It's Official. The Gay Agenda is to destroy religion.

[Guest]

These articles:

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/03/georgia-anti-gay-boycott-veto

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/03/28/georgia-governor-to-veto-religious-freedom-bill-criticized-as-anti-gay/

http://deadline.com/2016/03/georgia-anti-gay-bill-veto-religious-liberty-1201727179/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/georgia-anti-gay-bill-veto_us_56f93d5de4b014d3fe237e2a

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/georgia-lgbt-religious-freedom_us_56d75f00e4b03a4056775826

are confirmation of a fact we already knew.  The Gay Agenda wants to destroy religion.  For years now, gay activists have stated again and again that they just want to be equals.  They want the same rights as anyone else.  And if that were true, I'd be all for it.  But over the years, this has proven to be false.  We've had numerous reports and lawsuit-after-lawsuit where a gay couple was getting married and wanted a commercial service performed by a Christian business owner.  When the Christian refused, they got sued.  Not only that, but many sites like Go Fund Me have refused to host the legal defense fund for such business owners.

The rebuttal from the left has been that it is a public business.  And a public business cannot discriminate who it can and cannot serve.  All the while, they assured us that we can keep our religion.  How's that?  If we cannot act and make decisions based on our religious beliefs, what religious freedom do we have?  The response is essentially some variant of "you can go to church where ever you want".  

So, that's the extent of our religious freedom?

No, your actual religious establishments and ministers, etc. can withhold services as they see fit.

So, what's the beef with the bill in Georgia?

Well, the Constitution already protects religious establishments.  So they only want to pass this bill to encourage further discrimmination.

We thought that the right to practice our religion in any public place was secured.  But apparently that isn't true.  We've lost that.  Now you want us to believe that ministers are protected by the same veneer that we thought we ourselves had?

The sad outcome to this is that the Governor gave in to the false boycott demands.  The fact is that these boycotts were either never going to happen, or they are going to happen anyway -- regardless of the veto.

Edited April 6, 2016 by Guest

[anatess2]

Duh.

[unixknight]

I don't think their goal is to eliminate religion per se, but rather to force it to conform and validate them.  "Live and let live" isn't good enough for these people, they want you to acknowledge the moral equivalency of their choices to your own.  If Christianity in general were to do that tomorrow, I guarantee the pressure on religion would cease. 

(Yes, Judaism and Islam also condemn homosexual behavior, but those aren't the majority in this country, and the LGBTQ community do not see them as a threat.  Muslim owned bakeries won't do same sex wedding cakes either, but nobody bothers them.)

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Years ago at a homeschooling conference Joel Skousen explained that we were rapidly losing our rights, but no one was paying attention. He said (paraphrasing) that religious rights would be the last to go because that would wake people up---but by then it would be far too late.

[NightSG]

1 hour ago, unixknight said:

Muslim owned bakeries won't do same sex wedding cakes either, but nobody bothers them.

I suspect that's more for the same reason that peta doesn't bother bikers about their leather, and all the other environmental groups pick on soccer moms with SUVs instead of cowboy wanna-bes with 1 ton trucks that never haul anything.

If we started beheading people for interfering with our religious practices, they'd bake their own cakes.

Edited April 6, 2016 by NightSG

[unixknight]

10 minutes ago, NightSG said:

I suspect that's more for the same reason that peta doesn't bother bikers about their leather, and all the other environmental groups pick on soccer moms with SUVs instead of cowboy wanna-bes with 1 ton trucks that never haul anything.

What reason would that be?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, NightSG said:

I suspect that's more for the same reason that peta doesn't bother bikers about their leather, and all the other environmental groups pick on soccer moms with SUVs instead of cowboy wanna-bes with 1 ton trucks that never haul anything.

If we started beheading people for interfering with our religious practices, they'd bake their own cakes.

While I somewhat agree with the overall idea, I don't think the conclusion is true.  If we started behaving the same way, they'd haul us off to court precisely because we're Christian.  But they don't dare do the same thing to a Muslim.  That is exactly what makes them "useful idiots".

[Guest MormonGator]

11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

  But they don't dare do the same thing to a Muslim.  

Exactly. Because they don't understand the true nature of Islam, and they like to bully Christians because they know we won't issue a fatwa telling believers to kill them. Christians are into that "turn the other cheek" thing 

Edited April 6, 2016 by MormonGator

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Exactly. Because they don't understand the true nature of Islam, and they like to bully Christians because they know we won't issue a fatwa telling believers to kill them. 

I think you missed the point of my last post: If we started behaving the same way. They don't care about the behavior.  They care that we're Christians first.  Then they care about destroying us.  Then they actually care about their rights, but not ours.  They just plain don't care what Muslims do because protecting their rights is not their primary goal.  Their primary goal is to destroy Christianity.

I'll give @unixknight, a point.  They may not be concerned with Islam for now.  But if they ever did get rid of Christianity, they'd eventually get rid of all religion.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Duh.

Yeah, I know.

[Guest MormonGator]

8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I think you missed the point of my last post

 Their primary goal is to destroy Christianity.

 

1. I didn't miss it, I was adding to the conversation. 

2. We agree.  

[The Folk Prophet]

55 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'll give @unixknight, a point.  They may not be concerned with Islam for now.  But if they ever did get rid of Christianity, they'd eventually get rid of all religion.

I dunno...there's no reason on earth for Satan to tear down his own kingdom. False religions are...you know...false. Satan has good cause to support and uphold false religions. I mean, they stem from him in the first place.

[NightSG]

2 hours ago, unixknight said:

What reason would that be?

Self preservation.  Turning the other cheek instead of running them through with a sword, running over them or blowing up their families makes us the low hanging fruit.

[unixknight]

12 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Self preservation.  Turning the other cheek instead of running them through with a sword, running over them or blowing up their families makes us the low hanging fruit.

Good point.

And they say it's the Conservatives who fear Islam...

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I dunno...there's no reason on earth for Satan to tear down his own kingdom. False religions are...you know...false. Satan has good cause to support and uphold false religions. I mean, they stem from him in the first place.

While I get the false religion comment, I'm not certain about Satan's motives with regard to Islam.

[LeSellers]

11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

While I get the false religion comment, I'm not certain about Satan's motives with regard to Islam.

I believe that Satan hates false religion because they (typically) have gods: that could lead to the adherents' asking about God.

He doesn't even want us to believe he, himself, exists "for there is none". Why, if he could manage it, would he want us to believe that a god exists?

Lehi

[The Folk Prophet]

I don't think Satan's methods can be pigeon-holed that way. Every trick he can he uses to destroy our potential. I suppose he has a good, better, best ideology too...and he'd prefer we all go to outer darkness with him, but that does not mean he won't use every means available to simply get the potentially exalted to be only terrestrial beings.

There are, after all, only two churches.

As to Satan's motives with regard to Islam...my point is merely that I don't see Satan being as driven to go after religions that are further from truth than those that are closer to truth. His greatest efforts, surely, are against the true church. Christianity in general leads souls to Christ...generally, and is therefor a greater enemy to the devil than Islam which leads further from Christ, and Hinduism which leads even further, and etc., etc.

False religion is a tool of Satan's.

[Guest MormonGator]

48 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

I believe that Satan hates false religion because they (typically) have gods: that could lead to the adherents' asking about God.

He doesn't even want us to believe he, himself, exists "for there is none". Why, if he could manage it, would he want us to believe that a god exists?

Lehi

 "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist"-Roger, The Usual Suspects 

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

As to Satan's motives with regard to Islam...my point is merely that I don't see Satan being as driven to go after religions that are further from truth than those that are closer to truth. His greatest efforts, surely, are against the true church. Christianity in general leads souls to Christ...generally, and is therefor a greater enemy to the devil than Islam which leads further from Christ, and Hinduism which leads even further, and etc., etc.

The bolded portion is what I'm talking about.  My comment was regarding a hypothetical "if he got rid of Christianity" which would include our faith.  Then he'd work on the next closest and the next...

But we have been promised that this stone cut out of the mountain will never be taken again from the earth.  This makes the hypothetical  a bit of a stretch to begin with.

 

Edited April 6, 2016 by Guest

[NightSG]

56 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

The bolded portion is what I'm talking about.  My comment was regarding a hypothetical "if he got rid of Christianity" which would include our faith.  Then he'd work on the next closest and the next...

He wouldn't have to get rid of it, just weaken it to the point of being largely ineffective. It would take generations to rebuild to the level of missionary efforts we have right now.

[yjacket]

Yes, it is a long slow slide to Babylon and all the sudden people wake up and say, "wait a second".  It starts with something so simple as the word gay.  I refuse to use that word in reference to homosexuals.  Gay means happy, joyful.  Pick up any book from prior to ~1960s and gay is used many times but in reference to happiness.

So take a perfectly good word and associate it with homosexuals.  Now subconsciously and culture slowly starts to change, homosexuality is associate not with deviant behavior but with happiness. Then slowly incorporate it into books, tv, music, it becomes acceptable. Once it becomes acceptable turn it into a discrimination issue b/c this country (unlike 99% of the countries on this planet) is so deathly afraid of discrimination b/c people don't want to seem bigoted, racist or pick any other label thrown out there.

No, the homosexual agenda doesn't want to destroy religion, they want to co-opt religion.  Look what happened when God's restored church on Earth came down on the line; the weeping, wailing, resignations, etc. Even the very Elect have been deceived.  Shoot, I've been lamblasted here on this forum for typing an abbreviation of homosexual (homo.) the same as I have done in typing an abbreviation for heterosexual (hetero.).  For simply typing that (and I in no way was calling names), I was told I was being offensive by LDS members!

People have bought into this modern pyschobabble that homosexuals are "born that way", when there is absolutely no scientific evidence of it. Individuals have brothers or husbands who turn homosexual and out of what they think is genuine love for the individual they "accept" that lifestyle. As a culture we have really messed up what love is and what it really means.  True love, true Christlike love is the absolute desire for the individuals well-being. I love my children more than they will ever know; there is absolutely no one else on this planet that has their best interest more at heart than me. Because I love them, sometimes I have to teach them harsh lessons.  Those lessons will serve them well in life, those lessons include disciplining them or "disciple"-ing them.  It's painful, it requires being strict, it requires fortitude, sometimes it would be easier just to let them do whatever-but it wouldn't be in their best interest.

That won't change when they become adults, they have more liberty and freedom, but I will always be their father and as such I could never "accept" a child's deviant behavior. I simply would not allow them to bring their deviance into my house. I wouldn't allow someone to smoke in my house and I don't like going into homes of smokers, the same here. I would never cut my child off, however a child can do things that would in effect cut themselves off.

The fact is that I am unashamed of my position. I am a staunch libertarian and as such if billy wants to "marry" john, be my guest-but I'll stand up all day long and say it is morally wrong. Until individuals build a back-bone and stop being bullied and cowered into being labeled "bigot", etc. for their beliefs the slide will continue. 

[Still_Small_Voice]

I like what the Prophet Gordon Hinckley said on this subject:

“People inquire about our position on those who consider themselves so-called gays and lesbians. My response is that we love them as sons and daughters of God. They may have certain inclinations which are powerful and which may be difficult to control. Most people have inclinations of one kind or another at various times. If they do not act upon these inclinations, then they can go forward as do all other members of the Church. If they violate the law of chastity and the moral standards of the Church, then they are subject to the discipline of the Church, just as others are. "

Just because people are tempted to be homosexual does not mean they have to give in.  We are called to overcome the flesh relying upon the grace of God.  Some people have a weakness, with alcohol, others pornography, some struggle with their anger.  Do not excuse yourself in sin.  Cry unto the Lord and begin to work to overcome your weaknesses and sin.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

I like what the Prophet Gordon Hinckley said on this subject:...

I have been looking for that quote for years!  I knew he said it and I just kept thinking of different words in the search strings and came up empty.

THANK YOU!!!!!!

[NightSG]

11 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

Just because people are tempted to be homosexual does not mean they have to give in.  We are called to overcome the flesh relying upon the grace of God.  Some people have a weakness, with alcohol, others pornography, some struggle with their anger.  Do not excuse yourself in sin.  Cry unto the Lord and begin to work to overcome your weaknesses and sin.

Exactly.  I'm pretty sure every one of us has some strong and fairly constant temptation to one or more sins.

If not, then lets find those people without temptation and beat them up.

[unixknight]

I have a friend who is LDS and he's attracted to men.  He controls his temptation and is doing pretty well.

Once, I was talking to a co-worker who is homosexual and I mentioned this friend.  The co-worker's response:  "What a shame he has to suppress who he really is."  I found that remark incredibly annoying - and revealing.  It never even occurred to this guy that my friend is being EXACTLY who he really is, and who he wants to be.  He's choosing the Gospel over self gratification, a sign of incredible character and self discipline.  I think the real shame is an entire demographic whose most important self-identifying characteristic is the set of people they want to have sex with, and find it troubling when someone aspires to greater spirituality and discipline.

Edited April 7, 2016 by unixknight