User Profile: HarryPotter


Member Since: January 23, 2013


123 To page: Go
  • [-1] August 15, 2014 at 8:01pm

    So you adhere to ALL the Bible verses? No eating shellfish? No shaving? No wearing nylon? Etc?

  • August 15, 2014 at 7:00pm

    So would you feel better if the HIV you got in your blood transfusion came from a straight person? No? All blood and tissue should be and is screened. This ban accomplishes nothing except promotes bigotries against gays.

  • [2] August 15, 2014 at 6:57pm

    I know that the gay movement officially split with nambla in the early 80s. I’m not aware of any connection in the 90s, but any connection is shameful. Please look up the GLBT official position on nambla today. We are not connected.

  • August 15, 2014 at 6:54pm

    Yes, gays have higher rates of some STIs. Straights do of others. Straight people have higher rates of herpes, scabies, genital warts and others. But let’s just ignore those to make our point, right? And if a couple is monogamous, how exactly are they supposed to catch an STI? I have not heard that from the CDC at all. They recommend condoms for everyone who has multiple sexual partners gay or straight. But you can’t catch something if you are monogamous. Also, that business with drug resistant gonnorrhea… Yeah, that’s not in the US yet. A couple cases in Europe. As in less than 5. No idea if they’re gay or straight though.

    And my post was deleted. Oh well, I stand by it. If you want to know why gays have higher suicide rates, look at how they are treated. And I would like to see suicide statistics based on the type of household they grew up in. I call BS on that part. I know people who have gone through “conversion therapy” (torture) and contemplated suicide multiple times. Yes, this is just my small personal knowledge, but I stand firm on that when people are accepted for who they are, suicide rates drop. I have not seen a study on this though. If you have statistics to prove your assertions, please list them.

  • [-2] August 15, 2014 at 6:32pm

    First, yes. One man and one woman is an acceptable marriage. No where did Jesus say that 2 men or two women may not marry. And if the Bible didn’t mention homosexuality, then why do you have an issue with it? Why is it sinful to you? And once again (sigh) you cannot get an STI from a monogamous relationship. Do you even understand basic science?????

    So just because you don’t like the verses about women speaking in church and shaving, doesn’t mean they are any less valid? Good! So I assume you are now going to start speaking out against those “sins” right?

    Actually, man wrote the Bible, not God. But if the Bible is supposedly the infallible word of God, then you must be following ALL his rules, right? No shaving, no shellfish, no allowing women to speak in church or hold positions of authority. Don’t take it up with me, take it up with God!
    2-Yes, a straight marriage is an acceptable one. He never said 2 men or 2 women were not allowed to marry.
    3-Again, no. The Bible is mans word. And the Bible calls my relationship as much of a sin as a woman speaking in church.
    4- You assume that since you know I’m gay, you knows sex life. Nope. You know I am in a relationship with another man. How would that be different if I was in a relationship with a woman? Why do you suppose that is any different? You know just as much about my sex life and this woman’s sex life as I know about yours. Nothing.

  • [1] August 15, 2014 at 6:21pm

    Would you accept and promote the sin of women talking in church, or the sin of shaving? Oh? They aren’t sins? Neither is being gay then

    Yes, you can explain away any Bible verse if you want. I can explain away all the references to homosexuality as well. You can’t pick and choose which verses count and which ones to follow.

  • [-3] August 15, 2014 at 4:31pm

    The Bible (not God) give an acceptable definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. No where in the Bible does it ban marriage between a same sex couple. Also, the bible accepts and promotes polygamy and forced marriage. I don’t expect you to accept or condone my relationship (nor do I care) but I do care when you tell others that their relationship is somehow un-Christian or sinful. Especially when these people are just discovering who they are. This often leads to depression, self-loathing or even suicide when they cannot change. And this woman is saying that being gay is one small part of who she is. She never said it was her sole identity.

    Yes, you clearly have a much better grasp on reality. And you clearly know (magically I assume) which Bible verses count and which ones need to be explained away. Because somehow all the gay verses still apply, but you need greater context with the other crazy rules and they don’t apply today.

    Totally makes sense.

    Huh? Not sure I follow you. But if you’re saying to take all of the Bible at face value, then you must agree that women cannot be allowed to speak in church. That verse is pretty clear.

  • August 15, 2014 at 3:36pm

    So you wouldn’t mind if an organ wasn’t tested as long as it was from a straight person. If you get HIV, you can say, well that’s ok, statistically, that kidney had a lower chance of being infected that a gay persons. So I don’t mind that I’m dying now.

    No, they HAVE to test all of them. And organs are usually tested before removal. FYI.

    Also, straight people have higher rates of other STIs, like herpes and scabies.

  • [1] August 15, 2014 at 3:32pm

    Would you care to provide a reference for these “statistics”? Or are you just making them up?

    Actually, some animal organs have been transplanted into humans. The DNA doesn’t have to match exactly or else only twins would be able to donate. I don’t think you really understand this at all.

    Also, being gay is most definitely not a choice. Please google “gay genetics” for a basic overview. But twin studies which you seem to mention actually show a much high rate where both twins are gay that you would find in the general population. This shows that there is a clear genetic factor, even if it isn’t the sole cause. But if you think that being gay is a choice, there is an easy way to tell. Choose to be gay. Just for a little while. You don’t need to have sex, but choose to be attracted (physically, mentally, psychologically) to someone of your own gender. Feel the same way about someone of your own gender as you do about your spouse. I look forward to hearing how that goes.

  • [-6] August 15, 2014 at 3:12pm

    My argument? The Bible can be interpreted or twisted to mean just about anything. Instead of focusing on individual verses and condemning others, focus on the overall message of loving God, and helping your fellow man. There is nothing wrong with being gay, so stop making that such a big focus while using the Bible as an excuse for bigotry.

  • [-3] August 15, 2014 at 3:09pm

    Actually, I prefer the NRSV. More accurate translation. And yes, I have read the Bible the whole way through. And yes, you can explain away that verse, and just about any other verse in the Bible. Including the ones referencing homosexuality. That has been my point.

  • [-4] August 15, 2014 at 2:51pm

    First, my last post was rather mean-spirited and I apologize. Second, god did not say that, man did. Man wrote the Bible, not God. Finally, yes, we all need to follow God, and follow what we believe his plan for us is. This woman is gay and a Christian. She is following God still. Please do not pretend that she is not doing this.

  • [-2] August 15, 2014 at 2:47pm

    We can debate the meaning of Bible verses all day. My main point is that Bible verses can be twisted, manipulated and explained away and made to mean just about anything. Everyone has different interpretations. Of you have your own interpretation, great! But this singer has a different interpretation, as does the UCC and other churches. We cannot know who (if anyone) is right until we die. And while on earth, we cannot say that one is less valid than another. If you believe that being gay is sinful, that is your choice, your belief. This woman does not believe it is. All I ask is that you let this woman believe and worship as she wish, and not try to force your beliefs upon her or other gay Christians. And that you will not try to deny gays legal rights like marriage (legal marriage, not religious marriage).

  • [-2] August 15, 2014 at 2:40pm

    Actually, I am saying that none of them are sins. And that is you call homosexuality sinful, you must also call women speaking in church sinful. The Bible condemns both.

    Exactly. So the sin of homosexuality is no greater than the sin of a woman speaking in church. I’ll repent when all the women do.

  • [-2] August 15, 2014 at 2:31pm

    The thing is, this ban was not born out of science. It was born out of a fear at the start of the HIV epidemic. When there was little data on it and no treatment. Straight people also spread HIV. All blood and tissue is tested to make sure it is not diseases. The donors medical history is checked. The ban do no good, only stops potential life saving donations.

    No, I’m calling the ban against using gay peoples blood and tissue discriminatory. Straight people also have and pass HIV. And all blood and tissue is screened. So really the ban does no good at all.

  • [2] August 15, 2014 at 2:26pm

    I don’t think many of you are understanding this. If no gay blood or tissue is used for fear of transmitting HIV, are they not going to screen the rest? No, they will screen every donation to make sure it is safe. If one tainted organ or blood donation is diseased and gets through, it could mean death. With such high potential consequences, it all must be tested. So why ban gay donations? Do gays have higher rates of HIV? Yes. Do straight people have higher rates of other diseases like herpes and scabies? Yes. If one person is sick and needs a donation, they should be able to have access to it. Banning all gay donations is pointless. All it does is make it seem like all gays are diseased or unsafe. This isn’t true. The ban is potentially harmful to those who miss out on the blood or organs, and discriminatory. It is not helpful at all.

  • [-1] August 15, 2014 at 2:11pm

    The Timothy verse wasn’t the one I meant. It was another one against women. And if you really think that women shouldn’t speak in church, I pity you and your wife.

    Actually, the FDA ban is illogical and only really harms patients who need the new organs or blood. Scientists, doctors, they all a agree.

  • [-6] August 15, 2014 at 2:00pm

    Rape actively harms others. Being gay does not. Neither does a woman speaking in church. This is why the Bible verses against rape need to be followed, but those others I mentioned do not.

  • [-5] August 15, 2014 at 1:58pm

    If you and your wife agree to no longer be monogamous, that is not my business. But my boyfriend and I are monogamous. If you are going to condemn us for being gay because the Bible says so, you must also be condemning those women speaking in church. The Bible forbids that too.

    What is that excuse you and other use to explain away crazy Leviticus verses? Oh, these were only meant for the Jews in Israel. When Jesus came he nullified those and they no longer apply. In Romans, Paul is talking about straight men who were very promiscuous and left their wives. He says nothing about committed gay couples. The verse is more about fidelity and commitment than anything else. And obeying God. The Corinthians verse refers to sexually immoral, but again, this does not specifically mean gays. It means those who engage in sex outside of a meaningful relationship, or those who cheat on a partner.

    See? I can spout off a bunch of BS to explain away these verses too.

    I think I would enjoy a nice meal and worship service with you as well. Do not think I hate God or his followers. Do not think that I am just a heathen promoting hedonism. But there is nothing wrong with being gay. See my post above to pyro to see that ANY verse in the Bible can be twisted or explained away. Stop focusing on individual verses and focus on the overall message of love and helping your fellow man.

  • [-4] August 15, 2014 at 1:44pm

    If no sin is greater than another, then that means the “sin” of homosexuality is no greater than the “sin” of women speaking in church, or of women holding positions of authority, or of men shaving, etc. I don’t expect many people have repented of these “sins”.

123 To page: Go