Ellie Defends the Left and Homosexuality

Comments

I wasn't sure where to comment, LOL!

Well I haven't had time to read this completely, but I will and I hope you don't mind if I respond some time this week.

You don't deserve to be cursed at - you are being fair and reasonable in your allowing me to comment. I appreciate that.

I do think that the frequent posting of anti-gay sentiment coupled with semi-pornographic pictures is unfair to many in the gay community who do not practice such things. You are perfectly within your rights to post why homosexuality is not something you agree with, but I guarantee you that the semi-porn is an unfair image.

Anyway, more later. Sorry I'm moving at the speed of a snail. :)

Take your time Ellie, its just blogging.

:-)

hey saw this post on america c2c do you also belong to the resistnet
Ellie, you need to go look at the Empires that fell because of homosexuality. We will fall too, because GOD hates it. GOD.

Hi again Way2K :)

I find your title interesting. Because it does not really represent what I'm doing here. I actually am not defending homosexuality nor am I defending the left. I am not saying that I wouldn't at some point, but your blog title misses my point completely.

That's the biggest trouble with the left and the right on Vox - we are missing each other's messages! Please try to understand my final point.

1. Homosexuality: the debate on genes vs enviromnent is interesting, but not valid to what I am saying. Regardless of which it may be, my point is this: until you can show me proof that the vast majority of gays are perverts, it is completely offensive that you would show perverted S&M photos and spew language about homosexuality in the title.

From what I can tell, you are a vastly kind and intelligent man. Forget about the post itself - can you please consider refraining from posting photos and headlines which imply that all gays are perverts? That is my point.

Regarding abortion: this is an important point. No normal human being is pro-abortion. Anyone who thinks that killing infants is a good thing should be catapulted to Mars.

Please read the following comment I made in regards to abortion. I am very, very sorry for the length of this, but it is important.

We pro-choicers are not pro-abortion. (Notice no screaming, no caps-lock, no curses, etc). We just don't believe that changing the laws will prevent abortion.

So you get your piece of paper making abortion illegal. Do you really think that will prevent abortions? The doctors will just go underground and will be seen as heroes. Many authorities will probably look the other way. Heck, I bet they could still advertiste right with a sign right outside the clinic with no repercussions.

There was a story on NPR narrated by a woman who had an illegal abortion. She did not sneak in some back door - she was in a busy waiting room with many other women waiting for abortions just like a busy ER clinic. It was a popular place.

In college I volunteered for a women's care center - one of the nurses worked in an abortion clinic. When a woman came in for an abortion, she was required to have a counselling session. They would tell the woman, look - we know you're scared, but we can help you. What do you need - money? Health care? Housing? We'll give you it. We'll help you through every step of the process and we'll help you find an adopter for your baby if that's what you want.

Don't you think it's better to head them off at the pass? Scared pregnant women are more likely to trust a legal abortion clinic than someone who is going to judge them for thinking of an abortion.

So here's the question: are you really wanting to save babies? Are you sure that's what your motivation is? Because a religion that opposes birth control sure seems suspicious to me.

In other words, Way2K, I think there has been a serious misunderstanding about what the left stands for. I also don't think that the gay community is being understood.

Again, most of us are pro-military, pro-authority. Also pro-birth control and pro-tradition (i.e. Christmas trees and In God We Trust on dollar bills is just fine with us). Please talk to us before you judge. Clarification is everything.

Thanks so much for letting me comment. Feel free to tell me if I've misunderstood anything you've said.

Hi Mad Jewess.

I am interested in what you're saying - but I would appreciate examples so I'd have something specfic to respond to.

Ken I belong to a number of Ning social groups. I was a sucker for an invitation when I first joined The Conservative Underground. By the time I realized what I had done I decided to participate mostly at TCU and America 2c2.

ps Nice list I made, right? There's a 1. and nothing else. Sorry 'bout that.

also - I did not name the person with whom I had the abortion conversation, not to be deceptive but out of basic respect for privacy. I did not want to come across as cryptic.

america c2c was the first site i ever joined then of course resistnet tcu is a little better org. but small
Maybe homosexuals are not as explicitly perverted in public to the same degree as the Folsom Street Fair creeps; however one does not say many homosexual activist organizations publicly condemn either. In fact many of the homosexual activist organizations defend this kind of debauchery.

At any rate the Bible clearly states that homosexuality is perverted. That is good enough for me.

Here is an example of perversion that is no explicit to homosexuals but is very offensive to Christians: http://a4.vox.com/6a00cdf3a9bf0ecb8f011016a52744860d-pi

The argument that abortion should be legal because women who want to kill their babies in the name of birth control will go to back alley abortionists is kind of lame. If the Abortion clinics would indeed be intake clinics for the purpose of adoption would be great. But that is not the case. The purpose of an abortion clinic is to kill unborn babies for profit and to assuage the social and economic consequences of the lack of protection are just plain birth control.

You do realize that most women who get an abortion is not the result of rape, incest or other tragedies, right? A huge percentage of abortions are performed as a means of birth control.

Hence to equate pro-choice as anti-abortion does not make any sense. Pro-choice is pro-abortion. Certainly there will be a number of gals seeking the "back alley" abortion if baby killing is illegal; however statistics show that the number of abortions is way smaller when women and men are held accountable for their decisions of not thinking about how they had sex.

I would certainly like to read about the percentages of Liberals that are pro-military and pro-Christian as in not showing concern about public Christian mottos such as "in God we trust."

;) Hi again -

Re: the abortion issue - I would be curious to know where a poverty-stricken pregnant woman could go for food, money or other support if the right were in charge. So far as I can see the abortion clinics are the primary places that offer pregnant women some help - I'm sure there may be some churches that offer that but I would love to see some solid examples from you.

I'm not at all defending the act of abortion - I'm simply saying that we also need to find a way to help women who are pregnant and who do feel panicked. To blithely state that every woman who considers and aboriton is evil is just silly - especially coming from a gender who cannot know what it's like to suddenly discover that you are carrying a living human being inside of you.

The biggest problem the Right has is that they not only preach pro-life but they also are against birth control. Good luck with that. A condom is not a baby. An unfertilized egg is not a baby. A single sperm is not a baby. If the Right wants to keep women at risk for unwanted pregnancies they will never win the pro-life rights they want.

I guess the question you should ask yourself about your homosexual posts is this: what are you accomplishing by posting photos of perversion? Quite frankly I usually assume the author of the post likes them himself - I don't picture you as that kind of person. But I would never allow those nasty photos on my blog - they're disgusting. I prefer civil discourse.

I'll state again that you're a perfectly decent fellow, and I am glad to continue this converstaion for a long as you wish. Or you can tell me to buzz off, LOL. Either way, thank you for listening. :)

I don't know the statistics, but I am guessing of the 95% of women that abort their babies for birth control, not many are poverty stricken girls in confusion about what to do with an unwanted baby.

As to help for the necessities of life in keeping a baby. I am with you. Something definitely needs to be supportive. As I suggested, an abortion/murder clinic can transform into an adoption/life clinic and probably be profitable. I assuming that abortion doctors are in it for the money. So change the paradigm.

As to many on the Right being against birth control, that is sadly true. I would not say it is a majority. I would even be surprised if it was 50/50. Anyway do you seriously think that if it was left (oops I meant if it was up ) to a State decide abortion issues, do you think birth control would be any more limited than the present? I sure don't.

As to posting pictures showing what a homosexual lifestyle is about, it should shock heterosexuals what a homosexual practice looks like. It is perverse.

I also appreciate the even handed dialogue.

"We pro-choicers are not pro-abortion. (Notice no screaming, no caps-lock, no curses, etc). We just don't believe that changing the laws will prevent abortion."

I absolutely agree with you Ellie. Sadly, some people assume that if you are "pro-choice", you automatically think that everybody should have an abortion. Not so. I know that in general, I am pro-choice but when it comes to MY choice - I chose life.

Abortion clinics do NOT only provide abortions. In fact, many of them are the sole providers of women's health services like annual pap smears, birth control and STD treatments.

Abortion is NOT the problem - it is a SYMPTOM. It is a symptom a much larger and pervasive issue in this world. Banning it will do nothing to the numbers - it just forces the act into unsafe back-allies. Banning abortion is sort of like putting a bandage on an AIDS lesion and pretending you have cured AIDS.

If you want to lower the number of abortions you have to give women the tools and opportunity to make the choice. You have solve issues of the oppressive patriarchy. You have to solve domestic violence. You have to work to give women (and men) adequate maternity and paternity leave. You have work to make sure that working mothers are treated fairly and equal to childless women and all men. You have to work to make sure that women have OPTIONS. Please note the "s" at the end of options - that means more than simple adoption.

NOW...as for homosexuality - Way2k, you quoted a passage from Leviticus. IT specifically denotes a gender, ie Men. So does that mean female homosexuality is acceptable? After all, Leviticus is VERY gender specific throughout the book. Also, do you follow all of the other laws in Leviticus? FYI - in the same book that declares homosexuality and abomination, the Eagle is declared an abomination. Have you written to the congress and started a movement to have an "abomination" removed as our national symbol?

Katie I was wondering when my favorite liberal would show up in this discussion.

:-)

As to your thoughts on abortion, my response is pretty much the same as my last response to Ellie.

As to Biblical Scripture on homosexuality:

I think you are splitting hairs too much to attempt to shoot holes into Biblical Morality. Simple logic would surmise if male homosexuality is ungodly then female homosexuality would also be ungodly.

Nonetheless, if you are looking for specificity:

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. [i.e. there is a natural order such as male and female for procreation] 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. ( Emphasis is mine. Roman 1:18-27 NKJV)

Note verse 27.

Running short on time today but, well said Katie. Much more eloquently put than I could have. You are right - it's a symptom - it is a complex issue being treated as a very simplisitc one, and used as an excuse to keep women barefoot and pregnant, IMHO.

Well I don't know the actual statistics, do you? By your reasoning I could guess that 90 percent of conservatives are misogynous. But like you, I do not have enough regular communication with those on the opposing political party to make that call. My judgement of them is insulting - and I would hope that you as well would realize that guessing statistics especially on a group of people you don't work with regularly is pretty outrageous.

If you were a nurse working in a women's clinic (I'm including male nurses - my brother in law is one), you would have a much more valid guess. But let's not quote statistics until we have either a study or we're in a field where we can.

Unless you're working closely with the gay community, it's truly rude to post porn photos to represent "gays" or "homosexuals".

You have every right to your opinion about them, and to speak how you feel the Bible speaks on them - but please, mixing Bible quotes with pornographic photos is just terrible. Especially when we are, after all, talking about human beings with emotions and who are already the target of violence and hate.

Sorry if this comment sounds abrupt, I am rushed today. :)

Yeah my oldest daughter calls me a mysogynous all the time. So I kind of pour it on for her for I enjoy the feminist self-righteousness she delivers to me. Ellie she definitely would cheer you on. Not because of your acceptance of alternative lifestyles but because you are politely stating your point with the force of female dignity.

LOL

Anyway ... The photos in my opinion were less pornagraphic than shocking. I could have shown some truly sickening homosexual photos from the Folsom-East Street party in NYC. I would sorely be surprised if VOX would not have voiced the horrofic practices of public homosexuality in the raw was not a violation of the terms of usage.

For me the photo of the two homosexual dudes smooching after illicit wedlock was just as horrorific as the public perversity of Folsom Street East.

People need to know how shocking aberrant homosexual behavior is. Biblical Scripture views it as shocking as well; thus to rebuke homosexual acts it is appropriate to shine the light of the Gospel on the darkness of homosexual activity.

Ha well thank you for the compliment and your daughter sounds like a lovely person. Just for the record I certainly not mean to call you misogynous, just pointing out that my judgement cannot be correct if I don't spend time around Republicans (or know statistics).

I do think that the bondage shown in the photo was a bit over the top, but not against Vox policy (I haven't looked at their policies in general) - I guess what I'm saying is why post photos that you find disgusting? I was posting shocking photos of oiled birds until I realized it was crass and upset my readers.

I think of my blog as "my house" and I try to keep it controversial but also pleasant - not that it's any of my business what you post on your blog, just a thought. :)

I was pleased to see Obama appoint Alexia Kelley as Director of Faith-based and Community Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services. Kelley is co-founder of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, is staunchly pro-life.

Kelley's group released a study that showed socioeconomic factors have more positive effect on reducing abortions than prohibitive laws. The progressive agenda, including health reform, education, and reducing poverty, can achieve more for the pro-life agenda than the Bush-style siege tactics.

I'm pleased with Obama working with pro-life advocates who are practical about achieving their goals.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cristina-page/the-new-pro-lifer_b_211877.html

The statistics that most abortions are elective, used as birth control, rather than emergency operations, should give us hope that we can succeed in reducing the number of abortions by giving women better alternatives, better education about responsible sexual activity, and better support in proactive health services.

But there will always be emergency cases. Most people agree that there are legitimate exceptions to a complete prohibition. Only 4% of Americans say that abortion must never be permitted regardless of the circumstances (according to a 2007 CBS poll).

I believe there are many edge cases that should be permitted for the health of the mother. We can't predict the nature of all such cases, so I am in favor of keeping abortion safe, legal, and rare. I would certainly rather the decision be made by the mother, with input from the father, her doctor, and her church/spiritual counsel, instead of by some legislator.

Bill I agree with rare. It took the Court to legislate abortion. It will take some kind of legislation to make abortion rare. Unfortunately that legislation will have to receive the 'ok' from the Courts.

I am 100% against abortion as birth control. Adoption is always better than murder. I also agree that there are extenuating circumstances for a legal abortion to occur. This is especially the case in saving the mother's life. I am willing to be convinced about rape but in the back of my spirit that seems like the murder of an innocent child who had no choice in its circumstances. The rape thing is the only abortion issue that I waver back and forth on.

Yes, absolutely, the goal should be to make abortion as rare as possible. Ideally, so rare that the only abortions that occur are those that virtually everyone agrees are necessary, and not elective.

The study by Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good concluded that prohibition had little or no effect on reducing abortions, whereas social programs had a large effect. That was really interesting.

Ellie, you can justify wicked behavior until the cows come home, but you 2, will face death, as ALL of us will have to face our maker, and all of us will face death. Thats the way life is. The right thing to do, if you have 'tolerance' is to love the person without condoning abominations.

Homosexuality and bestiality

Lev 18:22-29 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.

abomination: corruption, depravity, a vile, shameful, or detestable action

This "Joseph Francis" left a nonsensical comment followed by a link to generic viagra. Joseph Francis profile shows he became a Vox member today on December 17. This would indicate this is slick spam.

I suspect "Joseph Francis will be deleted as a member for rules violations hence I am deleting his comment and not providing a follow-up link to a profile that is the work of spam.

I request you all to comment on the following idea.

Everyone born on this world as homosexuals. Because they know about their body parts very well than the opposite sex and they know which parts are pleasurable ones.
Buy Zenegra
Joseph, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
Joseph the biology of a male and female were not designed for homosexuality. If a person claims to no differently then they are delusional.

Post a comment

Already a Vox member? Sign in