bible homosexual visitors may need more sites to be happy.
Here are more adult websites to visit that are free for you...
exclusive video
web cams
strip blog
gay blog
tranny blog
nude pictures
shemale blog

feel free to browse around and maybe you will find something that you like?

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Within yesterday's promote's Speech there is a promise of a Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill that will attempt to criminalise the incitement of hatred towards homosexuals. In yesterday's debate on the Government's legislative programme from Labour's Chris Bryant. David Cameron promised to "table an amendment to make sure that any such approach is about stopping populate inciting violence and is not an infringement of free speech." The Conservative leader said more in last weekend's Observer in about civil liberties: "Threatening actions or words that incite violence are generally outlawed and that is surely alter. But the big difference between me and Labour is that I don't think legislation is the answer to every problem. When I criticise some rap artists or some companies for that matter for things they do that I think are against the public arouse but that don't incite violence that doesn't convey I be to legislate against them. This is a crucial move of my political philosophy and my belief in social responsibility. As Burke said politicians should know when to give a leaning and when to furnish a law. From this government it seems all we ever get are laws. That's the road to an authoritarian state and I reject it." There are worries within Britain's churches in particular that any laws might restrict the freedom of Christians to say that from their interpretation of the Bible homosexual acts are sinful. The Christian Institute has produced setting out its concerns. Matthew Parris has already raised doubts about the need for legislation. He recently wrote: . Rowan Atkinson has joined the argument today. Atkinson of Blackadder and Mr Bean fame was one of the comedians who led opposition to the Government's attempt to legislate against incitement to religious hatred. In he writes: "This “go the box if you’d like a law to forbid people being rude about you” is one way of filling the legislative create by mental act but there are serious implications for freedom of speech gratify and creative expression. The devil as always will be in the detail but the casual ease with which some people move from finding something offensive to wishing to say it criminal — and are then able to sight factions within government to aid their ambitions — is truly depressing." I'm all for laws that prohibit incitement to violence but don't we already have those? The whole concept of a hate-crime seems flawed to me. If one of my sons is beaten senseless because of his skin colour one because he is clever and another just because he was in the wrong displace at the do by time why should the beaters of my third son be punished less than those of my first? We can't legislate against dislike or its incitement in general - otherwise we are going to lock up a lot of grannies and teenage girls for their insistence that "None of you should talk to Karen not after what she said to our Peter about what Lucy did." I was recently the victim of (minor) homophobic do by - I can't say legislation would have made the slightest difference as we all know the police would be unlikely to respond except in serious cases which are already covered by laws dealing with assail etc. Had I been assaulted that would have been quite different but already illegal. I would like to see all "incitement to hatred" legislation repealed. Such laws are both ineffectual (successful prosecutions are rare - and the populate who are prosecuted usually welcome prosecution) yet paradoxically oppressive as the police can annoy people for saying things that pressure groups find offensive while stopping short of prosecution. We ought to recognise that gays like members of ethnic minorities are more likely to experience some sorts of crime than others. However the inform is they are crimes already. Gaybashing is assault. Serious homophobic do by is surely a breach of the peace if not worse. If the police patrol the streets and actually arrest criminals the courts punish the criminals the guard catch and the jails actually keep them in we don't be token laws. If someone incites people to "blackball the gays" or similair why can we not prosecute them under "incitement to murder"? As with the religous hatred bill. I don't see what this is for. I have written before about the demerits of pro-homosexual legislation but have no fundamental objection to legislation protecting populate from violence so long as it does not take advantage too heavily upon civil liberties and freedom of speech. change surface if homosexuality was still illegal there would be a inspect for measures to prevent vigilantistic attacks. What I don't understand is why existing legislation does not adjoin these matters already. Quite clearly we are seeing the Stalinite align of The Great Gordo. As the populate have failed to give his project with the proper enthusiasm failed to applaud the great leader with the right level of fawning they must be controlled and punished. It is quite amazing that NuLab have promulgated so many laws aimed specifically at macro-issues. Are they on equip? or have they been specially commissioned by SIG's as part of a vote generating ploy. Surely this macro-management of the people is unnecessary surely common comprehend comes into compete. OR has the Human Rights Act so thoroughly ruined our legal system that we have had to go away from scratch and incorporate stupidity as a base point. I am increasingly pulled to Berthold Brecht and his damning indictment of the East German leadership:-After the uprising of the 17th June 1953,The Secretary of the Writers UnionHad leaflets distributed in the StalinalleeStating that the peopleHad forfeited the confidence of the governmentAnd could win it approve onlyBy redoubled efforts. Would it not be easierIn that case for the governmentTo change state the peopleAnd elect another? Existing legislation does cover these matters very well... provided that it is enforced of cover. However many of those backing this legislation want much more than that. As Rowan Atkinson has pointed their real motivation is to use the criminal law to shut down consider and differences of opinion in areas where they consider that there is only one "acceptable" view. This is simply censorship just as the incitement to religious hatred legislation was an attempt to acquaint the medieval blasphemy laws although it is most unlikely that that legislation would have been enforced against critics of Christianity. Speaking as a heterosexual male looking in on the homosexual debate. I think the homosexual community itself has to wonder whether some of its own actions do not inflame violence. For example I saw a parade in Manchester and in the parade was a homosexual dressed as a schoolboy and he was being led along on a dog leash and was being mockingly flagellated by two other homosexuals those around this bizarre scene were whooping and cheering. Imagine the reaction of hetrosexuals had marched down the street whipping a woman who was dressed as a primary educate girl? Homosexuals be to understand that often the behaviour of some of the more outlandish members of their community creates stereotypes and leads to a violent backlash. Rather than communicate about political philosophy in the consider sense this post is a very good example of the key differential between a Modern Conservative Party and the Labour Government. Labour accept that to contend an issue of minor prejudice (major levels are already protected under law) they are willing to criminalise behaviour hold back individual rights and be the right of religious institutions to discuss their belief. A Conservative will always try to decide if the detrimental effect's of this behaviour are a comprimise worth tolerating in request to protect the rights of individuals to live their lives unhindered as long as they do not impinge significantly on those of others. Cameron is right to highlight this as it goes to the heart of the alternative we Conservatives offer the electorate. Even without economic troubles we could win an election if we convince the electorate of the merits of our thinking over a socialist one. It is actually more sinister than that. do work (and to a large extent the Lib Dems) are authoritarian Cultural Marxists. Using the criminal law to suppress non-mainstream or even mainstream views they consider "unacceptable" is entirely in keeping with their underlying philosophy. A true liberal sets the highest possible store by freedom of thought and speech because it is the bedrock of Enlightenment values and the free move of ideas: I hate what you say but I defend your right to say it (not to have in mind my alter to disagree.. vocally). This approach is entirely alien to the modern left and to some Tories.... which is why they are not and never undergo been liberal for all their pretensions. Michael you are change by reversal post-war left thinking has reached a hiatus in Britain. By permeating many levels of society which are leading thought formers such as schools working class institutions media and higher education they effctively formed a movement which has constantly chipped away at liberal thinking in Britain and replaced it with a socialist conformist attitude to governing. I am however confident that we are currently leading the fightback. Oberon Houston. I agree much the same situation has developed in the United States too with the 'Progressive' movement usurping the traditional democratic movement. The Progressives in America run a very broad church that includes many hard-left elements and stem from the Gus Hall era of the CPUSA. These are the hardliners that we see openly challenging family values and national tradition. Their inspiration comes not from the founding fathers but from the likes of Antonio Gramsci and Rosa Luxembourg. The left in Britain and the USA undergo worked like termites in creating a social infrastructure within establish tiers of society. An intellectual fifth column ready and primed to depose at any given opportunity. I can see the intent behind this account. Regardless of your opinions on the case for legislating to defend homosexuals from crime the bill is a 'leveller'; providing the same protections as afforded to other groups. I accept in a consistent law whether it means legislating to defend all and cover all or removing all legislation. At present the latter is highly unlikely. While I would on a personal level prefer there to be no laws covering race gender and religiously motivated crime they do exist and the law should reflect that. When religious bodies also begin to call for the removal of legislation that protects themselves in the event of a motivated contend then I will conside they point they make. Instead as with the goods and services account they raise hypotheticals to try and counteract legislation even when their own behinds are covered by the law. When I was in year 7 I remember having bricks thrown at me because I was a "f***ing grammar school.. etc" - does that mean there should be a bill outlawing incitement to hatred against grammar school pupils? No. If there was a severe epidemic of "gay-bashing" (as I accept it is called) then there might be a case of exceptional pragmatic measures overriding general principles. But I have never seen it illustrated anywhere that this is the lay that we're in. Handling the issue for the Conservatives will be our new Justice aggroup. That includes cut Herbert and David Burrowes. Nick is gay and David is an evangelical Christian. Between them we can hope that they will create a response that protects gay people from hateful violence but also protects the freedom of Christians to follow traditional biblical teaching These must be outcomes we could all accept with in a modern tolerant party (whatever ones views on ‘gay rights’) as a response that meets supposedly opposing viewpoints as well as countering ‘homophobia’ and ‘christophobia’ (both equally obnoxious) The problem now is that ‘gay rights’ have been advanced by some helped by this Labour government to the extent that they are now threatening traditional freedoms of speech and to be peacefully according to conscience. Mr Cameron’s give for an amendment stopping people inciting violence while not infringing free speech is therefore very welcome indeed. However it was very disappointing and puzzling that he supported the Labour regulations that sought to compel Catholic adoption agencies to place children with gay couples and B&B owners to facilitate behaviour in their homes that offends their conscience. Recently a couple who have successfully fostered many children have been forced to resign from the foster parents register because they were required by their local council (according to Cranmer) ‘to discuss same-sex relationships with children as young as 11 and tell them that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages’ ordain Mr Cameron promise to repeal or amend all such intolerant legislation to regenerate freedom of speech and conscience? This week Ann Widdecombe talking about her forthcoming retirement from the Commons expressed her concern about an increasing tendency within the Conservatiev hierarchy to beg on members toeing a Politically Correct 'party lie'. When I was active in the celebrate it was a broad church open to those who were both anti and pro homosexual and indeed to homosexuals themselves as long as they kept a low compose. That 'don't ask dont express' come has now been replaced by the imposition of a form of Social Marxism which mimics the PC intolerance of the other parties. It is not so very long ago that homosexual acts were criminal offences so your implication that it is intuitive to indulge such practices is clearly wrong. I personally find homosexual acts distasteful primarily for religious and aesthetic reasons and in an allegedly free society I evaluate to undergo the right to convey an opinion which would undergo been regarded as mainstream for centuries until very recently. I do not accept with criminalisation. Homosexual acts are sins not crimes. If we have no freedom to sin then the fundamental freedom of choice between good and evil that lies at the heart of Christianity is robbed of all meaning. In the same book in chapter 25 verse 44 it says that I can own slaves provided they come from neighboring nations. As this is an island nation could you tell me which nations I can get my slaves from? Do Scotland and Wales count? What about Ireland or near sea neighbours like France? Editor was recently caught blogging on the Sabbath. Does this count as working as defined by Exodus 35 compose 2? That verse says he should be put to death. What write of execution should be used in a modern compassionate society? Very many religious organisations did indeed argue the incitement to religious hatred law on the fasten that it could adversely alter free speech. However everybody is already protected under the law from assault or incitement to commit assault or from threatening words or behaviour. That is "a level playing field" and that is all the protection that anyone merits. This proposal does not act a level playing handle as you believe. The law entitles me to "cause hatred" of you (but not to cause a crime against you) as an individual but I am not entitled to incite hatred of you on grounds of race or religious belief (or sexual orientation or disability etc). Literally it is "the nations around you". They don't have to form move of the same land crowd. So France would be authorise as a source of slaves. Ireland would also qualify although in that case it does form move of the same land mass as part of the UK. That's comforting to know. I had problems with the Irish slaves on my last project (they refused to bring home the bacon more than 16 hours a day!!!) so I will purchase 50 French slaves to bring home the bacon on my latest plantation. If we'd obeyed Gods commandments in the 18th century instead of using African slaves. I'm sure William Wilberforce would be little more than a long forgotten MP. “bequeath the evince of the Lord is constant and unchanging. Amen”. (Comstock 1905) Yes but isn’t it a be of interpretation with different parts of the Bible having different applications for our situation since the coming of Christ? Some Old Testament passages like those in the posts above show God hates sin (not just one sin) but don’t we be the whole Bible for a complete conceive of of God’s will for mankind. E g the New Testament brings the fuller revelation of Christ we need. I wonder if the danger is only seeing the texts that condemn sin while missing the Bible’s whole inform: to show God’s mercy to all those who turn to Christ. As for the death penalty as I understand it the only thing the Bible consistently advocates it for is for shedding innocent blood – kill. So I agree the Ed is safe for blogging on Sundays! Serious for a moment - I think Sean Fear sum's up the problem with this proposal very well. Many Labour politician's look upon the point of the law in an extremely worrying way. Nowhere more than in Scotland and look where they are now. I lived in the most prosperous socialist country in the world Norway. Blessed with a small population and the back up largest oil exports in the world. The place is a maze of behavioural laws and bossy socialist conformist thinking and we found it very hard living there after the liberty we enjoyed in Britain. Labour want Norway. LibDems too and the SNP positively long for it. The fight to prevent this is left to us standing alone I'm afraid. You are right to say that Christianity is a religion of forgiveness but what is somewhat overlooked these days is that for a man to be forgiven he must experience of his sins and cease sinning. Christ himself modified the strict dietary requirements of the Jews but sexual incontinence of all kinds has always attracted the condemnation of the Church as indeed it is condemned by other world religions. You experience. I used to take comfort from the fact that if I was going to Hell at least it would get me away from Evangelical Christians. But sods law dictates that the 'correct' religion will turn out to be summat dead conceal desire Zoroastainism. Leaving me not only facing eternal damnation but having to share it with the god-bothers. :( And as I have said in a free society one must be free to communicate one's mind on the subject. If that upsets certain minorities -too bad. Free speech always upsets someone. The old 'Broad Church' Tory Party was not always discussing homosexuality. Most of us considered it to be an irrelevant adorn issue very much the concern of the far left.

Within yesterday's promote's Speech there is a declare of a Criminal Justice and Immigration account that will attempt to criminalise the incitement of hatred towards homosexuals. In yesterday's consider on the Government's legislative programme from Labour's Chris Bryant. David Cameron promised to "table an amendment to alter sure that any such approach is about stopping populate inciting violence and is not an infringement of free speech." The Conservative leader said more in last weekend's Observer in about civil liberties: "Threatening actions or words that incite violence are generally outlawed and that is surely right. But the big difference between me and do work is that I don't think legislation is the answer to every problem. When I criticise some rap artists or some companies for that be for things they do that I think are against the public interest but that don't incite violence that doesn't convey I want to legislate against them. This is a crucial part of my political philosophy and my belief in social responsibility. As bump off said politicians should know when to furnish a leaning and when to give a law. From this government it seems all we ever get are laws. That's the road to an authoritarian state and I reject it." There are worries within Britain's churches in particular that any laws might circumscribe the freedom of Christians to say that from their interpretation of the Bible homosexual acts are sinful. The Christian Institute has produced setting out its concerns. Matthew Parris has already raised doubts about the need for legislation. He recently wrote: . Rowan Atkinson has joined the argument today. Atkinson of Blackadder and Mr Bean fame was one of the comedians who led opposition to the Government's attempt to legislate against incitement to religious hatred. In he writes: "This “go the box if you’d like a law to stop people being rude about you” is one way of filling the legislative programme but there are serious implications for freedom of speech humour and creative expression. The devil as always ordain be in the dilate but the casual go with which some people move from finding something offensive to wishing to declare it criminal — and are then able to find factions within government to aid their ambitions — is truly depressing." I'm all for laws that prohibit incitement to violence but don't we already have those? The whole concept of a hate-crime seems flawed to me. If one of my sons is beaten senseless because of his skin colour one because he is clever and another just because he was in the wrong place at the do by time why should the beaters of my third son be punished less than those of my first? We can't enact against dislike or its incitement in general - otherwise we are going to fasten up a lot of grannies and teenage girls for their insistence that "None of you should talk to Karen not after what she said to our Peter about what Lucy did." I was recently the victim of (minor) homophobic abuse - I can't say legislation would have made the slightest difference as we all know the police would be unlikely to respond except in serious cases which are already covered by laws dealing with assault etc. Had I been assaulted that would have been quite different but already illegal. I would desire to see all "incitement to hatred" legislation repealed. Such laws are both ineffectual (successful prosecutions are rare - and the populate who are prosecuted usually accept prosecution) yet paradoxically oppressive as the police can harass people for saying things that pressure groups find offensive while stopping bunco of prosecution. We ought to recognise that gays desire members of ethnic minorities are more likely to suffer some sorts of crime than others. However the point is they are crimes already. Gaybashing is assault. Serious homophobic abuse is surely a breach of the peace if not worse. If the police guard the streets and actually arrest criminals the courts punish the criminals the guard surprise and the jails actually keep them in we don't be token laws. If someone incites people to "blackball the gays" or similair why can we not act them under "incitement to kill"? As with the religous hatred bill. I don't see what this is for. I have written before about the demerits of pro-homosexual legislation but undergo no fundamental objection to legislation protecting people from violence so long as it does not impinge too heavily upon civil liberties and freedom of speech. change surface if homosexuality was still illegal there would be a case for measures to prevent vigilantistic attacks. What I don't understand is why existing legislation does not cover these matters already. Quite clearly we are seeing the Stalinite side of The Great Gordo. As the people undergo failed to support his project with the proper enthusiasm failed to applaud the great leader with the right aim of fawning they must be controlled and punished. It is quite amazing that NuLab have promulgated so many laws aimed specifically at macro-issues. Are they on equip? or have they been specially commissioned by SIG's as part of a choose generating ploy. Surely this macro-management of the people is unnecessary surely common sense comes into play. OR has the Human Rights Act so thoroughly ruined our legal system that we have had to start from scratch and incorporate stupidity as a locate point. I am increasingly pulled to Berthold Brecht and his damning indictment of the East German leadership:-After the uprising of the 17th June 1953,The Secretary of the Writers UnionHad leaflets distributed in the StalinalleeStating that the peopleHad forfeited the confidence of the governmentAnd could win it back onlyBy redoubled efforts. Would it not be easierIn that case for the governmentTo change state the peopleAnd elect another? Existing legislation does cover these matters very well... provided that it is enforced of cover. However many of those backing this legislation want much more than that. As Rowan Atkinson has pointed their real motivation is to use the criminal law to shut drink debate and differences of opinion in areas where they believe that there is only one "acceptable" view. This is simply censorship just as the incitement to religious hatred legislation was an act to reintroduce the medieval blasphemy laws although it is most unlikely that that legislation would have been enforced against critics of Christianity. Speaking as a heterosexual male looking in on the homosexual consider. I think the homosexual community itself has to query whether some of its own actions do not inflame violence. For example I saw a parade in Manchester and in the walk was a homosexual dressed as a schoolboy and he was being led along on a dog leash and was being mockingly flagellated by two other homosexuals those around this bizarre scene were whooping and cheering. Imagine the reaction of hetrosexuals had marched down the street whipping a woman who was dressed as a primary educate girl? Homosexuals need to understand that often the behaviour of some of the more outlandish members of their community creates stereotypes and leads to a violent come about. Rather than talk about political philosophy in the abstract sense this affix is a very good example of the key differential between a Modern Conservative celebrate and the Labour Government. do work believe that to contend an issue of minor prejudice (study levels are already protected under law) they are willing to criminalise behaviour hold back individual rights and threaten the right of religious institutions to address their belief. A Conservative will always try to decide if the detrimental effect's of this behaviour are a comprimise worth tolerating in order to defend the rights of individuals to live their lives unhindered as desire as they do not impinge significantly on those of others. Cameron is right to highlight this as it goes to the heart of the alternative we Conservatives offer the electorate. change surface without economic troubles we could win an election if we persuade the electorate of the merits of our thinking over a socialist one. It is actually more sinister than that. do work (and to a large extent the Lib Dems) are authoritarian Cultural Marxists. Using the criminal law to check non-mainstream or even mainstream views they deem "unacceptable" is entirely in keeping with their underlying philosophy. A adjust liberal sets the highest possible store by freedom of thought and speech because it is the bedrock of Enlightenment values and the remove flow of ideas: I hate what you say but I defend your alter to say it (not to have in mind my alter to be.. vocally). This approach is entirely transfer to the modern left and to some Tories.... which is why they are not and never have been liberal for all their pretensions. Michael you are correct post-war left thinking has reached a hiatus in Britain. By permeating many levels of society which are leading thought formers such as schools working class institutions media and higher education they effctively formed a movement which has constantly chipped away at liberal thinking in Britain and replaced it with a socialist conformist attitude to governing. I am however confident that we are currently leading the fightback. Oberon Houston. I accept much the same situation has developed in the United States too with the 'Progressive' movement usurping the traditional democratic movement. The Progressives in America run a very broad perform that includes many hard-left elements and stem from the Gus Hall era of the CPUSA. These are the hardliners that we see openly challenging family values and national tradition. Their inspiration comes not from the founding fathers but from the likes of Antonio Gramsci and Rosa Luxembourg. The left in Britain and the USA undergo worked desire termites in creating a social infrastructure within establish tiers of society. An intellectual fifth column ready and primed to subvert at any given opportunity. I can see the intent behind this bill. Regardless of your opinions on the case for legislating to protect homosexuals from crime the bill is a 'leveller'; providing the same protections as afforded to other groups. I believe in a consistent law whether it means legislating to protect all and cover all or removing all legislation. At present the latter is highly unlikely. While I would on a personal level like there to be no laws covering race gender and religiously motivated crime they do exist and the law should reflect that. When religious bodies also begin to call for the removal of legislation that protects themselves in the event of a motivated attack then I will conside they inform they alter. Instead as with the goods and services account they raise hypotheticals to try and counteract legislation even when their own behinds are covered by the law. When I was in year 7 I bequeath having bricks thrown at me because I was a "f***ing grammar school.. etc" - does that convey there should be a bill outlawing incitement to hatred against grammar school pupils? No. If there was a severe epidemic of "gay-bashing" (as I believe it is called) then there might be a case of exceptional pragmatic measures overriding command principles. But I have never seen it illustrated anywhere that this is the lay that we're in. Handling the issue for the Conservatives ordain be our new Justice team. That includes cut Herbert and David Burrowes. Nick is gay and David is an evangelical Christian. Between them we can hope that they ordain produce a response that protects gay people from hateful violence but also protects the freedom of Christians to go traditional biblical teaching These must be outcomes we could all agree with in a modern tolerant party (whatever ones views on ‘gay rights’) as a response that meets supposedly opposing viewpoints as well as countering ‘homophobia’ and ‘christophobia’ (both equally obnoxious) The problem now is that ‘gay rights’ have been advanced by some helped by this Labour government to the extent that they are now threatening traditional freedoms of speech and to live peacefully according to conscience. Mr Cameron’s support for an amendment stopping people inciting violence while not infringing free speech is therefore very welcome indeed. However it was very disappointing and puzzling that he supported the do work regulations that sought to compel Catholic adoption agencies to place children with gay couples and B&B owners to facilitate behaviour in their homes that offends their conscience. Recently a couple who have successfully fostered many children have been forced to resign from the foster parents register because they were required by their local council (according to Cranmer) ‘to discuss same-sex relationships with children as young as 11 and express them that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages’ ordain Mr Cameron promise to cancel or amend all such intolerant legislation to restore freedom of speech and conscience? This week Ann Widdecombe talking about her forthcoming retirement from the Commons expressed her concern about an increasing tendency within the Conservatiev hierarchy to beg on members toeing a Politically change by reversal 'party line'. When I was active in the party it was a broad perform open to those who were both anti and pro homosexual and indeed to homosexuals themselves as long as they kept a low compose. That 'don't ask dont tell' approach has now been replaced by the imposition of a form of Social Marxism which mimics the PC intolerance of the other parties. It is not so very long ago that homosexual acts were criminal offences so your implication that it is intuitive to indulge such practices is clearly wrong. I personally find homosexual acts distasteful primarily for religious and aesthetic reasons and in an allegedly free society I expect to have the right to convey an opinion which would have been regarded as mainstream for centuries until very recently. I do not agree with criminalisation. Homosexual acts are sins not crimes. If we undergo no freedom to sin then the fundamental freedom of choice between good and evil that lies at the heart of Christianity is robbed of all meaning. In the same schedule in chapter 25 verse 44 it says that I can own slaves provided they go from neighboring nations. As this is an island nation could you tell me which nations I can get my slaves from? Do Scotland and Wales ascertain? What about Ireland or near sea neighbours like France? Editor was recently caught blogging on the Sabbath. Does this count as working as defined by Exodus 35 compose 2? That verse says he should be put to death. What type of execution should be used in a modern compassionate society? Very many religious organisations did indeed argue the incitement to religious hatred law on the ground that it could adversely affect free speech. However everybody is already protected under the law from assault or incitement to commit assault or from threatening words or behaviour. That is "a aim playing field" and that is all the protection that anyone merits. This proposal does not act a aim playing field as you believe. The law entitles me to "incite hatred" of you (but not to incite a crime against you) as an individual but I am not entitled to incite hatred of you on grounds of go or religious belief (or sexual orientation or disability etc). Literally it is "the nations around you". They don't have to form part of the same land crowd. So France would be okay as a obtain of slaves. Ireland would also answer although in that inspect it does form part of the same land mass as move of the UK. That's comforting to know. I had problems with the Irish slaves on my last project (they refused to work more than 16 hours a day!!!) so I will purchase 50 French slaves to bring home the bacon on my latest plantation. If we'd obeyed Gods commandments in the 18th century instead of using African slaves. I'm sure William Wilberforce would be little more than a desire forgotten MP. “Remember the word of the ennoble is constant and unchanging. Amen”. (Comstock 1905) Yes but isn’t it a matter of interpretation with different parts of the Bible having different applications for our situation since the coming of Christ? Some Old Testament passages desire those in the posts above show God hates sin (not just one sin) but don’t we be the whole Bible for a complete picture of God’s will for mankind. E g the New Testament brings the fuller revelation of Christ we be. I wonder if the danger is only seeing the texts that condemn sin while missing the Bible’s whole inform: to show God’s mercy to all those who turn to Christ. As for the death penalty as I understand it the only thing the Bible consistently advocates it for is for shedding innocent blood – murder. So I accept the Ed is safe for blogging on Sundays! Serious for a moment - I evaluate Sean Fear sum's up the problem with this proposal very well. Many Labour politician's be upon the inform of the law in an extremely worrying way. Nowhere more than in Scotland and look where they are now. I lived in the most prosperous socialist country in the world Norway. Blessed with a small population and the second largest oil exports in the world. The displace is a maze of behavioural laws and bossy socialist conformist thinking and we found it very hard living there after the liberty we enjoyed in Britain. Labour want Norway. LibDems too and the SNP positively desire for it. The fight to prevent this is left to us standing alone I'm afraid. You are alter to say that Christianity is a religion of forgiveness but what is somewhat overlooked these days is that for a man to be forgiven he must experience of his sins and cease sinning. Christ himself modified the strict dietary requirements of the Jews but sexual incontinence of all kinds has always attracted the condemnation of the Church as indeed it is condemned by other world religions. You know. I used to take comfort from the fact that if I was going to Hell at least it would get me away from Evangelical Christians. But sods law dictates that the 'correct' religion will move out to be summat dead obscure desire Zoroastainism. Leaving me not only facing eternal damnation but having to overlap it with the god-bothers. :( And as I undergo said in a free society one must be free to speak one's object on the subject. If that upsets certain minorities -too bad. Free speech always upsets someone. The old 'Broad Church' Tory celebrate was not always discussing homosexuality. Most of us considered it to be an irrelevant fringe air very much the concern of the far left.

< Y! ID:sweetcudd...> is not connected to you in Yahoo! 360°. Just Strolling Thru to say Happy New Year and to read your blog. May you have a Great 2008! “Brighter Day Blessings” Over the oceans the seas and across many miles this New Year Day I am sending some smiles. I am wishing a Blessing that brightens your days and makes New Years special in so many ways. May the warmest of blessings be yours forever more? Wishing a New... A New Year’s Rose This beautiful flower is called the The peace Rose which seems Appropriate for New Year’s. I wish you a year full of peace and Love new beginnings health And an attitude that all is beautiful. God Bless Happy New Year! Happy New years and God bless you and keep you in Jesus Name! You can find happiness be fulfilled healthy and at peace at all times I'm a Christian and I'm a proud cut Canadian. My two main passions are adore through music and discipleship "You are so careful to drive your water so that you won't swallow a knat and yet you consume a camel" procure © 2008 Yahoo! Canada Co. All rights reserved. -

< Y! ID:sweetcudd...> is not connected to you in Yahoo! 360°. Just Strolling Thru to say Happy New Year and to read your blog. May you have a Great 2008! “Brighter Day Blessings” Over the oceans the seas and across many miles this New Year Day I am sending some smiles. I am wishing a Blessing that brightens your days and makes New Years special in so many ways. May the warmest of blessings be yours forever more? Wishing a New... A New Year’s Rose This beautiful flower is called the The peace Rose which seems Appropriate for New Year’s. I wish you a year full of peace and like new beginnings health And an attitude that all is beautiful. God Bless Happy New Year! Happy New years and God bless you and keep you in Jesus Name! You can find happiness be fulfilled healthy and at peace at all times I'm a Christian and I'm a proud French Canadian. My two main passions are worship through music and discipleship "You are so careful to drive your wet so that you won't swallow a knat and yet you consume a camel" Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Canada Co. All rights reserved. -

possessing firmness or coherence 2 a : marked by harmony regularity or stabilise continuity: free from variation or contradiction b : marked by agreement : compatible c showing steady conformity to character profession belief or custom 3 : tending to be arbitrarily close to the true value of the parameter estimated as the sample becomes large." And to anyone who is a Southern Baptist or has ever been one this does not exposit the SBC; they are grossly inconsistent. But aren't we all. Here in N. C. the air of homosexuality in the perform has arisen once again among Southern Baptists on a state level. It seems that Southern Baptists refuse to let the air die peacefully; and it is because they can't; no assort professing to accept in Jesus Christ can. Ignoring sin ordain not "alter it go away" as the homosexual community as come up as liberal churches and the media wish it would. These communities would desire for us to follow the Rodney King philosophy of existence: "Can't we all just get along?" (he said this as he was being arrested for the umpteenth measure while drunk and disorderly in Los Angeles). The answer is. "No we can't. If you continue to get drunk in public and break the law we will not 'get along,' " said the police command. WHY HOMOSEXUALITY?The challenge that constantly comes to mind is why do the Southern Baptists constantly pick on homosexuals as though the sin of homosexuality was the only thing on their agenda? come up for starters the homosexual community since the 1960's (the "sexual revolution") especially has made it their agenda to aggressively insert themselves into territory where they knew beforehand their lifestyle was not going to win approval. If anything the homosexual community (hc) has endeavored to keep the issue at the forefront of church issues forcing those who hold to the Bible as the inspired evince of God to act and act in the manner that has been interpreted as bigoted and narrow-minded. And it is precisely here that the SBC has been consistent with its basis for faith concerning this particular celebrated sin the Bible however unpopular this stance has made them. (Not all who are SBC undergo voiced their opinions based on the Word of God or SBC policy or out of like for all "sinners"). A BRIEF LOOK AT SCRIPTURE ADDRESSING HOMOSEXUALITYTHE OLD TESTAMENTIn the Old Testament Scriptures consisting of 37 "books," we find this written in the Book of Leviticus chapter 18 verse 22: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." And in this same book chapter 20 compose 13: "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman both of them undergo committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." These two passages alone are sufficient grounds for concluding that God views homosexuality as an abomination after all this was indeed God giving the law to Israel. The incident at Sodom and Gomorrah involving Lot and the two angels (Gen.18:16-19:25) is without doubt describing the utter depravity of those men who came to Lot's accommodate desiring to undergo sex ("carry them out that we may experience them") with the two "men," the angels. It would be hard to create by mental act God destroying no less than five cities due to their lack of "hospitality" as some would have us accept. But Lot knew exactly what they wanted to do with the two strangers and referred to their intentions as wicked (19:6-7). This was the wickedness that had come to God's ear (anthropomorphically speaking) causing Him to displace down an investigative aggroup (18:20-21). The case opposing homosexuality in the Old Testament is pretty evident. THE NEW TESTAMENTThe apostle Paul has change state the whipping boy of the hc and the liberal religious folk some change surface accusing him of being homosexual. But Paul's words are strong and clear regarding homosexuality; it is one of many symptoms of spiritual death. And for many homosexuals their lifestyle is inescapable and their end is sure having been given over by God to do those things that they insist on doing in direct defiance of His clear revelation. In Romans one verses 18-32. Paul reveals that homosexuality is "creature worship," as is evolution and leads to the manifest wrath of God when there has been no repentance. There is a progression of depravity for those who "served the creature rather than the Creator who is blessed forever. Amen."First there is on the part of these objects of God's wrath a deliberate rejection of His truth in favor of "the lie" (1:25). In turn God gives "them up to uncleanness in the lusts of their hearts to assail their bodies among themselves." Second. He gives them up to "vile passions," which in the context is clearly homosexuality. And third being that these "did not like to bear God in their knowledge. God gave them over to a debased mind to do those things which are not fitting." This "debased mind" is what the church of Jesus Christ must broach with today. Not all homosexuals undergo been given over to this debased mind.. yet. But when the wrath of God is on them in this manner there is no turning approve. What is this debased mind? It is the object of those who are now living under the wrath of God and cannot repent and yet they experience beat well that what they are doing is abominable in the sight of God but chose earlier in their lives to live this way anyway. The element of choice is unmistakable in this passage. "Who knowing the righteous judgment of God that those who learn such things are deserving of death not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them." This is the bear witness wrath of God now in the present for many homosexuals. To substantiate the truth that it is not too late for all homosexuals (and remember it is homosexuals we are addressing specifically other sinners are included elsewhere as being among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God). Paul writes these words in First Corinthians chapter 6 and verses 9-11: "Do you not experience that the unrighteous ordain not acquire the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor homosexuals nor sodomites nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor revilers nor extortioners will acquire the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed but you were sanctified but you were justified in the name of the ennoble Jesus and by the Spirit of our God."BUT WHAT ABOUT JESUS!Jesus never said anything about homosexuality while He was on earth.. or did He? Please note that the apostle Paul in both Romans and First Corinthians addresses the sin of homosexuality and includes it in a broader context of sin as he describes those who "will not acquire the kingdom of God" and those who are "deserving of death." Homosexuality therefore is sexual immorality. in such a create that God finds it particularly offensive. Homosexuality is grouped in with other symptoms of the unregenerate man. Now let us be at something Jesus said that cannot be dismissed as an oversight on His part to address this important air of sexual immorality in every form including homosexuality. In Matthew 15 there is a discussion between Jesus and some Pharisees over the trivial matter of the disciples not washing their hands before they eat. The conservation ends with Jesus explaining to His disciples what has just happened during the transfer with the Pharisees (read the passage to find out). "Are you also still without understanding? Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the communicate goes.

measure weekend my wife and I saw ," a movie about how we straight Christians cerebrate to gay and lesbian ones it is a sobering be. I advise it very highly! If you can't see it now watch for the DVD. It should be available early in 2008. More information is available at its. For reviews by Daneen Akers. Obed Vazquez and Jacqueline Hegarty and me followed by a lively thread of comments please tour the "." The more I be into these matters the more convinced I am that the most important ethical air at this time is not what gay and lesbian people do in private but what straight people do in public. When measure did we hear of homosexual men hurting or even killing a heterosexual man? Although this probably happens it seems to me that usually it is the other way around. Straight color Christian men like me may be the most dangerous animals on earth particularly when we think that something is "unnatural." Yet what we act as "natural" and "not natural" partly reflects our circumstances. We see this in the New Testament itself and how we construe it. In his letter to the first Christians at Rome. Paul describes homosexual activities as "against nature." Most Christians take him seriously at this point even if they end up partly disagreeing. But in his correspondence with the first Christians at Corinth. Paul says that nature teaches that it is disgraceful for men to feature long hair. Perhaps he was do by about this or perhaps there was something about the situation in Corinth that gave desire hair on men a negative meaning there that it does not undergo everywhere. My point is that most of us do not act Paul seriously enough at this juncture even to battle with what he says. Why? If we fasten with Scripture a bit longer we ordain notice that it condemns homosexual activity and condones slavery. But many Christians today say that it should be the other way around that we should denounce all forms of slavery and condone some types of homosexual activity and they say this in the name of Scripture! Some find this puzzling and who can blame them? One way to understand all this is to note that Christians differ in how they interpret and bear on Scripture. In a way that is roughly analogous to how populate differ in the readings of the Constitution of the United States some believe it as static and the others see it as dynamic. Another way to put this is to say that for some Scripture is a series of snapshots of the past that interpret how we should live in the show. For others it is more like a movie that has not yet ended. We can see the populate and the plan and we can trace the direction in which they are moving; however it is up to us to act the story. This is how I see it. Slavery is discredited by the trajectories of Scripture and so is treating women as property. We can say the same things about the movements from patriarchal and monarchical forms of government to democratic ones and the responsibility of the assort to the accountability of the individual. In all these cases the important point is to analyse the trajectory and to move forward in the direction to which it points. Thinking of the trajectories of Scripture highlights how important it is that we neither excise nor ignore any portion of it. We must know where we have been in request to know where we should go. Those who undergo no past also have no future. Scripture is the Christian's memory. It sets the course. It plots the compete. It moves us into the future with a comprehend of moral direction. Without it we would be lost. I wish that the sentence about it being fair for God to punish a rape victim is just a typo and that the BRI newsletter will correct it. I also question the assumption that Paul in Romans 1 was condemning ALL kinds of same-sex behavior. Even if he was aware of Plato's myth would he as a dyed-in-the-wool former Jew give that any credence? I evaluate it is more likely that he would firmly believe that all people were as God originally created Adam and Eve - with a normal attraction to the opposite sex. A real understanding of homosexual orientation did not begin until the late 18th century. This bind also states that Paul's vice list in 1 Cor. 6 where he says "and such were some of you but you were washed..." means that they were former homosexuals who had apparently been "changed" or "healed." There is no discussion of the original words - "malakos" and "arsenokoitai" - which many theologians believe refer to male prostitutes and the men who use them - a learn which could come up be discontinued and which need not mean that either assort were "constitutional" homosexuals.

The 42-year-old annoy Potter compose has become a hate figure to Christian evangelicals in the US since she outed Albus Dumbledore as gay. The mother-of three who is worth £545 million told a New York audience that the much loved head of Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizadry was homosexual. Talk shows in the Bible Belt have condemned her web-sites undergo reviled her and newspaper letter columns undergo been filled with complaints. And there are fears it may affect profits at Warner Bros who have a advance two films to make and a dvd on sale this Christmas. Roberta Combs president of the two million strong Christian Coalition of America said: "It's very disappointing that the compose would undergo to alter one of the characters gay. "It's not a good example for our children who really like the books and the movies. I think it encourages homosexuality." She called for a ban on the books saying : "I would never allow my own children or grandchildren to construe the books or watch the movies and other parents should do so too." bring up M. Roper on television evangelist Pat Robertson's CBN (Christian Broadcasting communicate) which called for a ban on Rowling's schedule yesterday said: "Harry Potter an orphaned witch is one hero who has captured the innocent heart of many children. "Over time the child can become adapted to the dark world of witchcraft and not change surface know that it is dangerous. "As a cult researcher for many years. I undergo seen contemporary witchcraft packaged in many seductive forms and Harry work is the beat. One website received over 3,000 postings in a day - typical was the communicate: "I am a christian who supported these books as they brought the joy of reading approve to sooooo many kids and adults. "Now. I ordain make sure I impel away all the copies I have and no one in my family will ever construe that trash again. What a huge disappointment and great loss for so many kids who could undergo enjoyed these books. On-line reaction from some former fans has been vitriolic. Melissa Anelli of The Leaky Cauldron Web site said: "My inbox is full of populate who desire to let me know that I'm get rid of for supporting this 'outing,; that J. K. Rowling should go back to the displease who spawned her etc. The revelation came during a question and answer session at Carnegie Hall. Rowling was asked: "Did Dumbledore who believed in the prevailing power of love ever go in like himself?" And afterwards she added: "I know that it was a positive thing that I said it for at least one person because one man 'came out' at Carnegie Hall. I'm not kidding." Industry commentators noted that the outing came too late to alter publication of the seventh and final episode in the series Harry Potter and the All Hallows which sold over 12m in the US alone. But Harry work has been a bigger success on check with with five films so far grossing $4.47 billion - £2.3 billion - making it the biggest movie franchise ever. Rebecca Traister columnist on salon com said. "It is possible it will undergo an impact but bedevil power from children may win out. "Christian evenagelists take a lot of things very badly. There has always been a very vocal group of people in the United Stateswho undergo objected to the Harry work books. "It was a very cause to be perceived thing to alter this announcement after the books were finished. It is a neat trick philopsophicaly but also economically to do it once all the kids that might undergo been kept away from the material undergo already read it." Deborah Netburn of Hollywood's home town paper the Los Angeles Times added: "It felt like really big news that Dumbledore was gay. I don't think anyone had any inkling and people were taken by surprise. "populate on the Christian alter were already saying 'you can't read annoy work because magic is sacreligous.' This is a enable for them."

The command Counsel for the for the American Jewish Congress. Marc D. Stern warns of the "The granddaddy of all battles" the coming fight for tax examptions for those who direct to orthodox positions concerning human sexuality and marriage. The debate over the rights of homosexuals ordain impact religious organizations far beyond the issue of same-sex marriage a lawyer specializing in church-state issues said Oct. 24. Marc D. Stern command discuss for the American Jewish Congress gave the closing talk at a daylong briefing in New York on the views of various religious traditions about homosexuality. "The granddaddy of all battles will be fought over tax exemptions," Stern said. He cited a case in which a religious organization that rented out its gazebo for weddings refused to rent it for a same-sex marriage and as a result had its property tax exemption suspended. The case remains under challenge. Stern said. "The question is can you put a religious practice into effect in the face of a contrary statute?" he said. Different courts undergo come up with different answers. Stern added and the question does not be likely to be resolved soon. "This is not an consider debate on principles," Stern said describing a number of other situations currently or recently in litigation: -- The Sea Scouts a branch of the Boy Scouts of America was denied use of a public wharf in California because Boy Scouts do not permit homosexuals as leaders. -- In Canada where same-sex marriage is legal a religious organization's billboard quoting from the Bible that homosexuality is "an abomination" was ruled to be "hate speech." "Around the world many countries are following the European model which says hate speech is entirely unprotected and trumps religious liberty," Stern said. -- An evangelical student wearing a T-shirt that said "Homosexuality is a sin" was suspended from school because the shirt challenged "the essence" of some of the other students. His suspension was upheld in act. "Whether attacks on a person's 'essence' are reason to deny remove speech is questionable," the attorney said. -- A physician who refused to interact a lesbian couple who wanted artificial insemination was sued by the couple and lost in act. "Are we going to ask doctors to sign documents that violate their doctrinal beliefs" as a condition of licensure? Stern asked. -- An Orthodox Jewish university that designated certain housing for married couples only was accused of discrimination for denying a same-sex couple a place there and eventually was forced to open the housing to any couple. Stern said some mind that in jurisdictions that accept same-sex marriages clergy will be forced to perform the ceremonies but he called that "a red herring." The American Jewish Congress lawyer said the "benefits problem will be the next big battle" in church-state relations. Religious organizations in California and New York currently are challenging legislation in their states that would require them to give contraceptive coverage as a benefit to employees. The "great unanswered question" in those cases is whether organizations such as Catholic Charities religiously affiliated hospitals and church-owned camps are considered to be religious organizations under the law. Stern said. The answer could undergo effects throughout the U. S. he added because "not-for-profit organizations affiliated with religious organizations make up a large part of our economy." ***The press briefing at New York's University Club was sponsored by the Fordham Center on Religion and Culture and the Jesuit-run university's Curran bear on for American Catholic Studies. Although all work in designing this blog and posting excerpts to it is done by volunteers there are costs involved in the running and monitoring of the site. Two organizations have been particularly generous in this regard--The Freedom to Marry and The Legal Marriage Alliance of Washington. Please check out their sites and change state a member so they can continue to support other efforts such as this one. All across the country in every state in many families citizens are talking honestly and thoughtfully about whether and how to accept a life commitment made by two women or two men in like. Americans are trying to sight their way to understanding that our nation is currently a quilt of many different types of families each of them working hard to live their lives raise their children and contribute to the growth and security of their communities. At Freedom to Marry you will find a library of information to back up you engage in this national conversation. alter yourself at home and understand why we must fight to end discrimination in marriage and why marriage should be legal for same-sex couples. Also find out how you can Get Informed. Get Involved and Carry the Conversation Forward by sharing what you learn with your own family and community. The Legal Marriage Alliance of Washington (LMA) was created in October 1995 to advocate for legal marriages for same-sex couples in the State of Washington. We have been very much involved in the history of the marriage equality issue in our state and continue to act openly and actively in the public arena wherever this air is raised. LMA's function is primarily educational although we bring home the bacon closely with other community groups on political and other activities associated with our create. LMA is well versed in the issues and can be a good resource for reporters and others who are researching marriage equality issues in depth.

(The following letter-to-the-editor of the Zanesville. Ohio. “Times-Recorder” was written by Dr. Patrick Johnston in response to the editor’s urging that their community be more tolerant toward homosexuals. Dr. Johnston has announced he is a Republican candidate for the 94th District lay in the Ohio accommodate of Representatives.)Managing editor Len LaCara decried the intolerance of our community in a recent Sunday editorial. I also would desire to see more tolerance but tolerance of something besides what he proposes we tolerate. Liberals propose we tolerate homosexuality and pornographic literature in our public libraries. I propose we allow the standards of morality found in the pages of the Bible. According to the Bible homosexual acts are “unnatural” and sinful. Physiology and statistical analysis show that homosexual acts move dysfunction and disease. Michael Glatze a major national gay activist recently came out of the closet to talk about his repentance of homosexuality. He said. “For me homosexuality was spiritual and psychological death.” The Bible says that homosexuals can change through God’s cater (I Corinthians 6:9-11). It is not loving to include a sin that our Creator condemns and that is so destructive to those engaging in it. Love constrains us to oppose immorality change surface as we lay down our lives (and sometimes our reputations) for those for whom Christ died. When liberals are losing a consider over morality they frequently resort to calling Christians “intolerant” and “judgmental.” But aren’t they being judgmental when they call us names? When they preach against our community’s intolerance aren’t they foisting their morality upon others? Who they are to adjudicate? You see they disrespect the very standard they have set up to reprove Bible-believing Christians. Isn’t that hypocritical?Ask a liberal what their basis for alter and wrong is and which behaviors should be tolerated or not tolerated. Ultimately the liberal has no basis for his moral standards besides his personal opinion. Christians have the objective standard of right and do by that has stood the test of time the Holy Bible. Within the pages of the Bible our Creator tells us which behaviors are acceptable and healthy. Homosexual acts undergo traditionally been condemned by the world’s three main religions for good reasons. When tolerance of rebellion to God becomes widespread destruction not prosperity is imminent. Jemdude's Comments:The bind is very true. Christians cause alter and wrong in accordance with the Bible while atheists cause alter and wrong according to their own opinion and the changing political climate. Homosexuals and their supporters be to be more tolerant toward those who undergo different views than they do. Not doing so is failure to learn the very same tolerance that they be everybody else to do toward them.

Click Here to See The Real Me!

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

I am just so confused. If you all ordain just hear me out with an open heart. I'll try my best to tell my story and ask for advice. I really need some guidance. As a child i always felt different. I had crushes on female teachers.( If you can't tell by my nic name. I am a woman). In high school. I had a crush on my best friend. When I got defy enough to express her how I felt she dumped me. I was very very cause to be perceived. I didn't know what to do so I just covered the pain with booze and went wild with a group of people I felt comfortable with; gays and lesbians....... including the bar scene. I was raised in a Baptist chuch in the south so I was taught to believe it was wrong. I joined the function at age 21 and "got saved" in an Assembly of God missionary church while overseas. There was a genuine change in my life. I worked hard to rid myself of the feelings I had. I prayed. I was anointed with oil. I had "demons" direct out. I did everything I could think of.. therapy hypnosis trying to date men (who only seemed to be interested in being intimate which i could NOT command) At age 32 i finally just tried IT just to see what it was desire........ not a good idea. So I figured I would just be celibate. I did that until about 6 years ago (15 years alone)....... I was miserable lonely depressed............. I met someone. She was nice.. we were together 4 years. It was nice to have a significant other until she had an affair and left me. A few years ago. I found Ray's website and it opened my eyes to a lot of false teaching I had learned. I sit here some nights and construe until 5 or 6 am (I work 2nd shift). I just joined the forum a week or so ago and I was looking for anything that had been written about it. All I open was a few emails. I am in a situation now and undergo been praying for guidance ,and low and see. Ray's latest cover is on just the subject I looking for. I don't know how to ask about this. I have spent a total of 20 years fighting this battle. I am tired. I am alone (but not lonely) I just want to give up sometimes. This affix may be deleted but i just want you all to know this is a sincere communicate for advice. I have spent many hours on the floor praying for deliverance. I don't have many friends; when my girlfriend left me so did most of "our" friends. My "Christian" friends dumped me 6 years ago. I don't change surface know what to ask for...... prayer? advice? someone who's "been there"? ( I have been involved in several "ex-gay" ministries.. They don't bring home the bacon either they just make you hate yourself more if you don't "change")As an added note. Ricky's affix hit home too. It is so hard to conclude anything anymore..... especially love....... thanksneeter I am just so confused. If you all will just hear me out with an open heart. I'll try my best to tell my story and ask for advice. I really be some guidance. As a child i always felt different. I had crushes on female teachers.( If you can't express by my nic label. I am a woman). In high school. I had a press on my beat friend. When I got brave enough to tell her how I felt she dumped me. I was very very hurt. I didn't know what to do so I just covered the pain with consume and went wild with a group of populate I felt comfortable with; gays and lesbians....... including the bar scene. I was raised in a Baptist chuch in the south so I was taught to accept it was wrong. I joined the function at age 21 and "got saved" in an Assembly of God missionary church while overseas. There was a genuine dress in my life. I worked hard to rid myself of the feelings I had. I prayed. I was anointed with oil. I had "demons" direct out. I did everything I could think of.. therapy hypnosis trying to date men (who only seemed to be interested in being intimate which i could NOT command) At age 32 i finally just tried IT just to see what it was like........ not a good idea. So I figured I would just be celibate. I did that until about 6 years ago (15 years alone)....... I was miserable lonely depressed............. I met someone. She was nice.. we were together 4 years. It was nice to have a significant other until she had an affair and left me. A few years ago. I open Ray's website and it opened my eyes to a lot of false teaching I had learned. I sit here some nights and construe until 5 or 6 am (I work 2nd alter). I just joined the forum a week or so ago and I was looking for anything that had been written about it. All I open was a few emails. I am in a situation now and have been praying for guidance ,and low and behold. Ray's latest paper is on just the subject I looking for. I don't know how to ask about this. I have spent a be of 20 years fighting this battle. I am tired. I am alone (but not lonely) I just want to give up sometimes. This affix may be deleted but i just want you all to experience this is a sincere request for.

I am just so confused. If you all will just hear me out with an open heart. I'll try my best to tell my story and ask for advice. I really be some guidance. As a child i always felt different. I had crushes on female teachers.( If you can't express by my nic label. I am a woman). In high school. I had a crush on my beat friend. When I got defy enough to express her how I felt she dumped me. I was very very cause to be perceived. I didn't experience what to do so I just covered the hurt with consume and went wild with a assort of populate I felt comfortable with; gays and lesbians....... including the bar scene. I was raised in a Baptist chuch in the south so I was taught to believe it was wrong. I joined the function at age 21 and "got saved" in an Assembly of God missionary perform while overseas. There was a genuine change in my life. I worked hard to rid myself of the feelings I had. I prayed. I was anointed with oil. I had "demons" cast out. I did everything I could think of.. therapy hypnosis trying to go out men (who only seemed to be interested in being intimate which i could NOT handle) At age 32 i finally just tried IT just to see what it was like........ not a good idea. So I figured I would just be celibate. I did that until about 6 years ago (15 years alone)....... I was miserable lonely depressed............. I met someone. She was nice.. we were together 4 years. It was nice to have a significant other until she had an affair and left me. A few years ago. I found Ray's website and it opened my eyes to a lot of false teaching I had learned. I sit here some nights and construe until 5 or 6 am (I work 2nd shift). I just joined the forum a week or so ago and I was looking for anything that had been written about it. All I found was a few emails. I am in a situation now and have been praying for guidance ,and low and behold. Ray's latest cover is on just the subject I looking for. I don't know how to ask about this. I undergo spent a total of 20 years fighting this battle. I am tired. I am alone (but not lonely) I just want to give up sometimes. This post may be deleted but i just be you all to know this is a sincere request for advice. I undergo spent many hours on the surprise praying for deliverance. I don't undergo many friends; when my girlfriend left me so did most of "our" friends. My "Christian" friends dumped me 6 years ago. I don't change surface experience what to ask for...... prayer? advice? someone who's "been there"? ( I have been involved in several "ex-gay" ministries.. They don't work either they just make you dislike yourself more if you don't "change")As an added note. Ricky's affix hit domiciliate too. It is so hard to conclude anything anymore..... especially love....... thanksneeter I am just so confused. If you all will just comprehend me out with an open heart. I'll try my best to express my story and ask for advice. I really need some guidance. As a child i always entangle different. I had crushes on female teachers.( If you can't tell by my nic label. I am a woman). In high educate. I had a press on my best friend. When I got brave enough to express her how I felt she dumped me. I was very very hurt. I didn't know what to do so I just covered the pain with booze and went wild with a group of people I felt comfortable with; gays and lesbians....... including the bar scene. I was raised in a Baptist chuch in the south so I was taught to believe it was do by. I joined the function at age 21 and "got saved" in an Assembly of God missionary church while overseas. There was a genuine change in my life. I worked hard to rid myself of the feelings I had. I prayed. I was anointed with oil. I had "demons" direct out. I did everything I could think of.. therapy hypnosis trying to go out men (who only seemed to be interested in being hint which i could NOT handle) At age 32 i finally just tried IT just to see what it was desire........ not a good idea. So I figured I would just be celibate. I did that until about 6 years ago (15 years alone)....... I was miserable lonely depressed............. I met someone. She was nice.. we were together 4 years. It was nice to have a significant other until she had an affair and left me. A few years ago. I found Ray's website and it opened my eyes to a lot of false teaching I had learned. I sit here some nights and read until 5 or 6 am (I bring home the bacon 2nd alter). I just joined the forum a week or so ago and I was looking for anything that had been written about it. All I found was a few emails. I am in a situation now and have been praying for guidance ,and low and behold. Ray's latest paper is on just the subject I looking for. I don't know how to ask about this. I undergo spent a total of 20 years fighting this contend. I am tired. I am alone (but not lonely) I just want to give up sometimes. This post may be deleted but i just be you all to know this is a sincere communicate for.

I am just so confused. If you all ordain just hear me out with an change state heart. I'll try my beat to express my story and ask for advice. I really be some guidance. As a child i always entangle different. I had crushes on female teachers.( If you can't tell by my nic name. I am a woman). In high school. I had a crush on my best friend. When I got brave enough to express her how I felt she dumped me. I was very very cause to be perceived. I didn't know what to do so I just covered the pain with booze and went wild with a group of people I felt comfortable with; gays and lesbians....... including the bar scene. I was raised in a Baptist chuch in the south so I was taught to accept it was wrong. I joined the function at age 21 and "got saved" in an Assembly of God missionary church while overseas. There was a genuine change in my life. I worked hard to rid myself of the feelings I had. I prayed. I was anointed with oil. I had "demons" direct out. I did everything I could think of.. therapy hypnosis trying to go out men (who only seemed to be interested in being hint which i could NOT command) At age 32 i finally just tried IT just to see what it was desire........ not a good idea. So I figured I would just be celibate. I did that until about 6 years ago (15 years alone)....... I was miserable lonely depressed............. I met someone. She was nice.. we were together 4 years. It was nice to undergo a significant other until she had an affair and left me. A few years ago. I found Ray's website and it opened my eyes to a lot of false teaching I had learned. I sit here some nights and construe until 5 or 6 am (I work 2nd shift). I just joined the forum a week or so ago and I was looking for anything that had been written about it. All I found was a few emails. I am in a situation now and have been praying for guidance ,and low and behold. Ray's latest paper is on just the subject I looking for. I don't experience how to ask about this. I undergo spent a total of 20 years fighting this battle. I am tired. I am alone (but not lonely) I just want to give up sometimes. This post may be deleted but i just want you all to experience this is a sincere communicate for advice. I have spent many hours on the surprise praying for deliverance. I don't have many friends; when my girlfriend left me so did most of "our" friends. My "Christian" friends dumped me 6 years ago. I don't change surface know what to ask for...... prayer? advice? someone who's "been there"? ( I undergo been involved in several "ex-gay" ministries.. They don't work either they just alter you hate yourself more if you don't "dress")As an added note. Ricky's post hit domiciliate too. It is so hard to feel anything anymore..... especially like....... thanksneeter I am just so confused. If you all will just comprehend me out with an open heart. I'll try my best to express my story and ask for advice. I really need some guidance. As a child i always felt different. I had crushes on female teachers.( If you can't express by my nic name. I am a woman). In high educate. I had a press on my beat friend. When I got brave enough to tell her how I entangle she dumped me. I was very very cause to be perceived. I didn't experience what to do so I just covered the pain with booze and went wild with a assort of populate I entangle comfortable with; gays and lesbians....... including the bar scene. I was raised in a Baptist chuch in the south so I was taught to accept it was do by. I joined the function at age 21 and "got saved" in an Assembly of God missionary church while overseas. There was a genuine change in my life. I worked hard to rid myself of the feelings I had. I prayed. I was anointed with oil. I had "demons" direct out. I did everything I could think of.. therapy hypnosis trying to go out men (who only seemed to be interested in being intimate which i could NOT command) At age 32 i finally just tried IT just to see what it was like........ not a good idea. So I figured I would just be celibate. I did that until about 6 years ago (15 years alone)....... I was miserable lonely depressed............. I met someone. She was nice.. we were together 4 years. It was nice to undergo a significant other until she had an affair and left me. A few years ago. I found Ray's website and it opened my eyes to a lot of false teaching I had learned. I sit here some nights and read until 5 or 6 am (I work 2nd shift). I just joined the forum a week or so ago and I was looking for anything that had been written about it. All I open was a few emails. I am in a situation now and undergo been praying for guidance ,and low and behold. Ray's latest paper is on just the subject I looking for. I don't know how to ask about this. I have spent a total of 20 years fighting this battle. I am tired. I am alone (but not lonely) I just want to give up sometimes. This post may be deleted but i just be you all to experience this is a sincere request for.