"LGBT RIGHTS"

  • 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.
Many shops and diners have signs at their doors displaying this: "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."

Why do you think that is?
 
Jhana said:
Well I don't see him advocating that christians should refuse adulterers, Muslims, Jews, Bahai's, Buddhists, Ouija board players, unmarried couples, liars, thieves, rapists or other people the right to buy cookies, whether it's for a muslim gathering ('supporting' islam), a jewish festival ('promoting' Judaism), a Buddhist temple function ('supporting' Buddhism), a Bahai feast ('supporting' Bahai faith), a group of ex-cons having a party ('promoting' god-knows what), a prison féte, a group of prostitutes who eat at the brothel ('supporting' prostitution).
Click to expand...
But, isn't this thread about, and I quote, "a christian thread talking about the sexually deviant homosexual (LGBT Rights)"? It would be sort of odd for someone to be talking about one of those other subjects you mentioned when it has nothing to do with the subject of the thread. Just an observation......

People only have this issue with homosexuals it seems. The flaw in that is that if you're going to refuse to sell products to people who are homosexual (because they promote or openly engage in something contrary to your religious beliefs), then you should also refuse to sell to someone who promotes or engages in anything contrary to your religious beliefs. That'd include all atheists and practically everyone who isn't christian. And that is where this whole premise falls apart - inconsistency.
Click to expand...
I cannot help but to be in total agreement with you here. People of the sort you have described here are basically two-faced, not looking at their own faults, while sending those they find offensive straight to Hades. I am of the sort, and I am sure most here are also, which loves the sinner, but hate the sin. And I am sure you and most others can agree that one can love even a murderer without loving their act of murdering.

Homosexuals go crazy about it and file lawsuits because homosexuals get singled out for sub-par treatment by christians. Other groups, not so much, and nowhere near the same degree.
Click to expand...
Perhaps this is why Scripture says not to condemn (pass an adverse sentencing), seeing that while judging, one is not only spiritually judged, but can also be physically judged. I think those Christians who send more people to Hades then Jesus need to understand the difference of showing someone what God has deemed to be contrary to His will and the actual condemnation itself, understanding that there is but one Judge.

But, then again, most people find that pointing out of one's contrariness to God's will as judging, although it is God Himself who has said that such, whatever it may be, will receive an adverse sentencing. When I was gay, I felt that the person himself was judging me to Hades by my understanding of his words, when all the while, all he was trying to convey the best he could was that such an offense towards God's will would send me there. But, thank goodness that he loved me enough to try and save my soul from that everlasting sentencing.

Now that I understand that it is God who will be doing the judging, I had to forsake my reasoning of being a victim of someone's else condemnation and by which, had my excuse to continue living the gay lifestyle, and face reality: for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction. To me, that meant that if I wanted God in my life, then I had to face the reality that no one but myself will be held accountable for my actions and if I continued in that lifestyle, I would face an reaction opposite of what I would have hoped for.

Perhaps this is what people are trying to say here. They love the person, but as God do, they also hate the sin which will forevermore separate one from God if not repented of. To me, this is love, desiring the everlasting salvation of another's soul.

Thanks for hearing me out......
 
Veritas said:
And your sarcasm displays your enormous intellect I suppose?
Click to expand...

No it doesn't but you didn't give me much to work with, and to say someone's ignorant of law without actually proving or arguing about why they're ignorant of law isn't really a statement with much depth or opinion, it's just a dig. Granted, though, sarcasm doesn't help much either.
 
Veritas said:
Many shops and diners have signs at their doors displaying this: "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."

Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...

What they don't advertise is that it has to be for a valid reason. No doughnut batter = no doughnut. Too drunk = no more alcohol. Homosexuality isn't a valid reason.
 
cfultz3 said:
But, isn't this thread about, and I quote, "a christian thread talking about the sexually deviant homosexual (LGBT Rights)"? It would be sort of odd for someone to be talking about one of those other subjects you mentioned when it has nothing to do with the subject of the thread. Just an observation......


I cannot help but to be in total agreement with you here. People of the sort you have described here are basically two-faced, not looking at their own faults, while sending those they find offensive straight to Hades. I am of the sort, and I am sure most here are also, which loves the sinner, but hate the sin. And I am sure you and most others can agree that one can love even a murderer without loving their act of murdering.


Perhaps this is why Scripture says not to condemn (pass an adverse sentencing), seeing that while judging, one is not only spiritually judged, but can also be physically judged. I think those Christians who send more people to Hades then Jesus need to understand the difference of showing someone what God has deemed to be contrary to His will and the actual condemnation itself, understanding that there is but one Judge.

But, then again, most people find that pointing out of one's contrariness to God's will as judging, although it is God Himself who has said that such, whatever it may be, will receive an adverse sentencing. When I was gay, I felt that the person himself was judging me to Hades by my understanding of his words, when all the while, all he was trying to convey the best he could was that such an offense towards God's will would send me there. But, thank goodness that he loved me enough to try and save my soul from that everlasting sentencing.

Now that I understand that it is God who will be doing the judging, I had to forsake my reasoning of being a victim of someone's else condemnation and by which, had my excuse to continue living the gay lifestyle, and face reality: for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction. To me, that meant that if I wanted God in my life, then I had to face the reality that no one but myself will be held accountable for my actions and if I continued in that lifestyle, I would face an reaction opposite of what I would have hoped for.

Perhaps this is what people are trying to say here. They love the person, but as God do, they also hate the sin which will forevermore separate one from God if not repented of. To me, this is love, desiring the everlasting salvation of another's soul.

Thanks for hearing me out......
Click to expand...

Granted. I totally appreciate your comments, and I place value on the fact that you've experienced all of this first hand. I do understand where your moral outlook on this topic comes from. But for me to see this whole thing relevant in the context, I have to look at the law of the US and say 'well, if you're gonna live there, you gotta obey the law'.

You know.

As much as we all want a perfect world, I don't think any of it can be had by condemnation or force, and the christians who are proposing themselves to be arbiters of the love of God, are the same ones proposing this exclusivity and judgement. I just don't find it to make logical sense.

What I mean is, if a person takes on an oath of calm, non-malevolence, patience, righteousness, meekness, empathy, removal of self-desire and ill-will, then surely selling cookies is to be seen for what lies in its merit rather than what force of hand withholding of the cookie might inflict on a consumer.

To put it very shortly, the perspective of the person who wants to withhold a cookie, seems a petty perspective in comparison to cultivating things in your mind that bring you to a transcendent understanding of the world and of the people within it.

And to put forward an argument that jives with the more world-minded perspective; if you're gonna open a business, you should understand consumer law.
 
Last edited:
Jhana said:
No it doesn't but you didn't give me much to work with, and to say someone's ignorant of law without actually proving or arguing about why they're ignorant of law isn't really a statement with much depth or opinion, it's just a dig. Granted, though, sarcasm doesn't help much either.
Click to expand...

Look, people have rights. That includes one who practices homosexuality. But no matter what this, or any other government says, they do not over-ride my personal, God-given rights.

The Anti-Discrimination laws apply to the government and those who knowingly or un-knowingly enter into a contract with the government. They then fall under said government's authority.

Now, I answer to an higher authority, YHWH. I must first obey His Law. Make sense?
 
It's sort of like saying 'yea we're above the petty ways of the world, and we are the shining example, the salt of the Earth', and then lowering yourself to a standard of eye-for-eye.
 
Veritas said:
Look, people have rights. That includes one who practices homosexuality. But no matter what this, or any other government says, they do not over-ride my personal, God-given rights.

The Anti-Discrimination laws apply to the government and those who knowingly or un-knowingly enter into a contract with the government. They then fall under said government's authority.

Now, I answer to an higher authority, YHWH. I must first obey His Law. Make sense?
Click to expand...

Totally. Crystal clear. In fact, it's my point exactly - Don't open a business under US law if you aren't willing to obey it.
 
"We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." Is still a right in the USA.
 
Jhana said:
......
As much as we all want a perfect world, I don't think any of it can be had by condemnation or force, and the christians who are proposing themselves to be arbiters of the love of God, are the same ones proposing this exclusivity and judgement. I just don't find it to make logical sense.
Click to expand...

Some believe that they themselves can bring in God's utopia, known as His Kingdom, while pushing aside the understanding Scripture gives us that only Christ can do such. This sort of sect from Christianity is nothing new, we see it in the Crusades, the Salem Witch Hunt's, even in the Inquisitions. It is seen in such sects that they are motivated more by hate than love, the Westboro Church and the KKK being examples.

As with any religion, there are many divisions, some to the left, while some to the right, while yet, both ends have their fanatics. But, do we conclude the whole religion wrong from such people who are driven to play the judge and, if need be, use force to implement their theological understanding? Logic dictates to me that if anything is judged by it extremes, then that which is its true self is also judged by one's own personal understanding without the reality of having been truly taken into consideration.

What I mean is, if a person takes on an oath of calm, non-malevolence, patience, righteousness, meekness, empathy, removal of self-desire and ill-will, then surely selling cookies is to be seen for what lies in its merit rather than what force of hand withholding of the cookie might inflict on a consumer.
Click to expand...

But, in reality, if one speaks only the good things which something has to offer, then when trouble comes, then that person is most likely to conclude that he was mislead. That is, if one is not told that their current path they are walking leads away from God, but are permitted to continue unabated, then would not half of the truth been spoken and the merit one is left with is betrayment. When all the while, simple mentioning the inflicting consequences of an action would had saved that one from that infliction.

To put it very shortly, the perspective of the person who wants to withhold a cookie, seems a petty perspective in comparison to cultivating things in your mind that bring you to a transcendent understanding of the world and of the people within it.

And to put forward an argument that jives with the more world-minded perspective; if you're gonna open a business, you should understand consumer law.
Click to expand...

Spiritually speaking, it is God who withholds the cookie, inasmuch as a parent withholds a cookie from a misbehaving child. It is also God who cultivates things in His children's minds, inasmuch as one is cultivated by those things which he surrounds himself with. It would be wrong of me not to mention that each culture believes they have transcendent understanding of the world and the people in it. That being so, it would seem logical to say that even Christians, based upon their understanding of the utterances of God, believe they have that sort of understanding. And if God be true, which He is, then it would also seem logical, at least to me and those who believe in God and His morals, that His written word gives that understanding which far surpasses worldly understanding.

You see what I am trying to say? We all believe we have the perfect understanding of things. But, in reality, only God comprehends.....
 
cfultz3 said:
Some believe that they themselves can bring in God's utopia, known as His Kingdom, while pushing aside the understanding Scripture gives us that only Christ can do such. This sort of sect from Christianity is nothing new, we see it in the Crusades, the Salem Witch Hunt's, even in the Inquisitions. It is seen in such sects that they are motivated more by hate than love, the Westboro Church and the KKK being examples.

As with any religion, there are many divisions, some to the left, while some to the right, while yet, both ends have their fanatics. But, do we conclude the whole religion wrong from such people who are driven to play the judge and, if need be, use force to implement their theological understanding? Logic dictates to me that if anything is judged by it extremes, then that which is its true self is also judged by one's own personal understanding without the reality of having been truly taken into consideration.



But, in reality, if one speaks only the good things which something has to offer, then when trouble comes, then that person is most likely to conclude that he was mislead. That is, if one is not told that their current path they are walking leads away from God, but are permitted to continue unabated, then would not half of the truth been spoken and the merit one is left with is betrayment. When all the while, simple mentioning the inflicting consequences of an action would had saved that one from that infliction.



Spiritually speaking, it is God who withholds the cookie, inasmuch as a parent withholds a cookie from a misbehaving child. It is also God who cultivates things in His children's minds, inasmuch as one is cultivated by those things which he surrounds himself with. It would be wrong of me not to mention that each culture believes they have transcendent understanding of the world and the people in it. That being so, it would seem logical to say that even Christians, based upon their understanding of the utterances of God, believe they have that sort of understanding. And if God be true, which He is, then it would also seem logical, at least to me and those who believe in God and His morals, that His written word gives that understanding which far surpasses worldly understanding.

You see what I am trying to say? We all believe we have the perfect understanding of things. But, in reality, only God comprehends.....
Click to expand...

Right, and I get this. And I'm absolutely thrilled that you've admitted this, because although I know this viewpoint to be the viewpoint of many, many people won't admit this. It will be a case of 'God has shown me the truth', not 'my perspective and my outlook dictates what 'truth' is to me (evidenced by the fact that there are so many denominations of 'truth').

But this is my problem, with this premise, of 'we know the truth and what the world needs, or 'we understand perfectly'. Do you not think that even an evil man has the 'understanding of right and wrong' as his motive? Don't you think that the leaders of the inquisition had this motive? Or King James, the same King James of the KJV, has this perspective when he tortured witches under what he thought was the instruction of the bible on witchcraft?

And yet nowadays such a practice is deemed horrible and perverse. Yet here we are using the man's bible. You know lol.

I don't know, I guess it just makes me laugh to think about this kind of thing sometimes. What will christianity have discovered in another 800 years?

It also makes me beg the question, regarding some of your earlier paragraphs here, that if a religion as a whole has so many different extremes and variations, then how does one even decide what is truth, other than in his own reading and interpretation of the words he reads? In other words, if there are so many denominations and interpretations, ranging from extreme and polar to moderate and open-minded, yet all justify their perspectives as being from the book which a group of men sat down hundreds of years ago and compiled as to what THEY thought was the truth, then what in God's name is the truth, really?

It is madness.

That's why I don't take a title, and that's why I genuinely believe that the only real benchmarks for truth in mass religion are the popular opinions and accepted consensuses. It's inner religion that I believe holds the true consensus; the perspective of the heart of the reader.

And mine says to treat homosexuals with discrimination is to incriminate myself for the logs that lie in my eyes.

You know. These people walk blind, and people who profess having open eyes want to dig at them. I just don't get it.
 
Last edited:
IntoTheVoid said:
Do I have a right to refuse Women because I'm sexist? Or refuse black people because I'm racist?
Click to expand...

Do I have the right to make you sell me your clothes because you have too many and I don't have enough? Same logic.
 
Veritas said:
Do I have the right to make you sell me your clothes because you have too many and I don't have enough? Same logic.
Click to expand...

If IntoTheVoid owns a clothing store, and you're buying clothes from that shop, then yes, you do have the right to buy clothes from his shop and he has to sell them to you, unless he doesn't have the ones you want, or you're violent, mean, nasty, abusive, or perhaps discriminatory to him.

Or you come in without any clothes on at all.

That would be worrying.

Kinda ironic too though isn't it. 'I NEED CLOTHES AM NAKED!!'

'Get out!'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back