LGBT Prediction That Is Worth the Paper It's Printed On

[person0]

On 5/26/2024 at 11:03 AM, LDSGator said:

It’s not an exact science and there are always exceptions, but what I’ve noticed is that people over 50ish do the “don’t ask, don’t tell” thing while people under 50 usually don’t notice or care. 
 

It really threw me off when I met a conservative, home schooled religious family and they were agnostic on LGBT rights. I expected them to be hardcore against it. There’s been a fundamental shift in how society views the LGBT community.  

Most people I associate with regularly are exceptions to your rule.  I think it is less about age and more about who has allowed themselves to be indoctrinated by the left and those who call themselves 'allies'.  Also depends on what you mean by 'hardcore against it'.

[LDSGator]

12 hours ago, person0 said:

Most people I associate with regularly are exceptions to your rule.  I think it is less about age and more about who has allowed themselves to be indoctrinated by the left and those who call themselves 'allies'.  Also depends on what you mean by 'hardcore against it'.

Most of my friends wouldn’t describe themselves as “allies.” Or liberals. I live in one of the reddest parts of a red state after all. The “liberals” here usually own five guns instead of ten.

Edited June 1, 2024 by LDSGator

[Phoenix_person]

11 hours ago, LDSGator said:

Most of my friends wouldn’t describe themselves as “allies.” Or liberals. I live in one of the reddest parts of a red state after all. The “liberals” here usually own five guns instead of ten.

You know what they say: if you go far enough left, you get to keep your guns.

[LDSGator]

11 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

You know what they say: if you go far enough left, you get to keep your guns.

Lol! Truth. 

[old]

On 5/22/2024 at 1:03 PM, Carborendum said:

In 20 years we will see a huge change in the political landscape because of transgender issues.  

• People who don't so identify will have children who have been raised as trans.
• People who disagreed, but thought it was harmless will realize that their children and/or grandchildren are trans and cannot reproduce.
• Those who don't support it and consider it the mental disorder that it is will have many children and grandchildren who are sane enough to lead the world.
• People who are fully LGBT active will have few children.  They will consider the children of conservative Christians as being abused for not being raised LGBT.  And they will want to pass laws that allow government to remove children from such homes and give them to LGBT households.

But what do I know?

"Love is love" is codeword for "Sex is sex".  It fundamentally means I as an individual have the right to sexually desire whoever or whatever I want to and as long as "consent" is given, I have the right to do whatever I please, however I please, whenever I please.  It is a complete and utter self-gratification where the only thing that matters is sexual pleasure.

LGBTQ+ is just the latest step on a long train that got rolling with the 1960s sexual revolution. 

Anyone who states that any expression of sexual lust (be it identification with or physical action) outside of one man, one woman marriage is already branded a bigot, hater, homophobe, not someone to be around in "polite company".

We live in a society that has absolutely 0 self-discipline, whether it be sexual, physical (food), material wants; it is a society that lusts after the flesh and the things of this world.  It is most certainly not Godly and is not Christian.

It is absolutely impossible to be openly identify with sexual morals that have for thousands of years been 100% forbidden (regardless of the likes of the fools of Dan McClellan that say otherwise) and be Christian.

Christianity in the West is dead; and it's dead because it believes it can indulge individuals in taking upon themselves in the image of sin and be disciples of Christ. Disciples of Christ fundamentally reject this and know that the only image that men and woman are made in is the image of God and the image of God manifested in the Divine Logos is one of self-restraint, self-denial, self-discipline, humility.

All the things that are the complete opposite of PRIDE.  Too many Christians, sadly, believe they are worshiping Christ in their Churches, when really they are anti-Christ.

[old]

To point this out expressly.  Here is a quote from the 

Ministering Resources to support LGBTQ+ Latter-day Saints facebook page (expressly 100% pro-all things LGBTQ+ for LDS)

This may ruffle some feathers, but I do feel the need to strongly express things as I see them after going to Utah Pride yesterday:
With the amount of overtly sexual elements present out in the open, the "family friendly" moniker is bonkers. Pride is not for kids! Teaching people tolerance and love is important, but Utah Pride is not the environment for children."

The comments effectively end up being, I'm sorry you were offended or it wasn't what you were expecting-which is a non-apology and an excuse.  Others write:

"I know opinions of the festival this weekend will no doubt be diverse, which is actually a good thing, but the past couple of years I’ve loved going to the pride festival in Salt Lake City. For me, it’s been an incredibly special and even healing experience, at moments I’d even use the term spiritual to describe it. The only thing for me that has been missing, has been family, I’ve yet to actually get into the festival with any family members. Which I’ll admit at times has been difficult for me, particularly last year."

--------------

PRIDE festivals with men prancing around in speedos, or men naked, garishly dressed men with fake boobs in leotards; it's obvious it's about "sex is sex"; only those who refuse to see or refuse to hear think otherwise.

Christians bought the lie that to be a Christian was all about being "nice and kind"-when Christ was anything but "nice and kind".  Christ told the truth, in the way that would resonant the best with each group that He spoke to for their ultimate benefit. To those that required harshness he used a whip, cursed a fig tree, called a woman a dog, and to others he told to simply to sin no more.

Christianity is dead in the west because it's full of country-club "Christians" rather than men and women who struggle against their own passions every day and are examples of piety for their own sins and leaders of what it looks like to humbly submit to God.

 

[NeuroTypical]

11 hours ago, old said:

Here is a quote from the 

Ministering Resources to support LGBTQ+ Latter-day Saints facebook page

Sorry, what are you quoting?  I couldn't tell after two careful readings of your post.

Also, could you link whatever you are quoting?

[old]

25 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Sorry, what are you quoting?  I couldn't tell after two careful readings of your post.

Also, could you link whatever you are quoting?

From here:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1433556613672143/

[zil2]

@old, when you desire to quote someone:

• Position the cursor on a new line
• go to the toolbar of the editor window and click / tap the icon with the " (quote marks) (on a mobile device, you may have to go landscape mode)**
• this will insert an empty quote box in the editor, like this:

Quote

 

• paste quoted text inside the quote box
• move the cursor outside the quote box and resume your own text (if relevant)

 

** @pam, any chance you could edit the "short" toolbar for mobile devices to include the quote icon - there's plenty of room for it.  Right now it only includes the first 4 icons.  (Should be a setting either for the editor plugin or a related editor toobar plugin.)

[Phoenix_person]

12 hours ago, old said:

Christians bought the lie that to be a Christian was all about being "nice and kind"-when Christ was anything but "nice and kind".  Christ told the truth, in the way that would resonant the best with each group that He spoke to for their ultimate benefit.

The Bible I grew up reading portrayed Christ as someone who always showed compassion and warmth to those who deserved it, and quite often to those who didn't. There were exceptions, sure, but I think it's pretty clear that the foundation of Jesus' biblical ministry was love (which, yes, is different from acceptance or tolerance).

12 hours ago, old said:

To those that required harshness he used a whip,

Yes, I frequently see this story cited by "Christians" trying to justify hateful behavior towards minorities, foreigners, and LGBTQ people. But what type of person was it that Jesus was truly going after with whips and flipping tables? I'll give you a hint:

 

12 hours ago, old said:

called a woman a dog

I think you missed both the point and the ending of that story.

12 hours ago, old said:

LGBTQ+ is just the latest step on a long train that got rolling with the 1960s sexual revolution. 

That train left the station long before the 60s.

12 hours ago, old said:

Anyone who states that any expression of sexual lust (be it identification with or physical action) outside of one man, one woman marriage is already branded a bigot, hater, homophobe, not someone to be around in "polite company".

There's no need to be hyperbolic. Heterosexuality is still the norm in our society. Practicing heterosexuality isn't bigoted. Telling someone else that THEY need to practice heterosexuality is. That doesn't mean I believe that churches should change their stance on LGBTQ issues. I believe in religious freedom. I also believe that the free market will eventually put a squeeze on a lot of churches that shut out LGBTQ people. That's not persecution, though, it's just free will at work. As I said earlier in this thread, Christianity is fighting to maintain relevance in an environment where there's a new Catholic priest or Baptist youth pastor being charged with sexual assault of a minor seemingly every week. The anti-LGBTQ messages are still alive and well in some churches, but some congregations are no longer receptive to that. It's not persecution when your congregation rejects your message. 

12 hours ago, old said:

It is absolutely impossible to be openly identify with sexual morals that have for thousands of years been 100% forbidden (regardless of the likes of the fools of Dan McClellan that say otherwise) and be Christian.

Sure. But since when do we all need to be Christian? And no, non-het behavior has not historically been 100% forbidden in non-Christian cultures. Ancient gays were written out of the history books by historians that were overwhelmingly Christian, but that doesn't mean they didn't exist or were universally persecuted. Look up the Sacred Band of Thebes. And don't get me started on the theories about King David and Jonathan.

[Vort]

6 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

12 hours ago, old said:

Christians bought the lie that to be a Christian was all about being "nice and kind"-when Christ was anything but "nice and kind".  Christ told the truth, in the way that would resonant the best with each group that He spoke to for their ultimate benefit.

The Bible I grew up reading portrayed Christ as someone who always showed compassion and warmth to those who deserved it, and quite often to those who didn't. There were exceptions, sure, but I think it's pretty clear that the foundation of Jesus' biblical ministry was love (which, yes, is different from acceptance or tolerance).

The point is that it's much different from being "nice". ("Kind" is another matter.)

7 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

12 hours ago, old said:

To those that required harshness he used a whip,

Yes, I frequently see this story cited by "Christians" trying to justify hateful behavior towards minorities, foreigners, and LGBTQ people. But what type of person was it that Jesus was truly going after with whips and flipping tables? I'll give you a hint:

I have to agree with this. I would also note that Christ drove the moneychangers out of the temple. Jesus' ministry was to the house of Israel, not to the Gentiles, with whom he seldom interacted.

8 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

12 hours ago, old said:

called a woman a dog

I think you missed both the point and the ending of that story.

Again, I have to agree.

9 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

12 hours ago, old said:

LGBTQ+ is just the latest step on a long train that got rolling with the 1960s sexual revolution. 

That train left the station long before the 60s.

True enough that sexual libertinism is hardly a new thing that has come about only within our lifetimes. But it's obvious that the 1960s "sexual revolution" constituted the open overthrow of previous societal limits on what had theretofore been considered antisocial sexual behavior. Pretending otherwise doesn't change the substance of old's argument.

12 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

13 hours ago, old said:

Anyone who states that any expression of sexual lust (be it identification with or physical action) outside of one man, one woman marriage is already branded a bigot, hater, homophobe, not someone to be around in "polite company".

There's no need to be hyperbolic.

He is not being hyperbolic. His statement is literally true, as I expect everyone here (including you) can attest.

13 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Practicing heterosexuality isn't bigoted. Telling someone else that THEY need to practice heterosexuality is.

No more than telling someone else that they need to be tolerant of homosexuality, or that they need to avoid defecating on the street, or that they need to wear Old Spice cologne.

15 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

And don't get me started on the theories about King David and Jonathan.

Yes, for heaven's sake, please do not get started on such ahistorical, context-free nonsense.

[LDSGator]

16 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

also believe that the free market will eventually put a squeeze on a lot of churches that shut out LGBTQ people. That's not persecution, though, it's just free will at work

I totally agree. I think the future of churches won’t be persecution-it’ll be apathy.  

[pam]

1 hour ago, zil2 said:

 

 

** @pam, any chance you could edit the "short" toolbar for mobile devices to include the quote icon - there's plenty of room for it.  Right now it only includes the first 4 icons.  (Should be a setting either for the editor plugin or a related editor toobar plugin.)

Sent this to our tech guy.

[NeuroTypical]

9 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

27 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

also believe that the free market will eventually put a squeeze on a lot of churches that shut out LGBTQ people. That's not persecution, though, it's just free will at work

I totally agree. I think the future of churches won’t be persecution-it’ll be apathy.  

I'm 6-8 years into a 20 year bet with my atheist buddy on this issue.  From where he's standing, my church will do anything to preserve growth, and therefore we'll have same-sex marriages in the temple somewhere in the 2030's.  I say we're what we claim to be, which is led by Deity, and governed by eternal principles.  I figure the church won't change principles just to remain relevant, we'll shrink in size first. 

Loser has to put on a pink tutu and sing "I'm a little teapot".

[LDSGator]

Just now, NeuroTypical said:

Loser has to put on a pink tutu and sing "I'm a little teapot".

You and @mirkwoodhave an odd friendship. 
 

😜 

[LDSGator]

4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

figure the church won't change principles just to remain relevant, we'll shrink in size first. 

Agree. I think we’re already seeing it, sadly. 

[NeuroTypical]

5 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Agree. I think we’re already seeing it, sadly. 

I've said it before: Bishop Gator.  You'll turn things around!   

[LDSGator]

2 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I've said it before: Bishop Gator.  You'll turn things around!   

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. No thanks. 

[pam]

24 minutes ago, pam said:

Sent this to our tech guy.

@zil2Fixed

[zil2]

1 minute ago, pam said:

@zil2Fixed

Thank you!!!  To you and the tech.  It's so much better now - lots o' buttons.

[old]

18 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

The Bible I grew up reading portrayed Christ as someone who always showed compassion and warmth to those who deserved it, and quite often to those who didn't. There were exceptions, sure, but I think it's pretty clear that the foundation of Jesus' biblical ministry was love (which, yes, is different from acceptance or tolerance).

So you are the arbitrator of who did and did not deserve "compassion and warmth"? Wouldn't that be God's decision not yours? Did Christ come to call the sinners or the righteous to repentance? Where the Pharisee righteous or were they sinners?

He told them the following:

34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

Is the above in more or less loving then telling the woman to "sin no more"?

Christ showed compassion to everyone, he showed compassion to the Pharisees. The manifestation of His compassion is different; but make no mistake the Pharisee have God's love, mercy and compassion just as much as the woman; otherwise you make Christ out to only be the Christ for some but not for others. 

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

Yes, I frequently see this story cited by "Christians" trying to justify hateful behavior towards minorities, foreigners, and LGBTQ people. But what type of person was it that Jesus was truly going after with whips and flipping tables? I'll give you a hint:

 That is your interpretation of the Scriptures; and it's a false interpretation. It is world-view about Christ that has only existed for about 30 seconds.  Much wiser and holier men than you have been thinking about, writing about, and discussing God's Word far, far longer than anyone here alive.

God looks on the inward heart, for those who claim they are all about "not judging", they sure do judge others quite a bit.  They label any action, thought, deed, they don't like as "hateful". Yet only God knows the inward heart, whether they have hate and malice in their heart for their brothers/sisters.  A man is about to jump off a cliff. Is it hate to say "don't jump!" or is it love to say "meh, go ahead, it doesn't affect me". LGBTQ+ and their allies have totally conflated and told so many lies they yell, scream, jump up and down and say "anyone who says 'don't jump' is a bigot, a hater, an evil person".

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

Not killing oneself is still the norm in our society. ... Telling someone else that THEY shouldn't commit suicide is [bigoted]

It's obvious to see how utterly silly the arguments you make are.

 

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

That doesn't mean I believe that churches should change their stance on LGBTQ issues. I believe in religious freedom. I also believe that the free market will eventually put a squeeze on a lot of churches that shut out LGBTQ people.

You are allowed to call other people names, bigots, homophobes and that is the Church people should join-the one that calls people names. But the Churches who say homosexuality is a sin if they dare say a bad word you don't like they are evil.

It's a double-standard.  "I don't believe they should change their stance, I just believe they should go out of business". "That's not persecution, though, it's just free will at work".

It's all cool man, you reserve the right to persecute others by calling others bigots, homophobes, effectively stating those churches should die; but that's not persecution.

Christianity is the greatest force for good in the world; it conquered the world, not by force but by it's example.  Protestantism (which is what most people in the west think is Christian-will die sadly.

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

Sure. But since when do we all need to be Christian? And no, non-het behavior has not historically been 100% forbidden in non-Christian cultures. Ancient gays were written out of the history books by historians that were overwhelmingly Christian, but that doesn't mean they didn't exist or were universally persecuted. Look up the Sacred Band of Thebes. And don't get me started on the theories about King David and Jonathan.

Your own version of history...you are more than welcome to create your own reality; it won't do you any good though.

[LDSGator]

8 minutes ago, old said:

not by force but by it's example.  Protestantism

Little bit more complicated than that. They came with the bible in one hand, but the bayonet in the other.  

[Carborendum]

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

Yes, I frequently see this story cited by "Christians" trying to justify hateful behavior towards minorities, foreigners, and LGBTQ people. 

I'd really like to see what example of "hateful behavior" you're citing here.  It may very well be that the behavior you cite is something we would agree is very hateful.  And I'd point out that the few who behave this way are certainly not representative of the Christians we know.

It may also be that what you're calling "hateful" is simply expressing our own opinions and beliefs.  I don't see why anyone would consider the simple, logical, unemotional expression of our beliefs and stating facts as something to be called "hateful."

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

There's no need to be hyperbolic. Heterosexuality is still the norm in our society.

He didn't just say heterosexuality.  It is the one man, one woman, married nuclear family that he was describing.  And among the rising generation, that is now the minority.  About 85% of millennials and gen z say that marriage is not important to them.  And over 20% identify as non-binary.  And the adults are saying that there's nothing wrong with it.  So, no, it (the one man/one woman married nuclear family) is not the norm in our society.

Many people never get married.  Many others have children out of wedlock and separate or raise the child without marriage.  And a greater number of couples are LGBT unions.  And, of course, polyamory.

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

Practicing heterosexuality isn't bigoted. Telling someone else that THEY need to practice heterosexuality is.

Simply telling someone that a certain practice would be a better alternative is not bigoted.  It is just as easily an earnest appeal to help someone become happier.

"Bigoted" must include a desire to "other" someone.  If telling someone to change their self-destructive behavior is "bigoted" then every parent worth their salt is "bigoted" against their own children.

So, which is more bigoted? Telling someone that their behavior is self-destructive and their lives would be better if they changed it?  Or telling someone that their rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of expression should be revoked because of their sincere beliefs?

Edited June 3, 2024 by Carborendum

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

And no, non-het behavior has not historically been 100% forbidden in non-Christian cultures. Ancient gays were written out of the history books by historians that were overwhelmingly Christian, but that doesn't mean they didn't exist or were universally persecuted.

I'm interested - how come you believe that?  What surviving historical records substantiate this claim?  

 

 

[LDSGator]

19 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

no, it is not the norm in our society

https://news.gallup.com/poll/389792/lgbt-identification-ticks-up.aspx

 

Heterosexuality is still the norm in our society. That’s what @Phoenix_person was saying. I think. 

Amazingly, both the hard right and hard left want to believe that homosexuality is far more common than what it is because it fits their already held views.  

Edited June 3, 2024 by LDSGator