Benjamin Perry, Bi-Sexual Minister, Suggests that Jesus Is Bi-Sexual and Jesus Having Homo Sexual Relations with His Disciples Would Be Okay

Benjamin Perry, Bi-Sexual Minister, Suggests that Jesus Is Bi-Sexual and Jesus Having Homo Sexual Relations with His Disciples Would Be Okay

This person’s view is probably an outcome of “Queering” or “Queer Theory,” which I’ve written about before on this blog in other posts. It’s related to the “Critical Theories” nonsense, where postmodernism prevails, where the far left woke believe that there is no such thing as objective truth or reality.

I’ve actually done a post or two in the past several years that are similar, because this Perry person is not the first to suggest that Jesus may have been having sex outside of (hetero) marriage.Screen capture of Perry's Twitter bio blurb

(As far back as the 1970s, actually, I remember coming out of a church Sunday morning service to see that someone had gone around and stuck fliers under all the car’s window wipers declaring that Jesus was probably a homosexual.)

I left this Perry person a few comments.

One of which is: he’s the progressive version of hyper-conservative preacher Mark Driscoll. Both Perry and Driscoll are absolutely sex-obsessed.

I also pointed out to Perry that like all other “sex positive” and sex obsessed people who dabble in theology, he is, as the left likes to put it, “erasing” an entire group of people – in this case,  in his attempt to normalize or justify homosexual fornication (or even hetero fornication), he’s ignoring the fact that Jesus of Nazareth was a never married, childless, CELIBATE.

Continue reading “Benjamin Perry, Bi-Sexual Minister, Suggests that Jesus Is Bi-Sexual and Jesus Having Homo Sexual Relations with His Disciples Would Be Okay”

Complementarian Christians Do Not Think Women are of Equal Worth to Men – Case 2 – Christian Men Mocking the “Me Too” Sexual Assault and Harassment Twitter Tag and Bob Who Detracts (Part 1.3)

Complementarian Christians Do Not Think Women are of Equal Worth to Men – Case 2 – Christian Men Mocking the “Me Too” Sexual Assault and Harassment Twitter Tag and Bob Who Detracts (Part 1.3)

Part 1 | Part 2 | (Part 3)

Regarding the Tweets by a person named Bob‏ (Twitter handle: @JustBobThx) to Dee.

You can view several Tweets that Bob sent to Dee under Dee’s first Tweet (Link): here. I will be referring to those tweets through the remainder of the post.

In the midst of conservative, complementarian Christian men, such as (Link): Tim the Bible Thumping Wing Nut (his screen name) and Fred Butler mocking women sexual harassment and sexual abuse victims by way of the Twitter hash tag “Me Too,” and and (Link): Ricky Masuer  defending said aforementioned mockers, Bob jumped in to dress down Dee, who was responding to the sexist tweets.

Here is a text copy of one of his tweets:

Replying to @wartwatch (wartwatchis Dee) @JeffTheGK (JeffTheGK has been on Dee’s side in this debate)
Bob said:

Is that so. Here’s [he includes screen captures of other people’s tweets] 1 of ur many pro- LGBT buddies in ur “we stand against abuse” club. Waiting 4 ur outrage. Better get writing a blog 2 warn ppl. This is degrading, disgusting, & vile. Ur CONSTANTLY telling GOBC 2 call out their own-so go ahead & do it urself. @Biblethumpingwi ///

Bob is quite simply trying to change the subject.

(Bob later gripes and complains about gender egalitarian Jory Michah and rants about abortion).

The issue that initiated all this dialog was (Link): Tim (aka “Bible Thumping Wing Nut”) ridiculing the sexual harassment or sexual assault of women via the “Me Too” twitter tag.

The subject was not about LGBT topics or Christian gender egalitarian Jory Michah.

Bob, because he is sexist but probably thinks he’s NOT sexist, needs to read my (Link): Post 2 about Rick Mauser, as well, at least the portions of that post under the headings of

  • BIBLICAL PATRIARCHY
  • CHRISTIANS SEXUALIZE GIRLS AND WOMEN, NOT JUST SECULAR CULTURE
  • SEXISM EXAMPLES
  • SEXISM IN THE FORM OF UNCONSCIOUS BIAS

My Views

I have been a conservative over the duration of my life.

I have been pro-life on abortion, and I always voted Republican (though I am no longer Republican. In the last few years, I have come to realize that the Republican Party is either similar to the Democratic Party in some ways, or it has its own set of flaws).

As far as LGBT issues are concerned: I believe the Bible says that homosexual behavior is sinful, but, I’m rather “libertarian” on the topic – if two adults of the same gender want to get it on, it’s not hurting me, so I do not care what they do.

However, I do not generally support liberal, social justice warriors who want to do things such as sue Christian bakers out of business for refusing to bake wedding cakes for homosexual weddings. (I am open to being persuaded otherwise on this topic.)

I do not support things such as LGBT people bullying porn actress women (Link): who refuse to have sex with homosexual men. Liberals definitely get some things wrong.

I am definitely not a liberal.

BOB’S SEXISM AND “PASTRIX”

Bob is sexist.

Bob uses the sexist derogatory term “Pastrix” (which I believe was coined by sexist radio Christian host Chris Rosebrough) to refer to women pastors, or to women who write blog posts about theology.

(I refer you again to (Link): Bob’s posts in this Twitter thread to see for yourself).

If you want to have a respectful dialog with someone on the subject of whether women should be allowed to be preachers in churches or not, that’s all fine and good, but there is no reason to use sexist, disrespectful terms such as “Pastrix” in the process.  Continue reading “Complementarian Christians Do Not Think Women are of Equal Worth to Men – Case 2 – Christian Men Mocking the “Me Too” Sexual Assault and Harassment Twitter Tag and Bob Who Detracts (Part 1.3)”

HIV Positive Homosexual Guy Allegedly Cut Tips Off Condoms to Infect His Grindr Dates

HIV Positive Homosexual Guy Allegedly Cut Tips Off Condoms to Infect His Grindr Dates

I most usually focus on hetero-sexuals or heterosexual related issues, but there’s this story (another example of why being celibate isn’t so bad, you don’t have to worry about someone deliberately trying to give you a STI):

(Link):  HIV-positive hairdresser allegedly cut tips off condoms to infect his Grindr dates

Oct 2017

A hairdresser deliberately infected at least four men with HIV after meeting them on gay dating app Grindr — before sending them mocking messages, a court heard.

Daryll Rowe, 26, from Edinburgh, Scotland, is accused of embarking on a “cynical campaign” to infect as many men as he could with the virus.

He texted one of his alleged victims: “Maybe you have the fever cos I came inside you and I have HIV, lol. Whoops!”

The court heard Rowe also called one of his victims and laughed over the phone as he goaded the man about his potential diagnosis.

The victim later tested positive for HIV, with a strain of the virus similar to Rowe’s.

Continue reading “HIV Positive Homosexual Guy Allegedly Cut Tips Off Condoms to Infect His Grindr Dates”

The False Teachings Regarding Celibacy from City Church of San Francisco

The False Teachings Regarding Celibacy from City Church of San Francisco

Here we go again. I’ve seen this issue come up before with other Christians, other churches, who hold all sorts of falsehoods about celibacy.  I will be offering comments and criticisms of the views presented in this letter from a San Francisco Church – a link, with excerpts from the page, is below.

The Bible teaches that abstaining from sexual behavior is for all single persons, regardless if they are hetero, bi-sexual, or homosexual, or of some other orientation.

Furthermore, the Bible does (Link): not teach that God “gifts” people with celibacy or that only some, only a few, will be celibate, or that (Link): life long celibacy is an heroic feat possible for only a minority.

Review a bit of my life story: I am over the age of 45, a hetero-sexual woman who long desired marriage, marriage did not happen for me (and it may never), yet I am a virgin, but God did not remove my sexual desire. I still have a desire for marriage, and also a libido.

If I can remain celibate this long, and I have in fact done so, there is no reason for this San Francisco church to imply it is cruel, impossible, or unrealistic for LGBT persons to remain celibate over a life time.

While being celibate over a lifetime is not always easy, it is in fact possible.

Remaining celibate for a long time comes down to self-control and choice, not some magical rare gifting where-in God only zaps a few people with celibacy and removes a sexual drive. The Bible says all believers in Christ (Link): have self-control but churches such as this one operates under the assumption that this is not so.

(Link): A Letter from the Elder Board of San Francisco

Excerpts:

A Letter From The Elder Board

…..WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS NOW?

1. God is bringing LGBT Christians through the doors of City Church.
As you read this perhaps you, your friend, or family member are one of them. They desire to follow Jesus, and are eager to live faithfully to the gospel and desire spiritual growth. Some have been living celibate lives and want to know if we can talk out loud about this.
Others report they have become Christians at City Church. Some report that while they were raised in the church, they left it, but have returned and experienced great renewal.
And many hope for a life long partnership one day that will fulfill their basic human need of belonging, companionship, and intimacy.
Others are already married or partnered and know this is a safe place for them to grow in their relationship.

2. Our pastoral practice of demanding life-long “celibacy”, by which we meant that for the rest of your life you would not engage your sexual orientation in any way, was causing obvious harm and has not led to human flourishing.
(It’s unfortunate that we used the word “celibacy” to describe a demand placed on others, as in Scripture it is, according to both Jesus and Paul, a special gift or calling by God, not an option for everyone). In fact, over the years, the stories of harm caused by this pastoral practice began to accumulate.
Our pastoral conversations and social science research indicate skyrocketing rates of depression, suicide, and addiction among those who identify as LGBT. The generally unintended consequence has been to leave many people feeling deeply damaged, distorted, unlovable, unacceptable, and perverted. Imagine feeling this from your family or religious community:
“If you stay, you must accept celibacy with no hope that you too might one day enjoy the fullness of intellectual, spiritual, emotional, psychological and physical companionship. If you pursue a lifelong partnership, you are rejected.” This is simply not working and people are being hurt. We must listen and respond.

3. We feel a growing sense that this counsel is not necessarily the way of the gospel.
While members of the LGBT community have always been welcome at City Church, we prevented people from joining our church if they were unwilling or unable to practice lifelong celibacy. ….

..SUMMARY: WHAT HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED HERE?

…On the other hand, we want to be clear what this now means. We will no longer discriminate based on sexual orientation and demand lifelong celibacy as a precondition for joining. For all members, regardless of sexual orientation, we will continue to expect chastity in singleness until marriage.

/// end excerpts from City Church web page

If your church position is that any and all sexual behavior is fine and peachy, so long as the person is married, AND you’re arguing you are now hunky dory with homosexuality, that would mean, I take it, that you are saying  you are fine with LGBT marriage, and are saying LGBT persons may have same-sex relations so long as they are married to their same-sex partner?

And what if marriage never happens?

I’ll tell you what happens and what should happen:

The person has to remain celibate, if they claim to be a Christian who wants to respect God, God’s morals, and what the Bible has to say about it.

Look, guys at San Fran church, I would dearly love to marry, but no “Mr. Right” is materializing on my front door step.

I may never marry.

If I were still completely a Christian (I am quasi agnostic currently), I’d have to sexually abstain. And I am HETERO. You should expect no less from LGBT persons.

In my time blogging or Tweeting about being a hetero celibate, I have heard from other other HETERO celibates, some in their 40s, 50s, and older, all of them to date have been Christians, I believe.

These heterosexuals are still abstaining – many of them wanted to marry, but they never met the right person, so they remain single.

Please stop acting as though life long, or decades-long, celibacy is so very difficult that it’s this impossible standard nobody can achieve, so you drop it as a biblical sexual ethic.

Just because something is difficult does not mean it stops being right or possible.

Just because it seems that everyone else is doing something (i.e., sex outside of marriage) does not mean you should just say, “Aw, screw it, nobody is living this celibacy stuff out any more, let’s just drop this expectation!”

Where does the Bible say to base morality on popularity or on how many people are doing or not doing something?

If everyone began robbing banks tomorrow, would your church start saying,

“We no longer demand our members to be honest, and work for a living to pay their bills, but it’s okay if they rob banks.”

If you wouldn’t slack off on other biblical mores such as stealing and robbing, why would you do so in the area of sexuality? Why is sexuality an exception here?

Due to liberal political correctness, is that it? That’s not a solid reason, either.

I have to laugh at all the liberal Christian and ex-Christian accounts, blogs, and groups I follow on Twitter, Facebook, and elsewhere, who keep arguing that Christians have turned virginity (or celibacy) into idols – oh no they don’t. This post serves as another example of that.

Christians are ditching and dumping celibacy and virginity teachings faster than you can blink and eye.

There is no so-called Christian “idolizing of virginity” going on, as liberal and ex Christians proclaim – spare me.

Christians should be among the forefront of society defending sexual abstinence, but here they are, acquiescing to culture. Or they (Link): don’t want people to be angry with them, nor do they be perceived as “mean”

They are fine with fudging on biblical ethics in the process.

I have to say, every time I see these types of web pages – such as the one published by this San Francisco church – all I can think is that they are robbing some Christian celibates of a motivation to continue sexually abstaining, since they continue to chip away at a basis or rationale for anyone to remain a virgin or celibate.

Churches like this one are sapping hetero celibates of the the strength to keep going and holding on. Churches such as “City Church” are supporting LGBT persons at the expense of hetero celibate adults – enough of that! They should knock that off.


By the way (and I’ve already tweeted them a link to this blog post)…

the (Link): San Fran City Church Twitter account

@CityChurchSF


Related Posts:

(Link):   Typical Erroneous Teaching About Adult Celibacy Rears Its Head Again: To Paraphrase Speaker at Ethics and Public Policy Center: Lifelong Celibacy is “heroic ethical standard that is not expected of heteros, so it should not be expected of homosexuals” (ie, it’s supposedly an impossible feat for any human being to achieve)

(Link):   False Christian Teaching: “Only A Few Are Called to Singleness and Celibacy” or (also false): “God’s gifting of singleness is rare” – More Accurate: God calls only a few to marriage -and- God gifts only the rare the exceptions the few with the gift of Marriage

(Link):  Self Control – everyone has it, is capable of it, but most choose not to use it

(Link): The Gift of Singleness – A Mistranslation and a Poorly Used Cliche’

(Link): Douglas Wilson and Christian Response FAIL to Sexual Sin – No Body Can Resist Sex – supposedly – Re Celibacy

(Link): Singleness Is Not a Gift

(Link): There is No Such Thing as a Gift of Singleness or Gift of Celibacy or A Calling To Either One

(Link):  The Myth of the Gift – Re Christian Teachings on Gift of Singleness and Gift of Celibacy

(Link): Pastors avoid ‘controversy’ to keep tithes up, author says – Confirms What I’ve Been Saying All Along, Re: Churches: Contrary to Progressive Christians, Churches / Christians Do Not Support or Idolize Sexual Purity, Virginity, or Celibacy – they attack these concepts when not ignoring them

(Link): Theology of Convenience, Expediency, and Borne of Culture – Christian Preachers and Writers Diminishing Seriousness of Sexual Sin

(Link):  Some Researchers Argue that Shame Should Be Used to Treat Sexual Compulsions

(Link):  Christian Preacher Admits He Won’t Preach About Sexuality For Fear It May Offend Sexual Sinners

(Link): No, Christians Do NOT Support or Idolize Virginity and Celibacy, they attack both)

(Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity – Christians Attack and Criticize Virginity Sexual Purity Celibacy / Virginity Sexual Purity Not An Idol

(Link):  Some Researchers Argue that Shame Should Be Used to Treat Sexual Compulsions

(Link): Christians Selling Out Hetero Celibacy By Defending Homosexual Behavior – Re: Jars of Clay Controversy

(Link): Editorialist at WaPo Argues That Single Christian Adults Can Have Sex So Long As They are Chaste About It – Also Speculates that Jesus Was “Probably” Celibate

(Link): Sometimes Shame Guilt and Hurt Feelings Over Sexual Sins Is a Good Thing – but – Emergents, Liberals Who Are Into Virgin and Celibate Shaming

(Link): Sometimes the Bible is Clear – Regarding Rachel Held Evan’s Post

(Link): Sex, Love & Celibacy by Christian Author Dan Navin

(Link): Nobody Bats An Eye at Condemnation of Hetero Sexual Sin – Observations from Duck Dynasty Controversy

(Link): Southern Baptists open to reaching out to LGBT – but still don’t give a flying leap about HETERO CELIBATE UNMARRIED ADULTS

(Link): Church Touts Homosexuality as a Gift, Not a Sin

(Link): The New Homophiles: A Closer Look (article) Re: Christian Homosexual Celibates and Christian Homosexual Virgins

(Link): Christian Double Standards on Celibacy – Hetero Singles Must Abstain from Sex but Not Homosexual Singles

(Link): The Activist Who Says Being Gay Is Not A Sin – double standards for homo singles vs hetero singles

(Link): Christians Who Attack Virginity Celibacy and Sexual Purity – and specifically Russell D. Moore and James M. Kushiner

(Link): Why So Much Fornication – Because Christians Have No Expectation of Sexual Purity

(Link): Why Do Christians Ask if Homosexuals Can Change Their Orientation – Why Not Explain that Celibacy is an Option?

(Link): Being Against Gay Marriage Doesn’t Make You a Homophobe (editorial by a homosexual man)

(Link): Ever Notice That Christians Don’t Care About or Value Singleness, Unless Jesus Christ’s Singleness and Celibacy is Doubted or Called Into Question by Scholars?

The New Minority: Why as a Gay Christian Man I Stand with Tim Farron by David Bennett

The New Minority: Why as a Gay Christian Man I Stand with Tim Farron by David Bennett

Interesting editorial.  I agree with him when he writes of how anyone who opposes certain beliefs of secularists (and I’d add liberals) is painted as an enemy.

(Link): The New Minority: Why as a Gay Christian Man I Stand with Tim Farron by David Bennett

Excerpts:

In a post-Christian, secular society in Britain which now supports gay marriage and gay sexuality, the LGBQ (not speaking for I or T) movement no longer sits as the true minority. The angry persecution of people of faith is fundamentalist secularism exposed for all to see.

….I am all for secularity, but not secularism; the ideology that says you are accepted in our value of diversity as long as you agree with me. True secularity says I might not agree with you but I support you in my value for diversity, a value Tim Farron embodied so graciously.

Instead, affirmative views on gay marriage within and outside the walls of the church have such political power that anyone who disagrees has been made the new minority. The Church is so petrified to represent its view, it hides in cowardice. Tim Farron is one of those who didn’t hide and was honest. Tim, I stand with you.

I happen to represent the thousands of British Christians who are gay and celibate.

We, like Farron, often experience vitriolic backlash, not just from secuarlists but now from our own churches.

We don’t belong in all of the ‘happy’ activist Christian societies that are ramming down the walls of the Church for marriage equality. We simply want Jesus Christ to be Lord of the Church, and his Word to be trusted and his Spirit welcomed.

Continue reading “The New Minority: Why as a Gay Christian Man I Stand with Tim Farron by David Bennett”

Single, Adult Woman Lies on Church Employment Form About Pre-Marital Sex and Sexual Orientation, Says Friend – Letter to Ask Amy Advice Column

Single, Adult Woman Lies on Church Employment Form About Pre-Marital Sex and Sexual Orientation, Says Friend – Letter to Ask Amy Advice Column

I’ll paste in the letter below, and probably Amy’s response. I think Amy dropped the ball on her reply, for the most part.

I’m using this letter not so much as it pertains to homosexuality, but the phenomenon of singles (or anyone, I guess) lying about their sexual habits or pasts, especially in a church context.

When I was growing up, my parents encouraged me to seek a marital partner at church. The thought being that I could meet a decent, kind, stable man at a church and marry the guy.

The problem is (as I’ve detailed on this blog time and again) is that churches attract all sorts of weirdos, perverts, and losers (and liars).

If you are a single Christian woman who insists on meeting a single man at a church, you better be well aware that just because a guy is attending church, works at said church, or says he loves Jesus and is a Christian, does not mean he is a nice guy or is honest. He might be a child rapist, a woman abuser, or have a raging pornography addiction.

The letter below is about a lesbian woman who misrepresented herself (her sexual nature / sexual history) to a church to get hired, contra to  Ask Amy’s spin on it (you can read a copy of this letter here):

  • Dear Amy:
  • I have a huge dilemma. “Jane” and I have been good friends since middle school. I love her like a sister.
  • Recently, Jane accepted a job at a church as the youth director in the town where we attend college. She is good with youth and is very outgoing.
  • However, Jane was not fully truthful when applying for this job.
  • The church asked all applicants to affirm its faith statement and a code of behavior that prohibits premarital sex. Jane signed the code of behavior, indicating that she would not have premarital sex.
  • To further confuse the issue, she told them that she did not have a boyfriend. In truth, Jane does have sex. However, she is a (quiet) lesbian.

Continue reading “Single, Adult Woman Lies on Church Employment Form About Pre-Marital Sex and Sexual Orientation, Says Friend – Letter to Ask Amy Advice Column”

Inclusive Dating Liberals: You Should Date People You’re Not Attracted To Out of a Sense of Guilt or Duty (and which contradicts other liberal feminist views about women and dating)

Inclusive Dating Liberals: You Should Date People You’re Not Attracted To Out of a Sense of Guilt or Duty (and which contradicts other liberal feminist views about women and dating)

I saw this conversation on twitter earlier today. Someone I follow on Twitter re-tweeted one of the tweets, which is how I saw this.

Other than one of the people who re-tweeted this, I don’t think I know any of the participants in this conversation, or who is involved (not at first glance):

I do follow several left wing persons and news sites on my Twitter account.

I sometimes visit left wing sites that discuss politics, feminism, entertainment, and other subjects, so I am partially aware of some left wing causes, views, and so forth.

However, I don’t keep up with the minutia of it and all the nit picky details of all liberal pet causes. Therefore, I do not completely understand their rationale for some views, or all the jargon they use.

Nor do I think I care to learn it all in-depth, as I only have one life to live and would rather spend it doing things like watching repeats of Zombieland on cable and new episodes of Diners, Drive Ins, and Dives.

Apparently, the woman who started out that thread (named Claire) is a lesbian, if I am understanding things correctly.

Here is one of her tweets (link to tweet):

“Not taking transwomen as sexual partners doesn’t mean lesbians don’t consider TW worthy of respect, safety, kindness, friendship, etc.”

—end quote—

Claire went on to Tweet this in the same thread:

“And it is pressure. This insidious idea that if a lesbian won’t consider sleeping with someone, she must be a bigot, is insidious & coercive”

—end quote—

If I am understanding this correctly, she is saying that some people who support transgenderism are demanding that lesbians should date men who underwent some kind of sex change surgery or what have you to appear to be women (I think these persons are called transwomen? As I said, I don’t care to keep up with all the rhetoric of liberal causes and their terminology.)

I cannot agree with a view that says you should date or marry people with whom you are not the least attracted or that you have moral qualms about.

I covered this topic on a previous post on my blog:

I have never felt very attracted to white guys with red hair. According to liberal logic, however, this somehow means I hate gingers, and they would lecture me and insist I date red headed men, even though I really do not want to.

Now you understand I’m not in favor of people who are overly picky in other regards. Like this guy:

Continue reading “Inclusive Dating Liberals: You Should Date People You’re Not Attracted To Out of a Sense of Guilt or Duty (and which contradicts other liberal feminist views about women and dating)”

FDA: Only Celibate Homosexuals May Donate Blood

FDA: Only Celibate Homosexuals May Donate Blood

This is somewhat funny to me. The FDA has lifted bans on homosexuals donating blood, provided they abstain from homosexual sex for 12 months in a row prior to donating. In other words, they have to practice celibacy.

Now, I find this rather amusing because although I know for a fact that people can damn well go without sex for a lifetime, let alone 12 months, the rest of society – including many conservative Christians, sadly – run about assuming that nobody, no hetero or homosexual, can possibly go without sex, not even for ten minutes in a row.

Why, they teach, people just cannot refrain from sex! Sooner or later everyone is gonna do it, even Christians.

The truth is, everyone is capable of self control and does not have to cave in and have sex – but people choose to have sex.

One troubling aspect of this is that liberals are more concerned about being politically correct than in keeping the blood supply safe.

Some of these liberals even complain about even having a 12 month waiting period in effect (I’ve seen some of them complain about this in some of their blog posts or news articles, such as (Link): this ridiculous page by a Joe Durbin, and this (Link): other ridiculous page at The Daily Beast by Tim Teeman).

(Link):  Blood Donation Ban From Gay Men Ends, Criticism Starts As 1-Year Abstinence Policy Established

(Link):  FDA Keeps Ban on Active Homosexuals Donating Blood

  • by Austin Ruse, December 21, 2015
  • Even though the (Link):  FDA announced this week that homosexuals may give blood, overturning a 30-year-old blanket ban, the government will still not let sexually active homosexuals donate. Any man who identifies as homosexual may only give blood if he stipulates he has not had sexual contact with another man in the previous 12 months.

Continue reading “FDA: Only Celibate Homosexuals May Donate Blood”

TV Already Has Enough Token Homosexuals – Daryl Dixon Should Remain a Celibate Hetero Single – and Not All Older Single Men Are Homosexual

TV Already Has Enough Token Homosexuals – Daryl Dixon Should Remain a Celibate Hetero Single – and Not All Older Single Men Are Homosexual

Oh brother. I seriously doubt that The Walking Dead writers are going to actually make fan favorite Daryl Dixon a homosexual, but it sure makes for good publicity.

I cannot, off the top of my head, think of any television show that has an adult single over the age of 30 who is a virgin and who is living a celibate life.

I cannot think of many progressive Christian or secular writers who support adult virgins, celibates, or asexuals. They will sit around blogging in support of every form of sexuality or sexual deviancy under the sun but for people who chose to abstain from sex.

About the entire cast of the GLEE television series was homosexual. The television series “Modern Family” has a homosexual couple who adopted a child. “Will and Grace” featured two homosexual guys as their main characters. “Faking It” is an MTV show about a girl who thinks she might be a lesbian.

There have been several other shows over the years that have featured homosexuals and lesbians. The world does not need anymore homosexual or lesbian characters, any more than the world needs another marriage sermon (see this page).

If folks are going to insist that each and every form of sexuality get equal screen time, I want to see more adult single, hetero virgin/celibate characters. Maybe also include some adult celibate homosexual characters, too.

It is so cliched’ for every character on a show to date, sex it up, or marry – there’s nothing special or interesting about it. One of the reasons I like the Daryl Dixon character is precisely due to the fact he seemingly lacks a love life and sex. It’s just him and his crossbow, shooting zombies in their faces.

No, Daryl Dixon should not be made into a homosexual character who dates. I also don’t want to see him get a girlfriend. Him getting into any sort of sexual or romantic relationship would ruin the character to a degree, maybe totally.

I also want to say that one common view that pops up on pages that report this story is damaging to hetero virgin men who are over 25 or so years of age: the assumption is that if people do not see a man over 25, 30 or older with a woman, he MUST be a homosexual.

This knee-jerk reflection is very insulting and offensive to hetero males who are single into adulthood, ones with Christian or traditional values who don’t believe that homosexual behavior is moral. Just because a man is not dating a woman, has never dated, or has never married or never had sex with a woman, does NOT necessarily mean he is a closeted homosexual or is one in practice.

There are asexual and celibate older HETERO men out there (just as there are asexual and celibate older HETERO women too).

Continue reading “TV Already Has Enough Token Homosexuals – Daryl Dixon Should Remain a Celibate Hetero Single – and Not All Older Single Men Are Homosexual”

They’re Gay, They’re Christian And They’re Celibate! (by S. Bailey)

(Link): They’re Gay, They’re Christian And They’re Celibate!

    Religion News Service | By Sarah Pulliam Bailey
    Posted: 08/04/2014 6:27 pm EDT

…Rodgers [self identified lesbian] spent several years in Exodus, the now-defunct ex-gay ministry, before deciding she couldn’t become straight after trying to date men. Instead, she has chosen celibacy.

… For years, those who were gay or struggled with homosexuality felt like they had few good options: leave their faith, ignore their sexuality or try to change.

But as groups like Exodus have become increasingly unpopular, Rodgers is among those who embrace a different model: celibate gay Christians, who seek to be true to both their sexuality and their faith.

Straddling one of America’s deepest cultural divides, Vanessa Vitiello Urquhart wrote in a recent piece for Slate that celibate gay Christians present a challenge to the tolerance of both their churches and the secular LGBT community. Those celibate gay Christians often find themselves trying to translate one side for the other.

But frequently, neither side really understands what it’s hearing.

“We can be easily misunderstood, to put it nicely, by both sides of the culture war,” Rodgers said. “For those who have a more affirming position, it’s as if we’re repressed, self-hated homophobes, encouraging the church to stand in its position on sexuality. And conservative Christians think that those who shift on sexuality are being rebellious.”

Continue reading “They’re Gay, They’re Christian And They’re Celibate! (by S. Bailey)”

The Christian, Liberal, and Feminist Tendency to Intellectualize Away the Meaningfulness of Female Virginity; Also: Are Engagement Rings Sexist? Liberal Vs Conservatives Sound Off

The Christian, Liberal, and Feminist Tendency to Intellectualize Away the Meaningfulness of Female Virginity; Also: Are Engagement Rings Sexist? Liberal Vs Conservatives Sound Off

✮ From the liberal corner:
(Link): Engagement rings are barbaric

✮ The conservative reaction:
(Link): Engagement rings are barbaric because men are awful or something

✮ My reaction:
This is another time the secular, left wing feminists are off their rockers (I sometimes agree with them, usually do not and this is one of those times, no, I don’t agree). I see no harm or inherent sexism in a freaking engagement ring.

Here are excerpts from the Salon page, with commentary about it, by me, below it:

(Link): Engagement rings are barbaric

    Sparkly rocks remind us of an age when women were considered a form of chattel
    by SHANNON RUPP, THE TYEE

    Unsavoury custom

    … The engagement ring is not, as diamond advertisers of the last 80 years or so have insisted, a symbol of love: it’s a sort of down payment on a virgin vagina.

    I’ve always thought giving engagement rings was a slightly unsavoury custom, given that it began in an era when women were chattel, more or less. It’s hardly romantic. The rings remind me of a time when women couldn’t own property because they were property. Well, except for widows. There’s a reason that Merry Widow of opera fame was so merry.

    As Scott Fitzgerald noticed in the 1920s, the rich are different from you and me, and the custom of laying down an engagement ring was something rich people did in an era when marriage was recognized for what it really is: a business contract. It was done to secure property (and political alliances among royalty and the aristocracy) and to ensure there would be an heir and a spare to inherit it all.

    That’s why female virginity was such a big deal. It had financial value because it was connected to property. Pre-DNA testing, no one could be sure who the father was unless the bride was irreproachably chaste. And no one wants to see property going to bastards. Post-delivery of the requisite sons, everyone was free to go about discreet amusements, and the country weekend at the manor house came into vogue.

    … Then, engagement rings functioned as a sort of retainer — a lease-a-womb scheme, if you will. The unspoken part of the deal was that an engagement often allowed for a sampling of the goods.

    … Frances Gerety (who incidentally was a spinster) cleverly connected romantic love to diamond engagement rings, forever. She obscured their creepy origins as down payments on chattel, and diamond purveyors are still profiting from her sharp thinking.

    …That’s not a coincidence, and it’s not just the wedding industry ramping up. Apparently about half of couples were having premarital sex in the 1940s, and researchers believe that women were looking for some sign of commitment from a man before doing the wild thing. In an era of unreliable birth control, a ring was still seen as a down payment and a sort of insurance policy in the event the man bolted and left her holding the baby.

Since when is a woman having a “virgin vagina” or entering into marriage with one, an “unsavory custom?”

Is this another sign that secularists, left wingers, and others, are biased against adult virgins, or biased against the idea of a woman choosing to remain a virgin until marriage? Because it kind of sounds like it.

As to this:

    That’s why female virginity was such a big deal. It had financial value because it was connected to property. (etc)

This is another dismissal of virginity, another tactic I have seen used not just by secularists and left wingers, but one I’ve seen used a time or two on Christian, or ex-Christian sites, especially by women who are red hot infuriated over “modesty” and “purity” teachings.

Women who are opposed to virginity try to argue that the only reason any woman at any time in history has remained a virgin until marriage is due to patriarchal concerns about tracing the family tree, and at that, with monetary inheritance concerns.

Continue reading “The Christian, Liberal, and Feminist Tendency to Intellectualize Away the Meaningfulness of Female Virginity; Also: Are Engagement Rings Sexist? Liberal Vs Conservatives Sound Off”

Apparent Inconsistency at SCCL Group – They’re Repulsed by Sexualization of Some Relationships But Not All

Apparent Inconsistency at SCCL Group – They’re Repulsed by Sexualization of Some Relationships But Not All

Sometimes, I enjoy and agree with some of the views as expressed by S. Drury’s SCCL (“Stuff Christian Culture Likes”) Facebook group, but not always.

Folks who frequent the SCCL group generally despise Christian sexual purity teachings.

Me? Nope.

My position is that the church needs to start upholding sexual purity teachings more, rather than the SCCL group’s preferred option of backing off or halting.

Very few churches and Christians today condemn sexual sin, nor do many Christians support virginity or sexual purity, something I have blogged about on a recurring basis (see links at the bottom of this post for more).

One of the things that caught my attention were a couple of posts at the SCCL group this week.

Continue reading “Apparent Inconsistency at SCCL Group – They’re Repulsed by Sexualization of Some Relationships But Not All”