Category Archives: Homosexuality

Brian Sewell Gay Writer and Broadcaster “I will not convert to Gay Marriage”.

Posted by Milton Almeida

Read here

It proves nothing but the fact that the gay community is not the “Borg”… the Collective Intelligence, as widely believed. Some do think on their own!

Don’t ask me! Ask this lesbian and academic!

I dind’t say it! Don’t kill the messenger!

camille paglia“Homosexuality is not ‘normal.’ On the contrary, it is a challenge to the norm; therein rests its eternally revolutionary character Queer theorists – that wizened crew of flimflamming free-loaders – have tried to take the post structuralist tack of claiming that there is no norm, since everything is relative and contingent. This is the kind of silly bind that word-obsessed people get into when they are deaf, dumb, and blind to the outside world. Nature exists, whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single, relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction. Penis fits vagina; no fancy linguistic game-playing can change that biologic fact.”

Read more here - this is only one web site that quotes her on that. If you are interested in the issue through her perspective you will have to check for yourself!

My point in publishing this here is, to my self-acknowledged ignorance of her work, and knowing that many of you are aware of her writings on the issue, and perhaps other articles are published about her in this and many other blogs, I didn’t know that within the “gay” campsite there was someone as “not so fond” of gay activist as I am. Note: I object to gay activism! All the accusations that I receive for saying this are a violation of the 9th Commandment and pure slander! I have stopped defending myself for my view both to the fundamentalist as well as to the activists, including some academics, since I get it from both sides. I just submit this for perhaps you will find that what activists proclaim (again, including some academics) about gays is still open for discussion; at least is still in the realm of theories, which is not and should never be a reason for Christians simply to bash a gay person whereas still debating the issue as they see through the perspective of their faith.

Refrain form primarily drawing and posting conclusions about my views in your comments. I pride in having a good record in dealing with persons and the issue. Deal with her view here as quoted in this doctor’s Web Site, which I used because I founded to be the less clouded and cluttered one. Comment at length but don’t kill the messenger just yet…

Wedding cakes and flowers

wedding cakeAllow me to be the “contrarian”, but before labeling the author of this article and its main thrust, “anti-gay” or “homophobic”, fundamentalist or a “fun the mentalist”, please, please consider his proposition. Then, call it whatever your emotion prompt you to call him.

Read here. “Of Consciences and Cakes: A Response to Kirsten Powers”

no, it is not about sex; or, why the UMC should have more intercourse.

English: (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In a well-written post on the current debates regarding the pastors who are forsaking the Book of Discipline, David Watson writes,

Church law matters because it allows us to go about our work together. It is not always right, but it is a necessary way of organizing our corporate life.  Apart from this realization, the UMC cannot exist.

via Church Coffee: This is not about sex.

Intercourse, the title of this post, is not just about sex. Intercourse is about the exchange of ideas and the connection between people.  The Book of Discipline is our intercourse. It is how we exchange our ideas and form our connection. When it is broken, we no longer have a connection. A sexless marriage is a roommate situation. An intercourse-less UMC is a baptist denomination.

News is breaking almost constantly of UMC pastors who, in breaking their vows to God and to the rest of the UMC, decide to officiate homosexual marriages. This is against their promise to uphold the BoD. I wish news would break equally about UMC pastors who refuse to follow other rules, such as the social principles, but alas, no news exists.

You know my position on this. Whether it is achieved by Luther’s Two Kingdoms or through the 14th Amendment or because I believe it is right, homosexual marriage should be allowed. There are a lot of sins, but I do not believe this is one of them. Further, I believe the denial to the human the right to love is an abomination to Natural Law and is in of itself a sin.

If the BoD was unchangeable, then the avenues the pastors are traveling may be more acceptable; however, it can be changed while maintaining the proper place for Scripture. Therefore, I cannot follow these pastors who would break the BoD. After all, I don’t support the more conservative pastors who likewise break the BoD.

There are two comments on Dr. Watson’s blog I wanted to respond to, but did not feel his blog was the proper place. In one, a commentator decries bigotry but uses the ignorant phrase regarding pharisees. This is a self-inflicted wound, but it is one showcasing a lack of introspection. The other one is rather jumbled, more so than my usual lack of writing skill. To deny that homosexuality is a sin is not to change the authority of Scripture. Rather, it is to uphold the authority of Scripture in all matters of salvation. What we deny is the usual interpretation. These are the same arguments that once revolved around women ordination and segregation. Scripture is primary in the United Methodist Church and must remain so, however, we must allow that our opinions about it are not.

We need less sex in the UMC and more intercourse. We need that connection rather than momentary meetings, such as General Conference or Annual Conferences. Rather, we need to respect one another in our connection and try to resolve these tensions without ignoring the concerns of the other party.

Enhanced by Zemanta

My latest on @HuffPostRelig – Don’t read if you like me

Some, mainly Jim, will not like what is said. Of course, many will refuse to unpack what I’ve said and instead read it as a set-in-stone. Of course, Jim has sworn off reading Huffington Post, so whew… he won’t read it anyway.

Joel L. Watts: Finding a Christian Way Forward on Gay Marriage in the Things Unsaid.

The thing with theology… it changes. It changes due to time, information, context.

I am not ready to let loose our dusty old texts, but I would gladly limit them to the Christian sphere where they rightly belong. Indeed, I am convinced if we let loose these things that so fill our modern viewpoint, we would be groundless. But, that is another discussion for another time.

I am not convinced, given the advancements in understanding history, science, genetics, and the such, that we can continue to promote the idea that Scripture teaches against the modern definition of homosexuality. Just as there is a modern definition of marriage, there is a modern definition of sexuality. These things are different than what we read in Scripture.

New Game: What does the bible explicitly state?

So, the Southern Baptist Church is moving away from the Boy Scouts, because nothing says being like Jesus like moving away from children, even children you find vulgar, even children who represent what you consider the sickest of sins…

But, it is one statement in this that has caught my attention.

For Southern Baptist pastor Tim Reed, it was Scripture versus the Scouts. “God’s word explicitly says homosexuality is a choice, a sin,” said Reed, pastor of First Baptist Church of Gravel Ridge in Jacksonville, Arkansas.

So, let’s play a game. Explicit means “fully revealed  or expressed without vagueness.”

What does the bible explicitly state? Now… the rules are simple:

  1. If the stated view can be challenged by another verse, then it is not explicit.
  2. You cannot deny facts such as historical criticism, or even lexicons.

So, what does the bible explicitly state?


Enhanced by Zemanta