and name calling” is based in emotion and not the Constitutionality of the issue. Is it better to go into a debate filled with emotion that can dictate your responses or is it better to be collected and argue the merits?

      So are you a man or woman? You assume that by having a female screen name that one wouldn’t assume you be anything but female proves what? The contempt I’ve had is for your blatant arrogance and outright lies of the things that I have said. I have nothing against you personally, I don’t know you personally, we only know what we have allowed to share on this forum. Again, another false charge of sexism because I addressed you by a genital reference? If you are male and made it clear earlier, than I very well would have said, “Holy crap man,…” This is another false assumption that I assume to be superior than another. Women are simply different from men, with strengths and weaknesses, like men. People complement one another with strengths and weaknesses.

      “Ah, like Ty Mansfield, and Alan Rekers, and many other people who condemn homosexuality, perceive homosexuals as inferior, and so on.”

      This proves what other than you are making another unsubstantiated claim?

      “Trouble is, most are not, and even those who have been crass, have a sound foundation for their criticism: over and over again, consistently, homosexuals who marry heterosexually only end up hurting themselves and those around them.”

      This is what irritates me about so many of these posts. The “mightier than thou” attitude that is intrinsically part of the criticisms.

      What is wrong with stating your concern, then wishing someone luck and happiness in their legal consenting adult decision?

      They may end up hurting each other and themselves, but so what? He could end up just as hurt had he married another man. That is part of the risk/reward of being in a relationship. There is always that risk.

      “I am convinced that you maligned people on this board because you automatically interpret everything that GLBTQ people do or say as negative, wrong, bad. In your mind, I am convinced, we can’t ever by right, can’t ever be speaking from experience, can’t ever be sincere, can’t ever be religious.

      And that in a nutshell is homophobia, Joseph, the assumption that GLBTQ people are just intrinsically wrong in everything they do and say and feel. Your posts are overflowing with it.”

      Well there’s good news Cassandra, you’re wrong. Simply because you choose to falsely interpret and twist my words into something that supports your skewed perception does not make it true.

      “And Joseph, you have repeatedly accused me without so much as a single relevant quote, all the while complaining at me, though I quote you extensively and demonstrate, with care, each claim you make that is false.”

      You don’t seem to care how much I quote you and point out your errors, you still make quotes and then assign completely different meanings to what I say.

      “Joseph wrote: “But thanks for including me as one of the atheists since I’m Mormon.”

      Of course that is not what I wrote or expressed. Very creative, but not very honest.”

      This is rich…

      Post 301

      “Bill and Joseph and james_from_the_great_city_of_cambridge and all of the other fundamentalist atheists here”

      So you didn’t write that? Third word in is my name. I referenced the post, people can see for themselves. Or am I lying again by hacking the website to change your previous post to include me in that categorization of fundamentalist atheism?

      Who’s being honest Cassandra? You’ve complained about quotes and there’s one for you to chew on.

      “But Mormon church has engaged in a deliberate program of overt, systemic oppression against GLBTQ people, and as an organization, has tried to define itself, and mormon belief, by that deliberate oppression of GLBTQ people.”

      The church supports the rule of law and issues to sees relevant. Banning same-sex marriage is still legal, until the legislatures change the law or until the Constitutionality of such bans are addressed. I do not personally agree with the bans because I support the Constitution and I know my church will respect the established when it comes about. I can’t speak for my church nor do I care to even try. I can merely speak for myself, that is if you will actually let me.

      “The fact is that the organization, the Church of Latter Day Saints, has been waging a war of persecution against millions of people, and its actions opposing civil equality for GLBTQ have been entirely evil.”

      The claim of evil is your own. I understand the theological stand the church and many others have taken; however, theology has no bearing when it comes to the Constitution, aside from rights are God given, not government given.

      “I haven’t studied Mormon theology enough to know if this systemic evil truly reflects mormon theology. And I recognize that it doesn’t reflect the lives of all Mormons, though it does reflect the lives and character of the leadership of the Mormon church.

      It simply is inescapable that the Mormon church as an organization has consistently vilified GLBTQ people and treated us as inferior and less than human, and that Joseph has done the same here.”

      Exactly, you don’t know the theology.

      This is why repealing the ban on same-sex marriage requires a firm foundation in reason and the Constitution. We Mormons believe the Constitution is a sacred and divinely inspired document. If the angle is approached that proves such bans are Unconstitutional, then the Mormon church and its members are far more inclined to be supportive.

      “This appears to be a threat as well as yet another unsubstantiated derogatory claim.”

      A threat? That really is a pathetic attempt to play the victim over an obviously commonly used phrase about conversation.

      May 26, 2010 at 2:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      My comments are not representative of the Mormon Church. They are my personal opinions.

      Cassandra, I will say this. If your translation of the scriptures were correct, then I can see how your claims are validated.

      However, I know without a shadow of a doubt that you have misinterpreted the scriptures in Genesis, Leviticus, and Jude and probably several others. How do I know this? Not by my interpretation, but by the interpretations handed down by the prophets.

      Cassandra, I understand why you believe what you believe. I think I’d believe the same way, if I chose to interpret the scriptures the way you do.

      Well, I don’t interpret scriptures my way. I read them as God intended. And that’s why we will not agree on this issue.

      May 26, 2010 at 5:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • James_From_The_Great_City_of_Cambridge
      James_From_The_Great_City_of_Cambridge

      Time for a Queerty poll.

      Who’s the crazier bitch?

      A. Scotty, who needs to spend less time on gay sites salvitaing for
      cock and more time sucking it in parks, that Mormon twat.
      B. Cassandra, who believes the same religious bullshit as Scotty
      but has somehow convinced herself she’s not crazy.

      I say Scotty but only by a hair. Get your votes in now boys!!

      May 26, 2010 at 6:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jeffree
      jeffree

      @James_From_The_Great_City_of_Cambridge: Scotty should have been banned, flagged and banished about 275 posts ago. Even reported for alluding to threats.

      Cassandra, here & elsewhere is a tireless advocate of LGBTs. I don’t share her religious beliefs at all, but she can vigorously fight bible beaters verse by verse when they spout hatered.

      May 26, 2010 at 7:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty

      “My comments are not representative of the Mormon Church. They are my personal opinions.”

      Considering the political actions of the Mormon Church, its leadership shares your opinions. At least you have the integrity to admit that your statements are only your opinion, and do not reflect God’s will, moral authority, ethical behavior, reason or logic.

      “Cassandra, I will say this. If your translation of the scriptures were correct, then I can see how your claims are validated.”

      The translations I’ve provided are correct. You are, of course, free to refute them, but, simply posting the Hebrew and then posting your own translation is not sufficient.

      I’ve already covered, in detail, the translation and logic errors in your abuse of the passages from Leviticus. The burden is on you at this point to prove that the translation and interpretation you’ve provided is accurate.

      That’s after you demonstrate that there is an exception to Christ’s ‘evil fruit is proof of an evil tree’ test.

      “However, I know without a shadow of a doubt that you have misinterpreted the scriptures in Genesis, Leviticus, and Jude and probably several others. How do I know this? Not by my interpretation, but by the interpretations handed down by the prophets.”

      In other words, you have no evidence. Sorry, but your fallacy appeal to ‘the prophets’ – presumably the Mormon leaders, is not convincing evidence.

      “Cassandra, I understand why you believe what you believe. I think I’d believe the same way, if I chose to interpret the scriptures the way you do.”

      Clearly, you do not understand, since you continue to sin against me and have not repented for your sins against me yesterday.

      “Well, I don’t interpret scriptures my way. I read them as God intended.”

      LOL. All act of reading any text involves some degree of interpretation, so of course you interpret texts. When there is any level of multiple meaning, as there is with all of the texts you have listed, then the moment you pick one over all the others, you’ve interpretted the text.

      The simplest example, Scotty, is the word ‘yada’ in the Sodom account. It occurs in the OT more than 900 times, yet only a handful of those are as a euphemism for sex, and, every time it is used euphemistically to indicate sexual knowledge, it is used in a heterosexual context, and with one exception, the euphemism is strengthened by subsequent verses that indicate whether or not the woman became pregnant as a result. Most of the time, 99% of the time actually, yada means acquire knowledge.

      Further, accurate translation of the passage puts all of the people of Sodom at Lot’s door, men, women and children, hardly a situation conducive to rape.

      And then there’s the issue of rape. Even if this passage were trying to convey carnal knowledge, the attempted act was one of rape, an act of violence. Now the Bible has many explicit passages condemning heterosexual rape, so, if you insist that a alleged rape of men creates a total condemnation of homosexuality, than the many Biblical laws against heterosexual rape create an even stronger condemnation of heterosexuality.

      There is also the fact that Sodom was condemned before the angels arrived, that Lot’s offer to vouch for the strangers reinforces the ‘yada = interrogate’ interpretation, and of course, the long-standing Jewish tradition I posted a link for, and Ezekiel’s statements about the sin of Sodom.

      “And that’s why we will not agree on this issue.”

      No, we won’t agree because vilifying homosexuals make you feel morally superior, it gives you someone to say “those people are worse than me” so you don’t have to make any improvements in your own moral life.

      However, Scotty, all of your dancing around here still doesn’t address the very issue you first raised:

      “By their fruit you shall know them” – the test Christ gave us for recognizing false teachers and false teachings. The fruit of your belief is destruction, hate, oppression, murder, libel, loss of faith in God, and more.

      Your belief ‘homosexuality is sin’ only bears evil fruit. According to Jesus, that means your belief is evil.

      Don’t you believe Jesus?

      May 26, 2010 at 7:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      Cassandra, you have purported over and over again to be a person of faith. If you are a person of faith, and because people of faith are taught to FORGIVE those who offend — to “pray for [their] enemies” — FORGIVE Scotty.

      If Scotty asks forgiveness for unkind things he has said about you (and others), will you forgive him?

      May 26, 2010 at 8:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Guest
      Guest

      Hey Scotty..I must have hit a nerve because you flagged me. Here is my response to your tirade last night.
      You know in your heart that you did not choose to be gay..neither did I. I SERIOUSLY hope you find your way. PLEASE don’t wait as long as I did. Trust me..I am not “Satan”..I am just a guy who happens to be gay and grew up in the 70′s in a small town in Ohio..it was pretty much awful. I would not wish it on my worst enemy. I am happy now. My partner and I have been together for 20 years. I cannot imagine my life without him. We are good people..and I know you are in your heart too.
      Here is my response:
      Jim

      Wow..what we just saw with Scotty is a PERFECT example of self loathing internal homophobia! They either direct there loathing to themselves-like the poor young Mormon guy who committed suicide or they direct it to people who are gay and happy. Scotty (I think) is young so hopefully he will come to terms with it. I hope he doesn’t wait until he is thirty like I did! Scotty if you are reading this I still wish you well. I certainly cannot judge you because I did not grow up in your shoes.

      I think we all could learn a lesson from the people who lived in the US before we did. The American Indians accepted gay people. They not only accepted gay people..they were known as “special people.” Indians recognized homosexuality in nature..it was just “part of life.”

      I wonder how many young gay kids have to commit suicide or how many gay people have to turn to drugs and alcohol OR marry people of the opposite sex before they (the Church) take a different look at the issue. They took a different look on many social teachings of the Old Testament..like..owning of slaves..selling daughters into slavery..eating shellfish..getting your hair trimmed..working on the Sabbath and on and on. I am sorry but these churches have blood on their hands. They have caused so much misery and grief to so many FAMILIES!

      May 26, 2010 at 8:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Joseph,

      I am going to summarize because frankly, the bs from you just keeps growing and growing, like some kind of cancer. For the moment, I going to focus on dishonesty:

      “You belittle any real life experience I bring to the conversation by using the word, “alleged” in order to make it sound like I am lying.”

      That is a lie by exaggeration. I have not belittled “any” experience from you, I have told you that you have not met the standard of proof you require of others, and that your military experience is irrelevant. There is a difference, but you lied about my post.

      Remember, Joseph, you have repeatedly demanded evidence from others, yet you provide none yourself.
      I wrote:“You haven’t provided any evidence so far that I have called you are liar, have you?”
      Joseph replies: “Post 250 from you to David in Houston.
      “Joseph is playing games here.”
      . . .
      Those are 8 quotes from just 1 of your posts.
      Let’s see… 2 statements saying I’m playing games, that would indicate I am being intentionally dishonest. 4 statements saying what I said was bullshit, which indicates I am lying or simply wrong. 1 statement where I am “pretending” to know something that I never claimed, that would indicate I am intentionally trying to deceive someone. And 1 statement where you say “outright lies.”

      And yet, not once did I say “you are a liar”. The truth is, I have never called you a liar, I have pointed out that many of your statements are false or lies. But how many times have you called me, and others that directly?

      Of course, your complaint that I and others have challenged the accuracy of your remarks is nothing more than a way of avoiding the fact that you have made false claim after false claim after false claim after false claim.

      So, with so many false claims, are you being deliberately deceptive, or are you just completely uneducated about this subject? Let’s look at another example:

      “Frisco is a common nickname for those of us who live in Northern California”
      Really? In what parallel universe? Joseph, I lived in San Francisco for 20+ years and the nickname is nearly universally hated there.
      “But your claim to being a California resident can be verified how?”
      Neither can yours.

      But I can back up my assertion regarding the nickname “Frisco”
      http://www.journalism.sfsu.edu/www/pubs/gater/fall97/sept11/Frisco.html
      “t was two years ago at UC Berkeley when police officers approached two men sleeping under a tree and asked them for identification.
      “We’re from Frisco,” the men said.
      A moment later, they we’re in handcuffs.
      No, it’s not illegal to say “Frisco,” though some would like it to be. But the two men were wanted fugitives from Utah and they gave themselves away because the officers knew the odds of a San Franciscan saying “I’m from Frisco” are about as slim as surviving a jump off the Golden Gate Bridge. Which begs the question, what is it about the ‘F-word’ that can turn otherwise tolerant San Franciscans into word-usage vigilantes?
      Otis Redding left his home in Georgia and headed for the “Frisco Bay,” the lyrics read in his hit single “Sitting on the Dock of the Bay.” It’s a good thing he didn’t mention this to many people before penning his song because he may have heard from someone like Dayna Nelson, a local freelance tour guide, who would have told him “only goobers and losers use that term.”
      And headed for the San Fran Bay?
      Many credit Friscophobia to the recently deceased newspaper columnist and San Francisco icon, Herb Caen, whose first book, published in 1953, was “Don’t Call it Frisco.” Caen was considered by many to be the recognized authority on what was, and what was not, beneath the city’s dignity, and to him, Frisco was intolerable.
      “Not Frisco but San Francisco,” he wrote in typical fashion in the San Francisco Chronicle. “Caress each Spanish syllable, salute our Italian Saint. Don’t say Frisco and don’t say San-Fran-Cis-Co. That’s the way Easterners, like Larry King pronounce it. It’s more like SanfrnSISco.”

      So, no Joseph, Frisco is not a common nickname for San Francisco.

      I’m spending time on this point, Joseph, because it indicates that you really have no clue what you are talking about, and yet present one false statement after the other as fact.

      The reality is that you are verbally abusive and your posts contain one false, misleading, deceptive or inaccurate statement after another.

      One of your lies was “the merits were never advocated at a state wide level” and when challenged on it, you replied:

      “I live in a small town in the North East part of California. I also lived in Chico before then and never heard media adds advocating the merits of the Constitutionality with the U.S. Constitution. Where is the lie? If it were really advocated to every person, shouldn’t I have heard these arguments?”

      Here you are concluding that solely because you did not hear a certain message, that message was not given. The ridiculous thing is that you seem to consider that your limited experience in a small town, and Chico – lovely college town by the way, somehow indicates the state of the rest of the state.

      Joseph, the LA times, which is available state-wide, covered the merits of opposing Prop 8. National news stations covered the merits of opposing Prop 8. National magazines covered the merits of opposing Prop 8. Oprah Winfrey covered the merits of opposing Prop 8. The No on 8 campaign focused on “the merits” rather than making an emotional connection. You are either lying to advance your agenda of destructive advice, or, completely uneducated about this issue. Or both I suppose.

      In post after post, you’ve set yourself up as some sort of expert on what GLBTQ people should do to win equality, and yet, your advice is all bad. Kors and company basically did what you suggest, and we lost.

      I think you are trying to sabotage GLBTQ civil rights, frankly. I’ve seen plenty of other homophobes pull the same game, over and over again.

      May 26, 2010 at 8:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Here’s another of your lies, Joseph.
      “I don’t dismiss anyone who disagrees with me while presenting a solid rebuttal.”

      The quote above is itself a dismissal – it dismisses any argument that doesn’t please as lacking ‘solid rebuttal’. But the fact is that most of the people rebutting your posts have provided more solid arguments that you do.

      “I can be a real asshole, but I am also compassionate”

      Again, these two states are self cancelling. A truly compassionate person does not act in ways that qualify them for the term ‘asshole’.

      That first clause, by the way, is one of the few statements your own posts actually substantiate.

      “However, the best way to mild me down is to have reasonable conversation. ”

      So in order for you to behave in public, everyone else must appease and please you, is that it? If we don’t fit your standard of reasonable – which seems to exclude any criticism or challenge or rebuttal of your remarks, it is our fault that you vilify and abuse us.

      “You believe I am engaging in wrong behavior. ” No, you actually admit to quite readily, don’t you? One such confession is quoted above, and it is not the first.

      Given that you recognize that you have a difficulty behaving in a civilized way, one that is respectful of others, per your self description “I can be a real asshole” -

      just what exactly qualifies you to criticize anyone else’s communication skills, public relations skills, or anything they do in public?

      Sense of entitlement doesn’t cut it, Joseph. By your own admission, you are not qualified to tell anyone else how to interact with others effectively.

      “Something I’ve actually said multiple times, I do not claim to know the experiences of others. But I can and do make observations based on previous experiences and/or conversations with others.”

      But, considering how you describe yourself, recognizing that your behavior is abusive, and yet you continue to be abusive, your observations have little value, they come from someone who describes himself as “a real asshole”. Your words, not mine. You’ve called me many insulting names, and now you call yourself one.

      “Prop 8 passed, therefor whatever strategy was used failed.”

      The strategy that was used by the “official” campaign was the emotionless, wonky principle speak that you have been endorsing, Joseph. The appeal to emotion that you falsely claim was made by GLBTQ people, and which wasn’t made in the official campaign, is the very communication method that would have won us the campaign.

      So, in addition to be verbally abusive, in addition to make false claim after false claim after false claim, in addition to liberally sprinkling your posts with personal attacks and libels about other participants here, you are actively criticizing the method – appeal to emotion – that would have enabled us to defeat Prop 8.

      And sick thing is, Joseph, that your denomination, the Yes on 8 campaign, and homophobes across the state and across the internet, play the appeal to emotion all the time.

      When they pull the ‘gays are after your children’ routine, it is an appeal to fear. When they pull the ‘gay taught in school’ routine, it is an appeal to fear. When they pull the ‘threat to churches’, it is an appeal to fear. When they pull the “ew, gay sex is icky” routine, its an appeal to revulsion.

      In my opinion, you are a saboteur. A very obvious one, and therefore not a very good one, but a saboteur just the same.

      Frankly, the rest of your post is so full of personal attack, derogatory assumptions about my character, intelligence, etc., that I am going to go against my long-standing habit and simply dismiss the rest as vile beyond redemption or value.

      Your post communicate only contempt and malice for GLBTQ people, Joseph.

      May 26, 2010 at 8:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Ryan :)

      “Cassandra, you have purported over and over again to be a person of faith. If you are a person of faith, and because people of faith are taught to FORGIVE those who offend — to “pray for [their] enemies” — FORGIVE Scotty.”

      Ryan, you have repeatedly sinned against GLBTQ people in general, and against me directly. Shouldn’t you be apologizing and repenting of your own sins against GLBTQ people, instead of worrying about someone else?

      “If Scotty asks forgiveness for unkind things he has said about you (and others), will you forgive him?”

      Absolutely. I wouldn’t ask him to repent otherwise. It often surprises people, but for all of the two decades I’ve been debating anti-gay theology, I have consistently forgiven those who apologize and repent of their abuse of GLBTQ people.

      Understand, repentance is more than just “I’m sorry you were offended” – for Scotty to repent, he has to not only recognize that what he has said is wrong, he has to reject the idea ‘homosexuality is sin’ – because that notion is the source of his sins against GLBTQ people. You can’t say, “I’m Sorry” and then go right on sinning in the same way.

      Now, are you going to repent as well?

      May 26, 2010 at 8:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Scripture was written by men scotty not God. You are delusional in a psychotic sense. You fail to comprehend that you are not the messenger of truth.

      May 26, 2010 at 9:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Ryan :): You are not well. How dare you ask anyone to forgive scotty. He behaves like the devil he believes in.

      May 26, 2010 at 9:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      Yes, of course. I offered you a sincere, genuine appology before and I offer it again now. Please accept. I’m interested to learn more about your thoughts/beliefs/opinions, but it is often difficult to not feel like I am being attacked. I do sincerely appoligize for attacking back. Perhaps you can direct me to sources of info that will help me better understand what you believe or perhaps contact information can be exchanged so private dialogue may take place? ryansmileyface at gmail

      May 26, 2010 at 9:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan :)
      Ryan :)

      @ewe:
      To the extent behavior is contingent on environmental stimuli, the only way to get people to change their behavior is to change /my/your own behavior (i.e., the stimulus which is being responded to).

      May 26, 2010 at 10:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: I’m tired, so I’m not going to stay up late and respond to the complete fabrication of the truth that you are obsessed with tonight.

      I provided many quotes from you that prove you are incorrect about just about everything I say, but you’re ignoring them, so be it.

      As for short, we from Northern California don’t give a crap about offending San Francisco, especially if it is a nickname being used. If there’s ever been a worthless reason to be upset about something, that is one of them.

      I’m practically addicted to reading the news and following current events.

      Oprah, the LA times and other liberal outlets are not going to reach the prospective voters the way a campaign should considering they have a targeted audience. My geographic location does nothing to limit the amount of news and media I expose myself to.

      “Your post communicate only contempt and malice for GLBTQ people, Joseph.”

      Since I’m growing tired of your false continued false accusations, because there is little point in continuing to argue with you (which is not an admission of defeat nor an indication that I will stop calling you out), why don’t we remove this veil that we call the internet and have a face to face.

      It’s been a while since I’ve gone to the bay area for pleasure.

      I’ll buy you lunch/coffee/whatever, we can chat and actually get to know each other. Have a person to person conversation that would humanize both parties.

      I haven’t seen one of my good friends in Santa Rosa for some time, so I can make it a weekend trip. Might as well, I live in Susanville which is a good four hours from Sac.

      What do you say?

      May 27, 2010 at 12:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Ryan

      In which post exactly did you repent of equating same-sex lovemaking with raping animals, a comparison you made in post 177:
      “And maybe, so we don’t get hung up on the example, it would be better to use the situation of bestiality.”

      It has been more than a month since I asked you to repent of that libel against millions of human beings:
      “If you, Ryan:) are a Christian or a Mormon, you have a need for repentance for equating same-sex lovemaking with raping animals.” Post 229.

      I see you trying to dodge the issue, in post 235 “Will you forgive my poor use of grammar/sytax and examples/nonexamples?”
      but that is not repentance, that’s excuse-making.

      I stand by my reply then, in post 239: “Dismissing it as poor use of syntax etc doesn’t change the fact that when you were formulating your remarks, you thought ‘what would be comparable to same-sex relationships?’ or something like that, and you thought of raping animals. Clearly, you see GLBTQ people in a very derogatory and demeaning way.

      Will you unconditionally and without excuses apologize for equating my loving, unitive relationship with raping animals?”

      Ironically, you “kindly demand respect” but show a great deal of disrespect to me and to GLBTQ people in general.

      Ryan, I reviewed your post 258, and it too is lacking an apology for equating same-sex relationships with beastiality. There’s no apology there at all, just another insult from you:
      “As the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, I anticipate you will again creatively twist my words”

      In post 284, you agree with Scotty, who has vilified GLBTQ people with the same derogatory characterization, equating our loving relationships to raping animals, and still, no apology.

      The next post from you that I found was post 425, from today. There is no apology in it, instead you question my spirituality. And while you ask if Scotty would be forgiven, you have no criticism of Scotty’s hate speech and death threats. And of course, no apology for equating homosexuality with beastiality.

      That is a very serious slander, Ryan:), one for which you have not presented a “sincere, genuine appology” but have simply dismissed it as poor grammar/syntax etc.

      A “sincere and genuine” apology, Ryan would be something like “I am sorry I compared homosexuality to beastiality, it was an inexcusable lapse of judgment and ethics on my part, a vicious and utterly reprehensible slander. I can make no excuses or justifications, only admit that I violated the humanity of every one here and ask for forgiveness that I know I do not deserve”.

      You do not seem to understand just how completely vile the comparison you made truly is, or perhaps, you just don’t care.

      And now, to add to the creepiness factor, you want “private dialogue”? Neither you, nor Joseph is trustworthy enough for anyone here to take such a risk.

      May 27, 2010 at 12:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Joseph

      I’m tired of your false accusations about me, as well as your name-calling, insults, empty dismissals, lies, distortions, fabrications, contempt for others, lack of respect for other people, and general malice.

      Reviewing your posts, I find that they are fairly well summarized in just a few quotes:

      Post 238
      ““First off, I never “verbally abused” Robert. I put him in his place.”
      Post 420:
      “I can be a real asshole”
      “I could be an asshole”
      “I am a very harsh person because pretending to play nice . . .”
      “I will admit I’m an asshole,”

      And of course “don’t give a crap about offending” is really the whole thing in one need package.

      I can find nothing to argue about with any of the above, they are well substantiated by the rest of your posts. There is nothing in your posts on which to challenge, must less disprove your self-assessment, while there is all too much that supports it.

      So you can rest assured, I will not attempt to change your mind about any of your statements quoted above.

      As for your creepy request to meet you face to face, too many people are beaten by homophobes as it already, why would I take a chance on someone who has already reviled me repeatedly, in public, with insult after insult and insult after insult?

      The only difference face to face is that you could be physically violent and abusive, as you have been verbally abusive and violent here.

      May 27, 2010 at 1:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      So according to Scotty and probably Joseph, Adam and Eve were the so called first parents of the human race. Then how on earth did the planet become populated? Scotty still has not provided any evidence and dismisses scientific facts. There’s only one logical answer to the question I posed and the answer is….incest! Proof positive that religious bigots’ brains are devolved.

      May 27, 2010 at 8:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      Hey RYAN, SCOTTY and JOSEPH., you 3 cockroaches ought to have a threesome…in Jesus’ name! Amen. Great stuff, CASSANDRA. God honors you. And I esteem you.

      May 27, 2010 at 9:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joseph
      Joseph

      @Cassandra: That’s funny, because I’m tired of your false accusations and how you intentionally ignore your own actions. It’s very high and mighty of you and extremely hypocritical. But your self-righteous zeal won’t let you even look in a mirror will it?

      So what you’re saying is you’re too brave to sit behind a computer and run your mouth rather than have a civil in person conversation?

      As for the poor attempt to libel me by once again acting like you either are and/or would be a victim of physical assault from me, it’s really pathetic. I have never instigated physical confrontation in my life, I have only defended myself on rare occasions.

      Also, it’s not creepy because you are so stuck on me providing proof and it’s not something I would ever agree to do unless it was i a completely public and safe place to meet. You honestly think I have the utmost trust in you after your constant insults and blatant lies? The difference is, I’m not a coward, nor am I a threat to you.

      But if you take comfort in using your computer as a shield to hide behind in order to continue to spread your vitriol and contempt, then so be it.

      I told you the town I live in, there’s only one National Guard armory and only one AGR with my first name who works there, considering there are only three full time Soldiers here. I’m really easy to find if there were any legal issues.

      If I had any intentions on following through with your unsubstantiated and insulting assumptions, why would I give you enough information so I could easily be arrested if I were to do something to you?

      If you’re really still that scared, which I don’t think you are, I think you’re trying to play the victim card again, bring some friends, I’ll be by myself. Well, not completely by myself, I’ll have my little dog with me since she goes every where with me.

      May 27, 2010 at 11:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Cassandra, dear child, I respect your religious beliefs. I believe you have some truth, but I also believe you distort much truth to fulfill the terms of church’s order rather than the will of God.

      With that said, I don’t understand why you hate the Mormon Church so much. The Mormon Church did nothing wrong. I do not see you targeting the Southern Baptist Church which I was a member of for 29 years and contributed very much so to the defeat of gay marriage in California. So these churches expressed religious freedom. You, the LGBT, and so-called “Human Rights” activists are insisting that these churches be stripped of their religious beliefs. If this wasn’t the case, then you would have no problem with parents having the God-given right to allow their child to be educated freely in a public school without being stripped of opt-out rights in lessons that are taught that go against religious beliefs.

      I cite Estabrook Elementary School in Massachusetts and their pro-homosexual advocate principal who refused to allow parents to opt-out their children from storybook lessons that encouraged and promoted homosexual unions because gay marriage was legal in that state. That principal violated religious freedom.

      Cassandra, you believe the gay propagandists are victims of a heterosexual society? Are they so victimized that they are then validated to reign corruption, hatred, and violence against those that disagree with them?

      I know that many of Queerty.comj’s members here feel that every single bit of what is described in the following article was fair, legal, and perfectly okay:

      http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/report_details_harassment_and_antireligious_bigotry_after_prop._8_passage/

      Because gay people are nice, happy, and great people, right? Well, some are, but I have a problem with the one’s that insist on flaunting their beliefs in such beguiling manners.

      Lastly, Cassandra, the Heavenly Father manifests His highest form of love–agape–in Creation. Bringing life unto man and saying unto he and the woman, “Be fruitful AND MULTIPLY and replenish the Earth.”

      A homosexual couple cannot exemplify this highest form of love. A man and man cannot have a child. A woman and woman cannot have a child. Childbirth–precious life through a perfected union–is only capable between a man and woman.

      Many are there that abuse this right, and the Lord of Hosts deals with them accordingly. Many are there that cannot bear children, but the Lord hears their pleas with the full understanding that a woman who cannot bear a child with the help of man is still a woman who wishes to bear a child by man.

      Many are the gay activists that try to tell me, “If marriage and love is about childbirth, then what about people with diseases who can’t have kids?” This point I just made does away with this argument.

      Proper gender roles must be fulfilled in order for any hope of childbirth to happen. And even if it doesn’t happen for those that do fill proper gender roles, then the reasons behind that are simply between that couple and God.

      1 Corinthians 11:11-12 put God-ordained marriage in true perspective in Paul’s writings:

      “Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.”

      May 27, 2010 at 11:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Cassandra:

      And Cassandra, I apologize for using hate speech. That is the way of the world. They are not God’s way. It is unfortunate that I allowed myself to be taken advantage of in such a fashion.

      You are more than welcome to continue hating Mormons and the LDS Church. In my mind you’re only fulfilling prophecy anyways.

      Queerty.com is welcomed to continue with its vilifying of the Mormon Church and its members. Again, it is only fulfilling prophecy.

      Matthew 5:

      “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.”

      Psalm 143 (Oh, King David):

      “Hear my prayer, O Lord, give ear to my supplications: in thy faithfulness answer me, and in thy righteousness. And enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living be justified. For the enemy hath persecuted my soul; he hath smitten my life down to the ground; he hath made me to dwell in darkness, as those that have been long dead.”

      Think about that, Cassandra, the pro-homosexual advocates are not a minority in this country. A pro-homosexual advocate may not be a homosexual, but one who seeks to fulfill a pro-homosexual agenda.

      I believe pro-homosexuality will increase more and more just as you and the people of Queerty.com hope for. It’ll happen and it is happening because prophecy foretold that iniquity would abound in the latter-days. Homosexuality is one form of that iniquity. The Human Rights activists are attacking religious entities with raging persecutions. They seek to defend liberal human rights and crush holy religious ones. And as these things come to pass, we will know even more that the coming of the Son of Man is drawing nearer.

      May 27, 2010 at 12:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Scotty: “A homosexual couple cannot exemplify this highest form of love. A man and man cannot have a child. A woman and woman cannot have a child. Childbirth–precious life through a perfected union–is only capable between a man and woman.”

      Not physically no, but by a surrogate mother. In addition, the justification that the primary reason people marry, ergo procreation is nothing more than a red herring to justify discrmination based on purely religious cult beliets, NOTHING more. If you want to ban same-sex couples from marrying based on that over worn canard,then by the same token you’re going to have to ban straight couples who choose NOT to procreate or who can’t. A marriage license is issued by the state, NOT by religious cults. How would you and your ilk like it if we and our straight allies started a movement to ban people having religious marriages from obtaining a marriage license? You’d be the first to cry discrimination. Unlike you and your cult, we’re not that hateful. Since when do religious cultists dictate who gets which rights in this country? This is NOT a theocracy.

      Another thing, you don’t have to have a disease to disable procreation, there might be genetic reasons and malfunctions of the body that cause sterility. Religious cults do NOT own civil marriage which has absolutely NOTHING to do with religion. What next, ban atheists from marrying? Yes pal, atheists have civil marriages too. You’re a fool.

      Read more: http://www.queerty.com/gay-mormon-ty-mansfield-is-getting-married-to-a-woman-20100415/#ixzz0p9Dzowuv

      May 27, 2010 at 12:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      What have we learned over the past couple months that has proven itself over and over again? When you hear someone vehemently bashing gay people then there is a 99.9% chance that that person is a self-loathing closeted homosexual. Self loathers either A) direct their hatred towards themselves (attempt suicide) or B) direct their hatred towards gay people who are out and happy.
      I hope this population rapidly decreases with the next generation. Let’s get rid of those closets and just be who we are-the way we were created.

      May 27, 2010 at 1:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: That’s right scotty. You get back into your temple and stay there. Stew in your own twisted guilt and shame. You are out of your mind and a one track simpleton.

      May 27, 2010 at 2:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Scotty, you said…Author: Scotty
      Comment:
      @ewe:

      “Poor whelp. You can’t even use clean speech. How pathetic. There are so many other choice words to use, but you choose to use idolatrous speech, and for what? You think anyone’s impressed because you know how to use hateful speech to pro port your religious bigotry and intolerance? Maybe your friends here are impressed, but they are easily amused. The sight of penis going in a butt thrills them. But no sensible person would be impressed.”

      The sight of a penis going in a butt also thrills many straight males evidenced by the soaring rate of straight porn emerging in red states depicting just that. Only the recipients are women. Are you aware that the highest rate of straight pornography is found in red states, including Utah. Why don’t you and your gang of psycho talkers go after them instead. Clean up your own filthy house before you start targeting ours.

      No. 449 JamesStone, well said. The fact that these psychopaths seek out gay blogsites to vent their venom is very revealing don’t you think? I doubt if they troll straight sites.

      May 27, 2010 at 5:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Robert, NYC:

      For one who cannot have kids for whatever, you should read what I wrote because you must’ve either missed it or ignored it.

      It is different if a couple can’t have children and desires to have children. The homosexual couple must use other people to get children. Adoption is fine, however, you are insisting that this is like unto childbirth, and it isn’t.

      At least not in God’s eyes. . .

      “Neither is the man without the woman nor the woman without the man in the Lord.”

      May 27, 2010 at 6:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @ewe:

      Because you are tolerant of religious freedom, right? No, you hate the Mormon Church despite the fact it did nothing wrong. Even if gay marriage was legal in California and everything was right in your world, you’d still find another reason to hate the Mormons and other Christians.

      You’ll never be content with what you have. Again, you are one who cannot function in this society unless you are hating Christians. Your hatred and religious bigotry is what drives you.

      The pro-homosexual activists have used scapegoating throughout their entire campaign. That is, pro-homosexual activists can never be wrong and must always have someone to blame everyday of their lives because those of the pro-homosexual agenda will never be able to achieve true equality.

      Pro-homosexual advocates will not be happy until every church forcibly marries those of their kind. Pro-homosexual advocates won’t be happy even if they were able to have all the same legal rights and protections through civil unions because a the terminology “civil union” is different that “marriage.”

      You’ll never be happy in this world, Ewe, and neither will those like you. It’s not because of churches that make you unhappy, it’s because homosexuality is a sin, and the higher powers will make sure you know that true joy does not come from a relationship apart from that which was spoken of and practiced by the prophets. Of course, you’ll always blame someone else for all your problems.

      “Neither is the man without the woman nor the woman without the man in the Lord.”

      May 27, 2010 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @JamesStone:

      What we have also learned that those that oppose homosexuality the strongest are most likely the ones like myself who were sexually manipulated as a child and most likely by a member of the same gender which was my case. In my case the sexual manipulation went on for 16 years.

      Why? I knew that homosexuality was wrong. I don’t question my Heavenly Father’s words about what He says about homosexuality. I was very young when I was first exposed to homosexuality, and I wouldn’t know any other way except homosexuality.

      Natural, heterosexual desires weren’t allowed to form properly like they were supposed to because they are constantly suppressed by same-sex manipulation.

      So I never lost my same-sex attractions as a result. That doesn’t mean God meant for me to be attracted to members of the same sex.

      I’d rather live in celibacy than to give into attractions that the Heavenly Father never intended. I know homosexuality is not ordained of God. I know it isn’t. You look at the origins of homosexuality and look at the examples of those that practice it. Why do 99.9% of Internet cites about homosexuality also include links to gay pornography? Really, the sexual manipulation comes first and this is what the gay elitists look to feed. They do so by sexual conduct.

      Why can you click on some of the members names of Queerty.com that are actual members and they direct you to gay porn cites?

      Think about that.

      May 27, 2010 at 7:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty

      “Cassandra, dear child, I respect your religious beliefs.”

      No, you do not, nor do you respect me. You ‘dear child’ is condescending and an attempt to discredit what I have written by labeling me too young to know anything.

      I’m approaching 50 quickly, Scotty, and judging by your posts on the 26th, that’s probably 3 times your age plus a few years.

      “I believe you have some truth, but I also believe you distort much truth to fulfill the terms of church’s order rather than the will of God.”

      You can believe anything you like, but that doesn’t make it so, and it won’t convince me or anyone else. Your are simply dismissing the points I’ve raised, particularly the big theme, to avoid admitting that your own behavior here proves that ‘homosexuality is sin’ cannot be holy, it cannot be from God.

      “With that said, I don’t understand why you hate the Mormon Church so much. The Mormon Church did nothing wrong.”

      I cannot help it if you do not pay attention, suffice it to say, the Mormon Church is actively oppression millions of people, and it lied about, libel and vilified those people, conning millions more, in order to deprive GLBTQ people of a basic civil right.

      By denying same-sex couples the right to marry, a right Mormons have and zealously protect, the Mormon church treated GLBTQ people in a way that the Mormon Church does NOT want to be treated, violating ‘love your neighbor as yourself’.

      The Mormon church sinned against GLBTQ people.

      “I do not see you targeting the Southern Baptist Church”
      Because this particular thread is about a Mormon, and the respondents here have identified themselves as Mormons, or have defended the actions of the Mormon church here.

      You don’t see me extolling the virtues of chocolate here either, but that doesn’t mean I hate chocolate.

      “So these churches expressed religious freedom.”

      No, the violated the religious freedom of anyone who believes that homosexuality is not a sin. Rewriting the laws of society to enforce your condemnation of homosexuality is not religious freedom, Scotty, it is religious slavery for everyone else.

      “You, the LGBT, and so-called “Human Rights” activists are insisting that these churches be stripped of their religious beliefs.”

      That is simply a lie, Scotty.

      “If this wasn’t the case, then you would have no problem with parents having the God-given right to allow their child to be educated freely in a public school without being stripped of opt-out rights in lessons that are taught that go against religious beliefs.”

      The operative word there Scotty is Public. Your religious beliefs do not determine what can or cannot be taught in public schools.

      “I cite Estabrook Elementary School in Massachusetts ”
      There is something interesting about this reference; the only sites I could find in Google about it, are virulently homophobic in content and message. I would be happy discuss it with you, if you find links to coverage from mainstream press, or better still, neutral sources.

      “Cassandra, you believe the gay propagandists are victims of a heterosexual society? Are they so victimized that they are then validated to reign corruption, hatred, and violence against those that disagree with them?”

      You mean, like tying someone to a fence and beating him to a bloody paste? Scotty, do not even attempt to pretend that you and other homophobes are the victims here. The Catholic News Agency is not a credible source, particularly about GLBTQ people and Prop 8, the Catholic church helped fiance Prop 8. They complicit in evil and have to justify their evil with fabrications.

      One of the hideous, well-documented facts of homophobia in the U.S. is that people pushing anti-gay legislation have repeatedly been caught faking acts of harassment against themselves, stealing their own signs, sending themselves death threats, and so on.

      Remember, these are people who lie about GLBTQ people all the time, telling lies is something they do as a matter of course in this issue.

      And opponents of Prop 8 were abused and a threatened, violence was inflicted on No on 8 signs, and the cars of people with no on 8 bumper stickers.

      Meanwhile, the prejudice you spread, the “teaching” you share inspires murder and suicide, hate speech and oppression. And in the unlikely prospect that there is any truth to the claims in the link you provided

      all of that anger was a response to the attempt to harm millions of human beings. If it occcured, it occured only because Prop 8 existed at all.

      Really, your criticism betrays a fundamental moral failing. You are equating the actions of people resisting oppression to the actions of the oppressors. It is like rebuking the French Resistance for fighting back against the Nazi’s, or condemning the Colonial Army fighting back against the British, or condemning an abused spouse fighting back against her abuser.

      If you truly do not see the difference involved, then you have nothing to say to anyone about God or right and wrong or sin.

      “Lastly, Cassandra, the Heavenly Father manifests His highest form of love–agape–in Creation.”

      There is no love in “Homosexuality is sin”, there was no love in Prop 8 or Prop 22, or any other anti-gay legislation.

      “Bringing life unto man and saying unto he and the woman, “Be fruitful AND MULTIPLY and replenish the Earth.” ”

      Reproduction is not contingent on love, Scotty, and only a truly malicious person would conclude that relationships that do not produce children lack love.

      “A homosexual couple cannot exemplify this highest form of love.”

      Jesus, at least in Christianity, did not assert that reproduction was the highest form of love. And before we examine how Jesus did define love, let’s look at the implications of your theory.

      It means that Abraham and Sarah did not really love each other until they had children. It means that people who are naturally infertile do not really love their spouses. It means that women past menopause do not really love their spouses. It means that Christ, who according to tradition never married, did not experience the “highest love”.

      It means that tapeworms, who reproduce orders of magnitude more than humans do, are more loving than any human being. Bacteria reproduce more than humans do, so too grasses and dandelions. Your premise is unrealistic at best.

      What did Jesus say about love? John 15: 12,13

      “12My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. ”

      No word there about reproduction.

      “Many are the gay activists that try to tell me, “If marriage and love is about childbirth, then what about people with diseases who can’t have kids?” This point I just made does away with this argument.”

      No, it didn’t. It was just circular logic.

      Proper gender roles must be fulfilled in order for any hope of childbirth to happen. And even if it doesn’t happen for those that do fill proper gender roles, then the reasons behind that are simply between that couple and God.

      “1 Corinthians 11:11-12 put God-ordained marriage in true perspective in Paul’s writings:”

      And yet, it doesn’t actually indicate marriage, and it doesn’t actually repudiate, or even comment on same-sex relationships. It simply defines the nature of heterosexual relationships without denying or invalidating any other.

      And it does return our attention to Genesis 3 and the fact that the very first curse on humans in the Bible, is specifically and explicitly directed at the “result” of heterosexual intercourse.

      In Genesis 3:16
      16 To the woman he said,
      “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
      with pain you will give birth to children.
      Your desire will be for your husband,
      and he will rule over you.”

      God curses the very thing that is the result of what you claim is the highest expression of love. Someone is wrong, either you are or God is. Which is it, Scotty?

      Of course, the fraud lies in that you are taking a metaphorical passage and treating as literal one.

      “And Cassandra, I apologize for using hate speech. That is the way of the world. They are not God’s way. It is unfortunate that I allowed myself to be taken advantage of in such a fashion.”

      I accept your apology for the hate speech, even though you subsequently engaged in more abusive behavior.

      But the hate speech you’ve unleashed is only the outward manifestation of a far greater sin – the sin ‘homosexuality is sin’. The hate speech you engaged in was evil fruit of the evil belief ‘homosexuality is sin’.

      If you truly are sorry for your hate speech, then you now must reject the source of it.

      The source of your hate speech is the belief ‘homosexuality is sin’. Yes, it is part of the current way of the world, and “homosexuality is sin” is not God’s way. You were not taken advantage of, you were bearing the fruit of your belief.

      Your last post is tragic enough to deserve a post of its own.

      Until you own that and understand it, then your apology really has no redemptive meaning. I accept it, but understanding that your apology meant nothing really.

      “Think about that, Cassandra, the pro-homosexual advocates are not a minority in this country. A pro-homosexual advocate may not be a homosexual, but one who seeks to fulfill a pro-homosexual agenda.”

      Since there is no such thing as “pro-homosexual agenda”, your fantasy falls apart, Scotty. As for Matthew 5, and Psalm 143, they apply more to GLBTQ people than to any homophobes, particularly more than the extraordinarily wealthy, worldly things owning Church of Latter Day Saints, who had so much wealth it could revile and harm millions of people, while millions more starve for lack of food, die for lack of medicine, suffer for lack of shelter.

      “Homosexuality is one form of that iniquity. ” Only in the minds of oppressors and persecutors, workers of iniquity and injustice.

      May 27, 2010 at 8:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      “What we have also learned that those that oppose homosexuality the strongest are most likely the ones like myself who were sexually manipulated as a child”

      That is not true, Scotty. The reality is that organizations for people who have been sexually abused tend to be very supportive of GLBTQ civil rights, and tend not be homophobic.

      “and most likely by a member of the same gender which was my case. In my case the sexual manipulation went on for 16 years.”

      So now we find out that you are here, vilifying millions of people to punish them for something someone else did to you.

      Let’s start with facts. The overwhelming majority of all pedophiles self-identify as heterosexual. Adult victims of pedophilia identify as heterosexual or homosexual or bi, is essentially the same ratios as people who were not abused sexually. Most GLBTQ people were never sexually abused.

      “Why? I knew that homosexuality was wrong. I don’t question my Heavenly Father’s words about what He says about homosexuality.”

      No, you didn’t question the adults in your life who taught you what they thought the Heavenly Father said.

      “I was very young when I was first exposed to homosexuality, and I wouldn’t know any other way except homosexuality.”

      You were not exposed to homosexuality when you were sexually abused, you were exposed to rape. There is a difference.

      “Natural, heterosexual desires weren’t allowed to form properly like they were supposed to because they are constantly suppressed by same-sex manipulation.”

      It sounds like a sane theory, but, the evidence from the lives of thousands of heterosexual men who were molested as children by other heterosexual men disproves your theory. Further, testimony of thousands of gay men who were never molested, whose first sexual contact was an unpleasant and desireless heterosexual one, disproves it.

      “I’d rather live in celibacy than to give into attractions that the Heavenly Father never intended.”

      Then don’t rape people. Don’t cheat on your beloved, don’t use someone as a sexual object or as way to worship a false god.

      “I know homosexuality is not ordained of God. I know it isn’t.”
      People “know” all kinds of things that are not true. Atheists “know” that God doesn’t exist. Some people “know” that NASA faked the moon landings. Some people “know” that the earth is hollow and populated by an advance race.

      “You look at the origins of homosexuality and look at the examples of those that practice it.”

      The origins of homosexuality are genetic with some influence from maternal hormones during pregnancy. God said to Jeremiah:
      Jeremiah 1:5 (New International Version)

      5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew [a] you,

      The origin of homosexuality, ultimately, is God.

      “Why do 99.9% of Internet cites about homosexuality also include links to gay pornography?”

      Why do you make up fake statistics? Why is there so much heterosexual porn on the internet, why do so many heterosexual websites link to heterosexual porn. Why have heterosexuals been making porn for as long as people have been making anything that survived this long?

      “Really, the sexual manipulation comes first”

      No.

      “and this is what the gay elitists look to feed. They do so by sexual conduct.”

      No, and that is hate speech. You are again doing the very thing you recognized earlier was sin.

      Why is the very first curse on humans in the Bible directed at the product of heterosexual intercourse?

      Why did Paul never use either of the two greek words of his day that meant “men who have sex with men”?

      Why does your belief inspire you to use hate speech?

      Think about that.

      You are defining homosexuality by the rape you experienced, but that is a false definition, and one that offends against every GLBTQ person. I feel sorry for you, I understand where the malice in your posts comes from, but I can’t and won’t excuse it.

      You have transferred the anger you have at the person who raped you, perfectly appropriate anger, onto people who have never harmed you. And in the process, you’ve violated them verbally and spiritually.

      May 27, 2010 at 8:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Scotty, You are a monster. You are the type of warped human being that has no problem supporting incarceration and hard labor of those like the couple in Malawi and thereby most everyone on this blog as well. I see right through your bullshit dressed up in your own persoanl brand of biblical interpretation. Lastly, you have zero effect on my happiness. Your overbloated ego simply eludes you is all. Read my lips Bitch… Fuck off!!!

      May 27, 2010 at 8:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Ewe

      As terrible as the things Scotty says about GLBTQ people are, let’s not forget that he is a victim of sexual abuse as a child.

      And unlike some kinds of grandstanding that have been used here by others, that isn’t something someone brings up in public to shut down other people, to create a false and unearned authority that would negate having to cite sources.

      We have seen non-anonymous examples of people who were molested as children, and how the adults around them, the conservative theology they were exposed to, twists it all up inside.

      It might be a fabrication, but, most of the time when homophobes bs about sexual abuse, the story is ‘someone they know’ rather than personal.

      Unlike the claims that someone else made, “I have gay friends blah blah blah”, there’s a real chance that Scotty’s past is real, and it does explain how angry and cruel his posts have been – he’s lashing out at the closest thing he can find to the person who hurt him as a child.

      We should be showing him that we are not the person he is mad at, and that by lashing out at us, he is becoming the same kind of person as the person who molested him.

      I’m not criticizing your prior posts; as strong and blunt as they are, they are also authentic and that is important too. I am suggesting that you take into consideration that Scotty is wounded, and his homophobia and hate has a different source than that of a Martin SSempa or Fred Phelps, for example.

      That’s not a reason to cut him any slack or let him get away with anything, just a reason to be a little more patient.

      May 27, 2010 at 10:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      Oh, dear Cassandra. So you believe Christians must forcibly home-school or send their kids to more expensive private schools because the public schools are obligated to take one side of this issue–namely, your pro-homosexual side? You are suggesting that the public schools forcibly operate by your liberal agenda and that no person has a right to exert religious freedom in public schools.

      I don’t agree with forcing parents to either pay more for private schools, or accept sinful ideologies like homosexuality. No one’s pushing you into a corner you can’t get out of. Why does your liberal agenda insist on forcing it’s will on all Americans?

      And, yes, by doing this, you are insisting that churches have to right to speak on those things that go against the teachings of their faith.

      Judging from your posts, I would venture to say that you are not only Episcopalian, but also a clergy in the Episcopal church.

      First of all, I should say that personally I believe the Episcopal Church has some scope of Christianity–in that it believes in Christ and that he died for our sins.

      However, the Episcopal Church believes things no other Christian church does, and it’s doctrines do not agree from one Episcopal Church to the next from state to state. My God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

      So, now I see you trying to play the role of the battered step-child, poor woman. You suggesting that the Mormon church vilified homosexual marriages is your opinion, and any third party who saw the situation will see that it wasn’t the Mormons protesting gay night clubs. It wasn’t the Mormons who littered LGBT offices with messages of hate and intolerance. It wasn’t Mormons who vandalized gay people’s property by smashing out their windows with rocks or stealing their “No on 8″ signs from their yards.

      It wasn’t Mormons who physically assaulted homosexuals for protecting freedom. Thought many homosexuals in their protests physically assaulted sisters of the Church who were removing the litter placed around its temples by those of the religiously bigoted pro-homosexual agenda.

      6.7 million Californians voted in favor of Prop 8. The number that voted against it was around 5.5 million.

      I am willing promise on God’s word that of those 6.7 million people that voted to defeat gay marriage in California, well over half them and probably 80% or more have no affiliation whatsoever with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

      The LDS Church was teaching gospel truth. The Mormon Church did no wrong, nor did it speak of anything that was not truthful. Because you are so utterly defensive of your pro-homosexual stand, anything that is truth from someone that doesn’t agree with you, is automatically a lie in your eyes.

      It’s okay, Cassandra, your eyes have been shut to the truth. Not all who say “Lord, Lord” will enter into my Father’s kingdom. What have you done today to help your neighbor? What have you done today to show someone that God loves them?

      I helped some people move into their new apartment free of charge–one of them was a professed lesbian. She in my friend. :)

      What have you done to show God’s love toward others other than spreading half-truths about the gospel. Again, your interpretations are there for you and your Church, but they are not God’s will.

      “Neither is the man without the woman nor the woman without the man in the Lord.”

      May 27, 2010 at 10:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cassandra
      Cassandra

      Scotty,

      Just because I feel compassion regarding the sexual abuse you experienced, don’t think I will let you get away with anything.

      “Oh, dear Cassandra. So you believe Christians must forcibly home-school or send their kids to more expensive private schools because the public schools are obligated to take one side of this issue–namely, your pro-homosexual side?”

      Please do not lie about me, that is verbal abuse, and since you are someone who has experienced abuse in your own life, it is high time you begin to learn not to abuse others.

      No one is forcing fundamentalist, homophobic Christians to home-school or attend private schools. They are simply prevented from forcing their malice and hate speech about GLBTQ people onto the lives of people who do not share their beliefs. Homophobes are completely free to teach all the hate they want to their children on Saturdays and Sundays, after school and before school.

      And it is not a matter of ‘pro-homosexual’ anything, there are plenty of heterosexuals who do not believe homosexuality is sin, from a variety of faiths and people who are not religious. Your one perspective, which degrades and defames millions of people, is simply inappropriate in public schools.

      As for the specific circumstance, you still didn’t provide a credible source, so I must at this point conclude that you are not telling the whole or accurate truth about the incident, and that if you did cite a neutral source, parts of your account to be revealed to be false or distorted.

      “You are suggesting that the public schools forcibly operate by your liberal agenda and that no person has a right to exert religious freedom in public schools.”

      No, that is a lie, Scotty. You have borne false witness against me. Please repent.

      “sinful ideologies like homosexuality.”

      Homosexuality is neither intrinsically sin, nor is it an ideology.

      “Why does your liberal agenda insist on forcing it’s will on all Americans?”

      LOL. Scotty, it is your side that forced its will on everyone, particularly GLBTQ people. Trying to foist blame on us, is dishonest, more false testimony on your part, more sin.

      The lives of GLBTQ people have been limited, hindered, interfered with on fundamental ways, by homophobes like yourself and your church. We have been deprived of basic civil rights, and there are those among you who seek to institute the death penalty, the one you gloated about the other night, here in the U.S. The only limits being placed on homophobes is on their ability to harm others. They remain free to believe any ugly and vicious thing they want, to preach it and teach it on their property, just like racists. They just are limited in their ability to harm others.

      “And, yes, by doing this, you are insisting that churches have to right to speak on those things that go against the teachings of their faith.”

      Did you leave a word out there, or is there a mis-spelling?

      Either way, anyone’s right to speak anything ends where anyone else’s right not to be harmed begins.

      “Judging from your posts, I would venture to say that you are not only Episcopalian, but also a clergy in the Episcopal church.”

      Guessing is not your strong suit, you are wrong on both accounts.

      “However, the Episcopal Church believes things no other Christian church does,”

      oh, like the Mormons. And the Lutherans. And the Catholics. And the Baptists, and so on and so on. Each of the denominational differences is based on some nuance of belief that is unique, more or less, to that denomination.

      “My God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.”

      False gods often are. The problem is that your vision of God inspires you and your peers to destroy other people.

      “So, now I see you trying to play the role of the battered step-child, poor woman.”

      Your insults do not bolster the impression that you actually are a follower of Christ, Scotty.

      “You suggesting that the Mormon church vilified homosexual marriages is your opinion,”

      No, it is fact Scotty. The Mormon church, and the Catholic church, and other groups of homophobes violated the civil liberties of millions of people. And individuals from those groups committed crimes of arson and vandalism, hate speech and harassment against GLBTQ people, and not just during the Prop 8 campaign.

      “6.7 million Californians voted in favor of Prop 8. The number that voted against it was around 5.5 million.”

      Your numbers are off, and that suggests that your other claims are distorted as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_%282008%29

      Yes: 7,001,08 No: 6,401,482

      Instead of the 1.2 mil spread you claim, the spread was just under 600,000. Depending on the site you look at, about 40% of eligible voters, or close to the same percentage that voted either side, chose not to vote at all.

      “I am willing promise on God’s word that of those 6.7 million people that voted to defeat gay marriage in California, well over half them and probably 80% or more have no affiliation whatsoever with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.”

      I guess you really do not respect God’s word very much, Scotty.

      Further, you point is irrelevant, because what matters is who funded the campaign, who spread vicious hate speech about GLBTQ people, and ultimately, whose civil liberties were raped on the public stage for most of year.

      The Mormon Church is a rapist of sorts, like the person who raped you as a child; it forced its way into the most personal and private parts of people’s lives and raped them on national tv.

      “The LDS Church was teaching gospel truth.”
      No. Actually, since the LDS Church denies the godhood of Christ, how can it ever, truly, teach gospel truth?

      “The Mormon Church did no wrong,”
      Only in the eyes of people with no morals or ethics. If you cannot see the wrong in the actions of the Mormon Church, it simply means you cannot recognize wrong, sin, abuse, at all.

      “Not all who say “Lord, Lord” will enter into my Father’s kingdom.”

      We’re back to Matthew 7:15-23. Yet you, and your church, have harmed other people, deprived them of a basic human right, libeled and slandered them, endangered their lives and their families. In short, you’ve been workers of iniquity, teaching something that only bears evil fruit.

      Worse off, you either deny that the fruit is evil, or cannot recognize evil when you do it.

      “What have you done today to help your neighbor? What have you done today to show someone that God loves them?”

      How ironic, coming in defense of the Mormon Church, which with its allies, spent 39.9 million dollars to harm people. One of the wealthier denominations helped raise 39.9 million dollar and didn’t spend it to rebuild homes destroyed after Katrina, or to feed the homeless, or to provide vaccinations for uninsured children, or safe refuges for battered spouses (there’s a lot of that in the Mormon church by the way), or counseling for victims of sexual predation (also alot of that in the Mormon church).

      No, the Mormon church and its allies spent all that money to harm people.

      “I helped some people move into their new apartment free of charge–one of them was a professed lesbian. She in my friend. :)”

      I feel sorry for her. Does she know how abusive and degrading you are, if she exists, for the ‘I have a gay friend’ is a very common lie among homophobes.

      “but they are not God’s will.’

      No, they are not your will. But you are not God, and never will be, no matter what the Book of Mormon tells you.

      And don’t imagine for a second that if you did help some other human being today, it takes anything away from the fact that you have vilified and libeled millions of people today, and yesterday, and the last time you posted, and the time before that. Ephesians 2
      8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast.

      The only thing that can erase your sins against GLBTQ people, Scotty, which continue here day after day, is repentance and a change of heart.

      Don’t forget for a second that your believe caused you to sin, in the form of hate speech. It is a belief that only bears evil fruit, it does not come from God.

      Oh, I’m not your “dear” anything. You are someone who injures millions with words, including people I love and care about, and who paints and ugly and vicious picture and calls it god.

      May 27, 2010 at 11:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      @Scotty
      Scotty..the person that did that to you belongs in jail. That is a crime. He is a pedophile. You belong in therapy..hopefully a licensed therapist can help you with your sexual issues.
      Now I see why you are so angry. You are directing all of your anger against all gay people rather than the person that did this to you.
      I knew I was gay probably at age 10. I wasn’t sure what it was but I knew at that time I was beginning to be attracted to males. I was NEVER sexually abused by anyone. I had great parents. And yet..I am gay. In the same respect..I could never even think of abusing a child!!! YUK!! That in my mind is revolting.
      Your letters seem full of ANGER and HATRED. Please direct that anger and hatred towards the person that did this horrible thing to you and not all gay people.
      It’s funny…there is a woman that I work with who has been married THREE times since my partner and I have been together. I work in a Catholic hospital. Her new hubby is on our insurance plan along with her kids and his kids from a previous marriage. Yet..every month I have to write out a check for over $450. a month for my partner’s health insurance because we are not married. Why are we not married??? Well….now tell me Scotty..how many millions did the Mormon church donate to stop gay marriage in California?? Yep..the NOM..and all of the good “so called “Christian” organizations poured tons of money into our state to do the same thing here. It is really sad..that money could have been used to help so many people and they used it to hurt my partner and I.
      Scotty..again I wish you well. I hope you seek help. AND..I hope you find someone someday. Celibacy is no fun..I played that game until I was thirty. I can’t tell you how HAPPY I am being with my partner-we have had so much fun. Sharing life with someone who you are attracted to and they are equally attracted to you is awesome…

      May 28, 2010 at 12:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Cassandra: Thank you cassandra. I insist the wounded ask for help. If they are disguising their inner pain with judgement, wrath and misplaced inner strenghth then they are not ready to receive the dignity they refuse to others. Therefore they miss out and remain dysfuntional. Not my cup of tea and i am not wasting my time with any of them. I take responsibility for telling people like scotty to fuck off while they say the exact same thing all the while using and hiding behind their distorted version of a supreme being. He is the worst kind of most vile sinner i frequently encounter. I agree with you that he is in pain but he is not dragging me into the depths of hell he is already living in. He is an emotional terrorist that must be confronted with his own reflective style in order to awaken him. There are plenty of people seeking goodness. He is not one of them. Don’t waste your time, it only feeds his ego.

      May 28, 2010 at 2:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Cassandra No. 460….what Scotty and others of his ilk don’t get is that the mormon cult, among others including the infamous roman cult, used religion to defeat what was a civil matter. Same-sex marriage is about civil marriage which has absolutely NO component of religion and is also gender neutral, stipulated in every same-sex marriage law in eight countries and five states in America. No religious cult is compelled to recognize or perform any same-sex marriage, one of the lies perpetrated against us, a case of bearing false witness. I’ve witnessed several civil marriages, straight and gay, none referred to any deity or procreation either.

      JamesStone No. 461, I hear you. When the religious cults and other religious bigots voted to make Prop. 8 succeed, they didn’t care that you and your partner faced discrimination. They knowingly voted for its success regardless. The mormon cult donated I believe in excess of $22 million to make sure that gays should be discriminated against.

      Scotty is obviously in a lot of pain and it would seem that praying away the gay hasn’t worked, hence his appearance here. He’s to be pitied. You’re right, he’s misdirected his anger at the wrong people. Like you, I grew up in a loving home, two great parents who’ve since passed on and two younger siblings, both males. I was raised no differently than they were, I was essentially the all American boy doing all the things that boys do. It was at the age of 7 that I realized I was attracted to boys, yes 7 years of age. I don’t know where it came from, all I knew was that I felt different. There were no external influences on my orientation either, none that I was aware of in retrospect. As I progressed I dated girls even had sex with some of them, but deep down, I knew this wasn’t who I really was, it just didn’t seem right to me. I felt no emotional attachment to any of it. It wasn’t until my late teens, around 19 I think that I acknowledged to myself that I was gay and from that day on, I’d never felt happier and well adjusted. I am proud of who I am. I was lucky to have had great parents, a good family life, They never once rejected me, quite the opposite.

      Until Scotty accepts his orientation, he’ll roam the world lonely and bitter, not being true to himself and others. No amount of prayer can ever change that. He needs to love himself instead of transferring his anger and inner conflict onto the rest of us for something that was never our fault. We are not his enemy, he is his own, trapped in a self-imposed prison of guilt and shame. Its very sad. He’s self destructing. A lot of ex-gays use religion to mask who they are and that leads to disaster, often suicide. It doesn’t have to be that way.

      May 28, 2010 at 8:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      Cassandra No. 460….what Scotty and others of his ilk don’t get is that the mormon cult, among others including the infamous roman cult, used religion to defeat what was a civil matter. Same-sex marriage is about civil marriage which has absolutely NO component of religion and is also gender neutral, stipulated in every same-sex marriage law in eight countries and five states in America. No religious cult is compelled to recognize or perform any same-sex marriage, one of the lies perpetrated against us, a case of bearing false witness. I’ve witnessed several civil marriages, straight and gay, none referred to any deity or procreation either.

      JamesStone No. 461, I hear you. When the religious cults and other religious bigots voted to make Prop. 8 succeed, they didn’t care that you and your partner faced discrimination. They knowingly voted for its success regardless. The mormon cult donated I believe in excess of $22 million to make sure that gays should be discriminated against.

      Scotty is obviously in a lot of pain and it would seem that praying away the gay hasn’t worked, hence his appearance here. He’s to be pitied. You’re right, he’s misdirected his anger at the wrong people. Like you, I grew up in a loving home, two great parents who’ve since passed on and two younger siblings, both males. I was raised no differently than they were, I was essentially the all American boy doing all the things that boys do. It was at the age of 7 that I realized I was attracted to boys, yes 7 years of age. I don’t know where it came from, all I knew was that I felt different. There were no external influences on my orientation either, none that I was aware of in retrospect. As I progressed I dated girls even had sex with some of them, but deep down, I knew this wasn’t who I really was, it just didn’t seem right to me. I felt no emotional attachment to any of it. It wasn’t until my late teens, around 19 I think that I acknowledged to myself that I was gay and from that day on, I’d never felt happier and well adjusted. I am proud of who I am. I was lucky to have had great parents, a good family life, They never once rejected me, quite the opposite.

      Until Scotty accepts his orientation, he’ll roam the world lonely and bitter, not being true to himself and others. No amount of prayer can ever change that. He needs to love himself instead of transferring his anger and inner conflict onto the rest of us for something that was never our fault. We are not his enemy, he is his own, trapped in a self-imposed prison of guilt and shame. Its very sad. He’s self destructing. A lot of ex-gays use religion to mask who they are and that leads to disaster, often suicide. It doesn’t have to be that way. I see another George Rekers and Larry Craig in the making.

      May 28, 2010 at 8:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scotty
      Scotty

      @Robert, NYC:

      Robert,

      I have the Spirit of God, the Savior Jesus Christ, and a loving Heavenly Father in my life. For this, I will never be alone.

      Cassandra,

      Once against you are playing off the LGBT to be the poor, abused, battered stepchild using words such as “malice” and “viscous” to describe acts against gays and lesbians in California. Well, last I checked, I didn’t see homosexual night clubs getting attacked or rushed by mobs such as the LDS Temples in San Diego and Los Angeles.

      Last I checked, I didn’t see widespread vandalism of homes and business owned by homosexuals in California like you did with homes that had “Yes on 8″ signs in their windows.

      I know you want to believe, Cassandra, with all of your heart that the pro-homosexual agenda is innocent, pure, and holy in every way, shape, and form.

      That’s just not the case. Now, I have seen you try to distort every scripture that rebukes homosexuality by twisting it into your own interpretation. Cassandra, you read too much into the scriptures. Not every word and line in the Bible is symbolic. Some of it is actually quite literal, such as:

      “Neither is the man without the woman nor the woman without the man in the Lord.”

      The man is not complete without the woman, and the woman is not complete without the man according to the Lord thy God. It’s as simple as that, child.

      You have shown no proof whatsoever in any written scripture where homosexually is approved of by God. You have given no account of any righteous person in scriptures, any follower of Christ, any apostle or prophet who lived a homosexual lifestyle. You won’t find any such person in scriptures because they all lived God’s standard–Adam and Eve, man and woman. This would be the standard. Anything else defies that standard.

      May 28, 2010 at 10:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Scotty: Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. You are delusional and obviously hang out with other psychotic people wishing on a star and insisting you know there is a personal god. You labeled it, you think it and that does not make it true inside or outside of yourself. You are in denial about a lot of things and your one answer to everyone for everthing is TIRED. Keep your religious faith to yourself. It is dangerous.

      May 28, 2010 at 1:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      How can anyone have a conversation with someone who believes there was a specific Adam and Eve? This is beyond rediculous. There are psychiatrists for people who insist on such simple answers.

      May 28, 2010 at 1:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamesStone
      JamesStone

      Hey guys…let me tell you about my “radical gay agenda” today. I worked all day and I am POOPED! Then I had to go to the grocery store because tomorrow my (our) nephew is graduating from college in accounting!! SOO PROUD OF YOU BEN!! Then I went to the grocery store to buy a lot of stuff cuz the big party is here at our house. Tonight if you were a fly on the wall in our bedroom you would see 2 middle aged men sleeping on opposite ends of the bed..SNORING!!
      Jim
      Now..that’s RADICAL!

      May 28, 2010 at 9:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      #462, SCOTTY, no you don’t .Don’t flatter yourself.

      May 30, 2010 at 3:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John Ward
      John Ward

      @Scotty:

      A fine point, perhaps, but we should be clear that the second time that verse in Leviticus uses two different words that are both translated as “man” in the KJV. The second word — zachar — doesn’t refer to men in general, but rather to the male prostitutes who were part of the “worship” of Baal. What was prohibited (under penalty of death, no less) was not all man-to-man sex, but rather sex with the priests of Baal as part of a religious rite antithetical to the Hebrew religion.

      Sep 2, 2010 at 6:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mitch
      Mitch

      wow really? all you idiots who make fun of him and say he is wrong, shut it. I am a gay mormon, and i am still far to young to marry but i have been working so hard to change it. and you know what? that attraction will never go away 100% but you can live with it, AND get married to a girl AND have a happy relationship and marriage. Plus, god did not make anyone gay, nor does he want us to be gay! everyone has trials! so all you nay sayers, shut your faces and open your eyes to the truth! i have seen people change, and while no 2 people are the same there is ALWAYS a way for everyone!

      Aug 9, 2011 at 5:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • James
      James

      LOL he looks like a queen and like a queen he will flip as soon as he gets his grove on!! Poor girl…. heartache awaits .. run honey run!!

      Aug 20, 2011 at 5:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Karen
      Karen

      ALL things are possible by the Grace of God. When you know, and understand, this deep in your heart you can overcome anything! God Bless Ty and may he enlighten all the intolerant naysayers here.

      Jun 24, 2012 at 7:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nikko
      nikko

      @Karen: Bullshit, KAREN, bullshit. Many gay men (christians and non christians) prove that claim false. You’re Deluded..

      Jun 24, 2012 at 11:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB