What LGBTQ+ hath wrot


cat123
 Share

Recommended Posts

https://www.redstate.com/jenvanlaar/2019/10/18/ca-rep.-katie-hill-allegedly-involved-female-staffer-2-yr-throuple-relationship

This is what happens as we devolve into a wicked, adulterous, godless country.  Get ready for more as Christianity continues it's steep decline in the US.  This is what happens when church's renege on their obligation to defend at all costs the wickedness of LGBTQ+ ideology.

There is a picture-which is really bad, it's linked but not shown in the article.  You can easily find it however.

Edited by cat123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Just to make sure I understand, you're this upset because people are having sex, and you think somehow this is some sort of new low?

 

You cannot be serious.

You have a woman who came into Congress as the first openly bisexual woman who is in a throuple.  This throuple involves a thirty year old woman, a thirty year old man and a 22 year old young lady.  The young lady is a paid employee on the campaign staff of the 30 year old woman.  The older woman is elected to Congress.  She is on the following committees:

House Armed Service Committee,   Subcommittee on Tactical Air & Land ForcesSubcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces

House Committee on Oversight and Reform (Vice Chair) ,Subcommittee on Environment, Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy

House Science, Space, and Technology Committee,  Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics

Due to her position of influence she has access to classified information.  She is held up as a banner of LGBTQ+ individuals and yet she is openly having sexual relations (or put into compromising situations) with a) an EMPLOYEE!!! b) a young women.

If it were she were a straight male, this would be a massive news story, plastered all over the news about #metoo. 

But b/c she is LGBTQ+, you get comments like the above (basically amounts to a yeah, so what).

Do we have ANY morals anymore in this country?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cat123 said:

Do we have ANY morals anymore in this country?

Don't get me wrong, I've been on the front lines of this thing for decades.  It's just that, well, you seem surprised.  We lost the moral majority like 9 years ago, and plain old sputtering outrage about wimmin kissin wimmin doesn't really get us very far any more.  People these days will be more outraged at the power differential between a boss and a worker than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

Don't get me wrong, I've been on the front lines of this thing for decades.  It's just that, well, you seem surprised.  We lost the moral majority like 9 years ago, and plain old sputtering outrage about wimmin kissin wimmin doesn't really get us very far any more.  People these days will be more outraged at the power differential between a boss and a worker than anything else.

It's not about wimmin kissin wimmin.  That's what the whole LGBTQ+ agenda was about-what consenting adults do is none of your business, besides they are born that way and therefore you can't say anything about it being immoral.  Except these are the fruits of what happens when moral individuals, Christian individuals don't fight back and succumb to the lies of that group.

The fruits of the ideology of the LGBTQ+ group devolves into this type of sickness where anything goes, where any type of sexual activity is seen as perfectly fine and good and just.  This type of behavior should be held up as an example of what the LGBTQ+ ideology leads to.

It doesn't surprise me that this happened, b/c these are the fruits of it-but this is the first incident of it in the high-powered halls of Congress.  And because she is protected by the LGBTQ+ velvet mafia, this will be shoved under the rug-just like you are doing.

It's despicable and the fact that you are just ho hum about it means that the war is totally lost-it's totally lost when even Saints can't be counted on to forcefully condemn this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*shrug*.  God has a plan of happiness for us, but the old tactic of pointing at people doing differently, and yelling about sickness and things being despicable and whatnot, just isn't persuasive any more.   We used to be preaching to the choir when we did that.  Now we're in the minority, and your righteous indignation is worth exactly squat.  It's not helping.  It does nothing to persuade anyone about anything.   Even though your indignation is certainly based on righteousness.

If you're looking for an echo chamber to agree with you and help you feel not alone, I suppose there's nothing wrong with that.  But if you're looking to make any sort of positive difference in the way the world is heading, you might want to re-think your tactics.

Can you look at these three people as children of God, inheritors of a divine birthright, with the potential to become someone you might see in the temple some day?  If not, you might want to do some thinking about the 2nd great commandment.  How does God want you to love these, thy neighbors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

*shrug*.  God has a plan of happiness for us, but the old tactic of pointing at people doing differently, and yelling about sickness and things being despicable and whatnot, just isn't persuasive any more.   We used to be preaching to the choir when we did that.  Now we're in the minority, and your righteous indignation is worth exactly squat.  It's not helping.  It does nothing to persuade anyone about anything.   Even though your indignation is certainly based on righteousness.

If you're looking for an echo chamber to agree with you and help you feel not alone, I suppose there's nothing wrong with that.  But if you're looking to make any sort of positive difference in the way the world is heading, you might want to re-think your tactics.

Can you look at these three people as children of God, inheritors of a divine birthright, with the potential to become someone you might see in the temple some day?  If not, you might want to do some thinking about the 2nd great commandment.  How does God want you to love these, thy neighbors?

You are absolutely wrong.  What is the pattern in the scriptures?

It's to condemn wickedness, not to get cozy with it, play nice and say-God loves you too!  Righteous indignation and condemnation of wickedness is the only thing that will turn this around-a call to repentance.

Why is that the only thing that will work? Because it's two-fold, 1) it helps the sinner know unequivocally it's wrong and 2) it helps those who aren't steeped in in to know that it is condemned. 

If you don't condemn it, what will your children think?

It's not an "old tactic"-it's the only tactic-it's the only thing that works as demonstrated by Scripture.  No where in Scripture-God's Word-does He say that's okay you sin-everyone sins, no biggie.  No, wickedness is condemned unequivocally and repentance proclaimed unequivocally and then when someone feels the desire and need to repent, then is when the idea of God loves you and provided a Savior for you comes into play.

Of course, I can see them with the "potential" to see in the temple . . .IF they repent and turn from their wickedness. If not, no-not ever.

You're tactic is EXACTLY why we are in this situation . . . church's and their members have rejected their obligation to call wicked, wicked, to call the sinner to repentance and to welcome the repentant sinner. 

All church's are becoming are social clubs, come join us . . why? just because just join us and worship to some God . . .but don't worry you don't need to change at all-God loves you just the way you are-you don't need to do anything at all. That is not a winning message.  It doesn't have the power necessary to actually convert people, it doesn't have staying power, it doesn't have the power to actually form a solid basis of faith. It's a meaningless message.  The most powerful Christian message, is the message of conversion-but you can't convert if you are told you have nothing to change, you can't change if people do not condemn wicked actions.

And more to the point, you are only *shrugging* because it is LGBTQ+. If this were a straight Congressman doing this with a younger female staff member-it's #METOO. You have not once said this behavior is despicable-you accept it, which is very, very sad.

Edited by cat123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am also very sad Cat123 about the general wickedness of the general population in America.  God's judgments will come on this nation and especially the wicked unless they repent and turn with their whole hearts to God.  We are seeing a corrupting rot especially in the Federal government and some state governments that is spreading because of our sins. 

I pray almost everyday that the Bill of Rights and the United States Constitution will be preserved as long as there is a band of Christians that possesses this land.

Edited by Still_Small_Voice
Grammar correction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

*shrug*.  God has a plan of happiness for us, but the old tactic of pointing at people doing differently, and yelling about sickness and things being despicable and whatnot, just isn't persuasive any more.   We used to be preaching to the choir when we did that.  Now we're in the minority, and your righteous indignation is worth exactly squat.  It's not helping.  It does nothing to persuade anyone about anything.   Even though your indignation is certainly based on righteousness.

If you're looking for an echo chamber to agree with you and help you feel not alone, I suppose there's nothing wrong with that.  But if you're looking to make any sort of positive difference in the way the world is heading, you might want to re-think your tactics.

Can you look at these three people as children of God, inheritors of a divine birthright, with the potential to become someone you might see in the temple some day?  If not, you might want to do some thinking about the 2nd great commandment.  How does God want you to love these, thy neighbors?

Whoa! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems as good a place as any to throw out my semi-related theory on just what happened in the U.S. How is it that 2/3rds opposition to gay marriage became 2/3rds support (thus, according to OP, leading to things like supervisors seducing young staff into joining a throuple)? My sense is that those who flipped from opposed to supportive are conservative in the law & order & stability vein. So, once SCOTUS said that gay marriage was a basic human right, allegedly assured in the U.S. Constitution, then a good number of opponents shifted to the new social consensus. If the highest court says this is the way it is then this is the way it is. These are the same ones that say, "Just bake the cake." They are also the ones who opposed Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, because he violated the law (Jim Crow laws banning People of Color from sitting in White-designated areas). This dilemma will not be resolved by conservatism or liberalism. What we need is, "Thus sayeth the LORD..."

Edited by prisonchaplain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/19/2019 at 3:16 PM, cat123 said:

All church's are becoming are social clubs, come join us . . why? just because just join us and worship to some God . . .but don't worry you don't need to change at all-God loves you just the way you are-you don't need to do anything at all. That is not a winning message.  It doesn't have the power necessary to actually convert people, it doesn't have staying power, it doesn't have the power to actually form a solid basis of faith. It's a meaningless message.  The most powerful Christian message, is the message of conversion-but you can't convert if you are told you have nothing to change, you can't change if people do not condemn wicked actions.

 

Our own church has made this error - "Baseball baptisms."

I am speaking to the social aspect of it all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t look now but this is the topic that will(should?) fracture the church.   Our Church, what we tout as the Lords,  is sponsoring a Gay men’s Chorus on Temple grounds............

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/gay-mens-chorus-of-washington-dc-tickets-74633806725

I don’t support this.   Why must the church say one thing, yet their actions send a different message.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pressing Forward said:

I don’t support this.   Why must the church say one thing, yet their actions send a different message.

 

What are they saying and what are they doing that send different messages? Links to sources please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
On 10/19/2019 at 5:35 PM, NeuroTypical said:

yelling about sickness and things being despicable and whatnot, just isn't persuasive any more.

 It never was.  Yelling, screaming and jumping up and down almost always doesn't convey the message you want it to. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pressing Forward said:

Don’t look now but this is the topic that will (should?) fracture the church.   Our Church, what we tout as the Lords, is sponsoring a Gay men’s Chorus on Temple grounds.

I do not like this either.  We as saints should promote morality and righteousness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

I do not like this either.  We as saints should promote morality and righteousness.

I’ll ask you the same question.

What are they saying and what are they doing that send different messages? Links to sources please.


 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pressing Forward said:

Don’t look now but this is the topic that will(should?) fracture the church.   Our Church, what we tout as the Lords,  is sponsoring a Gay men’s Chorus on Temple grounds............

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/gay-mens-chorus-of-washington-dc-tickets-74633806725

I don’t support this.   Why must the church say one thing, yet their actions send a different message.

 

I think "hosting" would be a better term than sponsoring.  And what is wrong with letting a group of men sing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

I do not like this either.  We as saints should promote morality and righteousness.

In the first Vision God called all the existing churches wrong... and that their creeds were an abomination.  Note the word "Abomination" that is some of the strongest language the Lord has ever used against a group people.

Yet we often work with other churches.  Most people realize that working with some group or organization does not mean we agree, support and endorse them and everything they stand for.

For Christmas celebrations at temple visitors center it is common for people who do not share our faith and beliefs to be a part of the program.  They might be another religious group, maybe they are a secular group, maybe they are a family.  It does not matter what they are or what they believe.  All that really matters is if they want to come celebrate the Birth of our Savior with us.

Inviting a group of Sinners (which we all are) to come celebrate Christ with us sounds exactly like something we should be doing to me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fether said:

What are they saying and what are they doing that send different messages? Links to sources please.

I imagine @Vort is typing away madly to give a thorough reply, I'll try to channel my inner Vort:

Quote

No, there's nothing wrong with men in a choir.  But this isn't just a random group of men, this is a group of men self-identifying themselves according to a specific struggle with a specific aspect of salvation.  You don't see us inviting the Childhood-Trauma-Inspired-Rage-Issues Choir, or the Rap-Sheet-Includes-Felony-Assualt Choir, or the 40-lbs-overweight-and-doesn't-exercise-enough Choir, but we're going out of our way with the whole gay pride thing?  I don't get it.

- NT, channeling Vort's energies through a crystal ball

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

No, there's nothing wrong with men in a choir.  But this isn't just a random group of men, this is a group of men self-identifying themselves according to a specific struggle with a specific aspect of salvation.  You don't see us inviting the Childhood-Trauma-Inspired-Rage-Issues Choir, or the Rap-Sheet-Includes-Felony-Assualt Choir, or the 40-lbs-overweight-and-doesn't-exercise-enough Choir, but we're going out of our way with the whole gay pride thing?  I don't get it.

- NT, channeling Vort's energies through a crystal ball

I'm not sure, but my guess is the choir is the one who initiated the arrangement for the performance.  The Church did not go out to create this choir.  If there was a 40lb-overweight choir (or any other group) that wanted to sing, I imagine they'd let them have a night to sing also: as long as the songs and performance pass specific criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2019 at 8:26 AM, NeuroTypical said:

I imagine @Vort is typing away madly to give a thorough reply, I'll try to channel my inner Vort:

Quote

No, there's nothing wrong with men in a choir.  But this isn't just a random group of men, this is a group of men self-identifying themselves according to a specific struggle with a specific aspect of salvation.  You don't see us inviting the Childhood-Trauma-Inspired-Rage-Issues Choir, or the Rap-Sheet-Includes-Felony-Assualt Choir, or the 40-lbs-overweight-and-doesn't-exercise-enough Choir, but we're going out of our way with the whole gay pride thing?  I don't get it.

- NT, channeling Vort's energies through a crystal ball

 

Well...yeah. Pretty much a bull's-eye.

I don't know whose decision it was to invite the Homosexual Men's Choir to sing at the DC temple. My instinct is that it was not the First Presidency. Therefore, I feel reasonably free to criticize such a decision, and my inclination is to criticize it quite vigorously...

I'm curious to see if the NAMBLA Pedophilia Choir gets an invite. Maybe the Ashley Madison® Swingers' Club Choir? The Made Men "We-Plug-'Em-You-Plant-'Em" Choir? Hey, they're just singing Christmas hymns! Where's the harm? Let's all come together to celebrate our shared values!

We are living in Insane World.

Now, the buck stops with the FP. Such an invitation, once extended, probably can't be rescinded without all sorts of ugly blowback. Plus it would simply be rude to invite someone to a venue and then take it back. But if the FP doesn't approve of the act, I'm sure the decision-makers will be instructed and/or restructured so that such things don't continue. And if the FP approved the event, then I have nothing publicly to say about it.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Vort said:

Well...yeah. Pretty much a bull's-eye.

I don't know whose decision it was to invite the Homosexual Men's Choir to sing at Temple Square. My instinct is that it was not the First Presidency. Therefore, I feel reasonably free to criticize such a decision, and my inclination is to criticize it quite vigorously...

I'm curious to see if the NAMBLA Pedophilia Choir gets an invite. Maybe the Ashley Madison® Swingers' Club Choir? The Made Men "We-Plug-'Em-You-Plant-'Em" Choir? Hey, they're just singing Christmas hymns! Where's the harm? Let's all come together to celebrate our shared values!

We are living in Insane World.

Now, the buck stops with the FP. Such an invitation, once extended, probably can't be rescinded without all sorts of ugly blowback. Plus it would simply be rude to invite someone to a venue and then take it back. But if the FP doesn't approve of the act, I'm sure the decision-makers will be instructed and/or restructured so that such things don't continue. And if the FP approved the event, then I have nothing publicly to say about it.

It was most likely someone under the temple president who made this call.

If you go to their website you'll find a "book us" link. It costs 500-2500 to book. It's possible they do it for free, Wich would be great charity work for the church, but most likely some tithing money (or at least some church funds) went to pay to have them preform- which is even better. the visitors center is on dedicated Holy Ground know anciently as the outer courtyard of the temple. It's good we are doing this.

Some of the pictures at the bottom of their page are certainly interesting.....half-naked men prancing around, not that there is a problem with that.  I think it's great anyone who sees the visitor center at Christmas this year will be able to look at their webpage and see how inclusive we are. We are finally getting with the times.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Yet we often work with other churches. 

I think that's a relatively new thing. It's a wonderful thing, don't get me wrong-but various Christian faiths in the past generally didn't work together. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. Now that Vort has shown up, I can give my totally arguable, possibly wrong take on things.

Most of us were born into a world that has always thought "if you've got sinful urges, you're out of alignment with gospel standards".  In the last bit of time, the notion seems to be swinging to "sexual orientation is a core aspect of who we are, and may or may not say anything about your alignment with gospel standards, and you may be doing yourself a disservice by trying to change it."  

There's a new class of people out there - the "I'm proudly out-of-the-closet-celebrating-life gay, and I'm living gospel standards, and that's ok" type of person.  The differentiator is between urges/leanings/tendencies/inclinations/persuasions, and behavior is huge here.   In this new notion, a gay choir is more analogous to a disabled vet choir, or a recovering alcoholic choir.  We don't try to fix 'em any more, we accept 'em for "who they are". 

Your recovery from your physical disability is set by physical realities, and it may be a waste of time to try to pray your leg back.  Go join the choir.  You may be able to play at the temple, even though some of your choir members are drinking swearing adulterous SOB's. 

Your sobiety is set by your behavior, and your energies may be better spent on managing your behavior, instead of trying to eliminate your addiction.    Go join the choir, even though some of you might be off the wagon right now.

And, no matter how much you might want to be straight and get sealed in the temple and whatnot, you might be better served just by admitting you're gay and following God as a gay guy.  Go join the choir, even though some of you aren't interested in following gospel standards.

 

I'm not trying to be persuasive here.  I honestly don't know if this take on things is right or wrong.  I'm just a guy trying to make it through life walking the best path of discipleship I can see, and doing it imperfectly.  But every year that goes by, I see more and more indication that the church is adopting this notion.

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share