Login to Change.org
Create an Account
Kenneth Wallin
Charlotte, NC
Recent Activity
-
Kenneth commented on the article |
Lisa,
I rather doubt we shall define everyone as normal. I am sure there are members of the Man-Boy Love Organization that would want to have themselves declared "normal." I am not willing to do so, regardless of the amount of effort they might make to show it is considered "normal" elsewhere.
In like manner, I do not accept the claim that somehow it is "normal" for two men to practice sodomy. Not to be graphic without need, it is not "normal" to want to force a part of ones sexual anatomy into an orifice designed for excrement. It is a horrid aberration of the physiology of our human form. Can't change an anus into some sort of vaginal orifice regardless of desire to have it so operate. Sorry if this offends us in polite discussion, but the fact is homosexuality is an aberrant behavior.
And, with that .. I am out of here to return to work. -
Kenneth commented on the article |Hmmm, Mr. Sawyer, I reckon the key understanding is that the term marriage was between a man and a woman in the US (except for the struggle with the bigamy problem with some religions, where it apparently was a man and some women). I never would support the racial discrimination in social or marital discourse. I have since I can remember held to the belief the union was not a marriage of my understanding of the term if it included some other sexual arrangement, such as two men, or two women, or three men, or some other arrangement. I cannot make the journey.
I cannot see this as a civil right ... you can join in a civil union with anyone you choose to (as far as I am concerned). That is a civil matter and the proper controller is the state. I see no federal involvement unless two states are engaged in a disagreement over the decision. DOMA, my friend tells me, is a federal decision making this the case.
I think I have been civil and respectful to you, but now you prefer to decend to perjorative language (quackery, ignorance, arrogance), and this leaves me no way to engage in civil discussion.
I am departing this thread. I must tell you I am sorry for you, I feel you are heading for a physically troubling life, I hope you remain well. I don't, however, plan to engage in further discourse here, so if you wish to disabuse yourself -- go right ahead. -
Kenneth commented on the article |
Malin, you purport facts without foundation. I suspect homosexuals have been just as gifted, in fair measure, to hetrosexuals. But I suspect, as, like you, I cannot offer proof, they have been no more so, in fair measure, than the hetrosexual element of the population.
I really do not care what sexual lifestyle you pursue. Your choice of how you seek sexual gratification is not my concern. Likewise, who you choose to feel committed to is not my concern. I always caution smokers, drug users, and others with self-destructive lifestyle choices they are courting disaster in their physical lives. I would also advise an adulterer that their lifestyle is also dangerous physically. Moreover, a homosexual lifestyle is just as dangerous.
Think with me, even if you are determined to disagree, and I care not if you do, the human body is not constructed in a physical biological way to accommodate the homosexual lifestyle. Physical harm to the health of the homosexual practicioner is sure. I need not tell you this -- the statistics are alarming enough.
Mr. Sawyer, I need no lecture on how to believe from you. And I give no credence to this "psychosexual orientation." Psychobabble may make you feel superior, but I have enough education to know it is only psychobabble. And I again note for you I am clearly fine with the civil union for homosexuals, but I shall not surrender in any discussion the term marriage which is a term signifying the union of a man and a woman as currently endorsed by what is surely the first or second most liberal state in the US. You have a right nice day. -
Kenneth commented on the article |
Raymond, not to engage in some sort of word battle with you, but to make sure I understand where you are heading, you want to enter the new terminology "civil marriage" into the discussion?
I think we need to be careful not to mix up the understandings of those engaged in this discussion. I care not what lifestyle one chooses, I do care how one seeks to catagorize the lifestyle. I think the state can choose to allow "civil unions" and they have remained within the "state and church" bright line demarcation. Any joining that claims "marriage" as a characterization is treading away from the "state v church" separation.
Let this go, it is not worthy of a group to seek to wrest a different group away from a belief, and attempt to force them into a belief they cannot accept. Christians are, in the main, not going to accept "marriage" as a term for an homosexual union.
In what church are you ordained? If you are a homosexual, are you actively practicing the lifestyle? If not, what are you attempting to force in this discussion? The first post was, in my understanding, correctly relating the Word. God does not allow any reportrayal of homosexuality as being "acceptable and normal." He did make the change regarding shellfish, and he was a thought leader in changing the approach toward women. I find nothing recorded where He changed the biblical approach to homosexuality. He always did ask all of us to be kind, and sure to offer our Christian love to even those whose behavior was wrong. Our mission as Christians is clear, advance the Kingdom of God. We do that by speaking His truth, and then we stand down and allow Him to work.
I read so much in your posts that attempts to "interpret" the clear word of God in some contextual manner. That, in my opinion, is not a good thing. Martin Luther drove the church to allow all of us access to the Word so we could read it and hear what God said, not what some local interpretor said the Word meant. -
Kenneth commented on the article |
Joseph, you can be who you want to be. I make no choices for you, just make a wide pathway around the psuedo-science. I do not accept the argument that God or some supreme universal power or the other made you homosexual. It is an twisting of science to try to use it to prove your behaviors are somehow genetically imprinted. I ain't buying.
Lisa, are you positing a theory that homosexuality is a disease. Alcoholism is a disease, as is anoxeria. They can be managed with treatment. Homosexuality is a behavior, I do not claim it a disease. It certainly leads to diseases, as it is corrupt biologically.
Joseph, I am sorry, but I choose to pass on Mel White. He has nothing to say I want to hear. Sorry, you cannot engage me in a discussion using corrupt theological writings. I could raise the Bible, which I believe is a statement of my God's will, intention, and desire for us all. But you are not interested in His Bible, are you? If you are, may I suggest you start by reading the basic foundational books (this would be the first five books of what we refer to as the Old Testament). -
Kenneth commented on the article |
Erin, I like science, however psuedo-science is a little hard to take. Please cite specific sources of studies conducted as foundation for the claims you make. I have heard much of this "it is thought" kind of talk before. Just saying brains are wired differently is nice, but where is finding for this claim. I can claim that men have different wiring in their brains for behaviors I want to color as support for a contention I support. Is not of value until we can show factual unbiased studies supporting such beliefs -- otherwise it is urban legend or better "old wives tales."
There are many individuals who were formerly engaged in homosexual behaviors. Not sure I would use the word cured due to the medical conotation. It might be better to think of changed behavior as a way to express the accomplishment. When one learns a behavior, one can change it given a desire and time. -
Kenneth commented on the article |
Lisa, look from the other side; now, not trying to get you to change your beliefs, just look at this dispassionatly from another angle -- perhaps it is, "WHO does not need management?"
From this perspective the clear response is, "we all do." And, normally, we manage ourselves. Sometimes we are lucky enough to have a wife or husband to help us, but sometimes we have to go it alone -- mostly. So, why should a person practicing the Homosexual lifestyle be a bit different. The fact is many manage themselves through celebate living, but the better way would be to find a group of recovering former Homosexuals and get help. It is entirely possible to recover, and live a good and full life as our God intended.
When I hear someone say let me be who I am, I want to remind them who they are supposed to be. If you are born with the body, and features of a male of the species, then that is who you are. If the converse is true, one is born a female, then that is who you are. Don't get trapped by jingoistic chatter about Homosexual genes, and all that nonsense. Be who God made you, and if you have fallen prey to the Homosexual lifestyle proponents, be assured it is possible to recover.
Good day. -
Kenneth commented on the article |
Ok Lisa, behaviors should be left alone. Are you so sure you want to head down this trail?
We use science all the time, and btw -- I am not an advocate, to modify behaviors. And we have no conclusive proof of sexuality being 'located' in our neurobiological makeup either. We are settled on using drugs to control behaviors we don't like, such as ADHD being controlled with Ritalin, without regard to the side effects, such as stunted growth, and mental sluggishness. I suggest we stop this foolishness, and spend time knowing the reasons for behavior and offer care and structured environments for overcoming destructive behaviors.
We also must stop the 'flame-on' rhetoric from all sides. Homosexuality can be overcome, so many have mandged it, but drugs won't manage it.
There is obviously no line drawn, anywhere. -
Kenneth commented on the article |
sandy, What in the wide world of sports are you talking about? I have read your post several times, and must report to you I come away more bewildered each time.
Surely you are not suggesting God makes homosexuals? How could you be so confused? I am not a student of God's Word to the degree I should be; I do try but the demands of work and school are heavy on me. But, I do know enough to know you are so very, very mistaken about our God.
Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, there is no conclusive proof of a Homosexual gene, just speculation by biased researchers. Every time a researcher comes out and claims it, another researcher cannot replicate their findings. Have cheer, they never intend to quit trying. They will just never find it.
I never judge a person, I recognize behavior, and when it is unrepentant evil, I let it go and move on. I did that with just the other day with another thread. It was of no value to try to discuss with hatred spewing at me. I just leave. God only requires I speak the truth as He has shown it to me, then He requires me to get out of the way and let Him be in charge. So, you see, my friend, I do not feel anger and frustration. I pass the word and let God have the wheel.
You are right about one thing, and I would be dishonest to not agree, God does not make mistakes. Now, He does allow free will, so if you choose to head off in some direction of your own choosing -- my friend, He will let you do so. You might want to consider the implications of what you say. Your own words can become your worst nightmare. If, as you say, and I agree, God does not make mistakes, why are we killing the children He has given us? Did He err by making one of us (humans) inadvertantly? So, we must conclude He erred and we should kill His mistake? Hummm', don't think so. You might want to put that argument back under your seat. It is not so good.
Lisa, people can choose to stop errant behavior, and be, your word, 'cured' and it is not a bad thing. I want to believe people can overcome any destructive behavior they would choose to want to overcome. Only if you fall under the spell of the Evil One can you come to believe homosexuality is not a behavior choice.
Have a good and Godly day. -
Kenneth commented on the article |
Unbelievable. And you give ultimatums, about what I can say. I am so sorry for the both of you. I have seldom encountered such hate. And saying you are confused when life begins. I will uncheck the box, I cannot participate where such evil exists.
Impact
0 Actions
0 Recruits