Petraus affair
- Thread starter celestemekent
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A
Study military history. Almost all armies, in all civilizations, from antiquity right up to the modern era traveled with bands of prostitutes. The French Foreign Legion still does. There's a definite correlation in history between armies and fornication/adultry throughout history.
Obviously, it's wrong from the Christian worldview and the Christian worldview is the correct worldview. But, there it is anyways all through history.
I find it hypocritical of the modern liberals (and the modern liberal media) to actively support the homosexual indoctrination of children in the public "education" system even to the point where it's now a jailable criminal offense in my state for a counselor to offer hetrosexual alternatives in their advice to little kids while going after a grown man in the military for having an affair. Pure hypocrisy on their part.
Obviously, it's wrong from the Christian worldview and the Christian worldview is the correct worldview. But, there it is anyways all through history.
I find it hypocritical of the modern liberals (and the modern liberal media) to actively support the homosexual indoctrination of children in the public "education" system even to the point where it's now a jailable criminal offense in my state for a counselor to offer hetrosexual alternatives in their advice to little kids while going after a grown man in the military for having an affair. Pure hypocrisy on their part.
T
Ummmm .... I agree with some of what you say here, but not all.
"I do not think that word means what you think it means."
"Hypocrisy" refers to saying something is wrong and doing that same thing anyway. Now, if a specific journalist, say, Jane Doe, was extremely harsh in her criticism of Petreus, and then it was discovered that she was having an extra-marital affair, that would be "hypocrisy." Or, if some military person, say "Jack Mack" were going on a rant about how we should not let gays into the military, and then it was discovered that he was gay, that would be hypocritical. What you describe above it not an example of hypocrisy, because homosexuality and fornication are two totally different things.
Yes, it is possible to be both homosexual and a fornicator. But it is also possible to be homosexual and not fornicate, and it is certainly possible (and, sadly, very common) to be a fornicator and not homosexual. The two things are really completely separate, and I don't know why you would confuse them. Perhaps you need to ask your Dad to explain the birds and the bees to you, if you really don't know the difference.
Homosexuality, in modern parlance, refers to the attraction of one's own gender as opposed to the opposite gender. It's as easy for a homosexual to be celibate as it is for a heterosexual to be celibate: just don't have sex if you're not married. Problem solved.
To imply that all homosexuals are guilty of fornication is not just wrong, it's insulting to the many devout Christians who struggle with homosexuality every day and pray for God's help in that struggle. It is not an easy path, and people like you equating them with adulterers doesn't help. They need our love and support, not our condemnation.
Secondly, you seem to be implying that "the liberal media" (which I assume refers to that radio station Air America with all the left-leaning hosts, and maybe pundits like Jon Stewart and bill Maher) have anything to do with legislation in your state. That whole sentence there smells funny -- I am not sure what "heterosexual alternatives" even means, and why a counselor would even offer them, let alone what it means for the state to jail a counselor for offering it. The only thing I can think is that your state has mandated against public (i.e. tax) money going to support religious-based programs like Exodus, Inc. which seek to change one's orientation.
If that's what you're referring to, then as a Christian, you should support the separation of Church and State. Do you really want this government to tell you how to worship? We can barely trust them with the things they're supposed to do -- military, infrastructure, etc. -- why would we trust them with something as important as religion?
If this law you're referring to is not some sort of separation of church and state issue, then you're going to have to explain it to me, because I have no clue what you're talking about, and I still seriously doubt that journalists, no matter how liberal they are, have anything to do with passing that legislation (if said law even exists).
"I do not think that word means what you think it means."
"Hypocrisy" refers to saying something is wrong and doing that same thing anyway. Now, if a specific journalist, say, Jane Doe, was extremely harsh in her criticism of Petreus, and then it was discovered that she was having an extra-marital affair, that would be "hypocrisy." Or, if some military person, say "Jack Mack" were going on a rant about how we should not let gays into the military, and then it was discovered that he was gay, that would be hypocritical. What you describe above it not an example of hypocrisy, because homosexuality and fornication are two totally different things.
Yes, it is possible to be both homosexual and a fornicator. But it is also possible to be homosexual and not fornicate, and it is certainly possible (and, sadly, very common) to be a fornicator and not homosexual. The two things are really completely separate, and I don't know why you would confuse them. Perhaps you need to ask your Dad to explain the birds and the bees to you, if you really don't know the difference.
Homosexuality, in modern parlance, refers to the attraction of one's own gender as opposed to the opposite gender. It's as easy for a homosexual to be celibate as it is for a heterosexual to be celibate: just don't have sex if you're not married. Problem solved.
To imply that all homosexuals are guilty of fornication is not just wrong, it's insulting to the many devout Christians who struggle with homosexuality every day and pray for God's help in that struggle. It is not an easy path, and people like you equating them with adulterers doesn't help. They need our love and support, not our condemnation.
Secondly, you seem to be implying that "the liberal media" (which I assume refers to that radio station Air America with all the left-leaning hosts, and maybe pundits like Jon Stewart and bill Maher) have anything to do with legislation in your state. That whole sentence there smells funny -- I am not sure what "heterosexual alternatives" even means, and why a counselor would even offer them, let alone what it means for the state to jail a counselor for offering it. The only thing I can think is that your state has mandated against public (i.e. tax) money going to support religious-based programs like Exodus, Inc. which seek to change one's orientation.
If that's what you're referring to, then as a Christian, you should support the separation of Church and State. Do you really want this government to tell you how to worship? We can barely trust them with the things they're supposed to do -- military, infrastructure, etc. -- why would we trust them with something as important as religion?
If this law you're referring to is not some sort of separation of church and state issue, then you're going to have to explain it to me, because I have no clue what you're talking about, and I still seriously doubt that journalists, no matter how liberal they are, have anything to do with passing that legislation (if said law even exists).
Leading me back to a few points.
1. If you want to keep a secret, don't tell anyone involved in politics or the government. Except for me, of course. You can trust me.
1.5. The only man you can trust in the CIA is Colonel Flagg.
2. The release of that information was contrived to suit somebody's purpose. Not saying whose.
3. His fall is interestingly symbolic.
1. If you want to keep a secret, don't tell anyone involved in politics or the government. Except for me, of course. You can trust me.
1.5. The only man you can trust in the CIA is Colonel Flagg.
2. The release of that information was contrived to suit somebody's purpose. Not saying whose.
3. His fall is interestingly symbolic.
J
I still have a lot of respect for his innovations and service to his country. Yes, it's a bad thing, whether it's something that happens all the time or not, but it must be incredibly painful for the families involved. I hope everyone has prayed for all of the parties involved.
Ritter, I don't doubt for a moment that some folks benefited from this situation. That's usually the way of things, especially at that level, huh?
Ritter, I don't doubt for a moment that some folks benefited from this situation. That's usually the way of things, especially at that level, huh?