Mister Peabody #fundie christiannews.net

Doug Bristow:
If you do not believe in God, why are you here on this blog?

Jennifer Joyce:
Who says I don’t?

Mister Peabody:
I do:
Here is the first part of my recent response to you that was omitted in my post below: (your comments are in parenthesis)

(You can’t be that stupid, Peabody, you just can’t.”)
Your ad hominem attack is the norm for today but so be it.

( “AIDS isn’t going to magically show up in a monogamous relationship between two homosexuals.”)
That presupposes:
1) All monogamous homosexual “marriages” practiced complete abstinence before their “wedding” and therefore could not bring the disease into the “marriage.” I mean really,,you believe all committed homosexual relationships practiced complete abstinence before “marriage”? Both with their final partner and with no others before? It was all just,,,,kissing,,,,for example?”
I bet “You cant handle the truth.” The 1992 National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS; Laumann et al.) focused on the sexual habits of all Americans, surveying 1,749 women and 1,410 men. Homosexual/bisexual men have two to six times more sex partners than heterosexual men, while women who have same-gender partners have three to four times more sex partners than women who have no same-gender partners.
In 1994, the largest gay magazine in America, The Advocate, published the results of questionnaires returned by 2,500 of its adult male homosexual readers. In the course of the relatively short average lifespan of the respondents (thirty-eight years old), only 2% had had sex with just one man. Fifty-seven percent had more than 30 male sex partners, and 35% had more than 100. In the past year alone, about two-thirds (63%) had more than one male sex partner and the large majority of these (over 60%) had five or more; only 28% had just one partner. And this all stops with the words “We queer do?” I gots me a bridge to ....
2) That in the event of divorce in homosexual “marriages” all subsequent “remarriages” would not have AIDS because of course once divorced, they would return to their “premarriage” life of homosexual celibacy until “remarriage.” Is this likely? See above.
3) That all monogamous homosexual relationships are free from adultery (I am speaking in lay terms as adultery for same sex unions would be a non sequitur because a union that has no standing before God from the start cannot be violated before God). But please, define monogamous and what percentage of such committed homosexual relationships (CHR) would fit your definition. Of course you will say all committed homosexual marriages are exempt from adultery. In a committed heterosexual relationship the dreaded comment “gee honey I don’t know how I gave you an STD. Must have been from a toilet seat,” would never occur in your committed homosexual relationship. But really, the percentage of your committed homosexual relationships that are perfect would likely be a smaller number yet of all CHR’s but actually constitute the basis for your justification of endorsing homosexuality ‘en total.’ My my.
So let me share what some studies have shown about whether there are perfect CHR’s. In 1984 a homosexual couple, David P McWhirter and Andrew M Mattison, one a psychiatrist and the other a psychologist, published a book, ‘The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop’, that focused on the sexual habits of the most "stable" gay couples (mind you the most stable). Of one hundred fifty-six couples, only seven had remained monogamous, and not one of the seven relationships had yet reached the six-year mark. The consensus among the couples interviewed was that the heterosexual model of monogamy did not work for gay relationships. Another study in Chicago showed only slightly better results for monogamy, only 9% were faithful. The overarching reason for these failed relationships was ADULTERY, with a large percentage having dozens of other partners within a few years of “marriage.” So obviously your justification for homosexuality based on committed loving relationships just took a BLOW! What God has not put together, many others will put asunder.

4) God has no ability to bring judgment by disease. Did He in this case? I do not have the Mind of God to claim that. Could He? See Numbers.

(“That isn’t how it works. Back in the 80s (40 years ago!) it was the “gay disease”. Now the highest demographic with it are straight black women. But you would rather attack the dirty homosexuals, right? Because they are so icky.”)
As I stated, pick any sin. They all lead to the same result-Eternal Death. You are correct, it was the gay disease because that is where it started. It has spread now to many segments. That however does not preclude where and how it started. Furthermore, I (we) do live in a world with sin and all is “icky.” But I live by 1 Jn 1:9. That verse does not make me better than my fellow man, or you, but only allows God to look upon me as if He sees Christ, sinless, and redeemed by Christ’s work on the cross. Anyone can be that way too as opposed to standing by their own (sinful) merits.

(“If you want to stand by what one interpretation of what you think the Bible said about homosexuality when it was not known, not studied, and likely not even documented, without a shred of science, evidence, data, then you do that.”)
Ahh, now we are getting to the heart of the matter. It is becoming clear to all, which is my intention, that you believe that the science of today Trumps what the Bible says:
(Bible scripture removed)

5 comments

Confused?

So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!

To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register. Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.