Converting gays creates 'damaged people'

[loCAtek]

Cool Jim, for trying to make this a thread and not a pissing match.

[rubato]

The anti-gay laws in Africa have come about because of US christian groups:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/de ... omosexuals
"...
Anti-gay bigots plunge Africa into new era of hate crimes

Uganda is likely to pass a law within months that will make homosexuality a capital offence, joining 37 other countries in the continent where American evangelical Christian groups are increasingly spreading bigotry.
...
But many suspect that it was outsiders who inspired this bill in the first place. In March, Bahati met several prominent anti-gay US Christian activists who attended a conference in Uganda where they pledged to "wipe out" homosexuality. The conference featured Scott Lively, president of California's anti-gay Abiding Truth Ministries and co-author of The Pink Swastika, a book claiming that leading Nazis were gay. Also there was Don Schmierer, on the board of Exodus International, which promotes the "ex-gay" movement, believing people can change their sexuality and be redeemed. The third extremist evangelical to attend was Caleb Lee Brundidge, who is linked to Richard Cohen who believes that psychotherapy can "cure" homosexuality.

Bahati's bill was drawn up within weeks of the conference, but it has only just begun to cause waves within America's powerful evangelical community. Legalising killing gay people has triggered a bad press for the bill.
..."



yrs,
rubato

[dgs49]

It is not possible to make "homosexuality a capital offense." Even in Uganda, a celibate homosexual has nothing to fear.

Homosexuality is a preference, nothing more. Nobody knows what is in your heart, and it can only be shown through behavior. There are many, many celibate people in the world. Some are celibate by choice and some because they simply cannot "connect" in a sexual way (I have nephews in this category). What the Church teaches homosexual men is exactly the same as what it teaches heterosexual men: Sexual contact outside marriage is sinful. And guess what: Virtually every other mainstream church in the world pretty much teaches its adherents the same thing.

The Church cannot prevent homosexuals from doing the things they do to obtain sexual gratification, nor can they prevent heterosexual couples from living together without benefit of marriage. But the Church MUST teach such people that their conduct is sinful, because it is.

Nobody claims to be able to "cure" (all) homosexuals. The claim is that any homosexual who wants to change can change his BEHAVIOR, and possibly even suppress the inclinations, through a combination of prayer, therapy, and social support. NOBODY is forced into such a program; it is all totally voluntary.

The main thrust and motivation for rubato and others like him is anti-Catholic bigotry. How else can one possibly explain their constant, constant, constant, railing against the Catholic church, with no mention of Judaism, LDS, Islam, etc., which religions preach pretty much the same thing about homosexual behavior.

It's not about Christianity.

[rubato]

"....

The main thrust and motivation for rubato and others like him is anti-Catholic bigotry. How else can one possibly explain their constant, constant, constant, railing against the Catholic church, with no mention of Judaism, LDS, Islam, etc., which religions preach pretty much the same thing about homosexual behavior.

It's not about Christianity.

Actually reading posts before responding will allow you to approximate cogent commentary more closely.


""American evangelical Christian groups are increasingly spreading bigotry. ""


"Evangelical Christian" does not equal Roman Catholic.

yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

Meanwhile....

Britain will consider withholding aid from countries that do not recognise gay rights, Prime Minister David Cameron said, after Commonwealth leaders failed to adopt reforms on the issue.

"Britain is now one of the premier aid givers in the world. We want to see countries that receive our aid adhering to proper human rights, and that includes how people treat gay and lesbian people," Cameron told the BBC.

He added: "British aid should have more strings attached, in terms of do you persecute people for their faith or their Christianity, or do you persecute people for their sexuality. We don't think that's acceptable."

Cameron was speaking at the end of a Commonwealth leaders' summit on Sunday, in Perth, western Australia, which failed to adopt a recommendation to call for an end to homophobic laws in 41 member nations.

He insisted the issue of gay rights had been discussed at the summit and he had personally raised it with "a number of the African countries that I've been speaking with," although he would not say which ones.


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/cameron-threat ... 44610.html

[rubato]

Proving that the British "right wing" are to the left of the Democratic party of the US.

yrs,
rubato

[BoSoxGal]

Which is not a bad thing, IMHO.

[loCAtek]

The anti-gay laws in Africa have come about because of US christian groups:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/13/death-penalty-uganda-homosexuals
"...

yrs,
rubato

Wait, that's misleading as homosexually was already illegal in Uganda;

Laws prohibiting homosexual activity were first put in place under British colonial rule in the 19th century. Such laws were retained following independence and enshrined in the Penal Code Act of 1950:

and thank goodness this bill did not pass;

Uganda anti-gay bill 'shelved by parliament']

I don't see it as proof any 'Christian' promotion of bigotry; when many religious groups expressed opposition to it;

Wiki

Religious and human rights organisations

Several Christian organisations oppose it, including the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church of Canada, Integrity Uganda, Exodus International, Accepting Evangelicals, Changing Attitude, Courage, Ekklesia, Fulcrum, Inclusive Church and the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement. Exodus International sent a letter to President Museveni stating, "The Christian church ... must be permitted to extend the love and compassion of Christ to all. We believe that this legislation would make this mission a difficult if not impossible task to carry out."[58] A group of U.S. Christian leaders have released a statement to Uganda about the bill, one of these leaders being Thomas Patrick Melady, former U.S. Ambassador to Uganda.[59] The Anglican Reverend Canon Gideon Byamugisha said that the Bill "would become state-legislated genocide".[60]

Following private discussions with the Ugandan Anglican Church, the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams has said in a public interview that he did not see how any Anglican could support it: "Overall, the proposed legislation is of shocking severity and I can’t see how it could be supported by any Anglican who is committed to what the Communion has said in recent decades. Apart from invoking the death penalty, it makes pastoral care impossible – it seeks to turn pastors into informers."[61]

Divisions emerged in the Anglican community however. In response to the Anglican Church of Canada intervention, the Bishop of Karamoja Diocese, Joseph Abura, wrote an editorial saying, "Ugandan Parliament, the watch dog of our laws, please go ahead and put the anti-Gay laws in place. It is then that we become truly accountable to our young and to this country, not to Canada or England. We are in charge!"[62] While the Anglican Church in Uganda opposes the death penalty, its archbishop, Henry Luke Orombi, has not taken a position on the bill.[63] Some individuals within the Anglican church, such as retired bishop Christopher Senyonjo, from the West Buganda diocese, have been vocally opposed to the bill and supportive of LGBT rights in Uganda. In 2010, Bishop Senyonjo was touring the United States to draw attention to the bill.[64]

Uganda's Catholic Archbishop of Kampala Cyprian Lwanga stated in December 2009 that the bill was unnecessary and "at odds with the core values" of Christianity, expressing particular concerns at the death penalty provisions. Lwanga argued that instead homosexuals should be encouraged to seek rehabilitation.[65] For its part, the Holy See has maintained excellent relations with Uganda, with Pope Benedict XVI receiving the Ugandan ambassador in December 2009 and commending the climate of freedom and respect in the country towards the Catholic Church. During this meeting, there was no mention of the anti-homosexuality bill.[66] However, three days earlier the Vatican legal attaché to the United Nations stated that "Pope Benedict is opposed to 'unjust discrimination' against gay men and lesbians".[67]

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, urged Uganda to shelve the bill and decriminalise homosexuality.[68] Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have condemned the bill, calling it a product of a campaign by evangelical churches and anti-gay groups that has led to death threats and physical assaults against Ugandans suspected of being gay.[25][6] John Nagenda, Senior Presidential Advisor to the president of Uganda, has expressed that he does not think the bill should be passed.[55] The Global Fund to Fight AIDS has stated that excluding marginalised groups would compromise efforts to stop the spread of AIDS in Uganda where 5.4% of the adult population is infected with HIV.[28][69] Elizabeth Mataka, the U.N. Special Envoy on AIDS in Africa expressed her concern with the bill as it will dissuade people from getting tested for HIV if they will subsequently be punished with the death penalty.[42] Uganda experienced a rare and very successful drop in HIV transmission in the 1990s.[70] The 16,000 members of the HIV Clinicians Society of Southern Africa sent a letter to the Ugandan president stating, “Encouraging openness and combating stigma are widely recognized as key components of Uganda’s successful campaign to reduce HIV infection” and the bill threatens to enact a “profoundly negative impact on Uganda’s efforts to combat HIV”.[71]

As well as;

Ugandan Constitution

Despite penal sanctions concerning homosexual acts remaining in place, LGBT rights under Uganda's constitution have recently been challenged in the Uganda High Court.

On 12 September 2008, in a case against the Attorney General of Uganda, brought by LGBT activists Yvonne Oyoo and Victor Juliet Mukasa, the High Court through High Court Judge Stella Arach set a precedent and stated affirmatively that at least articles 23, 24 and 27 of articles 20 to 45 of the Ugandan Constitution do apply to the GLBT community.[10][11]

The Ugandan Constitution of 1995 offers broadbased protection against discrimination, through article 21, sections 1–5.

21. Equality and freedom from discrimination.

(1) All persons are equal before and under the law in all spheres of political, economic, social and cultural life and in every other respect and shall enjoy equal protection of the law.

(2) Without prejudice to clause (1) of this article, a person shall not be discriminated against on the ground of sex, race, colour, ethnic origin, tribe, birth, creed or religion, social or economic standing, political opinion or disability.

(3) For the purposes of this article, “discriminate” means to give different treatment to different persons attributable only or mainly to their respective descriptions by sex, race, colour, ethnic origin, tribe, birth, creed or religion, social or economic standing, political opinion or disability.[12]

[loCAtek]

Meanwhile in Botswana, Africa;

Botswana leader: Legalize gays to fight HIV spread


Botswana’s former President Festus Mogae has called for his country to decriminalize prostitution and homosexuality to prevent the spread of HIV, according to the BBC.

Mogae, who now heads the government-supported AIDS Council, said the challenges of promoting safe sex would be lessened by making the two practices legal.

“To protect them and their clients from being infected, you have to assist them to protect themselves. I don’t think by arresting them you help them,” he said, according to the International Business Times.

The former president also asked for condoms to be distributed in prisons, and said the government is causing the HIV/AIDS pandemic to worsen by ignoring the situation.

“If people can go to prison HIV negative and come out of it HIV positive, it means that prisons, whatever the law says, are one of the sources of infection,” Mogae said.

Botswana is a relatively stable and democratic society in southern Africa, but it has one of the highest HIV-rates in the world. About 17 percent of the population is HIV-positive.

Mogae’s views contrast sharply with the beliefs of many in the largely conservative country, the BBC reported. The controversial stance is likely to be eschewed since many in the country — including Mogae himself — are not accepting of homosexuality and prostitution.

“I don’t understand it [homosexuality]. I am a heterosexual,” he said, according to Pink News. “I look at women. I don’t look at other men. But there are men who look at other men. These are citizens.”

Mogae’s presidency ended after two terms in 2008, after he saw his country become the first sub-Saharan country to introduce free anti-retroviral to end mother-to-child AIDS transmission.

He was awarded the $5 million Mo Ibrahim award later in 2008 for his leadership in Botswana and was commended by the former U.N. leader Kofi Annan for working aggressively to tackle the HIV/AIDS problem.

Wiki

Religion in Botswana


Christianity
 
71.6%


An estimated 70 percent of the country's citizens identify themselves as Christians. Anglicans, Methodists, and the United Congregational Church of Southern Africa make up the majority of Christians. There are also congregations of Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Seventh-day Adventists, Baptists, the Dutch Reformed Church, Mennonites, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and other Christian sects.

[dgs49]

How ironic. Europeans claim to be "Christian" but very few of them go to Church, and most don't believe in God, in any meaningful way. The African countries (and the U.S., when you think about it), still cling to the Christianity that the Europeans brought.

And how odd it is that Lefties (and most white Europeans) are so flummoxed at Christians for condemning conduct that the Bible teaches is evil. The whole point of the Bible is that it gives guidance on matters of faith and morals.

[Scooter]

So those who are saying that the condemnation of homosexuals has nothing to do with Christianity are wrong; it is in fact a moral imperative of Christianity to condemn homosexuality. Perhaps you should advise them against continuing to post such nonsense, then.

[quaddriver]

Condemnation of homersexuls, appears to be equal opportunity.

[dgs49]

The majority of spokespersons for the various sects of Christianity do not condemn homosexuals, but rather homosexual acts - which most Christians believe to be the teaching of the Bible.

But it is not an exclusively Christian position. Most of the major religions of the world teach that homosexual sodomy is wrong. Indeed, one doesn't have to have any religious background at all to feel a rather profound revulsion for the acts that are considered "normal" in a homosexual relationship. To quote the late Jim Varner, "Eeeeeeeeeew!"

Whoever wrote that, "the condemnation of homosexuals has nothing to do with Christianity," was not using very precise language, although the basic point is correct. Globally speaking, most condemnation of homosexual activity has nothing to do with Christianity; it is other religious traditions or simple human biology that drives it.

[GrossDad]

. . . Indeed, one doesn't have to have any religious background at all to feel a rather profound revulsion for the acts that are considered "normal" in a homosexual relationship. To quote the late Jim Varner, "Eeeeeeeeeew!"

Not for a person who is sexually attracted to other members of his/her own sex.

Whoever wrote that, "the condemnation of homosexuals has nothing to do with Christianity," was not using very precise language, although the basic point is correct. Globally speaking, most condemnation of homosexual activity has nothing to do with Christianity; it is other religious traditions or simple human biology that drives it.

"Simple human biology" does not lead to condemnation of homosexual activity by a person who is sexually attracted to other members of his/her own sex.

As my Despair.com mug says, "Tradition: Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid."

[Scooter]

"Simple human biology" says there must be reason why the most intense male orgasms are achieved through direct stimulation of the prostate, something possble only by massaging it by something inserted into the anus. "Simple human biology" therefore dictates that you God has a much broader view of what sorts of sexual activity he had in mind than you give him credit for.

[dgs49]

Why is it that anyone can understand a persons revulsion when shown a picture of someone from another culture eating, for example, live insects, or an exotic plant, but if you suggest that certain sexual practices between men cause natural revulsion in most men, you will get an argument? To say that there are men who are not revolted by even the thought of it says absolutely nothing. Sadists and masochists get enjoyment out of giving and experiencing pain, but most people find this disgusting. Would you say that it is "normal" to take pleasure in inflicting pain? It is abnormal, disgusting to those with normal sensitivities, and morally abhorrent.

Scooter, you have made this claim before. It is nothing more than a bizarre opinion, and you are welcome to it; I won't waste the keystrokes to argue because it would be pointless. One can only wonder why you find this claim to be so compelling.

[Scooter]

Why is it that anyone can understand a persons revulsion when shown a picture of someone from another culture eating, for example, live insects, or an exotic plant, but if you suggest that certain sexual practices between men cause natural revulsion in most men, you will get an argument?

Who has ever said you have no right to be revolted? Be as revolted as you wish, just don't pretend that your personal revulsion counts for anything, or constitutes any basis for creating legal roadblocks in the way of those whose sexuality revolts you.

Scooter, you have made this claim before. It is nothing more than a bizarre opinion

Have you ever had occasion to be brought to orgasm solely by the action of a penis stimulating your prostate through the anal wall, without any stimulation of your own penis whatsoever? Then you don't know what you are talking about.

One can only wonder why you find this claim to be so compelling.

Because, as you say, there's no arguing against biology. In this case, your repressed sexual repertoire prohibits you from recognizing that biology demolishes your side of the argument.

[Gob]

Scooter, you have made this claim before. It is nothing more than a bizarre opinion, and you are welcome to it; I won't waste the keystrokes to argue because it would be pointless. One can only wonder why you find this claim to be so compelling.

It's a well known medical fact Dave, and if you've never tried prostate massage, you don't know what you're missing.

It's another one of those "why did god, not only make it possible, but so pleasurable", conundrums...

Prostate massage is the massage or stimulation of the male prostate gland for sexual stimulation or medical purposes.
The prostate takes part in the sexual response cycle, and is essential for ejaculation. Due to its close proximity to the anterior rectal wall, it can be stimulated from the anterior wall of the rectum or externally via the perineum.

Prostate massage is also used for sexual stimulation, often in order to reach orgasm.

The prostate is sometimes referred to as the "male G-Spot". Some men are able to achieve orgasm solely through stimulation of the prostate gland, such as prostate massage or receptive anal sex. Men who report the sensation of prostate stimulation often give descriptions similar to females' accounts of G-Spot and Anal stimulation.[16]

Prostate massage is an uncommon sexual practice in couples' sexual lives although some men may achieve intense pleasure from it. Also, the advent of equipment and products for prostate massage encourages people to try it. Many couples though do not purchase such devices but use the finger for anal penetration and prostate stimulation to enhance the man's orgasm. The finger or the prostate massager is introduced into the rectum through the anus and the prostate gland is gently massaged. The prostate can also be simulated externally by pressing against the area behind testicles and near the anus, which is preferable by most men who are interested in prostate massages as it feels more comfortable and less painful. The main problem in using the finger is that it may be too short to reach the prostate gland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_massage

[Gob]

Should we all chip in to get Dave these for Xmas?

Gold-Plated Prostate Massager


Cost: $990

At first blush, this is just an 18-karat-gold-plated door handle. Then you read the description, "gentleman's pleasure object," and realize it's made to go up your butthole.

So now you have a classy gold tool that you might use to tickle your prostate discreetly in the country club sauna or furiously on the bow of your yacht, depending on how desensitized wealth has made you. But wait, what are those things that come with it? Travel prostate massagers? Actually, they're cufflinks, so you can advertise your favorite sex toy brand at black-tie galas, funerals and cancer fundraisers.

Presumably, the cuffs are special designed to not get in the way of even the most acrobatic butt-hole maneuvers.

The massager also comes with an "elegant wooden gift box," a "satin pouch for stylish storage" and a manual, which we assume consists entirely of fake stories for explaining to the emergency room staff how "the thing that flushes the toilet" got stuck in your butt.



Via Store.babeland.com

Read more: 14 'Luxury' Sex Toys for the Extremely Rich and Creepy | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/article_19488_14 ... z1dHg8kwEC

[Scooter]

fake stories for explaining to the emergency room staff how "the thing that flushes the toilet" got stuck in your butt

Priceless.