Arrest me and throw away the key

[Az]

Ain't no Crustacean.

It's still scum of the sea. However it's quite tasty.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben should also try and open a guesthouse in Canada and see what happens if he forbids gays from staying with him (As with a Scottish guy who wouldn't let them stay in his house, and was thrown off a tourist board as a result, although not prosecuted).

Oh, there are other ways to discourage them from staying with me...

All I need to do is invite some of my Catholic friends on a regular basis for their rosary service.

Should clear 'em out quicker than a whistle.

[Ben Kenobi]

"Pastor Green considers homosexuality an invention of the devil. He bunches it together with incest and pedophilia and contends that those "sexual abnormities are a deep cancer tumor on the entire body politic"

Sins of a kind.

I disagree with this assessment, that Pastor Green intends to expose homosexuals to harm. From his perspective, they can be changed, and they are not doomed to sin. Ergo, he believes that they can be helped, and ought to be helped, and not simply killed.

This contrasts to the Muslim mullahs who preach that the Jew is their enemy who ought to be killed. This is the distinction that needs to be preserved in kind.

How many Muslim mullahs in Sweden are prosecuted for preaching that the Jews are the enemy and ought to be killed? Why one standard for Christians, and another for everyone else?

[Ben Kenobi]

"forbids criticism of homosexuality"

Equating homosexuality with other sexual sins is a form of criticism. Therefore there is no distortion in the World Net article.

[Ben Kenobi]

Pekka:

He continues to say that homosexuals are likely to rape animals.

Where does he say this, Pekka? Do you happen to have the sermon in question?

That you don't have a right to have your own private life when it comes to sex as your own matter? Wrong. It is personal matter, and law protects it.

True, but Christians insist upon a higher standard amongst themselves. Do you forbid any criticism of permissive sexuality? Then you have plenty of pastors to jail. It is a legitimate part of the job of a pastor to uphold Christian teachings with respect to the integrity of the body.

Pedophiles are criminals, and sick people. Unlike gays, pedophiles have victims.

The comparison is that both are sins against the body. This returns us to the point that you are not your own, but were bought for a price. This way you can commit sins against your own body.

To many people, including myself, believe that homosexuals are just as sick as pedophiles, with respect to how they treat their own bodies. Rather then condemnation, they should be helped. Right now, trying to help them equates with condemnation, which is rather hard to see since what people do sexually has now become equivalent to who they are.

[Gibsie]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I disagree with this assessment, that Pastor Green intends to expose homosexuals to harm. From his perspective, they can be changed, and they are not doomed to sin.

I thought we were all doomed to sin.

[Ben Kenobi]

Bebro:

Why did he get away with one month in prison?

What would you consider sufficient punishment? A year?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

How many Muslim mullahs in Sweden are prosecuted for preaching that the Jews are the enemy and ought to be killed? Why one standard for Christians, and another for everyone else?

Feel free to post your statistics on Swedish mullahs found preaching anti-Jewish hatred who haven't been prosecuted.

Otherwise it's just your usual hot air, smoke and mirrors.

The reason for a double standard is of course that modern Christians dress so badly, and so many gabble on about sin whilst ignoring their own conspicuous brand of sanctimony.


'What would you consider sufficient punishment? A year?'

No. Missionary work in Africa, with H.I.V. orphans. Perhaps some good works rather than harsh words might serve Pastor Fingerwag well.

[Kitschum]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

I disagree with this assessment, that Pastor Green intends to expose homosexuals to harm. From his perspective, they can be changed, and they are not doomed to sin. Ergo, he believes that they can be helped, and ought to be helped, and not simply killed.

This, "[those] sexual abnormities are a deep cancer tumor on the entire body politic" is apparently a direct quote from the sermon. I wasn't sure if you caught that.

The pastor didn't (directly) intend to expose homosexuals to harm, in that we agree, my quoted editorial agrees and the court seems to agree as well. I'm having difficulty translating the legal speak here, but he was convicted of making statements with intent to denigrate/disrespect/defame ("uttrycka missaktning mot") a group of people because of their sexuality. In the court's opinion and interpretation of the law that is a violation of the rights of homosexuals and a threat to democratic values and the safety of minority groups in society.

This contrasts to the Muslim mullahs who preach that the Jew is their enemy who ought to be killed. This is the distinction that needs to be preserved in kind.

How many Muslim mullahs in Sweden are prosecuted for preaching that the Jews are the enemy and ought to be killed? Why one standard for Christians, and another for everyone else?

Is there another article you're referring to or is this a general inquiry?

[Kitschum]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Equating homosexuality with other sexual sins is a form of criticism. Therefore there is no distortion in the World Net article.

I still think there is.

The law doesn't forbid "criticism of homosexuality". If it had said "defamation of sexual minorities" or something similar I wouldn't have considered it a distortion, but "criticism" is a very strange word to use.

It's true that isolated it might just have been a case of bad translation and not deliberate, but in the context of the WorldNetDaily article with its Hitler/Chamberlain references I don't think so.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Bebro:



What would you consider sufficient punishment? A year?

he was joking

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


To many people, including myself, believe that homosexuals are just as sick as pedophiles, with respect to how they treat their own bodies.

To many people, like me, Christians like you are monotonous insulting bores, with nothing better to do than lecture other people about their supposed failings, cherry picking from biblical texts to suit their own prejudices.

'for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it. '

'7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

7:4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.'

[Berzerker]

7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.'

The implication being once you've cleared your own vision you can then judge others...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by molly bloom


To many people, like me, Christians like you are monotonous insulting bores, with nothing better to do than lecture other people about their supposed failings, cherry picking from biblical texts to suit their own prejudices.

'for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it. '

'7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

7:4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.'

them's fighting words Molly -- keep them coming

[Dr Strangelove]

You know, we still don't really know what Rev. Green really said. Maybe his speech was truly inflammatory.

Oh, and that thing in Romans 1. If you read on you'll find that Paul goes on to point out that there is a whole slew of cussed human behaviors worthy of condemnation according to the older Jewish tradition, including not only deviant behavior, violence and rape, but even gossiping, argumentativeness, boasting and pride. He goes so far as to equate the seemingly lesser sins like boasting, with the presumably bigger sins. He then goes further as to assert that the Jewish Christians who have a prideful disdain for the gentile converts in the Roman congregation, which is the real subject of Romans 1, are just as sinful as, well, let's say...... a transexual transvestite with a real flare for anilingus. You see, the whole point of Romans 1 was not to rally ther faithful against gays, but to heal a rift between two segments of the Roman congregation. In the future please read the whole section from which you're ripping a biblical quote to ensure that you preserve the meaning within the true context.