1. Cézsar wrote:

Marc, you into this shit?

2. Cézsar wrote:

*No pun intended by the way

3. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

in my own humble opinion, no heterosexual male, should enjoy getting his booty plunged…NONE.

I’m a woman, and a person could never do that shit to me…like i’ve said, i have no problems with homosexuals. a person’s life style, is a person’s lifestyle, and i make no judgements on that…but personally, if my significant other was to ask me to stick something up his butt, i’m running for the hills, straight up! to me something isn’t too right about that…again, this is only my opinion…

4. Julie A wrote:

WYLTK… im with you on this one. Not my cup of tea Glad im not the only one who found this article kinda gross!! LOL

5. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, just out of curiosity, why, when this article makes absolutely no mention of homosexuals, did you immediately offer your approval of homosexual lifestyles?

6. james wrote:

p.s. you do realize that by offering your approval of homosexuality, that you have effectively rendered a judgment, no?

7. Blaxx wrote:

I’ve always thought that having an interest in diggin out someone’s bootyhole makes you kinda suspect if not kinda gay, no matter if they are male or female. Yuck!

8. radio raheem wrote:

“if my significant other was to ask me to stick something up his butt, i’m running for the hills” …me too. while i don’t mind exploring his g-spot and what not, this is a bit more extra than i might be willing to do

but i think you guys misunderstood – but correct me if i’m wrong…seems like this girl is asking how she can get ready for takin it in HER ass, not how she can prepare for puttin something up HIS (and i’m assuming its a girl cause she mentions “his prostate” as if she doesn’t has one – which as a female she would not)…and “anal stimulation” is like what one might do for a woman on the other side – ever hear of “tossing the salad”? – i could see how one might not automatically be turned on by this idea, but…try anything at least once?

9. Ebonita wrote:

I’m surprised to see the anal stimulation=gay myth here. Frankly, it’s extremely immature and ignorant of male anatomy. Men enjoying anal play has nothing to do with their orientation and every to do with their prostate. You might want to read old Sex with Timaree entries or a health ed book or maybe speak with an enlightened mature male before saying something like this again. You’ll save yourself from looking more foolish.

10. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

because james, men who normally engage in anal sex, are homosexuals. this particular article is referring to a STRAIGHT man, that likes anal sex….i personally feel, if my man wanted me to penetrate his rectum, then to me, he has homosexual tendencies… and although i’m not opposed to homosexuals and their lifestyles, me being heterosexual, i’m opposed to my man being gay…

that’s why i mentioned that…i didn’t want anyone to take my comment the wrong way…my philosophy is: if you want to be gay, then be gay, i can even respect that, but i’m not gay, and don’t wish to engage in that kind of lifestyle…AT ALL.

i hope that was clear enough…

11. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Ebonita, and James,

that is why i started my comment with “in my own humble opinion”…

no matter what Timaree, Sex Ed Books, or T.V says…i’ll always feel like that….everyone has preferences, and some prefer their man, not to take it up the booty. now, if you don’t mind your man taking dildos up the butt, and getting his salad tossed, then that’s you. i wouldn’t judge you for that…i just personally wouldn’t engage in it myself, because i know i’m not into that…

again, i hope i’m clear

12. Blaxx wrote:

I’m with WYLTK on this one. She summed it up perfectly there. As soon as someone says something about homosexuals on this blog there are a line of people ready to jump all over them. No disrespect is meant and no myths are being misconstrued, this is just how we feel about anal stimulation

13. james wrote:

yes, wouldn’t you love to know?, that’s quite clear; it’s clear that you are judging and stereotyping a sexual activity, and that opinion on this matter is not nearly as humble as you claim it to be.

14. james wrote:

blaxx, does anybody here really care about how you feel about anal stimulation? is that really the point of this article; for us to step forward and affirm or diss certain sexual practices?

15. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

“blaxx, does anybody here really care about how you feel about anal stimulation? is that really the point of this article; for us to step forward and affirm or diss certain sexual practices?”

last time i’ve checked, the article was about, “booty stimulation”, and blaxx lent his opinion on it, and quite frankly, i was glad to know

secondly james, no one dissed anyone….i just gave my take, on anal stimulation with straight men…if you felt like i’ve dissed someone…then that’s your owm personal problem….would you have felt better, if i’ve said i loved it, and i think it’s awsome???…james that would make me a damn lier, and i rather speak the truth, than to appease the next man…like i’ve said, i have no problems with those that choose to engage in anal sex…i personally don’t like it for me.

got a problem with that??

16. Nubian King wrote:

It seems as though WYLTK’s comments have offended some of you. However, I have to defend her stance and encourage all African American women to be careful and yes, suspicious. You all have heard the AIDS stats as it relates to black women. There is obviously a pattern of “sexual deception” taking place.

Sorry in advance if I’ve offended any anal rights protetors.

17. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, if that’s all you wanted to say about this sexual practice was that you aren’t into it, that’s fine; but that’s not where you went; you included a judgment of homosexuals and heterosexuals who engage in this sexuality, while at the same time, in the very next sentence, saying that you aren’t passing judgment. but, of course, you are.

for example, if you offered me some marijuana to smoke and i simply smiled and said, “no thankyou;” you can surely see the difference between that saying with a slight sneer, “no thankyou, i ain’t no pothead.”

18. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

james, i’m working on my sense of humor ok? i see where you’re going with this, and if i’ve offended anyone, i apologize. that wasn’t the intention…i must admit, i’m a little vulgar, and politically incorrect, but if you’ve followed some of these threads, you’d notice that, and be a little less sensitive…but i do see from your perspective…maybe i shouldn’t have made that “booty plunge” comment…forgive me?

19. Deacon wrote:

As a gay man I’m ROTFLMAO at the fact that there are still people who think a sexual act is classified as gay or straight. So if a straight dude wants to do anal penetration on his girl from where WYLTK & Blaxx are coming from then the guy must be gay, why else wouild he want to hit it from behind. From what some of my straight females friends have told me they like anal as much as vaginal penetration. Blaxx & WYLTK, let me educate you to the fact that not every gay male participates in anal penetration, and yes they’re are staright men who enjoy having their prostate stimulated….Some comments show how educated people are about sex and sexuality.

20. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, i’m not here to condemn or forgive you. i just wanted to point out to you that your statement about not being judgmental was contradicted by your tone and choice of words.

yes, i certainly appeciate your humor and candor, as well as your vocabulary. “booty plunge” is the phrase of the day for me.

21. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

if people would follow the context,then people would understand the context….

Deacon,

when i commented, guess what? i was commenting from MY POV…i’m fully aware of people and their sexual preferences.
i have gay friends, i have straight friends, i have friends that are in to dominatrix, i have friends that are into anal, i have friend that are into 3 somes….the point is, i have all kinds of knowledge of what people are into sexually….i was speaking from my stand point, and what i’m into…No it doesn’t mean you’re necessarily gay, if you want to have anal sex with your woman.. again that’s a preference. i personally prefer to have regular vaginal sex….it’s soooo much you can do that way, that i don’t see the requirement to have MY butt penetrated, nor MY significant other’s….

and yes in the black community, we have a lot of brothas that are on the down low, so as a heterosexual female i’m wary of people and their sexual preferences….you can’t be upset with me for that…it is what it is….it’s all in what the individual is into, and will tolerate…i personally wouldn’t tolerate any anal business, jumping off in my bedroom…and that’s me…

please don’t twist this into some ignorant shit, that i did not say….

if people wanted to fuck donkeys, that’s on them, and their free to be. that does not mean, i’m going to do it…

22. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, people are not allowed to fuck donkeys as there couldn’t be any mutual consent. in that case, it would be a rape.

23. Cézsar wrote:

Vivid and engaged expositions of S & M one week, anal sex another. Now, given the source, I’m not surprised; infact, I’m almost certain this is just the tip of the iceberg. So no problems there, and certainly no judgement. It is what it is.

My question (well 2nd question) to you Marc is this: Considering your target audience and in your capacity as an educator, how helpful would you say these expositions are in the nurturing of conscious and progressive Black thought?

24. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

now james, you’re trying to get besides the point.

and that is not cool….i said “IF”

but i will agree with your comment 21…

25. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

beside*

26. DCI74 wrote:

Damn some you are just mad sensitive like butts lol. If you like to diddle to be diddled that’s your business, just wash your damn hands.

27. Blaxx wrote:

Y’all can get down however the fuck y’all want but I’m gonna call it how I see it and I don’t care what you think. I’m not out here to be PC and that’s my word.

28. Deacon wrote:

Still ROTFLMAO, WYLTK I’m going by your orignal statement, and just because I know a lawyer doesn’t make me a lawyer…..let’s not go off on a tangent, these are your words “in my own humble opinion, no heterosexual male, should enjoy getting his booty plunged…NONE.” the question Timaree was answering had to do with a sexual act not the guys orientation. I suggest you re-read your original comment.

29. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

i know exactly what i’ve said, and that’s exactly how i feel. you said:

“As a gay man I’m ROTFLMAO at the fact that there are still people who think a sexual act is classified as gay or straight. So if a straight dude wants to do anal penetration on his girl from where WYLTK & Blaxx are coming from then the guy must be gay, why else wouild he want to hit it from behind?” – deacon

That is completely different, from a guy that likes to RECEIVE it….and personally in my opinion, if as a male, you enjoy “receiving” anal penetration, then, to me, you may have homosexual tendencies…that’s my opinion sir…and your free to disagree with that…

like i’ve said, it’s too many brothas on the DL to not feel that way…don’t blame me, blame man, dammit…

i’ve stayed up front and honest about my sexual preferences, from day one. it’s these selfish brothas out here, that have allowed me to feel this way…

30. R.oB. wrote:

I’m with you on this one, Deacon. Generally, I would give WYLTK a pass because there is a fine line between preference and prejudice. But the force of her commentary makes me wonder. I always chuckle at how people go to such lengths to show contempt and disgust (”AT ALL”, donkeys, etc.) while giving themselves moral cover (”I’m not against…”). I myself feel a little unease when I see men tapping each others asses on the basketball court or football field, but I at least recognize that as homophobia…

31. R.oB. wrote:

BTW, is it me or is Timaree getting a little, errr, aggressive with her blog post pics? >;-)

32. cynthia wrote:

OUCH!

33. R.oB. wrote:

Hey now, don’t get it twisted. I’M NOT COMPLAINING!

34. DCI74 wrote:

I myself feel a little unease when I see men tapping each others asses on the basketball court or football field, but I at least recognize that as homophobia…

How is that homophobia R.oB or do you mean homoerotic?

35. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

R.o.B, i can completely understand, why you would feel that i’m prejudice in this case….i realize my choice of words, so i can dig it…but let me be clear, and this is the last time….

we all live in bubbles, we all know how we would like our bubbles to look and be….in my “bubble”, i’d prefer a man, that wasn’t into anal penetration. i’m a rastafarian, and my belief system, believe it, to be a sin. i also believe in ONE LOVE, so with me believing in one love, it has allowed me, to understand homosexuals, and their lifestyles…do i agree with the lifestyle? NO. personally, i don’t want any sexual parts of the lifestyle. but if my neighbor, friend, or foe wanted to be, then i would let them be…with NO judgement…..now if you wanted to know my personal opinions on the lifestyle, i’d let you know…which i’ve stated here today…

just so you know, i have an aunt who is gay, and a cousin. i love them to pieces. i kiss and i hug them…do i agree with their lifestyles? NO…but i don’t curse them, or call them names, and tell them they are going to burn in hell, abuse them, etc…i treat my aunt, like i would treat any of my other aunts, i treat my cousin, like i would any of my other cousins…and i treat my gay friends, just like i would treat any of my other friends…

i feel like that’s a personal choice…but in my “bubble” that shit won’t fly with me..period.

i’m sorry for the coarse words i’ve chose to use, but please don’t judge me, because you do not know me…i have no hate for any human soul on this planet…not even MASTER.

peace.

36. Deacon wrote:

WYLTK, believe what you want, I’m not trying to change your belief, but do understand the difference between sexuality and a sexual act…..and if a heterosexual male likes to have his girl play with his hole how does that make him gay, by that logic anytime a woman kisses another woman on the cheek that makes her a lesbian…..

37. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, if you don’t want to seem judgmental and homophobic–and would rather seem genuinely supportive of sexual and political freedom–some questions are not for the asking? for example, “do i agree with the lifestyle?” is an utterance filled with judgment. try reversing the question, as if you were gay; would you ask yourself, of heterosexuals, “do i agree with their lifestyle?”

blaxx, this has nothing to do with being pc, it has to do with homophobia. your statement about a sexual practice that you perceive as “kinda gay” and “yucky”, is, to me, blatantly homophobic.

38. Cézsar wrote:

Your unwillingness to accept wyltk’s point of view is truly ironic. And the term “homophobic” is a bit presumptious, no?

39. james wrote:

cezsar, i accept wouldn’t you love to know’s point of view as homophobic; it certainly isn’t anywhere near supportive of homosexuality or sexual freedom; at the very least, it’s patronizing and condescending. how is that truly ironic?

40. Cézsar wrote:

No you dont accept her point of view of personally not liking homosexuality for herself or her partner but wishing no ill will to those who do. You want her to personally be “supportive of homosexuality” and that’s why you keep posting even after her detailed explanation. You dont want to accept her right not to like it, and yet you expect her to accept your right to like it. That’s what’s ironic.

41. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know’s “humble opinion,” cezsar, is based upon several inaccuracies about sexuality, which were humbly pointed out by others in this thread. you have no right not to like a perfectly legal aspect of human sexuality. wishing no ill will, hugging your homosexual aunt is completely irrelevant to matter at hand.

42. Cézsar wrote:

“you have NO RIGHT not to like a perfectly legal aspect of human sexuality” – james

^Now that’s a model of tolerance. Now I know I dont need to explain the irony there.

43. james wrote:

cezsar, there is no irony. i don’t have to tolerate inaccurate positions based on feelings.

44. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

thank you Cezsar…you see exactly what i see….

james, i also don’t like red meat, or poultry(or high fructose corn syrup)…i also dislike, borderline HATE, neons, kias, and geo metros….i’d never engage in any of those things, even if someone gave them to me for free….would i talk shit, and hate on the next man for engaging in any of those things(well yeah, probably if you owned a geo metro)???? of course not, that’s absolutely ridiculous…

what a person’s into, is what a person’s into…and i know personally what i’m into…

you’re making it seem like, i’ve said, gay people don’t deserve to be here, and that they don’t deserve rights……and you’re basically telling me to disregard my entire faith, because i “don’t have the right” to disagree, with something that is legal….??????

ps – i’ve said, i have no hate for any human souls. i didn’t say shit about “geo metros”.

peace.

45. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, you are saying that your aversion to homosexuality is similar to your aversions for red meat, geo metros, and high fructose syrup. based on your previous postings, i now have to ask this question: would you hug a steak?

46. james wrote:

a more serious question, since you brought it up, wouldn’t you love to know?: are you in favor of gay rights?

47. Deacon wrote:

WYLTK,

48. Z wrote:

I think you all took the sister’s opinion to an entirely new level. Right now, AIDs is the #1 killer of black women. So I can personally understand why she’d say “I’d run for the hills, if my man wanted anal sex” (sorry if I didn’t quote word for word that was a looong post ago) Anyway, with so many men being on the down low (regardless of race, contrary to popular belief it’s not just black men) why wouldn’t the question “is he gay?”run through her mind? We understand that “area” is the “G” spot for men. She never said she didn’t understand that some people like anal sex. She never said don’t do it. What she said was “It’s not for me”. She didn’t say only homosexuals have anal sex. Again she said “It’s not for me.”

I don’t think a man wanting to try it makes him gay, but if he’s wanting anal sex more than vaginal sex…. well then I’d start questioning some things… just my two cents…

49. Deacon wrote:

WYLTK, what you’re not getting is that saying you have no hate for homosexuals that you have love for all human kind but classifying a sexual act as homosexual is like giving someone back handed compliment. A sexual act is just that a sexual act, saying that it’s something you’re not into is one thing but as you stated:

“in my own humble opinion, no heterosexual male, should enjoy getting his booty plunged…NONE.”

I’m a woman, and a person could never do that shit to me…like i’ve said, i have no problems with homosexuals. a person’s life style, is a person’s lifestyle, and i make no judgements on that…but personally, if my significant other was to ask me to stick something up his butt, i’m running for the hills, straight up! to me something isn’t too right about that…again, this is only my opinion…

Comment by wouldn’t you love to know? — August 11, 2008 @ 12:33 pm

you have the right to your opinion and we have the right to call you on that opinion if said opinion stereotypes someone opposite of the person giving it. So what about a heterosexual female who likes to have her booty plunged, does that make her gay, is oral sex between a man & a woman gay, just let me know what sexual acts are straight because I may be doing something that staright people do and if that makes me straight I want to know so i can stop doing it.

50. Deacon wrote:

This has got to be said, THE HIGH RISE OF HIV/AIDS IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY IS NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF BROTHERS ON THE DL, you have more staright black men cheating on women with other women than cheating on women with other men. The B/S about Dl brothers spreding AIDS in our community needs to stop, get the facts because the spreading of misinformation needs to stop…..

51. Logic wrote:

Tru dat @50. I personally don’t “believe” in homosexuality. You are not born gay, twin studies confirm this. That means that you chose, conciously or not, to be gay or to engage in homosexual behavior. I don’t agree with that. That doesn’t mean that I can’t treat homosexuals with respect and kindness.

52. james wrote:

samara, there is nothing for me to get over. i am merely pointing out the homophobic nature of the comments at hand. if you choose not to believe me, that’s fine. i’m not being overly sensitive. wouldn’t you love to know’s comments, whether she realizes it or not, along with blaxx’s comments, are based on stereotypes and homophobia. this site is designed to work through these very kinds of issues.

53. james wrote:

logic, to what twin studies are you referring?

54. R.oB. wrote:

Wow! tons of comments.

In response to WYLTK #34, the problem is that ou have expressed a pejorative judgment on people. Look at it this way. If someone white said, “I have black friends who I love to death but I think black hair is nasty. It feels funny. Perms make black women look much better IMHO. Thank God I have straight hair!” Even if this person marched with King, we wouldn’t have to high an opinion of that person’s preference. And mere faith doesn’t buy a person a pass from me. The KKK claimed to be a Christian organization first and foremost and had their version of the Bible to back it up. Ironically, it was Christians who made me full on support same gender loving people because of the fruit they bore. (See Mt 7:15-20)

In response to DCI74 #33, I was trying to point out that WYLTK’s point was, as Deacon pointed out , off base. The image of men expressing approval for one another by tapping their assess is homoerotic because of some homophobia in me. That was my point. Or maybe it just is homoerotic. Plenty of macho man, patriarchal things are: “It ain’t no fun if the homies can’t have none…” Wanting to have sex with another man is homoerotic regardless if a woman is the vehicle IMHO.

In response to #49, the AIDS spread in Africa can’t be attributed to the gay people there. It comes down to unprotected, non-monogamous sex. Period. Blaming DL brothers is like claiming gay men are all pedophiles. FACT: The vast majority of pederasts “enjoy” girls.

55. R.oB. wrote:

Logic,

I’d love to see those “studies.” I can’t find any respectable ones. Just “studies” that also claim that condoms are 50% effective, etc. Political, pseudo-science is all I’ve seen.

56. james wrote:

actually, r.o.b., i found the latest twin study to which logic was referring. it just came out in the archives of sexual behavior, the author of the study is niklas langstrom. the study seems to point less to genetic factors for homosexuality, but does say that genes are still an important factor, along with home enivornment, and exposure to certain hormones while in womb. focus on the family immediately seized on the study saying basically this: ha, we told you so, nobody is born gay!–as if that is all that matters.

57. Deacon wrote:

Can a heterosexual please tell me when they made the choice to be straight? I would think it works both ways if you think being gay is a choice.

58. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

“you have the right to your opinion and we have the right to call you on that opinion if said opinion stereotypes someone opposite of the person giving it. So what about a heterosexual female who likes to have her booty plunged, does that make her gay, is oral sex between a man & a woman gay, just let me know what sexual acts are straight because I may be doing something that staright people do and if that makes me straight I want to know so i can stop doing it.”

Deacon,

you are a gay man, so anything you do with another man(sexually), qualifies you as gay, so have no worries of doing any “straight” things with your other half, you’re safe….

you guys completely twisted this, into the very same ignorant shit, that i did not want…listen, NO it doesn’t mean you’re necessarily gay, if as a man, you like Anal….can i please make this clear for the last muthafuckin’ time????…..

I know that they are straight people with all kinds of anal fetishes(i’m not one of them), BUT I also know that, they are Gay people who love anal sex as well…i also know, they are in fact, brothers on the DL, whether it be 1 or 1 million, they still exist….and it just so happens, they exist MORE in my community….as fucked up, and as homophobic as this may sound, i’m wary of those kind of brothas, because i’m a heterosexual female, who seeks a heterosexual male….now, if a brotha comes out of no where, and says to me, “baby, stick this in butt, i like it like that”….i don’t give a fuck what NO ONE SAYS….i will be a little skeptical about that…..i would feel like, he may have some homosexual tendencies…and listen, that’s fine if he does, but don’t expect me, to tolerate it, in my bedroom…that’s all i’m saying….if some can’t feel that approach, and want to call me, prejudice, homophobic, etc…then feel free to do that as well….

but let’s flip it for a minute, y’all know i love to do that….

what if there were no sisters or brothers that held their stances, the way i’ve held my stance in this thread?…..what if everybody’s belief system was just, “oh what the hell, everyone just start screwing everyone”, and Nobody stood firm on their sexual preferences???….do you realize, there would be NO PEOPLE, to even be gay, let alone straight…..it took a man and a woman to make you DEACON….if no one stood by their principles, this world would be further a mess….sorry if i offended anyone for that, but it’s true…

i don’t give a fuck what no one says, people must sympathize, with the black woman, and try to understand her struggles just a little bit more….i can’t help but feel like some of you in this thread, are a tad bit selfish….

We out number our men, what is it, 10 to 1?….then half of our men are locked-up or dead….and then we have DL brothas….what is a sista to do???…..just sit back and be lonely, while you men cut the fuck up????…..if our men are sleeping with each other, locked-up, or dead,…..we can no longer reproduce, and make MORE beautiful black babies….and in some cases, that really makes me sad, and upset….

it’s like no one has the betterment of the black woman in mind…because you must realize, all the things that are affecting our men, our affecting us tremendously as well…i can guarantee, practically all the SISTAS, who read this…could relate to my sentiments

my beliefs, does not believe, homosexuality to be Natural…and i’m a natural woman, that stands firm in my convictions….i have no hate for homosexuals at all, do i feel they fall short?…yes i do, but i’m no God, so i don’t waste my time judging people, i let them be….just like i would want someone, to let me be….

Now, if no one wants to seem to understand that, then that’s on them….but i feel like i have all rights to feel this way…period

peace.

59. Ann wrote:

Dang ya’ll got real deep up in here. And isnt this a repost? I know I have read this before.

60. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, “falling short,” do you also have a problem with dwarves?

61. Nubian King wrote:

I feel you 100% WYLTK! As a black man, I am saddened also. I think what Deacon and James are trying to say is that these statements make it sound like we “tolerate” homosexuality and to them that is offensive. They have made me realize that I also do “tolerate” homosexuality. I think most of us do. However, I don’t apologize for this stance. Like you, I wish no harm on homosexuals but in the same vein, I believe the spread of this lifetstyle destroys our families and communities. In truth, I can only tolerate it in small or minimal doses. Sorry, I guess in truth, I am homophobic.

62. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

james, i find you to be very ridiculous in this thread….you absolutely refuse to acccept my stance in life….and no matter how hard you are trying to convince me that my faith is bull shit…it ain’t gonna happen….i was born out the womb this way, you hear me?…i’m not gonna let some brotha on a blog, allow me to say fuck my faith, because they don’t agree with me….

i’ve explained myself numerous times on this post, and you refuse to accept it….as much as you want me to hate gay people, james, I DON’T…so get over it…

63. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, homophobia is not strictly about hating gay people. there are, like any other fear, degrees to which it manifests.

nubian king, acknowledgement, of course, is half the battle. you’re on your way. you wish no harm, but you also have no actual well-wishes for an oppressed people.

64. www.rayandsamara.com wrote:

i think we all get the point James and Deacon. and if you really look back, you are being super sensitive. especially since we’re on post 63 and you’re still harping over post #1. I think this conversation has evolved enough to realize that there’s no homophobia but real opinions and preferences. if WYLTK (and myself) doesnt want her man to take it up the ass, or stick it in other’s asses, then she doesnt have to do that. I am still trying to figure out how you guys have internalized that as to all out bash against homosexuals. You need to let it go.

65. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

i can’t believe you negroes are still in here talking about butt sex.

here’s what i think:

anal stimulation is not an exclusively gay or straight thing. unfortunately many people think that it is, despite physiological evidence (i.e. the sensory role of the prostate) to the contrary. as such, many people who scoff at it (”that’s just wrong”) or who simply don’t like it (”it’s just not my thing”) are inevitably shaped by the social marginalization and taboo that accompanies such behavior. this is not to say, however, that everyone who doesn’t like it is homophobic. i don’t think that i’m homophobic, yet i tend to agree with blaxx that it’s just not my twist. still, i think it’s hard if not impossible to tease out the “natural” and “socially constructed” dimensions of desire.

66. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

as far as interest in anal being a sign of queerness, i think we should be careful but not naive. if a dude only wants to be anally penetrated, and will only penetrate you anally, i don’t think it’s unreasonable to think he might have a more “fluid” (if not gay) sexual identity. similarly, if i meet a woman who NEVER wants penetration and only wants cunnilingus, it would certainly raise eyebrows for me!!!

67. james wrote:

samara, post #1 is where this all started. all i’ve done stay on topic. perhaps if wouldn’t you love to know? wasn’t hypersensitive to sex talk, none of this excellent conversation would not have taken place.

68. Logic wrote:

I wouldn’t say that you necessarily choose to be heterosexual as this is in essence the “default” condition of human beings from a physiological standpoint. But if you want an answer… I chose tobe heterosexual when I recognized that homosexuality is unnatural.

If homosexuality is okay as a lifestyle, then why do homosexuals try so hard to convince people that they are born gay? So they can be absolved of any ridicule. “If I am born gay, then I can’t help who I am.” This is the logic behind their arguement.

I have never met a gay person who said “I choose to be gay, what of it?”

I could respect that!

69. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

Cezsar,

Yes, I honestly think this conversation helps aid black liberation. how can we be free if we don’t have honest conversations about our beliefs, anxieties, desires, and fears?

70. Nubian King wrote:

James, I don’t understand why you believe that we can’t be genuine in our “well-wishes. When I say I “tolerate” homosexuality, what is wrong with that? If I knew you and we were friends (or even a relative), why couldn’t I love you? I have ghetto friends and relatives who I “tolerate”. I still love them, I just don’t agree with there ghetto lifestyle.

I know you want to say, “how would I feel if you tolerated my heterosexual”lifestlye? While I am in no way better or even favored by God more than you, the heterosexual and homosexual lifestyle are not the same and therefore carry equal merit. Until two men or two women can get together and conceive a baby, heterosexuality carries more weight. Like what WYLTK said, Heterosexual attract is what got you here.

71. Cézsar wrote:

There you go with that word again, “fear”…and “homophobia”. I asked you before, but it went straight over your head. Dont you think “fear” is a bit presumptious? When was the last time someone cowered in fear at the very sight of you James?

72. Deacon wrote:

WYLTK I admire the fact you stand up for what you believe, but when you use a sterotype as basis for your opinion you should expect to be called on it, believe what you want just expect that others will have a difference of opinion, respectfully we can all agree to dissagree.

73. james wrote:

cezsar, my daughter is afraid of the dark, but not all the time, and to varying degrees. fear is highly situational and not necessarily based upon visual cues.

74. james wrote:

nubian king, you give greater status to people simply because of their biological abilities to procreate. what about the couples who cannot conceive in the natural way? do you hold them a little lower in your esteem?

75. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Deacon,

and i apologize if i’ve made you feel any sort of way, and i don’t mind you calling me out on anything love….if you feel the need to check me, then feel free to do so…

i really don’t feel like i’m stereotyping anyone, like Nubian King has mentioned, it is still some deception going on in our community….i’m not living in the times where DL brothas are a thing of the past….so i always gotta keep my third eye open for the “liar”….i’m sorry, it’s the community that has molded me love…and we all can agree with each other on this, to a certain degree….just so you know, i truly understand your angle, and i respect it….but their aren’t too many up front brothas like yourself Deacon…so i gotta stay on my job, until i can finally let my hair down…

peace.

76. Cézsar wrote:

“Yes, I honestly think this conversation helps aid black liberation. how can we be free if we don’t have honest conversations about our beliefs, anxieties, desires, and fears?” – Marc

^Excellent! The path to Black liberation is by finding ever more creative ways to smack your bitch up (male or female) and f**king them in the ass. Cant really argue with that logic Marc.

77. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

“samara, post #1 is where this all started. all i’ve done stay on topic. perhaps if wouldn’t you love to know? wasn’t hypersensitive to sex talk, none of this excellent conversation would not have taken place.”

james,

i’m not hypersensitive about anything named sex….i just personally don’t see the need for anal sex, that’s me…my body is hypersensitive…and certain things makes me uncomfortable…again these are preferences….man, i got some shit up my sleeve, that’ll fuck around and turn YOU out….so don’t tell me what i’m hypersensitive about…

you want so badly to get your point across, that you refuse to see other people’s points…again get over it

78. james wrote:

wouldn’t you love to know?, again, nothing for me to get over; i’m not the one with the obvious love and sex issues. if you had started this thread the way you’ve stated your personal aversion to anal sex in your last post, there would have been no discussion. i think i got my point across, and i hope it stays there.

79. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

james, i don’t have love and sex issues….my entire race does buddy….and you’ve made your point loud and clear, that you only care about what YOU THINK….and could you please use abbreviations when addressing me? it saves a hell of alot more time…with all these comments that you’ve made out to me, you could have saved at least 5 minutes of your life by doing so…

james, feel free to think what you want, because at the end of the day….i’m doing the same thing

peace.

80. econwhat wrote:

Don’t be a snake!!!

That’s all the input I can/will offer in this discussion. I’m a virgin to the “Sex with Timaree” column and I have no desire to be attacked by the likes of you commenters…this is grown folks talk to my ears y’all.

I’ll have to revisit when I seriously stop laughing at this thread cause y’all seem really serious about this topic, and right now I know I’m being disrespectful.

Peace Out..

81. james wrote:

wyltk, i type pretty well, so typing your entire moniker was meant to be a sign of respect. if i truly didn’t care what you thought, i would not have engaged you in the conversation we just had.

82. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

and james you know something?….i Thank you…i’m glad my view on this topic could be heard…whether people agree with me or not…you drew some interesting questions i can’t lie, but i still feel the same way….maybe tomarrow i’ll change…

but really i’d like if you’d just use abbreviations..the name is sooooo darn long…

peace.

83. inmyopinion wrote:

Well WYLTK, I’m with you and Blaxx 150%!

84. R.oB. wrote:

Logic and James, I saw that study too. Choice ALWAYS is a factor in sexual practice unless a crime has been committed but those studies also spoke of birth hormones also being a factor. Real choice there. Jokes. Focus on Family should be renamed focus on sex. That’s all they talk about.

WYLTK, I checked you because I saw more phobia than preference. Not trying to spit fire. And be careful about what your faith says. I did my reading and found some nuggets that put the lie to our so-called Christian (as in of Christ) faith. The more I heard “clearly says” the more I found cherry picking esp with homosexuality.

Nubian King, if freeing gay people destroys families than why when they try to marry, provide safe and secure homes for their children, support their partners when I’ll and at death, do we stand in the way of that? How hypocritical of us, the targets of miscegenation laws!

85. Nubian King wrote:

James, you asked about couples that can’t procreated. They deserve all the love and blessings that God provides. But a world dominated by couples that can’t conceive would be messed up.

R.oB, you used the phrase “freeing gay people”. If you they are enslaved, I wish them freed. It is one thing to discriminate and attempt to do harm to someone because of their sexual orientation and it is another to ENCOURAGE people to engage in sexually deviant behavior. When I said the lifestyle destroys families, I wasn’t trying to make a statement about the laws. If two gay people love each other and want to get married, then they should be allowed to, I guess (I don’t care enough to oppose the issue). However, what kind of world would it be if one day same sex unions outnumbered male/female marriages? What would happen if the very definition of marriage changed? Do we really want our kids growing up in a world where same sex relationships are encouraged?

“Children will be what they see.” Is this the type of world that we want them to see?

86. james wrote:

nubian king, while i certainly appreciate your imaginative powers, the world will never be dominated by couples without children. furthermore, same-sex marriages will never outnumber male/female marriages. the definition of marriage would not be altered in any way by allowing gays to marry. i don’t know about your kids, but mine are learning that homosexuality, as much as they might giggle about it, i am teaching them that homosexual love is virtual no different than the heterosexual love they have witnessed between their parents.

who needs encouragement to fall in love?

i want my children to witness a world that strives for “truth, justice, and the american way.”

87. R.oB. wrote:

Nubian just replace “same-sex” with “mixed” and you’ll be able to predict my response.

88. R.oB. wrote:

forgot “male/female” and “single race”

89. Deacon wrote:

“Children will be what they see.” Is this the type of world that we want them to see?”

Have you seen what’s going on in our communities now, maybe if they see two men/women in a loving relationship they would have more respect for eachother now, maybe it’s beacuse children see the way adults treat one another that they’d rather be doing things that will put them behind bars instead of studying the bar, standing on the corner instead of sitting in the corner office…let’s be realwe as a community have a lot more to be concerned about that two people of the same sex getting married.

90. R.oB. wrote:

amen

91. zak wrote:

wow. rockin’ the spider-hole is a big subject for you guys. I got nothing to add really (except if you do it, wash that stick afterwards–lotta bacteria) I kinda just wanted to write “rockin’ the spider-hole”…or slam-dancing the starfish.

92. R.oB. wrote:

I think the discussion has quickly left Timaree behind. I think we are debating the value of same gender loving people, their loves, their pain, their being. Whether they are “less” as WYLTK asserts or whether they are equal, valuable, and worthy just as they are. That kind of discussion is worth staying up late for, esp. if your people have been under this kind of attack for 4 centuries plus! But for me it’s deeper than that. I’m trying to be a disciple, kid. For real, for real.

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/luke/luke6.htm

So yeah, I’m down for this any time of the day.

93. Nubian King wrote:

This is another topic but alot of the social ills that you speak of Deacon, come from this confusion over who we are. Confusion over male and female sexual orientation adds to the chaos…btw, I spoke earlier about tolerance and that there is nothing wrong with it. In the same vein, I am sure you and James tolerate people like me. Nothing wrong with being “tolerated”.

94. Tanya wrote:

This is the type of shit that really pisses me OFF!!!! For a number of reasons, but the most pivotal:

Timaree is a bisexual, immoral, sex anytime, with anyone, anyway, anyhow, TYPICAL, white woman.

Who is the dominate force in the global porn industry – WHITE WOMEN.

Who is the dominate force in all the “Girls Gone Wild” videos – WHITE WOMEN.

Who is always at the center of any sex scandal be it with politicians, actors, professional sportsmen – WHITE WOMEN.

SO WHY THE HELL ARE BLACK WOMEN BLACK-BALLED AS HYPERSEXUAL??????????

95% of all the strippers and prostitutes in Vegas and elsewhere are WHITE WOMAN.

Obvious conclusion: WHITE woman are loose, Timaree style!!! – Gross, yuke, eww!

White woman are the direct, sole cause of the down fall of all virtuous sexuality in the human domain. DIRECT & SOLE cause!

Just look at who is teaching people how to engage in a GOD forbidden sex act – a WHITE WOMAN – Timaree!!!

95. Tanya wrote:

Marc, birds of a feather flock together!!! Your associations will either help you rise or cause you to fall. Which direction do you think the general public will gauge Timaree???

SMH

96. Tanya wrote:

WYLTK,

Dismiss whatever insults your own soul! Don’t apologize for your sentiments or your positions, speak your truth and hold your ground!

97. james wrote:

nubian king, i’m not sure what you mean when you say i “tolerate” people like you. what kind of people are you?

98. Tanya wrote:

Call me homophobic if you want, but I fear nothing, especially not a Gaylord!

Homosexuality is WRONG, it is NOT of GOD! Anything associated or linked to homosexuality (anal sex) is WRONG and NOT of GOD!!!!

NOBODY is born gay; people become gay as a coping and/or defense mechanism. Homosexuality is a psychological deficient. Homosexuals need attention, love, counseling and GOD!

Did you fools forget that GOD destroyed the world b/c of homosexual behaviors?!?!?!?!?!?!

When I get into office sodomy will be ILLEGAL again, everywhere!!!

99. Tanya wrote:

James – STOP taking it in the rear!

Deacon & R.oB. – Get the sugar out your shoes and STRAIGHTEN up!

100. MrsPickron wrote:

lve read all the comments and really don’t have much to say. I would take precautions if a man requested anal sex. I really don’t see anything wrong with them giving it to a female. If it comes to a point that anal is all they want from her then that is a problem. Of course people would think of homosexuals when it comes to anal sex… according to society anal sex is a gay men’s choice of sexual pleasure also at one point people blamed the spread of HIV/AIDS on gay men. People are growing, learning and are becoming more educated. It may not happen in your timing but its happening. Dag, Tanya I was waiting to read what you had to say it took you long enough! I can not agree with the birds of a feather part on this. Do you want Marc to discriminate and only allow hetersexual topics? I think being open to all aspects is an excellent idea. Futhermore, as you see hetersexuals are not the only bloggers on this site.

101. MrsPickron wrote:

homosexual acts are a sin but who’s to say anal sex is a homosexual act (only)? Jesus never mentioned anything about sex or homosexuality. Paul spoke of it and he did not speak about anal sex specifically and if it was a sin for a married male and female. I want to do more research about anal sex in the bible. If you have a scripture from the bible that I can refer to let me know .

102. timaree wrote:

oh, god, where to begin.

tanya- i believe larry flynt, hugh hefner, joe francis and the other major porn industry magnates might beg to differ with you on white women (or any women) being the driving force of pornography, strip clubs or any other sex work. they might point out that consumers, who are predominately male, drive the industry more than the female performers who simply do the work because it pays better than waiting tables.

we are clearly in disagreement about what higher powers demand of us and about what behaviors warrant harsh judgment, but i think we ought to find common ground. we ought to agree that the commoditization and cheapening of sexuality more often leads to female subjugation and exploitation than it is a symptom of insatiable female sexual appetites for impurity and godlessness.

sorry you’re so pissed off, and i hope you eventually find a better, more productive target for your vitriol.

103. Deacon wrote:

NK…It’s not that young men & women are confused about their sexual orientation that’s adding to our communities social ill’s, it’s the lack of acceptance of those young people
because of their sexual orientation that’s adding to our social ill’s…As to your comment:

“I feel you 100% WYLTK! As a black man, I am saddened also. I think what Deacon and James are trying to say is that these statements make it sound like we “tolerate” homosexuality and to them that is offensive. They have made me realize that I also do “tolerate” homosexuality. I think most of us do. However, I don’t apologize for this stance. Like you, I wish no harm on homosexuals but in the same vein, I believe the spread of this lifetstyle destroys our families and communities. In truth, I can only tolerate it in small or minimal doses. Sorry, I guess in truth, I am homophobic.”

Comment by Nubian King — August 12, 2008 @ 11:16 am

I’m not offended at all with what WYLTK believes, I just called her out on knowing the difference bewteen a sexual act and sexual orientation. I do thank you for owning your homophobia but that’s a issue you need to deal with because honestly whether you tolerate it or not it’s not going to change a person from being homosexual, just like a white person tolerating you for being black isn’t going to change the color of your skin….once you own up to what it is that makes you uncomfortable about homosexuality you’ll be able move on from it….think about it…

Fact: Most DL men claim to be tops so if your a woman who thinks/suspect you man is creeping on you with a dude, he wouldn’t want you playing with his hole anyway, 9 out of 10 times he would want to do you anally and claiming that hole is tighter…..

The follwing have been likened to have been caused by HOMOSEXUALITY:

Slavery
The stock market crash of 1929
“I Love New York”
Katrina
The 2008 NBA Champs Boston Celtics
Bret Farve becoming a New York Jet
“Sankes on a Plane” starring Sam Jackson
“Black Snake Moan” starring Sam Jackson
“Shaft” the remake starring Sam Jackson
Star Wars 4,5,6 starring Sam Jackson
Global Warming
The price of gas
The breakup of B2K (that one might be true)
TBS’s The House of Payne
Kwame Jackson going to jail
Hyundia’s out selling american made cars
the Baltimore Colt’s becaomeing the Indianapolis Colt’s

These and other major disaster were all caused by “HOMOSEXUALITY”. America we need to put an end to this illnees before any other major catastrophe occurs, like the election of a black president……

for those who take the above items seriously, you need to get a life.

104. Cézsar wrote:

“just like a white person tolerating you for being black isn’t going to change the color of your skin” – Deacon

^Well duh, of course there is no choice in what race you are born into but there sure is plenty of choice in what sexuality you practice. So your comparison is suspect and fallacious at best, and cowardly at worst. Considering the non-Al Qaeda morally-fecund route Black people have chosen to take in the face of unrelenting manifest malevolence, you’d have to agree that WE are perhaps the most tolerant group of people on the planet, especially toward white people…and the colour (or lack thereof) of their skin. So dont get it twisted.

You do not want to go down this road of using Blackness to justify you sexual preference. Just stay on topic my friend.

105. carisma wrote:

This post is just too much. Here is my opinion:

Anal sex is taboo amongst black communities because it is not in our past sexual history. Our ancestors did not encourage that kind of sexual behavior and that has been passed down to us. They valued the body of men and women too much than to do unnatural things. White people on the other hand, have been sexual perverts since forever.

With that said, we are now being taught their sexual perversions. I personally don’t think it’s right or wrong to engage in anal, it is all personal choice. I don’t want a man that likes anal all the time or wants penetration anally. I think that it effeminates men that receive anal penetration. We have too many gay and dl men in the black community and I do not want to convert another.

In closing, everything that feels good, is not good for you and your body.

PS
Marc’s cunnilingus comment had me thinking… well nevermind, haha

106. Deacon wrote:

I never knew sexuality defined/determined my blackness, or that I had to justify my sexuality. What I did was reference the similarity of being tolerated for one reason or another, at the end of the day he’s still black I’m still gay and neither of those facts are going to change whether people tolerate them or not.

107. james wrote:

cezsar, i would say that choice is fairly limited when it comes to your sexuality. as a man, i have absolutely no sexual attraction to males. i don’t think, if i were stranded on an island with a man, with no hope of being rescued, that i would willingly engage in any sexual activity with that man. i might play chess with him, but that’s about it.

i think we may have more choice about other things, like whether or not we want to work, and the place of our employment, or the politcal candidates we may support. you know, those external items, such as our choice of church, our favorite bar or grocery store. sexuality, as per the latest twin study that logic brought up, is more than likely formed in the womb, as are our personalities and special abilities like native intelligence, athletic talent, musical ability etc.; all of which, as soon as we are born, are then susceptible to the myriad of environmental factors that can either nurture or ignore, but very rarely alter.

108. james wrote:

i need to finish that sentence properly:

…but very rarely alter the baselines of our sexualities, personalities, aptitudes and abilities.

109. Logic wrote:

James, there is always choice involved when determining our actions i.e.engaging in homosexual acts. And that’s the point, you are only gay if you perform gay acts. You cannot be a thief until you steal. You are not an adulterer until you cheat.

The only difference is that gay people want us to tolerate their actions. But we don’t tolerate the actions of thieves, pedophiles, or other socially deviant individuals.

I personally could care less what gays do in the privacy of their own home, but when they start adopting kids doing other things to “mainstream” homosexuality, which I believe is a deviant behavior, then it becomes a problem.

110. james wrote:

stealing is a crime against another person, along with adultery. nobody is hurt by homosexuality, except for homosexuals who are abused or oppressed. there is absolutely no moral or scientific basis to your comments.

gays don’t want us to tolerate their actions, they want equality. sexual freedom and political equality has nothing to do with petty notions of toleration.

logic, homosexuals obviously make you personally uncomfortable. i won’t lie, i kind of cringed a bit inside when i saw two guys kissing in the subway the other day. but that was, of course, my problem.

while homosexuality is technically deviant, as intelligent and compassionate beings, we should be striving to overcome our aversions to homosexual households and welcome any solid citizens into our society with open arms.

111. james wrote:

(to further clarify, when i say that i cringed a bit inside when i saw two guys kissing in the subway, i probably have an aversion to all public displays of affection, hetero or homo. i’m big on holding hands in public places or kissing my wife in public. but again, that’s my problem.)

112. james wrote:

missing the “not” in front of big in that post. i’m not big on holding hands in public places…

113. Logic wrote:

James, you failed to dismiss my point which was, there is choice involved. And if choice is involved then action can be suppressed.

Also, my point is that those things (stealing, adultery, pedophilia) are socially unacceptable, as they should be. And so should homosexuality. Why? Because it is unnatural and (as a post pointed out earlier)its unchecked propogation throughout society would mean its end. Also, although, I believe that gays should be equally protected under the law, at what point does their equal protection start to interfere in my life?

Finally, homosexuals, in-and-of-themselves do not make me uncomfortable. But to witness acts of homosexuality i.e. two men kissing would make me uncomfortable. There is a difference between the two.

114. james wrote:

logic, choice, in the case of homosexuality, is irrelevant because there is no moral or scientific basis to include choice. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is, however, relevant to citizenship in america.

those social ills you are equating with homosexuality are not, i repeat, not in any way comparable to homosexuality.

as for the propagation of homosexuals, their numbers in the world will not be altered significantly by a culture that embraces equality for homosexuals households. there is no method to simply increase the number of homosexuals through birth or heredity.

because of the very nature of homosexuality there will never be disproportionate numbers of homosexuals. like we’ve already discussed, the complex genetic and environmental conditions necessary for an individual to be homosexual don’t occur that frequently. homosexuals are not a minority group because society has abused and oppressed them; they are a minority because of nature; but just because they are a minority doesn’t mean they should not be allowed to live in peace, and enjoy the same rights as their dominant counterparts.

logic, how in the world will homosexuals interfere with your life?

115. R.oB. wrote:

Wow! A lot being said.

I would like to know exactly how same gender loving people are not of God. Every explanation I’ve heard has been deficient to be charitable. I’d love to see something cogent. It’s natural because is a biological fact. We see it in nature. It is abnormal in the same way left-handed people or green eyed black people are abnormal. Lot of folks make LOUD CLAIMS WITH UPPERCASE LETTERS. But few seem to back up anything they say.

Deacon, dollars to donuts you won’t see any.

116. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

R.o.b,

you’ve asked me to check my faith and beliefs right?

well i want you to read Leviticus, chapter 18, “The relationships and walks of God’s earthly people”…

the whole book of Leviticus tells us what God does not want us to do….But i want you to go to chapter 18….read the whole chapter, but focus on verse 22….it clearly states that homosexuality is an abomination..

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is an abomination”

also see Romans 1:27…..see for yourself

like i’ve said i have my own beliefs, but I’m here to judge no one…that’s God’s duty not mine…i just love and live…

peace.

117. james wrote:

wyltk, the following passage is copied from soulforce.org:

“Nevertheless, the Bible quite clearly takes a negative view of homosexual activity, in those few instances where it is mentioned at all. But this conclusion does not solve the problem of how we are to interpret Scripture today. For there are other sexual attitudes, practices and restrictions which are normative in Scripture but which we no longer accept as normative:

1. Old Testament law strictly forbids sexual intercourse during the seven days of the menstrual period (Lev. 18:19; 15:19-24), and anyone in violation was to be “extirpated” or “cut off from their people” (kareth, Lev. 18:29, a term referring to execution by stoning, burning, strangling, or to flogging or expulsion; Lev. 15:24 omits this penalty). Today many people on occasion have intercourse during menstruation and think nothing of it. Should they be “extirpated”? The Bible says they should.

2. The punishment for adultery was death by stoning for both the man and the woman (Deut. 22:22), but here adultery is defined by the marital status of the woman. In the Old Testament, a man could not commit adultery against his own wife; he could only commit adultery against another man by sexually using the other’s wife. And a bride who is found not to be a virgin is to be stoned to death (Deut. 22:13-21), but male virginity at marriage is never even mentioned. It is one of the curiosities of the current debate on sexuality that adultery, which creates far more social havoc, is considered less “sinful” than homosexual activity. Perhaps this is because there are far more adulterers in our churches. Yet no one, to my knowledge, is calling for their stoning, despite the clear command of Scripture. And we ordain adulterers.

3. Nudity, the characteristic of paradise, was regarded in Judaism as reprehensible (2 Sam. 6:20; 10:4; Isa. 20:2-4; 47:3). When one of Noah’s sons beheld his father naked, he was cursed (Gen. 9:20-27). To a great extent this nudity taboo probably even inhibited the sexual intimacy of husbands and wives (this is still true of a surprising number of people reared in the Judeo-Christian tradition). We may not be prepared for nude beaches, but are we prepared to regard nudity in the locker room or at the old swimming hole or in the privacy of one’s home as an accursed sin? The Bible does.

4. Polygamy (many wives) and concubinage (a woman living with a man to whom she is not married) were regularly practiced in the Old Testament. Neither is ever condemned by the New Testament (with the questionable exceptions of 1 Tim. 3:2, 12 and Titus 1:6). Jesus’ teaching about marital union in Mark 10:6-8 is no exception, since he quotes Gen. 2:24 as his authority (the man and the woman will become “one flesh”), and this text was never understood in Israel as excluding polygamy. A man could become “one flesh” with more than one woman, through the act of sexual intercourse. We know from Jewish sources that polygamy continued to be practiced within Judaism for centuries following the New Testament period. So if the Bible allowed polygamy and concubinage, why don’t we?

5. A form of polygamy was the levirate marriage. When a married man in Israel died childless, his widow was to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bore him a male heir. Jesus mentions this custom without criticism (Mark 12:18-27 par.). I am not aware of any Christians who still obey this unambiguous commandment of Scripture. Why is this law ignored, and the one against homosexual behavior preserved?

6. The Old Testament nowhere explicitly prohibits sexual relations between unmarried consenting heterosexual adults, as long as the woman’s economic value (bride price) is not compromised, that is to say, as long as she is not a virgin. There are poems in the Song of Songs that eulogize a love affair between two unmarried persons, though commentators have often conspired to cover up the fact with heavy layers of allegorical interpretation. In various parts of the Christian world, quite different attitudes have prevailed about sexual intercourse before marriage. In some Christian communities, proof of fertility (that is, pregnancy) was required for marriage. This was especially the case in farming areas where the inability to produce children-workers could mean economic hardship. Today, many single adults, the widowed, and the divorced are reverting to “biblical” practice, while others believe that sexual intercourse belongs only within marriage. Both views are Scriptural. Which is right?

7. The Bible virtually lacks terms for the sexual organs, being content with such euphemisms as “foot” or “thigh” for the genitals, and using other euphemisms to describe coitus, such as “he knew her.” Today most of us regard such language as “puritanical” and contrary to a proper regard for the goodness of creation. In short, we don’t follow Biblical practice.

8. Semen and menstrual blood rendered all who touched them unclean (Lev. 15:16-24). Intercourse rendered one unclean until sundown; menstruation rendered the woman unclean for seven days. Today most people would regard semen and menstrual fluid as completely natural and only at times “messy,” not “unclean.”

9. Social regulations regarding adultery, incest, rape and prostitution are, in the Old Testament, determined largely by considerations of the males’ property rights over women. Prostitution was considered quite natural and necessary as a safeguard of the virginity of the unmarried and the property rights of husbands (Gen. 38:12-19; Josh. 2:1-7). A man was not guilty of sin for visiting a prostitute, though the prostitute herself was regarded as a sinner. Paul must appeal to reason in attacking prostitution (1 Cor. 6:12-20); he cannot lump it in the category of adultery (vs. 9).

Today we are moving, with great social turbulence and at a high but necessary cost, toward a more equitable, non-patriarchal set of social arrangements in which women are no longer regarded as the chattel of men. We are also trying to move beyond the double standard. Love, fidelity and mutual respect replace property rights. We have, as yet, made very little progress in changing the double standard in regard to prostitution. As we leave behind patriarchal gender relations, what will we do with the patriarchalism in the Bible?

10. Jews were supposed to practice endogamy–that is, marriage within the twelve tribes of Israel. Until recently a similar rule prevailed in the American South, in laws against interracial marriage (miscegenation). We have witnessed, within the lifetime of many of us, the nonviolent struggle to nullify state laws against intermarriage and the gradual change in social attitudes toward interracial relationships. Sexual mores can alter quite radically even in a single lifetime.

11. The law of Moses allowed for divorce (Deut. 24:1-4); Jesus categorically forbids it (Mark 10:1-12; Matt. 19:9 softens his severity). Yet many Christians, in clear violation of a command of Jesus, have been divorced. Why, then, do some of these very people consider themselves eligible for baptism, church membership, communion, and ordination, but not homosexuals? What makes the one so much greater a sin than the other, especially considering the fact that Jesus never even mentioned homosexuality but explicitly condemned divorce? Yet we ordain divorcees. Why not homosexuals?

12. The Old Testament regarded celibacy as abnormal, and 1 Tim. 4:1-3 calls compulsory celibacy a heresy. Yet the Catholic Church has made it mandatory for priests and nuns. Some Christian ethicists demand celibacy of homosexuals, whether they have a vocation for celibacy or not. But this legislates celibacy by category, not by divine calling. Others argue that since God made men and women for each other in order to be fruitful and multiply, homosexuals reject God’s intent in creation. But this would mean that childless couples, single persons, priests and nuns would be in violation of God’s intention in their creation. Those who argue thus must explain why the apostle Paul never married. And are they prepared to charge Jesus with violating the will of God by remaining single?

Certainly heterosexual marriage is normal, else the race would die out. But it is not normative. God can bless the world through people who are married and through people who are single, and it is false to generalize from the marriage of most people to the marriage of everyone. In 1 Cor. 7:7 Paul goes so far as to call marriage a “charisma,” or divine gift, to which not everyone is called. He preferred that people remain as he was–unmarried. In an age of overpopulation, perhaps a gay orientation is especially sound ecologically!

13. In many other ways we have developed different norms from those explicitly laid down by the Bible. For example, “If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and seizing his genitals, you shall cut off her hand; show no pity” (Deut. 25:11f.). We, on the contrary, might very well applaud her for trying to save her husband’s life!

14. The Old and New Testaments both regarded slavery as normal and nowhere categorically condemned it. Part of that heritage was the use of female slaves, concubines and captives as sexual toys, breeding machines, or involuntary wives by their male owners, which 2 Sam. 5:13, Judges 19-21 and Num. 31:18 permitted–and as many American slave owners did some 150 years ago, citing these and numerous other Scripture passages as their justification.

The Problem of Authority

These cases are relevant to our attitude toward the authority of Scripture. They are not cultic prohibitions from the Holiness Code that are clearly superseded in Christianity, such as rules about eating shellfish or wearing clothes made of two different materials. They are rules concerning sexual behavior, and they fall among the moral commandments of Scripture. Clearly we regard certain rules, especially in the Old Testament, as no longer binding. Other things we regard as binding, including legislation in the Old Testament that is not mentioned at all in the New. What is our principle of selection here?

For example, virtually all modern readers would agree with the Bible in rejecting: incest, rape, adultery, and intercourse with animals. But we disagree with the Bible on most other sexual mores. The Bible condemned the following behaviors which we generally allow: intercourse during menstruation, celibacy, exogamy (marriage with non-Jews), naming sexual organs, nudity (under certain conditions), masturbation (some Christians still condemn this), birth control (some Christians still forbid this).

And the Bible regarded semen and menstrual blood as unclean, which most of us do not. Likewise, the Bible permitted behaviors that we today condemn: prostitution, polygamy, levirate marriage, sex with slaves, concubinage, treatment of women as property, and very early marriage (for the girl, age 11-13).

And while the Old Testament accepted divorce, Jesus forbade it. In short, of the sexual mores mentioned here, we only agree with the Bible on four of them, and disagree with it on sixteen!

Surely no one today would recommend reviving the levirate marriage. So why do we appeal to proof texts in Scripture in the case of homosexuality alone, when we feel perfectly free to disagree with Scripture regarding most other sexual practices? Obviously many of our choices in these matters are arbitrary. Mormon polygamy was outlawed in this country, despite the constitutional protection of freedom of religion, because it violated the sensibilities of the dominant Christian culture. Yet no explicit biblical prohibition against polygamy exists.

If we insist on placing ourselves under the old law, as Paul reminds us, we are obligated to keep every commandment of the law (Gal. 5:3). But if Christ is the end of the law (Rom. 10:4), if we have been discharged from the law to serve, not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6), then all of these biblical sexual mores come under the authority of the Spirit. We cannot then take even what Paul himself says as a new Law. Christians reserve the right to pick and choose which sexual mores they will observe, though they seldom admit to doing just that. And this is as true of evangelicals and fundamentalists as it is of liberals and mainliners.”

118. Hoping wrote:

do you also see in Lev where you are told not to eat shellfish or wear clothing made of mixed fabric, or touch the skin of a dead carcas (leather)– doesn’t sound like we follow all of the rules to a tee do we???
Funny how certain things can be justified in the Bible and other things ingnored over time….
that same book told women they were unclean on thier period, couldn’t go into the fellowship until they finished the cycle and bathed in the river….what if women couldn’t go to church on thier period today???

119. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Hoping,

i’m glad you’ve mentioned that…and that is exactly why, i said i’m not here to judge….me personally I LOVE SHELLFISH…and i’m not supposed to eat it…i know that, my father hates the fact, that i eat it…but he still allows me to with no judgement….

also, there are people sleeping with their Mothers, Fathers, Cousins, Daughters, Sons, Brothers, and Sisters…their are all kinds of sins…some are an ABOMINATION, and some aren’t…none the less it’s still a sin….it’s different levels of sins…pick your battle, we all have them….i just know what i’m into and what i choose to do….i’m not here to judge anyone….that’s why personally i hate talking about my faith on this blog….because i’m not here to offend anyone….but if you ask i will tell you….

peace.

120. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

sorry for all the damn typos

121. Logic wrote:

James, choice is relavent. If you choose to do something because it satifies your urges then don’t say that I have to tolerate or accept it. If homosexuality was genetic and did not involve a component of choice, then I couldn’t say anything because “thay can’t help it.”

But that’s not the case, therefore I can’t sympathize with the plight of homosexuals, and that’s why i get pissed when they try to compare it to racism.

As far as interfering in my life is concerned, I’m mostly speaking about adopting children. When gay couple’s children interact with my children at school or wherever, I don;t want them to think that homosexuality is okay.

If we worked together and I literally brought a bowl of sh** for lunch and ate it in front of you, would’t you be disgusted by that? Would you tell your kids that its okay to eat sh** for lunch as long as you’re happy? Or would you tell your kids that it is disgusting and not to be done? R.oB, doesn’t this occur in nature? Is it okay for us to do?

122. carisma wrote:

James,

I would agree with alot of things you said. I also believe that our dna (genetics, ancestral behaviors) are formed in the womb. Once born, your dna is nurtured or ignored. Some choose to ignore or nurture their natural instincts. Primarily, we make the decisions to be what we want and do what we feel. With everything comes consequences; homosexuality, promiscuity, etc. are all consequences for doing what you want and whatever feels good. All that feels good is not good for you and your body. Being choked while having sex is supposed to increase orgasm, but it can also kill you.

Homosexuality and all other sexual perversions have been introduced to us by white people through television and the media. I remember growing up and seeing sexually explicit programming on HBO and Cinemax. Majority of it had white people involved in it. We live in a sexual overdriven society, thanks to this. People imitate what they see, like, and get turned on with. TV has turned black people into sexual perverts. Oral sex, anal, threesomes, etc were not common in black communities 20 years ago. Now, everybody doing it because they are imitating what others are doing. Not saying there is nothing wrong with sex, but there is no respect nor morale with sex today. Everybody doing everything. Im not perfect myself, but I know where my sexuality came from, watching tv.

123. carisma wrote:

Logic,

LMAO @ eat a big bowl of shit. I thought about the movie Happy Gilmore when Adam Sadler asked “Shooter McGavin” if he eats pieces of shit for breakfast.. haha

good point nonetheless.

124. Deacon wrote:

If a sin is a sin, how could there be different levels of sin and since when is one sin greater than the other, how is it you can eat a scaveger and God judged less than me for having sex with a man. WYLTK your comment back to Hoping is contradicting, that’s not a judgement call it’s fact, you state you know your sinning by eating shellfish but still eat shellfish because God forgives you, so if you know it’s a sin why do you continue to repeat the same sin. Funny how you can pick and choose which verse and scripture you want to obey, I guess you have to be heterosexual to do that, and let us know exactly which verse or scripture states that there are different levels of sin.

125. james wrote:

logic, i don’t know what else to tell you. your argument against homosexuality is terribly thin. the stuff about the bowl of shit is downright silly. it seems the only argument you really have against homosexuality is that you think it’s wrong and unnatural. well, that’s not really deep enough for me. i need actual moral and/or scientific evidence as to why homosexuals should be forbidden to freely act on their entirely legimate desires for sex and love. until i see that evidence, i’m pulling for full equality for the entire gay and lesbian community.

126. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Deacon,

like i’ve said, you say “tomato” i say “tamato”…same difference.

it’s all in peferences, and what you believe to be the truth….certain things are an abomination, some aren’t….

it’s a difference between someone going into a store and stealing a bag of chips vs. someone who robs and murders someone….you choose who you are in this battle field…the choice is yours my friend…i’m not here to judge you, that’s God’s position. i’m certainly not worthy…. i’m just her lending my opinion sir…

peace.

127. Cézsar wrote:

“at the end of the day he’s still black I’m still gay and neither of those facts are going to change whether people tolerate them or not.” – Deacon

^Again Deacon, you do not want to go down this road. Do not allude to, suggest, imply, or event hint at the Black Struggle in your homosexual ramblings. I fail to see the connection. There is no equivalence to be drawn.

128. carisma wrote:

To demolish every opinion of what sin is, sin is anything that goes against nature. homosexuality is not a sin just because of what the bible said, but because it goes against nature. killing is a sin because it goes against nature by taking another person’s life. we are not permitted to do such. I don’t like to bring religion in the convo all the time because religion is an opinion and I deal with facts. If wondering if something is sinful, just ask, does it go against nature and the original intention of creation of mankind. There u go.

129. Deacon wrote:

WYLTK, so what you’re saying is that you can’t prove it’s stated in the bible one sin is greater than another. If a person commits suicide because they no longer want to live and one man took the life of another, what’s the difference there, a life is still lost and by God’s standards there both sins…..

130. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Deacon,

what are you asking me?…whatever i’ve stated about “God” and my “beliefs”…are just that, MY OWN. which is what originally started this conversation. Now your asking me about murder and suicide….those too are sins, how God deals with, is how he deals with….i wouldn’t know, i’m not him….i don’t question him either….i just live to the best i can, and to my own standards….you are failing to see the point of my comments….you keep reflecting back to the bible….and that was not the original intentions of my post….i just was letting you all in on some of my beliefs…..in my own humble opinion, i do think, it’s different degrees of human deception, and God judges accordingly…how he judges??? don’t ask me, because i wouldn’t know…that’s why i don’t judge people…because if i don’t even understand what God would do to them, how can i jump the gun and start judging??? i’m not worthy Deacon…..if you’d follow the context you’d understand the context…..you are taking this somewhere else……Now your basically trying to disect my faith in one thread….and that’s impossible…it runs too deep….can we please stay on subject????

peace.

131. Deacon wrote:

Cezsar don’t get it twisted, the two are different but do share a major commonality, discrimination and hatred. Don’t go there with me about which has it worse because until you’ve experience being called a nigger by a white person and a faggot by a your own people you have know idea.

132. MrsPickron wrote:

Please don’t compare the hate & discrimination that homosexuals go through with the hate & discrimination that my ancestors went through and what we continue to experience today. To me its disrespeatful and it discredits all the hurt and pain for 400+ yrs. You do have a choice about homosexuality. If you really believe GOD and read your bible you would go to GOD and ask him to take those feelings and ungodly desirers away from you. Just ask, pray and make sacrafices and it will be done. But if you want to continue to live in sin and have sexual interactions with the same sex don’t ask.

133. Deacon wrote:

Thank you MsPickron but I really do know God and the only choice I made was to be the strong black gay male he made me to be. I know the difference between the two struggles so let’s not go there and besides Adodi men are our ancestors too, (you can google Adodi to learn more about them) plus our struggle is more than 400*+ yrs and began long before we came here chained together on ships across the Atlantic. And even if I did compare the two I have every right to because I lived both and faught for both as a black man. And as I stated way back when no one sexual act has one sexual identity, it just depends on what you do and who you do it with, just enjoy it and do it safely.

134. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

“If a sin is a sin, how could there be different levels of sin and since when is one sin greater than the other, how is it you can eat a scaveger and God judged less than me for having sex with a man. WYLTK your comment back to Hoping is contradicting, that’s not a judgement call it’s fact, you state you know your sinning by eating shellfish but still eat shellfish because God forgives you, so if you know it’s a sin why do you continue to repeat the same sin. Funny how you can pick and choose which verse and scripture you want to obey, I guess you have to be heterosexual to do that, and let us know exactly which verse or scripture states that there are different levels of sin.”

Deacon,

just so you know, when i’ve said “my father hates the fact that i eat shellfish” i was referring to my earthly father not God(heavenly)…like i’ve said, i know i’m not supposed to eat it…the only reason why i didn’t say my Mother, is because, she and i used to fuck some shrimp up!….as i’ve mentioned, i believe there are different levels of deceit, you choose your battles…i’ve chose mine….

so i really don’t feel like what i’ve said to Hoping was contradicting….

peace.

135. Deacon wrote:

if you say so, then it is so

136. MrsPickron wrote:

I viewed the official website of Adodi men. I really don’t understand and just because these men were involved in this then doesn’t make it right now. Please understand that I do not discrimniate or hate homosexuals. I had two uncle who were gay, one of which died of complications from AIDS IN 1996. He loved and lived with his partner as long as I can remember for decades and I love the both dearly. My other uncle commited suicide 2003 as he was going through so many issues with his sexuality and refused to die from any complications caused by his virus. As a result of both of their deaths I participate in the AIDS walk and educate about the virus/disease every chance I get. I don’t know why I said all of that and actually this is the first time I put all that together and shared it. I was very embarrassed to have two uncles that were gay (both were my mother’s brothers). I didn’t share it much then. Anyway, I think being gay is a choice because that same love you have for a man you can love a woman and the only difference I see is the whole sexual part. So when I think of people being gay I think it is based on their desire of sex. Life is not all about sex, that same companionship a man can give you a woman can give. Enlighten me, why are people gay or should I say why are you gay? Again I just feel that it is a choice.

137. Cézsar wrote:

“Cezsar don’t get it twisted, the two are different but do share a major commonality, discrimination and hatred. Don’t go there with me about which has it worse because until you’ve experience being called a nigger by a white person and a faggot by a your own people you have know idea.” – Deacon

^I suspect you get called a faggot by more than just your own people. That’s a battle you have to fight and win on it’s on merits and it’s on merits alone. Stop trying to borrow pathos from the Black Struggle; it diminishes and undermines it’s seriousness and significance. Or is it that homosexuality cannot stand on it’s on two legs in it’s own defense? Which would beg the question – why?

138. Cézsar wrote:

*own merits

139. R.oB. wrote:

WYLTK and Deacon,

Great discussion! Again not spitting fire on you or your personal position but take issue with some facets of it and/or with that of others…

I suggest WYLTK that you read all of Leviticus where God tells us what is abominable or loathesome. Eagles, shrimp, and gay sex are all equally loathesome. Yet we Christians have no problems with our national symbol or Red Lobster, but somehow we justify having issues with gay people. It’s just that kind of cherry picking which kills credibility for people making claims about what’s kosher and what’s not (no pun intended). But here’s a nugget from Leviticus that really highlights that whole “this is what my heavenly father wants” mythos:

Lv 25:38-55 spells out rules for slaves. Israelites, belonging to God, had rights to manumission and redemption on the jubilee year, but you and me? Well, we have this:

Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess, provided you buy them from among the neighboring nations. You may also buy them from among the aliens who reside with you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. Such slaves you may own as chattels, and leave to your sons as their hereditary property, making them perpetual slaves. But you shall not lord it harshly over any of the Israelites, your kinsmen.

Same author, same audience as good ol’ Lv 18:22. People love to downplay this and right there is where I call “bullshit” on claims of God this and that. It’s why it was Christians who led me to my position and not gay people who are generally ejected from churches (but that’s another discussion).

As for Paul, I invite you to check this out. 1 Tim 6:1-2

Those who are under the yoke of slavery must regard their masters as worthy of full respect, so that the name of God and our teaching may not suffer abuse. Those whose masters are believers must not take advantage of them because they are brothers but must give better service because those who will profit from their work are believers and are beloved.

I only give these verses to show that there is plenty in the Bible to cherry pick to support your agenda. (It’s also why I’m slow to make simple claims about God’s Word and the Bible which I do not regard as one and the same for reasons I think are obvious now). It’s why when people say God this and that I realize that they, like you say you are doing WYLTK, are really just expressing their personal opinion which is far and away removed from God’s Eternal Word.

Respect to WYLTK and Deacon. Fruitful discussion.

140. R.oB. wrote:

Oh WYLTK, you can believe whatever you want. I’m not hating on that. In a public forum, we can take issue, disagree, hate even on a truth claim. “God hates sodomites” for example. I should not tell you whether to believe that or not, but I can say you are wrong or right without being “intolerant.”

One love.

141. Deacon wrote:

Cézsar you want to play the “Who Had It Worse” game, so on the totempole of oppression blacks are on top, then jews, native americans, hispanics, women, everyone else then gays. And to think I thought oppression was just that oppression.

142. Cézsar wrote:

^You really think women should be that low on your list? I dont think they would appreciate that.

143. DCI74 wrote:

Damn Tanya, do you know timaree personally? Did you lose husbands or boyfriends to white women and can’t get past that? I’m amazed that you feel so comfortable being so blatantly vicious towards her and you’re a Christian right? Wow…

144. Logic wrote:

I’m with MrsPickron @131. It is a choice 100%. And as such its not the same as being black. I was telling my wife that same argument-”that same love you have for a man you can love a woman and the only difference I see is the whole sexual part” Exactly!!!!

Like I said, if you choose to eat shit then eat shit. But don’t tell me that I have to be cool with that.

145. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

r.ob i hear you and all…but you asked me to show you where it says homosexuality is a sin…and i have…i’m not judging anyone or saying anyone is less than me…i’m just giving you my personal beliefs…which everyone has them, as we’ve witnessed here today….like i’ve said, to try to dissect my faith in one thread is impossible….and i’m not trying to impose my beliefs on anyone….what i’ve known been taught to me since the womb…with all due respect, i don’t need you to tell me what kind of relationship to have with God…that too is personal…you’ve asked for something and i’ve provided it….everybody lives to their own standards…i don’t have shit to do with what the next man chooses to do personally…like i’ve said, i know what I CHOOSE TO DO…and that was the very point of this whole disscussion….i’m not gonna go back and forth with you about RASTAFARI…because you aren’t a rasta…and i wouldn’t go back and fourth with you about your personal relationship with GOD….

like i’ve said some of you completely missed the point….

146. Deacon wrote:

Logic states:

“I’m with MrsPickron @131. It is a choice 100%. And as such its not the same as being black. I was telling my wife that same argument-”that same love you have for a man you can love a woman and the only difference I see is the whole sexual part” Exactly!!!!

Like I said, if you choose to eat shit then eat shit. But don’t tell me that I have to be cool with that.”

So your saying everyone has a chioce, and your choice is to love a woman, so that menas if homosexuality is a choice so is heterosexuality. Gay people choose to be gay and staright people choose to be straight, if it’s a choice for one it’s a choice for all…

147. R.oB. wrote:

WYLTK,

I think you missed my point. I wasn’t dissecting your faith. You got a couple years for that?!? . I was making the point that if Leviticus is right to male homosexualty a sin then Jews literally have a God given right to enslave us. You can’t have it both ways but I see so-called Bible believers doing just that. Picking and choosing. And that makes me disbelieve what they say. Do you feel that way? I don’t know. Don’t want to. That kind of talk turns nasty.

You’ve shown a lot to admire on this post and I give you a lot of props discussing as you have. That’s more Godlike than any pontificatong on the Bible we might do!

One love.

148. R.oB. wrote:

deacon

If it’s such a choice a girl I fell in love with should have had no power over me sexually once I chose to get away from that bad situation. Homophones crack me up. Make patently absurd statements sometimes.

One LOVE.

149. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

R.oB i didn’t miss your point…my thing is, my faith runs very deep, and i could argue what you’ve posted in #134….that would be like dissecting my faith and i didn’t want to do that….because like i’ve said, i’m not here to impose my beliefs on anyone…things are more complex than a thread on a blog…

my whole point of commenting was to basically say, everyone has their own walks of life, and tools they use to justify their behaviors….we all have our sins, and shortcomings. so in essence we are all one. it’s up to us the individual to pick what we feel is right, from what we feel is wrong within us….i think we all have that capacity….i’m not here to judge the next man for what he chooses…

if that makes me homophobic……so be it

and i’m done making this point….because i think i’ve made it clear enough, a gazzillion comments ago…

peace.

150. Kia wrote:

I agree with WYLTK’s point about not wanting anal sex in her bedroom. If I walked in to my bedroom and my spouse asked me to put some anal beads in his ass, that would be a problem for me. I’m just not in to that kind of kinky. I won’t knock the next person for going for it, but the image of my husband bending over to take it up the ass just doesn’t do it for me. If that’s what he’s in to, he’s going to have to do it on his own.

Does the fact that I don’t want to stimulate my husband’s prostate make my homophobic? I would hope not, however we are all effected by homophobia. Blame society, the porn industry, movies about prison sex, or the way I was raised for my inhibitions, but I choose not to participate.

I believe part of our hang-ups about anal sex is, that anal is one of the ways gay men share their bodies with each other. We tend to equate sexual anal penetration of a man with being gay. So if anal sex between to men = gay, then a man spreading his cheeks for me will make me go hmmmm. It doesn’t make him gay, but it would wave the “gay flag” for me.

151. Kia wrote:

Deacon: One main difference between the struggles of gays vs. the struggles of Black people is that you can hide the fact that you are gay more easily. If you got married to a woman and started a family, no one would have to know you were gay. They would assume from your lifestyle that you were heterosexual. As long as you kept up appearances, and never got caught doing another man, you could live on both sides of the fence. That means gay men have the ability, and can choose to hide from opression. When no one knows you are gay, you can avoid being a target of hatred. On the other hand, Black people typically have a hard time hiding their color. The majority of us can’t pass for White (even Michael Jackson), and are targeted because of our pigmentation. If I don’t tell anyone I’m Black, they can still figure that out just by looking at me. If I married a White man I still couldn’t hide the fact that I’m Black.

152. Deacon wrote:

R.oB.

The fuuny thing about people who use scripture against homosexuality is that they never read the whole scripture and have no idea of the histroical context of which the scripture was written for or about, and when you challenge them on it they want to act as if thier faith is being attacked….but the fuuniest thing is that the same book they get thier scriptures from is the same book whites used against black to support why blacks should be slaves…..go figure

153. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Deacon,

i don’t feel like my faith is being attacked…

My faith can not be summed up in one thread. it’s much more complex than that. that’s like opening pandoras box. trust that i can back up everything i believe…but i’m not here to shove my beliefs down people’s throats…because at the end of the day, we are all going to still feel the same about our lifestyles….

i’m not here to point a finger….do you, because i’m going to continue doing me…and guess what? i wish you all the best with what you do…

i feel like faith and religion is a personal and sensitive issue…and would take way longer than a 4 day post to explain.

154. MrsPickron wrote:

Amen I think that should close the thread right there! Thanks WYLTK!

155. Deacon wrote:

Faith is relative to the person who believes in it….if you can’t astnd up for it then you may not have it….

156. R.oB. wrote:

WYLTK,

Yeah, that dissecting faith stuff is bad news. A LOT of ill will usually results. But just because you have a faith walk (as do I) and I respect that doesn’t mean that I won’t challenge something that manifests evil. The belief that gay people are damaged, evil, inferior, deviant has manifestly caused them, and more importantly for me as a new father, their families and children suffering in the real world, in this society, on this earth, in this day. That’s a fact. So I stand resolutely against it. Come what may. Slave theology is another example religious faith that produced untold suffering in that case for black people. The slave-master saw his place as appointed by God and he believed that sincerely, deeply even. His Bible told him so. So, I don’t make idols of faith, religion, or even they Bible. They are not God.

Ultimately, the fruit you produce is the indicator of evil or good. Arguments are just words. Fruits and Actions are the real deal. Can they be seen on a comment thread on a blog post? I don’t think so! So drilling that down is a waste of time, nor was I trying to. I was making a point that, regardless of what you believe, homosexuality is as biblically sinful as Jews have a right to enslave we Gentiles. That’s a fact from simply reading the text. How you and I resolve that fact into our faith walks is indeed a personal, precious thing that I wouldn’t have the temerity to judge.

Deacon,

I’ve done that very exercise. Most Christian’s (and Jehovah’s Witnesses) I know love to believe only the Bible they choose to believe. So when you challenged something, you are indeed challenging their faith. Its a hard thing to avoid.

Peace.

157. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

R.oB,

It’s all good, i have no beef with you challenging me. it’s healthy. i will say though, my “faith” doesn’t manifest evil…
it manifests LOVE…i want you to understand that my “beliefs” are my lifestyle…i live it(that’s why i haven’t refered to it as my “religion”). what i’ve expressed in this thread, is exactly how i feel…and if you go back and read every comment i’ve written, you’d see that i never expressed any ill will towards anyone…i’ve just expressed, some of my personal beliefs and feelings. everybody’s lifestyles, are different… we have people who are muslim, buddist, baptist, atheist, etc.(all of whom i’m friends with) everyone has their own thing…if i can respect Deacon in his homosexual lifestyle, why can’t you guys just accept, and respect my lifestyle?

i’m kinda hurt, that you’d think my “faith” promotes evil. if you’d go back and check practically 95% of my comments in this entire blog, you’d see i’ve promoted nothing but love…that’s my whole Motto. though i’m no push over, and i challenge people when i feel the need, i still never spew hate…that one made me scratch my temple, can’t lie…

like i’ve said, my faith runs very deep, beyond this thread, beyond the bible, beyond this planet, and that is why i didn’t want to dig too deep. i feel like this isn’t the appropriate time, or place….i only reflected back to my faith in this thread, because, as i’ve mentioned, it’s my lifestyle. certain things i’m just not into, and i hope you and everyone else, can just respect that, as i respect you all…maybe one day i’ll dig a little deeper for you guys, but now isn’t the time…

Deacon,

i stand up for everything i believe in, and i think all my comments are evident of that…i didn’t get into it, because i didn’t want to offend you, more than i already have. i can see you are not really feeling my “beliefs” as it is…so i didn’t want to add to it…as i’ve said, i don’t hate you, or wish any ill will, you just live a lifestyle, that i wouldn’t personally live. if you can not respect that, then i don’t know what else to tell you. i still love you, at the end of the day.

peace.

ps-

“That’s a fact from simply reading the text. How you and I resolve that fact into our faith walks is indeed a personal, precious thing that I wouldn’t have the temerity to judge.” – R.oB

As i’ve said, i can argue that…do you know how many times simple text have been misunderstood???

158. Deacon wrote:

wylto I’m not offended by anything you said, do know that my sexuality is not my lifestyle; your getting the two confused. Just like every heterosexual isn’t the same neither is every homosexual. No one is attacking your faith, but you should not use your faith to attack someone else’s orientation just because you don’t agree with it. As I said before you can’t pick and choose which part of a scripture you’re going to follow and which part you’re going to disregard, using Leviticus to say homosexuality is an abomination and not own up to what the whole text has to say in my opinion is a misrepresentation of what the text is convey to the reader, it’s not just speacking to one group of people it’s speaking to everyone.

159. Deacon wrote:

And to take this back what started everything, if the man enjoys having his hole played with good for him and good for his girlfriend wanting to get the information she needed to satisfy his need…..

160. Tanya wrote:

Hey MrsPickron!!!

Great seeing you around the Barbershop again!

“Dag, Tanya I was waiting to read what you had to say it took you long enough!”

I know girl, I’ve been uber busy this week. But you know I catch up on the posts!

“I really don’t see anything wrong with them giving it to a female.”

Whether it’s a man giving it to a man, or a man giving it to a woman, or a woman giving it to a man, or hell, a woman giving it to a woman, it is a deviant sex act, and against GOD. Your body is a temple, and you are to respect that temple, or lose it prematurely and suffer accordingly. The anus has one specific purpose and sex or insertion of foreign objects is not part of that purpose.

“I can not agree with the birds of a feather part on this. Do you want Marc to discriminate and only allow hetersexual topics?”

I believe that the good ole saying of “birds of a feather flock together” is very true in many (maybe not all) aspects. I think it is important to address all topics, including homosexual behaviors. But I do not find Timaree’s column appropriate or productive in any regard. Timaree is a bisexual who promotes anal sex, and discusses lude topics in a lude manner. If Marc wants to be associated with that, that’s his business, but he needs to realize and understand that people will judge, discredit and disassociate themselves from him b/c of it.

I also find it funny (sickly contradicting, actually) that he refused to quote Bleek’s lyric of “some queer” b/c he found it offensive, but he finds no offense with the vulgarity in Timaree’s column. – Odd!

161. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

“homosexual acts are a sin but who’s to say anal sex is a homosexual act (only)? Jesus never mentioned anything about sex or homosexuality. Paul spoke of it and he did not speak about anal sex specifically and if it was a sin for a married male and female. I want to do more research about anal sex in the bible. If you have a scripture from the bible that I can refer to let me know .”

Anal sex/sodomy is identified in the bible as ritual homosexuality. The bible also identifies sodomites as shrine prostitutes.

“No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute.” – Deuteronomy 23:17

“There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices [abominations] of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.” – 1 Kings 14:24

“He expelled the male shrine prostitutes from the land and got rid of all the idols his fathers had made.” 1 Kings 15:12

“He also tore down the quarters of the male shrine prostitutes, which were in the temple of the LORD…” 2 Kings 23:7

(shrine prostitutes = cult prostitutes = sodomites = people who engage in anal sex)

“You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination” – Leviticus 18:22

“If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” – Leviticus 20:13

“And the men likewise gave up natural relations with woman and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.” Romans 1:27

In regards to woman engaging in anal sex with a man (married and unmarried):

“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.” Romans 1:26

Regarding Sodom and Gomorrah:

“They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them. Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.” – Genesis 19:5-8

Lot rather sacrifice his virgin daughters then allow his male guests to engage in sex with other men, b/c he recognized the wickedness of homosexual acts.

“Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah from the LORD out of the heavens and he overthrow the cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.” – Genesis 19:24-25

“…and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he overthrew the cities in which Lot dwelt.” – Genesis 19:29

B/c Lot prevented the men from having sex with men, and b/c Lot lived a righteous life, GOD saved him!

Here’s some of what Paul had to say about homosexual acts/sodomy:

“Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.” – Romans 1:24

“Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.” – Romans 1:28

“Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders” – 1 Corinthians 6:9

“Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.” – 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

Here’s the warning for modern day homosexuals/sodomites/shrine prostitutes:

“But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.” – Matthew 11:24

All the destruction by fire GOD put on Sodom for their homosexual lifestyles will be nothing in comparison to what he will do to all modern day sodomites.

Please bear in mind that all states banned consensual sodomy in the past b/c there is a legitimate objective of preserving morality by doing so, and it’s biblically based (just like murder and stealing).

Even the Dalai Lama views anal sex/sodomy as “sexual misconduct”. Opposition to, not only homosexuality, but anal sex/sodomy between anyone (man and wife or otherwise), is the one main, and probably only topic, all religious leaders from every corner of the world can completely agree on.

Further, anal sex/sodomy is medically and categorically identified as unnatural.

162. Deacon wrote:

The following link:

http://www.blackmeninamerica.com/relationships2.htm#Sexuality

is to an article by Scottie Lowe on:

http://www.blackmeninamerica.com/enter.htm

He couldn’t be more on point.

163. Tanya wrote:

Timaree,

“i believe larry flynt, hugh hefner, joe francis and the other major porn industry magnates might beg to differ with you on white women (or any women) being the driving force of pornography, strip clubs or any other sex work. they might point out that consumers, who are predominately male, drive the industry more than the female performers who simply do the work because it pays better than waiting tables.”

If you ask Larry Flint, Hugh Hefner, Joe Francis or any other “major porn industry magnates” they will all tell you they are very thankful to all the white low-life woman who were willing to degrade themselves for profit. They will tell you that without the white whores, they would not be where they are today. If there were no porn stars there would be NO PORN. Who are the majority/driving force of porn stars? – WHITE WOMAN!!! Period, the end!

Moreover, there are several respectable and necessary jobs that “pays better than waiting tables”. Like being a doctor, lawyer, teacher, social worker, even many retail positions pay more than waiting tables, also sanitation workers receive better pay than waiting tables. Why can’t these woman pursue one of these avenues???

But obviously we do have different standards in life. You think b/c degrading yourself pays well, its acceptable. While I know regardless of the pay, it is detestable on every level. I would encourage these women to take some pride in themselves and upgrade their lives to serving GOD through their daily work.

“we are clearly in disagreement about what higher powers demand of us and about what behaviors warrant harsh judgment, but i think we ought to find common ground. we ought to agree that the commoditization and cheapening of sexuality more often leads to female subjugation and exploitation than it is a symptom of insatiable female sexual appetites for impurity and godlessness.”

Clearly! I know my body is a temple and I respect it. You use your body in obscene ways to get cheap self-indulged thrills, and then teach and encourage others to do the same – far from what GOD commands of us, my dear!

To be clear:

The “commoditization and cheapening of sexuality” is the direct and sole result of “insatiable sexual appetites” and wicked sexual appetites that yield the “impurity and GOD-lessness”, that cause the “subjugation and exploitation” of all people. So you got it a little confused.

What we ought to agree on, is that sex is a gift from the Creator to us, and we are to honor that gift and use it only to love and procreate, and not to make money or fulfill selfish temptations. We ought to agree that the goal of sex is to be fruitful and multiply not to obtain multiple orgasms by any means necessary. That’s what ought!

“sorry you’re so pissed off, and i hope you eventually find a better, more productive target for your vitriol.”

Yeah I am pissed off! Let me tell you why I’m mad son…..

Black women everywhere in the world have suffered the generalization that all black women are hypersexual, and it is widely accepted. Yet there is nothing, at all, to substantiate it. However, there is much to substantiate that WHITE WOMEN are indeed hypersexual, yet it has never been widely accepted or even publicly stated.

A black woman does a little rump-shaking in her favorite rappers video, and everyone points to that as proof that black woman are hypersexual, and the rappers are deemed misogynistic.

But white woman, by large numbers, do all types of nasty and degrading, grossly sexual things in pornos, strip clubs etc, and they fully escape the black-ball label of being hypersexual. AND the Flints, Hughes, and Francis-es of the industry are looked upon as kings, heroes, machismo men, and even father figures.

There is a clear racial double standard and it pisses me off, and I spoke on it. I find it interesting (and flattering) that you refer to my speech as “vitriol”, b/c that is exactly what the Romans said about Jesus’ speech! So I guess I productively hit an appropriate target!

For what it’s worth my dear, use your inclination to sexuality and subsequently academic study of human sexuality to help further the productivity of man, and to help us all understand the science of sex. Stop teaching, encouraging and therefore destroying mankind by with this vulgarity you call advice.

I hope you can find a more productive way to use your prospective PhD in human sexuality. If, for nothing else, your own salvation!

164. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Tanya, i agree with your sentiments 100%.

Deacon, when did i ever “attack” you? it’s evident that you are in fact offended, if you feel that way. i can not recall, attacking you…please refresh.

ps- if homosexuality isn’t your lifestyle, then what do you call it?

because being straight, is my lifestyle…there are all kinds of things that make up one’s lifestyle, and sexuality is one of them….

165. Deacon wrote:

Homosexuality is not my lifestyle it’s my sexual orientation, not every homosexual lives the same lifestyle, do all heterosexuals live the same lifestyle, and what is a homosexual lifestyle anyway.

Per your post #150

“Deacon,

i stand up for everything i believe in, and i think all my comments are evident of that…i didn’t get into it, because i didn’t want to offend you, more than i already have. i can see you are not really feeling my “beliefs” as it is…so i didn’t want to add to it…as i’ve said, i don’t hate you, or wish any ill will, you just live a lifestyle, that i wouldn’t personally live. if you can not respect that, then i don’t know what else to tell you. i still love you, at the end of the day”

I’m not offended or ever was…to feel offended something had to be stated that would cause me to question what I believe and that hasn’t happened, I can’t speak for anyone else but if you feel offened you shouldn’t.

166. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Deacon,

No worries, because i’m not offended by you.

and if you’re referring to me, i don’t question anything i believe. my faith is as solid as a rock…and it cannot be moved…. i know it’s people that aren’t going to feel my beliefs, and it’s not my job to make them feel it, that doesn’t mean i don’t stand up for what i believe. like i’ve said, it’s a personal thing…and i’m not going to force it on anyone…

a lifestyle, is how a person or group of people live their lives…so that means it’s a individual and/or group thing…the way a person chooses to express themselves sexually, in their lives, is in fact a part of their lifestyle…

for example, i choose to have regular vaginal sex, with a man…i wish to engage in no other sexual acts in my life, other than that…that’s how i choose to live, that’s my lifestyle….

now, you choose to have anal sex with a member of your own sex, and that’s how you choose to live your life…therefore, that is your lifestyle as well…

i’m not saying you and the next gay man are identical, because you both are gay…but i will say, you do share the same sexual identity(orientation), and that is what you and the next gay man have in common with your lives….you live that way…

sexuality is in fact, a part of a person’s lifestyle, no matter how you slice it and re-word it….if it’s the way you live, then it’s your lifestyle…

167. Deacon wrote:

Thank you for making my point that sexual orientation and lifestyles differ, as much as you want to make the argument that all homosexuals lead the same sexual lifestyle you can’t, you’re assuming based on stereotypical heterosexual beliefs that because I’m gay I participate in anal sex that heterosexauls don’t, that’s like assuming all straight woman perform fellatio on men. People no matter what thier orientation decide which sexual act they will participate in becuase no one sexual act has a specific sexual orietation applied to it. You can believe homosexuality is a choice and that it’s un-natural and goes against Gods word because that’s you choice to do so, but taking selected verse from the bible doesn’t make it so. If saying homosexuality is a choice so is heterosexuality……

168. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

Deacon,

they are both choices love, i see beautiful women all the time, that i find sexy…if i wanted to give into temptation and screw a chick, i could….i choose not too….lesbians come at me all the time…and i have a few friends that are lesbians…but i’m just not interested…it’s not my flavor….

people choose who they lay with…there is no gun to anyone’s head….and no matter what you say, if you are gay, straight, Bi, Try….it’s all a part of your lifestyle….it doesn’t matter HOW you do it…if it’s something you do in your life, it’s your lifestyle….why are you so determined to say it’s not your lifestyle???

and you keep saying i can’t point out one thing in the bible, and disregared the rest…

well who ever said that i disregarded the rest? i’m staying on subject, with what this thread is about….i keep telling you i’m not getting into it, and it’s like you are not trying to understand that….my faith is deeper than ONE book in the bible sweetheart….I’M NOT GETTING INTO IT WITH YOU, BECAUSE THERE IS NO POINT….you don’t even accept the little that i did reveal…

here we are going on a week, and we’re still stuck on this….could you imagine if i unlocked the box?

dude, i’ll pass

peace.

169. Deacon wrote:

wyltk,
By choice do you mean, using your own example, that people are bisexual and choose the sexual orientation in which a segment of society deems acceptable, or do people just accept who they are and the sexual orientation that is natural to them….
“it’s all a part of your lifestyle” is a generalized statement, sex acts are a part of everyones lifestyle, so if your going to make generalizations based on socialized sterotypes then they apply to everyone, heterosexual included.

170. Cézsar wrote:

Let it go already Deacon. Your rationalization is a bit convoluted. Trying to point out that they are both choices is counter-productive to your cause because as you will admit (at least I hope you realise that) you yourself are a product of heterosexuality, as is humanity, so that makes it, if you insist, THE de facto CHOICE of human propagation, longevity and survival. Without it, you would not even be here to be having this silly argument.

Homosexuality is fruitless and pointless, and is therefore the only “choice” whose validity is under question. Not even Bill O’Reilly can spin heterosexuality into looking like an invalid choice. So, you dont win this argument by drawing a parallel between the two my friend. You just dont. Try another tactic.

171. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

“Let it go already Deacon.” – lmao.

Thank you, that was the real point, of my last 10 comments…

Deacon, i feel like i’m arguing with my Old Man…please stop it already, let’s just agree to disagree. my mind is already made up, and i feel like drowning myself in a barrel full of vodka, after this thread…i can’t take it anymore…

please save some energy for the week!

peace.

172. james wrote:

cezsar, but i do win this argument when i repeat that choice is completely irrelevant in this discussion. because of the inherently harmeless nature of homosexuality, there is no need to validate it as an appropriate or inappropriate sexual orientation, and there certainly is no need to cast aspersions on homosexuality.

173. Deacon wrote:

Like I said if sexuality is a choice for one orietation it’s a choice for all orientations, and as proud black gay male I know how I got here but thanks for reminding me. So let’s all choose our sexual partner safely whether they be same or opposite sex.

174. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

Do you really know how you got here (being gay)??? Do you???

Allow me to pontificate for a moment…

Homosexuality is an evil spirit. It is an evil spirit that consumes you and controls your every faculty.

You allowed that evil spirit into you, by not allowing GOD to deal with the evil in your life.

We all face and deal with evil in our lives, but some people know how to combat it and overcome it, through GOD, and some don’t. Homosexuals don’t.

Even though I don’t know you, I know humanity. Here is one of the evils I know for absolute fact you have faced:

- Deceased mother or father
- A mother or father that “abused” you or didn’t effectively show you love.
- A mother or father just simply not present in your life
- You were raped, molested, or sexualized
- You were unpopular or unattractive in school
- Woman rejected you and/or you found it difficult to interact with woman due to your own insecurities

Here’s something else I know: being gay has empowered you and comforted you in some way, but you still, deep down inside, know that it is wrong. But you defend it and continue to live it b/c it feels “good”.

Homosexuals are the enemies to all humanity. But b/c Jesus told us to love our enemies, I love you. AND that, is the only thing in my life that IS NOT MY CHOICE!

175. Tanya wrote:

DC,

I just noticed your comment and had to address it.

“Damn Tanya, do you know timaree personally? Did you lose husbands or boyfriends to white women and can’t get past that? I’m amazed that you feel so comfortable being so blatantly vicious towards her and you’re a Christian right? Wow…”

I’m only 27 and I’ve never been married, so no bitterness over lost husbands. And I’ve never had a boyfriend leave me, especially not for a white woman. So there is no PERSONAL animosity towards white women, or Timaree.

My cousin is married to a white woman, and their daughter (also my cousin) is a precious little girl (half white) that I love. Further, my most trusted business colleagues are white women. I have good friends that are white women, and they all know how I honestly feel on this topic (displayed hyper-sexuality of white women). But this does not affect ALL white women, and I have nothing against white women in general.

However, the general sexual escapades of white women are well documented, Timaree shares it, and I spoke on it.

Moreover, there was nothing un-Christian about the truth I directed toward Timaree. Do you know what an Onward Christian Soldier is???

176. Tanya wrote:

DC,

I just noticed your comment and had to address it.

“Damn Tanya, do you know timaree personally? Did you lose husbands or boyfriends to white women and can’t get past that? I’m amazed that you feel so comfortable being so blatantly vicious towards her and you’re a Christian right? Wow…”

I’m only 27 and I’ve never been married, so no bitterness over lost husbands. And I’ve never had a boyfriend leave me, especially not for a white woman. So there is no PERSONAL animosity towards white women, or Timaree.

My cousin is married to a white woman, and their daughter (also my cousin) is a precious little girl (half white) that I love. Further, my most trusted business colleagues are white women. I have good friends that are white women, and they all know how I honestly feel on this topic (displayed hyper-sexuality of white women). But this does not affect ALL white women, and I have nothing against white women in general.

However, the general sexual escapades of white women are well documented, Timaree shares it, and I spoke on it.

Moreover, there was nothing un-Christian about the truth I directed toward Timaree. Do you know what an Onward Christian Soilder is???

177. Neuromancer wrote:

Right on Tanya! I have been hoping that you would chime in on this subject. One of my guilty pleasures is watching you use your narrow-minded interpretation of an archaic superstition (christianity) to throw judgement-beatdowns on other people. It never fails to entertain.

Your pop-psychology analysis of the causes of homosexuality really takes the cake. Are there any other discredited, idiotic stereotypes of gays that you’d like to toss out there? For real, it has been long established that homosexuals come from a wide variety of backgrounds and social settings. You can’t boil it down to “Mommy was overbearing and daddy was weak or absent”

Cupcake, there are no evil spirits. Or good ones, for that matter. There is only reality, which is sufficiently frightening that humans tend to run to whatever fictitious god they happened to be raised to worship. The only “…enemies to all humanity” are the obtuse pieces of flotsam that preach hellfire and damnation at every opportunity and use religion as a weapon against others. And the obligatory “I love you” BS can’t obscure your obvious feelings of disgust and self-righteous superiority.

178. Tanya wrote:

Neuromancer,

You obviously lack GOD (and probably many other things).

“My people shall perish for a lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me. And since you have forgotten ***the law*** of your GOD, I also will forget your children.”

Best of Luck to you!

179. Tanya wrote:

Oh, that’s Hosea 4:6 by the way!

180. Deacon wrote:

Tanya I can’t help it your man left you for another man, that’s the only reason I can think of for your idiotic rant of confusion. You need help, seriously all that anger you have inside is eating you up, deal with it and let it go, therapy is your friend boo, get some. I know you want to believe that to be true but it’s not. You must really hate me to think up sh*t like that. Just because that’s your lifes story doesn’t make it mine. If I can make someone who doesn’t know me that upset damn I’m one bad brotha….

181. DCI74 wrote:

“Even though I don’t know you, I know humanity. Here is one of the evils I know for absolute fact you have faced”

Tanya come on now how is that statement in any way logical?

182. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

LOL!

My man did not leave me for another man. I only date people who are mentally stable and spiritual sound!

I don’t hate you, I hate your lifestyle. I don’t hate the sinner, I hate the sin.

You know very well you fit into one of those categories. You don’t have to tell us, but keep it real with yourself. Understand that you are gay as a coping/defense mechanism and deal with the cause.

Ellen DeGeneres was molested and sexualized. Rosie O’Donnell’s mother died during her childhood and her father did not effectively show her love. Both of them have spoken honestly on it. I could run down the long line of all the famous gay people and they ALL, every single one of them, fit into one of those categories.

Just face the facts and deal with your issues. Therapy and the Word is your friend!

There is absolutely NOTHING good or positive about homosexuality. Homosexuality is the devil’s tool to destroy mankind. PERIOD, THE END, END OF STORY, END OF REPORT!!!

183. Tanya wrote:

DC,

If you understand history, theology, philosophy, psychology and sociology, then you will understand human behavior (humanity). If you understand all of this, then you would see the clear logic to that statement.

But if you don’t, hey that’s your bad!

184. Tanya wrote:

DC,

I tried to post this before, but for some reason it didn’t take:

“Damn Tanya, do you know timaree personally? Did you lose husbands or boyfriends to white women and can’t get past that? I’m amazed that you feel so comfortable being so blatantly vicious towards her and you’re a Christian right? Wow…”

I’m only 27 and I’ve never been married, so no bitterness over lost husbands. And I’ve never had a boyfriend leave me, especially not for a white woman. So there is no PERSONAL animosity towards white women, or Timaree.

My cousin is married to a white woman, and their daughter (also my cousin) is a precious little girl (half white) that I love. Further, my most trusted business colleagues are white women. I have good friends that are white women, and they all know how I honestly feel on this topic (displayed hyper-sexuality of white women). But this does not affect ALL white women, and I have nothing against white women in general.

However, the general sexual escapades of white women are well documented, Timaree shares it, and I spoke on it.

Moreover, there was nothing un-Christian about the truth I directed toward Timaree. Do you know what an Onward Christian Solider is???

185. MrsPickron wrote:

I too believe homosexuality is a demon/an evil spirit and that’s why I said if you believe In GOD, faith and a prayer warrior that demon can and will be cast out of you. I’ve seen it happen.

Tanya, thanks for the scriptures.

186. Deacon wrote:

I’m ROTFLMAO, Tanya what homosexual took you man, because if you neEd to believe any of that happened to me you need serious help. Anyone who; as you put it, understood theology, philosophy, psychology and sociology would know none of that could cause a peson to choose to be gay so why don’t you take your “Oh Lawdy” degree and get a real one better yet go talk to someone who has, if you don’t have insurance check with your local free clinic……..

“Deceased mother or father
- A mother or father that “abused” you or didn’t effectively show you love.
- A mother or father just simply not present in your life
- You were raped, molested, or sexualized”

I know people who’ve been through that and for you to go there, is sad, really sad. Just remember karma’s a bitch and what you put out comes right back at.

- You were unpopular or unattractive in school
- Woman rejected you and/or you found it difficult to interact with woman due to your own insecurities

As for the rest, I wasn’t popular because I was, and to this day still am, well liked and respected. I’m too handsome to be unattractive, and as for being reject by women “HELLO I’M GAY”, can’t be rejected by what you’re not attracted to….

187. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

You’re lost! But that was evident with this statement:

“… [I'm a] proud black gay male…”

Comment by Deacon — August 17, 2008 @ 9:02 pm

You and ALL of your gay friends fall into one of those categories and the only thing that is sad is that you didn’t know how to deal with it through GOD, so you allowed the evil spirit of homosexuality to consume you.

There is nothing proud about being gay. You should be deeply ashamed of and change your evil ways. The Karma that will take you (as described by the Bible) for your wicked homosexual ways is horrifying.

Next thing you know pedophiles will be demanding civil rights and freedom to “live as they were born”.

The sickness has to stop!

There is nothing kind-hearted about supporting homos. Unless you think sympathy for the devil when he loses the final battle between good and evil is worthy.

188. Deacon wrote:

Tanya get some help, it really kills you that I’m a proud black gay man and that’s not going to change, your negativity just makes me more stronger person ….

189. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

It does bother me that you are gay and proud. It vexes my soul. And I know you rather be wrong and strong than face the truth. I know my words will never reach you. But b/c Jesus has commanded me to love you, I will.

I love you Deacon, and I’m going to prayer everyday for 7 days, starting today, for you. I’m going to prayer for GOD’s words to touch you, and I’m going to prayer for GOD’s hands to heal you, and I’m going to prayer for your mercy and forgiveness.

Where GOD is, evil can not be. You will not be gay for long, in Jesus name!!!

Alleluia!

190. Deacon wrote:

Tanya please DON’T pray for me, really you need to keep your prayers for yourself, with a spirit like yours you need your prayers more that I do. I”m gay today I was gay yesterday and I will be gay tomorrow…

191. DCI74 wrote:

Whatever Tanya this is not a battle of wits. I just wonder if you get nose-bleeds with your constant looking down on others. You can’t even answer a simple question without being haughty but I guess that’s just who you are and as long you’re happy…

192. BigVic4 wrote:

180 comments about dookie-luv ?!!?

You gotta be kiddin me.

193. MrsPickron wrote:

LOL! I never heard anyone call it that. LMAO!

194. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

It is SOOO HARD to love your enemies (as you have reminded me)! But I guess if it was easy everyone could and would do it.

“For many are called but only few are chosen.” – Matthew 22:14

Do you think your homosexual ways count you as GOD’s “chosen”???

You may have been gay yesterday, but you can’t guarantee what or where you will be tomorrow. But GOD can!!!

I know you don’t want me to prayer for you; the alcoholic never thinks they need help or even acknowledge they have problem.

But I WILL prayer for you!

195. Tanya wrote:

DC,

“Whatever Tanya this is not a battle of wits. I just wonder if you get nose-bleeds with your constant looking down on others. You can’t even answer a simple question without being haughty but I guess that’s just who you are and as long you’re happy…”

LOL!

My perfectly straight forward answer, to your perfectly straight forward question, was not an attempt for a battle of the wits. It was an open and shout response to your simple question.

BTW – I DON’T look down on ANYONE!!! But I do look down on lifestyles and behaviors. You know, like: 1) ignorance, 2) murder, 3) theft, 4) lying, 5) cheating.

Do you look UP to these things???????????? Do you support any of 1-5???

(If someone was personally linked to 1-5 then, and only then, they may feel looked down upon. {But that would be a personal issue, right?})

Moreover, there was absolutely nothing proud about my response. I didn’t say *I* know history etc. I simply stated that if *you* (in general, as applied to anyone) understood history etc. (valued it) they would understand human behavior and therefore see some level of logic to my previous statement.

But hey, some people are so insecure that they think it’s haughty for someone to ask them their age!

196. Deacon wrote:

Tanya being that you’re not the definitive authority on God, Jesus or the bible, as a Deacon I’m going to minister to you, recognize that each persons individual relationship with God is just that, “Thier relationship with GOD!”. Know this “God is still speaking, so never place a period where God has placed a comma.” So as you say your still going to pray for me I’m praying for myself to God to cancel out your prayers, he/she has more important thing to do like heal you of your agner.

197. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

If you are a Deacon in the church (any church) AND you are a homosexual, YOU ARE A FALSE PROPHET.

Do you know what GOD said he will do to false prophets???

You need everyone to prayer for GOD to relieve you of HIS anger and wrath!!!

198. Tanya wrote:

BTW – Deacon, weren’t you the one that made that stupid secular argument that since people eat shrimp and other scavengers of the earth and the bible says not to, that makes it ok for you to disobey GOD’s word and lay with a man as a woman (be gay)???

Not only am I going to prayer for you, but if you are a Deacon in a church, I’m going to prayer for everyone in that church that is under your misguidance.

Deacon, shame on you!

199. Deacon wrote:

Tanya, misquoting my comment will not make you right, go back and read it again…..I never said I was a prophet, just a Deacon, the only false prophet on here is you…..I never laid with a man as a woman would, it’s not possible since by your thought process the only reason for a woman to be lying with a man would be to procreate, and trust me when I were not trying to create a child….so you can keep your misguided prayers to yourself……

200. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

This just proves what a fucking fool you are.

Any minister of any religious sect is, according to the Bible, a prophet. You dummy! So if you claim to be a Deacon, you’re a prophet; and the fact that you’re a faggot, makes you a false prophet.

Further, faggots have sex with men. Having sex with a man, regardless of your intention, is laying with a man as a woman.

You really don’t understand scripture do you? I’ll add that to my prayer list for you. You lost soul you.

BTW – You need to go back and read the comments again, b/c I clearly stated that the purpose of sex is love AND procreation.

201. Deacon wrote:

Hate on me all you want Tanya, you’er a fake christian so wrapped up in hatred that the best you can do is call me a faggot, let’s not go there with the “love AND procreation” b/s beacuse you know you’ve spread your legs for a man and “love AND procreation” didn’t have sh*t to do with it. Now take your narrow minded, fake prophet, lost soul ass back to your prayer group and pray that one day you’ll get a man. Stop HATING on a brother because I can get a man and you can’t. The truth behind your hatred of homosexual men is that they can get what you can’t.

202. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

I have been abstinent for 4 years, and there is absolutely no man in the universe who can say he had sex with me that wasn’t my boyfriend that I loved. I respect and honor my temple.

“The truth behind your hatred of homosexual men is that they can get what you can’t.”

The only thing a faggot can get that I can’t is another faggot and a one way ticket to hell!

Homosexuality is gross and unGODly. Clean up your life or pay the ultimate price.

(You faggots make me sick.)

203. Tanya wrote:

BTW – There isn’t a decent Deacon anywhere in the world who would put forth any of the statements on this post that you did.

It is so painfully obvious that you suffer from an extremely dysfunctional home. Seek counsel.

204. Deacon wrote:

“It is so painfully obvious that you suffer from an extremely dysfunctional home.”

That explains your family home life and upbringing, and why your astinent, you have some serious issues with men you need to deal with, it’s obvious a man left you for another man, that’s a pain I can’t relate because it’s never happened to me. Your view on what’s Godly is irrelevant to me, so if I’m going to hell for being gay I’ll see you there, save me a seat, you’ll get there way before I do.

205. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

You’re disgusting, on every single level.

I grew up in a perfect home, and I am abstinent b/c I made a conscious vow to GOD to do so until I am married.

You’re a dirty faggot who claims to be a Deacon and where you’re going I will never see.

206. Deacon wrote:

Tanya a lesser man would call you a miserable bitchass narrow minded homophobic fake ass wanna be christian, a lesser man would call you that, I’m above that, but I wouldn’t disagree with him.

207. Tanya wrote:

LOL!

Whatever fag!

208. Tanya wrote:

BTW – You’re NOT A MAN, you’re a wanna be woman!

A real man would NEVER lay with a male.

You’re a faggot by definition – a burdensome woman; a burden to all of humanity. “Your blood will be on your own head” b/c of it and you will receive “within yourself the due penalty for your error”.

209. Deacon wrote:

Tanya you have know idea what a ream man is, I know you want me but you could never have me, even if I was straight, i’m too much of a real man for you. Just keep hating on me, I know it gives your meaningless life some purpose.

210. Deacon wrote:

BTW, God bless you Tanya, you really need a blessing to fill the emptyness in your life.

211. MrsPickron wrote:

Wow Tanya you called him the “F” word. “Tell’em why you mad”!? The “F” word was very low. I don’t think you should have called him that. I don’t agree with his homosexuality, his beliefs of being a Deacon in a church and to think that it is acceptable and most of what he is saying here. But to throw that word is wrong. I was going to ask him about his name but I really didn’t think he was a real Deacon, however; since he is GOD has already started to work on him. In my eyes and beliefs GOD uses people and have them go through things to better minister to others. It would make more sense for Deacon to minister to lost souls about homosexuality after he is delivered of his homosexuality than it would for you and I. Tanya, it is very possible that GOD could have been using this thread to speak to him. Also he could have been using you to share the word to get to him. You don’t know, Deac may have gave what you’ve been saying some thought because you were speaking truth from the word of GOD until the “F” word came out… “That aint GOD” its not desent or in order. So it you were reaching him you messed it up. You can’t be used anymore. Do you understand what I’m saying? Deac, there are prayers going up for you and are meant to be well, GOD will hear those prayers and you can’t stop them if they are genuine. You trying to stop them is the enemy using its power. That just mean GOD will appoint more prayer warriors to pray.

Deac, I’ve noticed that you haven’t responded to any of my comments and questions to you which were all positive. You did not fail to comment on the negative remarks to you… Wow!

212. Deacon wrote:

MrsPickron,

I did reply back to you in comment #128, and I like you I’ve lost people close to me to AIDS. I’m glad you looked up Adodi Men, I put it out there for people to get a clear definition of what Adodi means. The name ADODI:”the plural ADO, is a Yoruba word that describes a man who “loves” another man. More than just a description of partners, in Africa, the ADODI of the tribe are thought to embody both male and female ways of being and were revered as shamans, sages and leaders.” So as much as some African Americans want to say being gay is a eruocentric identity, it’s not, Native American have Two Sprirts some homosexuals can be found in all cultures. I said before I wasn’t comparing black civil rights to gay rights, as one who has faught for both I can see the similarities. What most African Americans don’t know is that the “The Stonewall Riots” is a part of the civil rights movement because “Black Drag Queens” were part of the group that faught back against police when The Stonewall Inn was raided unjustly. What bothers me about Black Christains is that they have an ideology that there’s only one way to look at and understand the bibleand that’s not the case, so I can understand why you would view homosexuality the way you do. I don’t see the way you do, and the Pastors & Theologians I’ve worked with teach from a point of view of inclusion for all and that when studying the Bible you have to have an open mind to understand the historical context of which the text was written and that you have to be willing to question what your being taught to believe. As for homosexuality being a choice I disagree, the oly choice I made was to be true to who GOD made me to be. It took me years to want to step into a church because I never felt welcome for who i am and what gifts I was bringing to the table, but when I met my best friend(who is gay and a PHD’d professor witha masters in divinity and phd in theologiacal ethics) and the people in his circle that I learned that GOD does accept me and that not every church is sending me to hell for being who I am. I can’t change you views on gays nor do I want to but I’m not changing who I am or what I believe. Being gay is not a choice, it’s not about sex it’s about a natural and emotional connection with a person I’m attracted to, that person happens to be male.

213. Tanya wrote:

MrsPickron,

“The “F” word was very low.”

You’re right! I know.

But I think Deacon is low. He calls me narrow-minded for accepting GOD’s Word as absolute, infallible truth. But he’s not open minded enough to consider that the life he is living is wrong and wicked, even in the face of GOD’s Word, and he’s a Deacon!

If he is a Deacon and he can actually say, to anyone, DON’T prayer for me, he is completely lost.

As Christians we are to share the Word with others, but we are not suppose to quote scriptures to ministers/prophets (priests, reverends, pastors, deacons, rabbis, clerics, sheiks, etc.). I stopped quoting scriptures to Deacon after he revealed that he was a Deacon.

As harsh as it may be, Deacon is a faggot. A faggot is a burdensome woman. Gay men live as woman (only a woman shall lay with a man), and they are a burden on humanity (sin and evil is a burden on all mankind).

But I can agree that I should not have used it the way I did towards him. (but I think you can agree that “evil and sin will vex the soul of the righteous”)

“It would make more sense for Deacon to minister to lost souls about homosexuality after he is delivered of his homosexuality than it would for you and I. Tanya, it is very possible that GOD could have been using this thread to speak to him. Also he could have been using you to share the word to get to him. You don’t know, Deac may have gave what you’ve been saying some thought because you were speaking truth from the word of GOD until the “F” word came out… “That aint GOD” its not desent or in order.”

You are absolutely right.

I know Deacon won’t be gay for long, b/c I’m prayering. But in the midst of my prayer, I am still an Onward Christian Soldier. (emphasis on soldier)

“Spare the rod and spoil the child.” This message can be found in Proverbs 13:24, Proverbs 19:18, Proverbs 22:15, Proverbs 23:13, Proverbs 29:15, 17.

According to Gary Martin this refers to, “The notion that children will only flourish if punished, physically or otherwise, for any wrongdoing.”

A child is anyone, regardless of age, who can not discern right from wrong. A rod is a beating/chastisement/punishment for doing wrong.

Sometimes calling someone a harsh name (chastisement/punishment) is what they need to hear in order to straighten up. And not being harsh with them will only keep them on the wrong path.

214. Tanya wrote:

PS – MrsPickron, I don’t think anything Deacon said on this entire post is what a decent Deacon would ever say, at any point in their call. I don’t know if being a Deacon is what GOD has planned for Deacon, but I do know that having a woman/wife is what GOD has planned for EVERY MAN. I know you’re joined with me in prayer that Deacon grows to understand and receive this.

215. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

GOD has Blessed me, tremendously!!! (Thanks be to GOD!)

But that’s ONLY b/c I obey his law. If you obey his law, GOD will Bless you too!

(being gay is against GOD’s law)

216. Deacon wrote:

Tanya I called you narrow minded not because you say your a christian but because or you views on homosexuality and because you don’t back up your views with facts….What you don’t want to accept is that there in no one way to be a christian, a christian is a follower of Christ and his teachings of which I proudly do. No I’m a christian according to your beliefs but it’s not your beliefs that matter to me, and not I don’t want you prying for me because your spirit is not a loving one, it’s one of anger and hatred so you need to keep praying for yourself because you need God to turn that hate you feel to love if not for you fellow man but for yourself…..Most woman who have a hatred for homosexuals as much as you do so because they have an issue with men or a man in thier cheated om them with another man, whatever your issue you need to deal with, I can disagree with you on homosexuality without it getting ugly but you can’t with me, without even knowing me you’ve called me evil, a faggot, claimed I’m not a real Deacon, and said I was goin to hell and that’s all well in good because God place many people like you in my path and I’ve overcome them because they make me a stronger person…..And to burst you bubble I’m gay today will be tommorrow and until the day I die.

217. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

You’re a dummy. You really, really, really, are a dummy.

“Tanya I called you narrow minded not because you say your a christian but because or you views on homosexuality and because you don’t back up your views with facts”

I have backed up everything I have said and the general position against homosexuality with pure facts. I backed it all up with scripture, GOD’s Word.

You dummy. You’re the one that claims to be a Deacon, but doesn’t even understand GOD’s most basic Words.

You dummy. There is ONLY ONE way to be a Christian and there is ONLY ONE way to worship GOD, b/c there is ONLY ONE GOD!!!

Jesus said many sheep have I that are not of this fold. “This fold” means GOD’s holy bond. There are many people who do and believe many different things, but they are not of GOD’s fold. All of mankind are GOD’s children. GOD has many different believers and non-believers of children, but not all are of his fold. You, with your homosexuality, are outside of GOD’s fold. You’re still his child, just not part of this fold (holy bond).

What I’ve stated here is much more than my beliefs, they ARE GOD’s Word!!!!! GOD’s LAW!!!!!! GOD’s Way for his people. If you don’t like it, take it up with GOD, not me. GOD is the one who made it clear that homosexuality is an abomination, NOT ME!!!

My spirit is full of love, b/c it’s full of GOD and GOD is Love. It is so evident that GOD is in my life. But you may not see it, b/c one, you don’t know me, but mostly b/c you are full of evil, and evil doesn’t know love. Anyone who can proudly defend something that GOD has clearly condemned is evil.

GOD condemned homosexuality.
Therefore, homosexuality is evil.
You defend homosexuality.
Therefore, you are evil.

Let me make this clear to your dumb gay ass for the last time:

I do not hate homosexuals, I hate homosexuality. I do not hate the sinner, I hate the sin.

But you are so dumb and full of sin you can’t see or understand the difference.

Further, NONE, NOT ONE SINGLE ONE, of my ex-boyfriends have ever left me for another man (or a white woman). I only date men who are mentally stable and spiritually sound. Homosexuals are not mentally stable or spiritually sound, at all. Besides, if any of my ex-boyfriends did cheat on me with another man, I would not be here to comment back and forth. I would be in jail for murder.

My hatred towards homosexuality is NOT about any personal connection or experience with it. It’s ONLY b/c it is against GOD. If you or your practices/lifestyle is against GOD, guess what???? – It’s with satan. Homosexuality is of satan. I hate satan, so I hate homosexuality.

Your lifestyle will bring nothing good to you or to the ones you love. Remember that. You’ll see.

218. Deacon wrote:

“You dummy. There is ONLY ONE way to be a Christian and there is ONLY ONE way to worship GOD, b/c there is ONLY ONE GOD!!!”

Only a narrow minded dumb ass would even make a comment like that so of course it would come out your mouth…You would walk up to Jesus and tell him he was going to hell because he was a Jew and not a christian…Who are you to say who is and who isn’t of GOD, you need to come down of your God complex because your not GOD!!!!! The more you hate on me the more God blesses me

So interms you’ll understand “You are rebuked” Your evil spirit can’t touch me, I got God on my in my life, so hate on that all you want……

219. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

“You would walk up to Jesus and tell him he was going to hell because he was a Jew and not a christian”

You have got to be the stupidest person in the Barbershop! I would never do such a thing.

Jesus was a Jew. A Jew, by pure original authentic definition is, “One who worships GOD”. This means, I and anyone else who worships GOD is a Jew as well.

Jesus was the King of the Jews. He was the King of those who worshiped GOD. Jesus was not only the Leader of those who worshiped GOD, but Jesus was the Greatest of all at worshiping GOD. There is no one who can worship GOD better or fuller than Jesus Christ. Jesus the King of the Jews!

Jesus Christ couldn’t be a Christian, b/c he couldn’t follow himself. He followed GOD. A Christian is one who follows Christ. We are to follow Jesus and the way he followed GOD. Only because man was having such difficulty following GOD, GOD had to send his son, Jesus Christ, as an example, to show us how to follow GOD. GOD wanted to give us a visual to make it easier for us to know and to do right. Jesus Christ is that visual. “For GOD so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” – John 3:16

To give you a deeper lesson, the term Jew today has taken on the meaning of “one who ONLY worships GOD”. As a way for modern day Jews to distinguish themselves from people who worship GOD and Jesus, or from people who worship GOD and Muhammad.

But just b/c modern day Jews slightly alter the authentic meaning of the term Jew, doesn’t mean the actual and authentic meaning of the tern Jew has indeed changed.

I am a Jew! I worship GOD!!! But since I worship GOD and follow Christ, I am also a Christian.

And since there is only ONE GOD, there can only be ONE way to worship him. Do you really think GOD would have a different set of rules and a different set of requirements for all of his children? NO! Did GOD send 10 differnt Jesus-es??? NO! GOD sent ONE Jesus and Jesus followed and lived by ONE set of laws. GOD has only ONE set of rules, only ONE set of laws by which he wants ALL of his children to follow. And rebuking homosexuality is ONE of those laws! (Don’t lie to yourself to feel better about the dirty homo things you do.)

“Who are you to say who is and who isn’t of GOD”

You can’t be that confused, lost and dumb, can you????

*I* DID NOT say who is of GOD and who is not. GOD said who is of him and who is not! It is the Bible, GOD’s Word that says homosexuality is an abomination, NOT ME. Read the Bible and work to understand it.

GOD said you, as a homosexual, are not of him. It’s in his holy book. The Holy Bible. I didn’t write the Bible. I only abide by it, like you and everyone else is suppose to.

Again, it is the Bible, GOD’s Word, that says homosexuality is an abomination. An abomination is an evil wickedness. Evil wickedness is NOT of GOD, so an abomination is NOT of GOD, so homosexuality is NOT of GOD. This is NOT my opinion, this is Biblical FACT.

And please stop saying I am “hating on you”. To “hate on” someone implies a level of jealousy. Do you really think I’m jealous of a homosexual??? LMAO, Sorry, there is nothing more laughable!!! Again, there is NOTHING GOOD OR POSITIVE ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY! I don’t envy you, I pity you.

220. Tanya wrote:

Deacon,

GOD has instructed me to share this with you:

“…‘Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not continue in the house for ever; the son continues for ever. So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed. I know that you are descendants of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me, because MY WORD FINDS NO PLACE IN YOU. I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.’

They answered him, ‘Abraham is our father’. Jesus said to them, ‘If you were Abraham’s children, you would do what Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from GOD; this is not what Abraham did. You do what your father did.’ They said to him, ‘We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even GOD.’ Jesus said to them, If GOD were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from GOD; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? IT IS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT BEAR TO HEAR MY WORD. YOU ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL, AND YOUR WILL IS TO DO YOUR FATHER’S DESIRES. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. BUT, BECAUSE I TELL THE TRUTH, YOU DO NOT BELIEVE ME. Which of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? HE WHO IS OF GOD HEARS THE WORDS OF GOD; THE REASON WHY YOU DO NOT HEAR THEM IS THAT YOU ARE NOT OF GOD.’”

221. Deacon wrote:

“Leviticuas 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

Since you’re focused on that one line, explain where does it state that “man lies with a male as with a woman” has a sexual connotations. Mans interpretation is sexual, and if it is sexual according to your beliefs the only reason a man & woman should be having sex is to procreate a child which two men know is not possible and knowing that there’s no way a man could lie with another man as with a woman because it’s not to procreate. Your so fixated on sex you can’t look at the text with a critical eye, but your closed minded so you wouldn’t do that anyway.

The truth you think your tell is your truth not mine, GOD and I have a great relationship that get better everyday…..

222. Tanya wrote:

“Since you’re focused on that one line, explain where does it state that “man lies with a male as with a woman” has a sexual connotations.”

I thought you were a Deacon???

“Adam LAY with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain.” – Genesis 4:1

To LAY with someone is to HAVE SEX with someone.

223. Tanya wrote:

“No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute.” – Deuteronomy 23:17

An Israelite is a Jew.
A Jew is one who worships GOD.
Do you worship GOD???

A shrine prostitute is someone who has anal sex.
Do you have anal sex???

If you worship GOD you are NOT to have anal sex.

224. Tanya wrote:

Have you ever heard anyone say, “that was a good lay”, or “she is an easy lay”??? Do you not understand what they mean??? They mean the same definition of lay as the bible.

To LAY is to have SEX. Period.

225. Tanya wrote:

“Your so fixated on sex you can’t look at the text with a critical eye, but your closed minded so you wouldn’t do that anyway.” – Deacon

You are the one stuck on stupid. You are so fixated with your ill lifestyle that you FAIL to UNDERSTAND the scripture. You are the one that is closed minded and closed off from GOD’s holy fold.

Why is it that you have provided NO factual evidence or support of homosexuality??? Why is it that as a ? ”Deacon” ?, you are completely unable to show any Biblical support of homosexuality???

Well, that’s b/c you CAN NOT. All you have is your sick, twisted personal view that what you do is ok, b/c it feels good to you. Who are you to say homosexuality is right???

“The truth you think your tell is your truth not mine, GOD and I have a great relationship that get better everyday…..” – Deacon

The truth I speak is GOD’s Word. But are blinded by the devil and your wicked ways so you fail to understand it. “My people shall perish for a lack of knowledge” – Hosea 4:6

“HE WHO IS OF GOD HEARS THE WORDS OF GOD; THE REASON WHY YOU DO NOT HEAR THEM IS THAT YOU ARE NOT OF GOD.” – John 8:47

Deacon, why is it that you, as a Deacon, have offered NO scripture, GOD’s Word, to support your favor of homosexuality???

Understand that EVERYONE has a relationship with GOD. The stripper and the serial killer have a relationship with GOD. The devil has a relationship with GOD.

NOT ALL relationships with GOD are GOOD relationships. If you defend homosexuality. You are defending the devil. You can’t defend the devil and think you have a great relationship with GOD. If you defend the devil, what you have is a great relationship with the devil.

Read John chapter 8….

226. MrsPickron wrote:

Tanya
Sometimes calling someone a harsh name (chastisement/punishment) is what they need to hear in order to straighten up. And not being harsh with them will only keep them on the wrong path.

No no no, I can’t agree. I know you don’t have children but when you do… if your child did not comprehend something you instructed to him would you use a harsh name to straighten him up? Would you call him “stupid”. When the bible says chastisement & punishment I don’t believe it means harsh name calling. I believe its sparing the rod. I’m not perfect, I’ve done it too but it is wrong.

I know you’re joined with me in prayer that Deacon grows to understand and receive this.

Yes, I didn’t want to say it b/c I don’t want Deac to rebuke my prayers. However my prayer was in general. I’ve been observing far too many children “being out” of the closet. Males and females at grade level are openly gay. Its a shame b/c I feel the generation is lost. I think it is a trend and it is not cute. So many people (famous people) are coming out setting the tone. Same sex marriage… What is the world coming to? There is a church close to mine that has a Pastor who is gay. For the people to know that their Pastor is gay and continue to follow him worries me. My prayer is in general.

I’ve learned a lot from this thread. Tanya I appreciate the scriptures you posted. Other than the teachings I receive, I only read the bible for things concerning my life and homosexuality was not one of those things.

I feel like you’ve said all you could say and most importantly you backed most of what you said with scripture. What else can you say? Deac will hear and listen or not. All you can do now is pray to GOD and ask HIM if you said what HE would have you to say and that it was acceptable unto HIM.

227. Deacon wrote:

In short you interpret scripture your way and I’ll interpret it mine, you are not the barrier of what is or isn’t a good relationship with God so your point of the stripper and the serial killer is irrelevant. Per your request:

1st Sammuel 18:1-4
18:1 It happened, when he had made an end of speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.

18:2 Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father’s house.

18:3 Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.

18:4 Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was on him, and gave it to David, and his clothing, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his sash.

The story of Jonathan and David is on of a covenant beyond your normal male friendship, why would Jonathan tell David of his fathers plan to have him killed, then beg Saul to allow David back into the kingdom after he escaped. And let’s recall the last time Jonathan and David saw one another:

1st Sammuel 20: 41-42
20:41 As soon as the boy was gone, David arose out of a place toward the South, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded.

20:42 Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, because we have sworn both of us in the name of Yahweh, saying, Yahweh shall be between me and you, and between my seed and your seed, forever. He arose and departed: and Jonathan went into the city.

Now lets go to the passing of Saul and Jonanthan in battle and David’s reaction to the news of hearing of thier deaths and what he said of Jonathan:

2nd Samuel 1:23,26-27
1:23 Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant in their lives, In their death they were not divided: They were swifter than eagles, They were stronger than lions.

1:26 I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan: Very pleasant have you been to me: Your love to me was wonderful, Passing the love of women.

1:27 How are the mighty fallen, The weapons of war perished!

You wanted scripture you got it.

228. Deacon wrote:

My point has been made, end of argument.

229. Tanya wrote:

You have NOOOOO Point!!!!!

Far from the end of argument…

Are you saying that King David, GOD’s warrior, was a homosexual?????

Are you saying David’s gay partner was Jonathan????

230. Tanya wrote:

So you didn’t understand that:

“You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination” – Leviticus 18:22

was talking about sex…

“Since you’re focused on that one line, explain where does it state that “man lies with a male as with a woman” has a sexual connotations.” – Deacon

But your sick and twisted mind believes that Jonathan and David had sex???????

What, from what you quoted, or from any scripture on David and Jonathan, gives you the impression that they had sex?????

You quote you, “where does it state sexual connotations”????

231. Tanya wrote:

As a Christian lay-person, I understand that I am not suppose to minister to ministers. I understand that I am not suppose to quote scripture to ministers.

But, I have no proof, at all, in any regard, that you are indeed a minister. (A Deacon is a minister)

And as someone who has a Certification in Basic Theology and is permitted to teach religion by the Catholic Diocese of Rockville Center NY, I have to break this scripture down for you and anyone else who the devil has tricked…

232. MrsPickron wrote:

Yes, they did have a homosexual affair,…1 Samuel 20:30 Saul is angered by his son’s homosexual affair with David and says, “do not I know that thou has chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion of thy mother’s nakedness?”
That doesn’t make it right. there was also murder, rape, thief, etc. All sorts of crimes and unGODly acts in the bible. You will not find a scripture that states anything about GOD accepting homosexuality. Quote one of those. We can quote scriptures of sin all day. But you need to back it up. GOD did not accept it then and HE’s not now.
1 Kings 14:24 God shows his homophobia by calling gay people “sodomites” and their sexual relations “abomination”

233. Tanya wrote:

NOOO MrsPickron, David and Jonathan did NOT have a homosexual affair.

I will break down the scripture and relationship between David and Jonathan verse by verse.

I’m working on it right now. I’ll be done with it in a few minutes.

234. Tanya wrote:

But you are absolutely right with this:

“GOD did not accept it then and HE’s not now.”

“1 Kings 14:24 God shows his homophobia by calling gay people “sodomites” and their sexual relations “abomination””

235. Tanya wrote:

“…You must not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your GOD and fear him, and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and cleave to him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your GOD.” – Deuteronomy 13:3

Homosexuality is a rebellion against GOD.

Both the Old Testament and the New Testament (not to mention all the books of the Torah and all the books of the Koran) speak AGAINST homosexuality.

Old Testament:

“You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination” – Leviticus 18:22

“No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute.” – Deuteronomy 23:17

(No room for interpretation there. It is what it is)

New Testament:

“Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders” – 1 Corinthians 6:9

***DAVID INHERITED THE KINGDOM OF GOD!!!***

“There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices [abominations] of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.” – 1 Kings 14:24

(No room for interpretation there. It is what it is)

There is nothing, anywhere in the Bible, the Torah or the Koran, that supports homosexuality. However, the Bible, the Torah and the Koran all show GOD’s wrath being brought down on homosexuals and sexually immoral people.

***GOD NEVER BROUGHT A WRATH ON DAVID!!!!!***

You can twist and warp anything to fit your lifestyle and to offer yourself psychological comfort. (BTW – psych means soul) But that does not make it fact, and that definitely does NOT make it GOD’s Word.

I’ve heard men say that adultery (cheating on your wife) is ok as long as you have been married for less than 10 years. And they use all types of nonsense to try and support their warped theory. They try to use the Holy Scripture to support this. But the bottom-line is the 7th Commandment says:

“Thy shall NOT commit adultery.”

(No room for interpretation there. It is what it is)

Whether you have been married for 1 day or 100 years – You shall NOT commit adultery.

Slave-masters tried to use the Holy Scripture to support enslaving and oppressing and hurting others. The Bible does NOT in anyway support slavery or encourage GOD’s people to enslave others.

This is why GOD said his people shall perish for a LACK OF KNOWLEDGE. People do not understand the scripture and sometimes they willfully misinterpret the scripture.

People make up, twist and turn things all the time to make themselves feel better. But that still doesn’t make it right or True!

236. Tanya wrote:

Here comes the breakdown of the Samuel verses…

237. MrsPickron wrote:

I’m ready I have my bible for reference

238. Deacon wrote:

“I’m 2 Blesssed 2 be Stressed by the devils Mess!!!!!”

“There is no word said against me that can bring down what GOD has uplifted!!!!!! Gay 2day Gay 2morrow Gay 4ever!!!!!

Nuff Said!!!

239. MrsPickron wrote:

I did some research and I figured out and believe that David and Jonathan’s relationship was not sexual, it was spiritual. In the bible days men kissed to greet liking to the mobsters who kiss each cheek as a greeting. I’m ashamed that I bought into it without doing my own research. GOd forgive me. I know the devil always try to test your faith, knowledge, belief etc.