Allow us to have homosexual sex in public places - if you don’t you’re homophobic

Ugh…is there a problem with this? If dogs can do it why not these people after all what is a few complaining neighbors. It is not like they have rights or anything they are just homophobes.
Signed,
Bruce Garner

Why should they be the only ones allowed to have sex in public? Why cannot the heterosexuals? What is with these deviants?

“What is it?”  They’re deviants!

I’m just saying that they are asking that they be given what they want to gratify their deviance. Anything less will not be tolerated and we will be deemed homophobes, oppressors, discrimination, and racists even though race has nothing to do with anything when it comes to sexual perversion.

They are right. We shouldn’t single them out .... LET"S BAN ALL SEX IN PUBLIC! Dogs included. What is wrong with these people! I mean the public. There should be a huge outcry!

Ya know, this extreme deviant behavior can only be attributed to either extreme sin-sickness, pronounced, grave emotional/phycological illness or an amalgamation of the two.  I read this account and cry for the children and grandchildren who’ll inherit this politically correct, vile dystopia.  No society, from the “cities of the plain” and imperial Rome to Weimar Germany were able to recover when the Almighty’s cup of wrath was full in face of such God-mocking, bestial behaviors.

I fear for Western Civilization in its mockery of the Holy, because those who conquer us will be every bit as fierce as the Assyrian and Babylonian hordes that fell upon Israel and Judah.

Oh wait - there’s “quite a lot of anger in the gay community” about this? Well WHY DIDN’T YOU SAY SO?

By all means, HAVE GAY SEX IN PUBLIC THEN!

We need a public rite of blessing for public gay orgies, but what do you bigots care? 

HaHa

This article provides more insight into the real nature of homosexual practice. Anyone curious about this need only spend the night in a bath house. These still exist in medium to large cities, and it’s a bit more discreet than prowling around in a park.

I’d strongly recommend this for all seminarians (the modern urban plunge, so to speak), as well as for all bishops, priests and laity who did or would vote for the various relevant resolutions.

Seeing is believing. Go seek the truth. You won’t believe what you see. This is what you voted for. See it for yourself. Is this holy?

I agree, Ralph—to his credit, Randy Shilts was honest about the bath house culture in “And the Band Plays On”...I know we are all sinners, but I wouldn’t expect straights to ask their priests for blessings on repeated visits to a cathouse.

I hesitate to say this, but I’m very distressed about the large number of threads posted over the last few days about militant gay activists. Collectively, all these threads have started to cross the line from faithfully exposing the deeds of darkness into the ugly abyss gay bashing. These people need love, prayer, compassion, and Jesus, not hate, fear, and sarcasm.

There are a thousand things wrong with America today. As a nation our sins are too great to enumerate. Why the obsession with homosexuality? The obsession does nothing to advance Christ’s kingdom, and nothing about it evinces love. It only makes us look hateful and lacking in grace.

Lots of homosexuals are ruthlessly bullied growing up, and almost none of them have found the peace that surpasses all understanding with Christ. Understandably then, they are angry and lost, and hating them for this only adds needless fuel to the fire. In Matthew 9:36 Jesus sees large crowds filled with sinful people. The Bible says “He had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.” Have compassion and give them Jesus. Give them the Gospel. Yes, you might be vilified by a college professor, or attacked in the Castro in the process, but never dwell on these retaliations. Turn the other cheek, for these people are “harassed and helpless”, and continue to offer the saving hope of the Gospel as long as you can. And you don’t have to start by condemning homosexuality. Just offer them Christ, and the Holy Spirit will give them conviction eventually.

While I’m on a rant, I think the church needs to stop making homosexuality a key litmus test for orthodoxy. Saying that the Episcopal church has become apostate and torn the fabric of the Anglican Communion because of VGR and the GC09 resolutions is a bit like Al Capone finally getting caught for income tax evasion. There are any number of fronts on which liberal christians can be fought: salvation by Christ alone, Biblical inspiration, God’s sovereign and eternal nature, Christology, and so much more. When we speak about the disintegration of the Episcopal church, we should focus on these things, not trivialities like C056. At this point, homosexuality has become a great distraction from the central tenets of the Gospel. It’s a fruit at the tip top of a tree, and the root of this tree is the refusal the acknowledge God as the just, eternal, omnipotent, merciful creator of life. It’s unproductive to say ‘you’re wrong on homosexuality’, rather, we should say ‘you’re wrong to try to make God in your own image.’

LDW, I agree with much of what you say. The actions of General Convention were a symptom, not a cause, of a larger, deeper repudiation of the Gospel.  There is no question that we sat back, perhaps comforted by the recitation of the Creeds on Sunday, as Bishops and others within the church openly challenged or repudiated the tenets such as salvation by Christ alone, Biblical inspiration, God’s sovereign and eternal nature, etc. There is also no question that conservative Christians have often blundered, and sinned, in there public statements on this issue.

I take issue with one point, however. What was different about the sexuality debate, was that it represented the first clear instance where General Convention openly broke with the clear teachings of Holy Scripture.  The rest of the heresy was just as real, but was accomplished without the need for GC legislation.  All of a sudden, orthodox Christians could not longer hide behind the ambiguity of the US Episcopal Church.  We could no longer be comforted by our Bishop telling us to ignore John Spong. Spong became mainstream.

We all fall short in the eyes of the Lord, and I don’t believe that someone in a gay lifestyle is any less deserving of God’s grace than I am.  However, God warns us individually of the peculiarly binding nature of sexual immorality, and tells us to flee it, regardless of the foundation in Christ we have established.  That has to mean something in the context of how we approach it as a church.  Don’t you?

I wouldn’t say that the sexuality debate was the “first clear instance.” To anyone with their eyes open, there were unavoidable problems with TEC long before VGR came along. In 1994, Spong published a book titled “Resurrection: Myth or Reality?” which claimed that Jesus did not rise from the dead. And guess what the Church leadership did about this: absolutely nothing. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 that if Christ has not risen, our faith is worthless. If a Bishop can publish a book denying the resurrection, and still remain in good standing in the Church, I think this is fairly clear, unequivocal evidence of apostasy.

In any event though, my discussion of sexuality, heresy, and TEC was just a minor addendum to my principal point, which is: why all these threads which seem to have no purpose save to make us bristle with unhealthy hatred toward fellow sinners, who just happen to be afflicted by a certain sin that most of us conveniently don’t have?

RE: “I hesitate to say this, but I’m very distressed about the large number of threads posted over the last few days about militant gay activists.”

LDW . . . why do you suppose Greg is running this series?  Do you have a speculation?  [Other than, of course, “hate,” “fear,” and “obsession.”]

RE; “and hating them for this only adds needless fuel to the fire . . . “

How is Greg’s pointing out that it’s not about tolerance for gay activists—[despite their rhetoric]—“hating them”?

RE: “When we speak about the disintegration of the Episcopal church, we should focus on these things, not trivialities like C056.”

Although I’m always happy to point out the underlying foundational disagreements that the holders of the two different gospels have, the affirmation of same-sex sexual activity is the *presenting issue* currently within TEC.  Furthermore, the revisionists formally, nationally, officially, and legislatively approved of this sinful activity in their highest legislative body.

Hard to ignore.

I suppose one of the reasons Matt, Greg, et al. post these threads because we’re always challenged by the libProts who visit this blog who believe that all the pro-gay approval activists are such peace-loving inclusively tolerant folks that these things never really happen and that all the “hate” comes from our side.

Intercessor,
Much as I disagree with Bruce Garner on gay issues, to take his name and put words in his mouth in the first comment is really bad.

We are better than that.

Yes - I didn’t quite understand what was happening in post #1. I naively took it at first that the “Intercessor” was also named Bruce Garner. On reflection I think it’s trying to be humorously critical. It’s hard to get that right online, as I know - I’ve got it wrong often enough, when tone, facial expression are abstracted and you’re simply left with bare text. I’m sure Intercessor is not trying to impersonate Mr. Garner (given that Intercessor clearly identifies himself as the author of the post). Nevertheless signing another poster’s name to a post is risky and perhaps invites misunderstanding.

What is it with you & your 2nd grade English skills?

<blockquote>Why should they be the only ones allowed to have sex in public? Why cannot the heterosexuals? What is with these deviants? </blockquotes>

LDW, have you listened to Matt+‘s sermon? A real zinger that should be widely disseminated. In particular, he speaks specifically about your point, “With all the problems in the world, why are we focused on what is going on in behind closed bedroom doors.”

If I might paraphrase Matt+: sex is an incredibly powerful force for good (building strong marriages which can be the bedrock of society. Conversely, it is an incredibly powerful force for evil. The later is obvious to anyone driving through a downtown of a major Paul rightly states that this can be spiritually disastrous, specifically mentioning homosexuality. So it is incorrect (though the liberals try) to dismiss this as adiaphora or lesser order issues. It is clear that any denomination that tries to be “inclusive” will also be inclusive of any number of heresies.

2nd paragraph should read:

If I might paraphrase Matt+: sex is an incredibly powerful force for good (building strong marriages which can be the bedrock of society). Conversely, it can be an incredibly powerful force for evil. The later is obvious to anyone driving through a downtown of a major city at night. Paul rightly states that sexual immorality can be spiritually disastrous, specifically mentioning homosexuality. So it is incorrect (though the liberals try) to dismiss this as adiaphora or a lesser order issue. It is clear that any denomination that tries to be “inclusive” will also be inclusive of any number of heresies.

(I bought a Dell Vostro A90 with Ubuntu for my mission trip to China, where I am writing now, but it has an annoying bug that pastes randomly. Will be glad to get back to the States and my full sized, bug-less keyboard.)

what a loving, inclusive, tolerant and kind comment Orgazeem

These guys will meet their match in the militant islamic society that is being allowed to grow there.  What does sharia law (that the ABC thinks they should have) say about their activities in public OR private?

why all these threads which seem to have no purpose save to make us bristle with unhealthy hatred toward fellow sinners,

I’m not overly fond of these threads either, LDW, but - we are being called “haters.” The common description of orthodox Christians is that we are full of hate. The common description of those who oppose orthodox Christians is that they are “loving” and “inclusive.” Who expresses hate?

I despise contractions….. and I asked three questions of which you, Orgazeem, could not or would not answer. Anyway, I am having trouble with your moniker. It seems to have connotations of “Orgasm”? In which case I will take your rude judgmental comment for what it is worth and consider its source.

I’ve been really appreciating this series on intolerant attitudes toward orthodox Christians, but LDW’s comment hit home to me. In my case it is more because I sometimes come close to hating Christians who support abortion for any number of reasons. I may say that my main objection is theological, and that I only hate opinions, not people, but sometimes I feel pretty hateful.

As a former Episcopalian from way long ago, I have been horrified by Spong’s beliefs for many years. When there was the big fuss about Gene Robinson, I kept wondering why people seemed to care more about a homosexual being a bishop than a man whose theology wasn’t even remotely Christian. As an admitted outsider, I still believe Spong was far more harmful as a bishop, and that he also likely contributed to the mindset that resulted in Robinson becoming bishop and the decision of your GC this summer.

With all of that said, I still appreciate seeing the examples of intolerance from the people who claim to be the tolerant ones. It’s important to expose such things.

RE: “When there was the big fuss about Gene Robinson, I kept wondering why people seemed to care more about a homosexual being a bishop than a man whose theology wasn’t even remotely Christian. As an admitted outsider, I still believe Spong was far more harmful as a bishop, and that he also likely contributed to the mindset that resulted in Robinson becoming bishop and the decision of your GC this summer.”

I agree that Spong is a far more harmful false teacher than Robinson.

But remember . . . Spong didn’t have the formal, legislative, national, official approval of the highest legislative body in TEC, as Robinson did.

That made—and makes—a massive difference for someone like me.

I see what you’re saying, Sarah. And I expect also that way more people outside of TEC have heard of Robinson than of Spong.

Please DO NOT miss Matt’s sermon linked by Robroy above.  It is excellent!  In fact, I wish he had time to do a series of teachings from his study on this topic that could be linked here.

In addition, there is a lively SF thread that lists many of the Scriptures, links to facts about homosexuality and in the arguments (including Matt+Kennedy’s) you will see different ways to talk about this central issue with a person who is unwilling to accept the authority of Scripture. 
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/sf/page/24965/

It is vital for Christians to get the facts and to think this through Scripturally and carefully and to be informed about the current science research and Christian psychological techniques for treating same-sex attraction.

The NARTH website and Anglican Mainstream have numerous articles articles.  Dr. Joseph Nicolosi’s latest book, Shame and Attachment Loss and Janelle Hallman’s book, The Heart of Female Same Sex Attraction, describes recent effective approaches to therapy.

LDW1988, I have to humbly disagree.  Greg and company are simply allowing these gentle people to express themselves in their own words.

The militant homosexual leadership doesn’t care about anything but furthering their cause.  A one-trick pony.  They don’t care what it does to society.  They don’t care what this does to our children.  They only care about their cause.  They are NOT tolerant in any way.