Archive for the homosexuality Category

« Older Entries

Picture This: My Rights Over Yours

Posted in christians, homosexuality, liberty, marriage, same sex marraige, toleration on June 10, 2012 by The Temptress

Pictures.

Mmmmmmm…. I absolutely adore pictures, my dear ones.

Well, most of them.

So many of my friends and servants to my Master are seduced by single photographs, even addicted to them, to the point where some of them act out in our favor in real life… just because of a picture or two.  It’s so easy!

I have the pleasure of using many photographers for my work.  I want to let you in on some of my personal favorites as far as photos go:  anorexic models (aka clothes hangers) to convince young girls that they need to starve themselves to be beautiful, Hollywood stars with fake everything to convince women that they need to have certain perfect measurements to measure up, and child porn, hetero porn, gay porn… I love porn!  (Can you tell?)  Just with the click of a button, so many can experience pleasure…

But there is one photographer I am not happy with today.

In a story found here, this photographer refused to provide her services to a lesbian couple, and is now, thankfully, being sued.  I quote: “According to the court’s verdict, the trouble began for Elane Photography when the company was contacted by lesbian Vanessa Willock asking if they could photograph a ‘commitment ceremony’ for a Willock and her ‘partner.’ The company, owned by Christian couple Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, responded stating that they only shoot traditional weddings, and do not do ‘same-sex weddings,’ but thanked Willock for her interest.”

Excuse me… where does this Christian (bleeecccchhhh!) get off trying to exert her First Amendment rights to photograph whom SHE wants to?

I completely support the lesbian couple for their lawsuit to take away the rights of Christians and their businesses to do business according to their beliefs.  I like the fact that they are bullying the Christians.  Good for them!  In fact, I think they should bully other religious persuasions as well.  You go, girls!

I hate the stupid First Amendment.  After all, what matters is that whoever has the loudest mouth, the biggest guns, the most power, and the most money, is the one who gets to rule.

That way, I and my Master get to rule, too.

Hm hm hm hm hm…. ;)

Always yours,

Temptress

5 Comments »

Obama supports gay marriage? Surprise?

Posted in homosexuality, liberals, marriage, Obama, political correctness, same sex marraige with tags , on May 13, 2012 by devilbloggger

Really?

I was amused this week, my friends, at all the feigned surprise when my beelzebud Obama actually came out of his CINO (Christian in name only) closet to support gay marriage.  REALLY?  Really?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

It’s news that Obama supports gay marriage?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Oh, I love the world I’ve created where one’s actions are ignored and their words, as empty or lying as they may be, are taken at two-face value.  In this case, the fact that people actually “wondered” what Obama’s views on same-sex marriage might be proves my great power on earth.

Let me impart some wisdom to you, my readers.  This will come as no surprise to long-time readers of this blog.  (You can search on “Obama” to see all my brilliant analysis of this, my favorite US citizen).  But I’ll tell you a sure-fire (so to speak) way to know everything Obama would do for any given topic.

Ready?

Here it is: for any given topic, subject, decision, statement, etc., simply ask yourself what would Satan do (WWSD)?

Alternatively, you could ask WWJD, and then do the opposite.  In every case, however, you will find that WWOD is exactly the same as WWSD.

In this case, for example, between Jesus and I (moi) which one supports same-sex marriage?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

And Obama?

See how easy it is?

Obama, my CINO-in-chief, thrills me with his consistent faithfulness in carrying out my will on earth as it is in Hell.

In fact, I challenge you, my servants, to come up with one decision, policy, action, or other verifiable display of belief that could not easily be inserted as an answer to the question, “WWSD?”

Try it.

It’s like a game.

A game that illustrates an important game that I’m winning.

Because I’m Liberal One.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

80 Comments »

Your Glee is My (unstoppable) Glee

Posted in Ethics, homosexuality, Morality, political correctness, progressives, same sex marraige, Sex, Sexual revolution with tags , , on November 13, 2011 by devilbloggger

Glee!

I knew it would come to this, my servants.  After all, what (or who) could stop it?  Yes, my friends, I’m bragging about the glorious boyboysex delivered into millions of households this week on Fox’s popular teen-targeted comedy “Glee”.

Comedy?

Maybe for you, but for me?  It’s pure glee!

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Boyboysex on prime time television.  According to Fox News’ article entitled “Straight, Gay Couples Lose Virginity on ‘Glee’ Episode, Spark Controversy,” my will on earth is hurtling along almost totally unimpeded.

Who can stop it?

According to the Fox News article, both a heterosexual couple and a homosexual couple will lose their respective virginities on this prime time fare.

And do you know what I like best?  It’s that the uproar is virtually solely over the boyboysex.  The world apparently yawns at two children of opposite sex “losing it” on television.  That is so yesterday.

But boyboysex?

Well, soon that, too, will be so yesterday.

You see, my servants, how far we have come. Today’s shock is tomorrow’s yawn.

And the beat goes on.

My Glee glee is particularly gleefulicious because it comes during the same week that the world is shocked at the allegations of boyboysex between a grown man and a 10-year old boy in the locker rooms of Penn State’s Happy Valley.

I love the hand-wringing over the fate of that poor little 10-year old (who was merely unlucky in time; within the next 50 years such behavior will be accepted as normal).  The popular press screams in high moral outrage about a grown man enjoying boyboysex with a 10-year old pinned to a shower wall.

You are all my 10-year olds, my friends.

While the world frets about that 10-year old on the receiving end of boyboysex in the locker room, do you know how many 10-year olds (or younger) watched boyboysex on Glee?

I’ll tell you.  I was gleefully counting: 2,744,992.

And do you know what else?  About 31% of those 10-year olds were watching with their parents in the room.

I’m not sure what I’m more proud of — the kids watching with their mind-numbed parents, or the kids watching without.  Both are huge victories for my kingdom.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Now, of course, there are those against my kingdom who try to sound the warning bell.    Melissa Henson, the director of communications and public education for the Parents Television Council, a nonpartisan education organization advocating responsible entertainment, was quick to weigh in by refuting the standard Hollywood line:

Hollywood loves to defend teen sex story lines by insisting, “Kids are having sex! We’re reflecting the real world!” But the truth is much more sobering and
complicated.

Yes, of course it is.  Because as Henson states:

Teens are also aware that television influences their behavior. According to one survey, a third of youths age 12 and older say the media encourages them to have sex by making it seem like “everybody does it.” And why shouldn’t they get that impression?

You see, my friends.  I use television to continually push back the lines of morally acceptable behaviour for language, sexuality, and culture in general.  But my greatest achievements come among the little chillen’s of the world.

And I’m proud not only because of what I’ve accomplished, but also at how easy it is.

A few minutes of prime time comedy will prove to anyone how effective my strategy has been.  The airwaves shining into the minds of chillens the world over are full of vulgarity, sexual innuendo, sexual exuendo, glamorized casual sex, shameless gratuitous sex, and, of course sex-laced laugh lines to make you laugh your way to moral rot and decay.

You see, my friends, I have almost the whole world grinning with glee as they face the shower wall.

And, again, who can stop me?

Apparently no one.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

(PS: Don’t tell anyone, but television would hardly be my playground of evil if only Christians and those who call themselves Christians stopped watching.  Shhhhh!)

26 Comments »

Satan Answers Mr. Keller’s Tough Questions.

Posted in atheism, atheists, Bible, Darwin, Darwinism, evangelisim, evolution, False religion, God, heresy, homosexuality, liberals, political correctness, prayer, public schools, secular humanism, secularism, separation of church and state, Truth, worldview with tags , , , on August 25, 2011 by devilbloggger

Oh yeah.

My my my.  Sometimes one of mine outdoes himself in his blind hatred of all things God (true God, that is).  Sometimes this servant of mine has a loud voice that gets heard by many, convinces a few, and pleases one. My my my.

When I saw Bill Keller’s article  in today’s New York Times entitled, “Asking Candidates Tougher Questions About Faith,” I must admit I was worried.  I thought it might be an exposé focusing on the atheistic faith of some politicians, the anti-Christian faith of others, or the general degradation of all things moral and upright by almost every politician.

But I suppose I should have known better.  After all, this showed up in my paper of record.  And it didn’t disappoint.

Yes, Mr. Keller dumped not on “faith” in general, a necessary element of anyone’s political worldview, but only on sincere God faith of the type expressed by George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Ronald Reagan.

I’m with Mr. Keller on this one, my friends.  There is nothing worse for my kingdom than a politician who has a sincere belief in God, and nothing better for my kingdom than a politician who has a professed, but clearly non-existent faith in God.

You will notice Mr. Keller has no problem with Mr. Obama’s faith.

Neither do I.

But consider the faith of Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, or horror of horrors Rick Perry, and Mr. Keller begins asking the baited question, “Does it matter?”

Matter?

For what?  For an ordered society where people can live freely in relative peace like they used to do when God was not banished from public discourse?

Yes, I suppose it does matter.

And to press his point, Mr. Keller sent a questionairre to suspect candidates to find out where they stand on questions he believes important.  The entire questionnaire can be found on The 6th Floor blog.  Just for fun, I have given my answers to his questions below.

Enjoy. 

1. Is it fair to question presidential candidates about details of their faith?

My answer:  Yes, of course.  Everyone has faith in something or someone, and the public has a right to know what or who is the object of one’s ultimate faith.  Obviously, it is that “something” or “someone” which/who will ultimately drive a politician’s policy choices.  I just hope that atheists, and practical atheists like most Democrats in the US don’t get questioned on this point.

2. Is it fair to question candidates about controversial remarks made by their pastors, mentors, close associates or thinkers whose books they recommend?

My answer: Yes, it is fair.  But the emphasis should always remain on “pastors” and not “thinkers” like Karl Marx,  Bill Ayers and others who espouse destructive ideas that I’ve miraculously made standard thought among the political elite, as well as the faculty of most college campuses.

3. (a) Do you agree with those religious leaders who say that America is a “Christian nation” or “Judeo-Christian nation?” (b) What does that mean in  practice?

My answer:  No. America used to be a Christian nation.  Of course it is not now.  In practice a Christian nation would not kill millions of babies for convenience, celebrate homosexuality as normal, or trash Biblical sexual morality (all three are intimately related).  A Christian nation would not ban Christmas displays, censor Christmas carols in public schools, fire teachers for reading Bibles at work, object to crosses in public places (whether inadvertent or purposeful), freak out over after-school bible studies, go spastic over graduation prayers, kow tow to imprisoned terrorists on religious grounds, sue every person for every Christian utterance made in public, or … well, you get the idea.

4. If you encounter a conflict between your faith and the Constitution and laws of the United States, how would you resolve it? Has that happened, in your experience?

My answer: I encounter conflicts all the time.  The Constitution was written based on an implicit faith in the God of the Bible–an obvious conflict for my purposes.  Fortunately, I resolve it by convincing many people that the Constitution is “living” and subject to change based on prevailing morals by consensus.  Does it seem like the time is right to make abortion a Constitutional right?  Then, by God moi, I make sure someone finds that right buried in that dadgum thing somewhere. 

5. (a) Would you have any hesitation about appointing a Muslim to the federal bench? (b) What about an atheist?

My answer: Moi?  Ha ha ha ha ha.  Of course not. 

6. Are Mormons Christians, in your view? Should the fact that Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons influence how we think of them as candidates?

My answer: No.  But Mormons can be just as damaging to my kingdom.  I hate Mormons almost as much as I hate Christians.

7. What do you think of  the evangelical Christian movement known as Dominionism and the idea that Christians, and only Christians, should hold dominion over the secular institutions of the earth?

My answer:  Frankly, that idea scares the . . . well, the . . . the heck out of me.  Fortunately, it will never happen, but I can use the notion to prey upon fears, just as I’ve done with Mr. Keller.  Question: Would Mr. Keller care if “Dominionism” was the idea that atheists, and only atheists, should hold dominion over “secular” institutions of the earth.  Why not?

8. (a) What is your attitude toward the theory of evolution? (b) Do you believe it should be taught in public schools?

My answer:  I LOVE the theory of evolution.  This theory has done more to advance my kingdom than any other in the history of the world.  Of course it should be taught in public schools, but not as Darwin presented it, a tentative scientific theory, but as dogmatic fact immune from criticism.  Darwin, a true scientist, included many reasonable scientific objections to his theory of descent with modification in his book Origin of Species.  I would not want students to know these objections, all of which continue as refutations to Darwin’s theory today.  One of my greatest lies on earth is that Darwinism is ironclad science and anyone who questions it is naïve at best, and evil at worst.  (Consider: Darwin’s own book, half of which contains scientific criticism of his theory, could not be taught in public schools today!  The criticisms are just as valid today, but they are not allowed to be taught. Darwin would likely abandon his theory based on them.)

9. Do you believe it is proper for teachers to lead students in prayer in public schools?

My answer:  Are you serious?  Of course not.  Unless, of course, the prayers are to an ungodly toy deity.

There you have it, my servants. 

I wonder how my answers would stack up against the politicians Mr. Keller opposes?

I wonder how my answers would stack up against the politicians Mr. Keller endorses?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

5 Comments »

Polygamy: It’s very big o’ me.

Posted in homosexuality, marriage, polygamy with tags on July 25, 2011 by devilbloggger

UPDATE:  The first paragraph of this post has been updated from the original to correct a misleading idea.  Hey, almost no one’s perfect!!
 
Quote of the Day:  Like magic, my servants, I’m making another of God’s precious gifts to humanity disappear: marriage. – Marriage is for old people

Polygamy.

Did you ever wonder, my servants, who made the rule that men can have only one wife and who wants to change that rule?  Here’s a hint to answer who wants it changed: the question rarely arises in the alternative — whether a woman can have more than one husband. 

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Hey, but seriously, if men and women are mere accidents of nature, who cares if one accident prefers to be married to two or more other accidents?  In other words, when it comes to whether polygamy is wrong, the real question is who sez?

Yeah, who sez??

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Every deviant and perverted societal ill begins with someone asking, who sez?

Here’s a kingdom truth, my friends: when morality is based on no recognized authority higher than man, you get man’s moral authority, which is to say morality for the moment mandated by man-decree. 

I sez, sez some strong man, and if the strong man who sez it is stronger than you, then your behavior is forced by his morality.  Which, happily, ultimately mirrors my morality.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Don’t believe me?  Look at how I got boyboysex and girlgirlsex accepted in the world, and especially in the United States. 

Is boyboysex wrong? 

Who sez?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

And what about polygamy?  What is to stop polygamy from becoming legally protected the world over?

As one astute commenter to my earlier teaser post indicated, the question is largely relevant only to the West, and particularly to the United States.  Consider: according to BigThink.com, polygyny, which is virtually the only form of polygamy practiced in the world, is actually widely practiced.

Though reviled in the West, polygyny is actually quite common throughout the world. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, studying over a thousand societies from 1962-1980, there were over 1,000 polygamous societies, compared to just 186 monogamous ones.

Those are good numbers, no?  And the practice is even alive and well in the US.  According to a study quoted by BigThink.com:

Polygamy is alive and well in parts of America. According to researchers at Brigham Young University, there are 30,000 to 50,000 people currently living a polygamist lifestyle in the United States, many of them in sects that splintered from the mainstream Mormon church when it renounced polygamy in 1890. A separate study reported on NPR estimates that 50,000 to 100,000 Muslims in America may be quietly living polygamist lives.

My friends, let me be clear: I love polygamy.  You may find that belittling to your righteous notions of marriage, but I find it big o’ me.  (Ha ha ha ha ha, I wish I made that up, but I didn’t).

So you can imagine my amusement, my friends, when someone brought me an article from today’s Daily Caller,  entitled, ” Why the polygamist rights movement will never succeed.”

What?  A mere mortal question my ability to force my will on earth as it is in Hell?

Yes, and this mortal, a chap named Peter Tucci, beautifully illustrates exactly how I achieve my will on earth: by underestimating the power of  a small group of persistent sinners to eventually impose their sin on all of society.

Mr. Tucci first correctly salutes my great success in forcing legal boyboysex and girlgirlsex on a gagging society, by noting that:

It’s hard to say that gay marriage should be legal but polygamy shouldn’t. After all, if the government has no business telling people who they can or cannot marry, why can it tell people how many people they can marry?

Yes, what role does government play in stopping the foistmentation of legalized sin on a hapless society?
 
Mr. Tucci further notes:
On Wednesday, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley made a civil libertarian case for legalizing the practice in a New York Times op-ed. And Canada, which legalized gay marriage in 2005, may be on the verge of becoming the first Western country to legalize polygamy.

In other words, when it comes to polygamy in the West, I have almost achieved my will on a part of earth as it is in Hell.  My goal, of course, is to achieve the festering sore of sexual deviancy on all of earth, especially in the United States.

Which is why I just loved Mr. Tucci’s soothing salve:

But social conservatives shouldn’t fret, because polygamy won’t be legal in America anytime soon.

Why not fret? you ask. 

I’m glad you asked, because it allows me to illustrate the kind of thinking that greases the intellectual skids for sliding my lovely will into society.

Here is Mr. Tucci’s first slippery reason:

One problem for polygamy supporters is the fact that there are only, at most, a few hundred thousand polygamists in the United States. The small size of the polygamist population means that polygamists can’t sway elections by themselves — they lack the money and votes.

It need not be about elections, Mr. Tucci.  In the United States, all selfish old men need do is convince five Supreme Court justices that they have a constitutional right to multiple subjugants.

And if the Court is in the mood, make no mistake about it, the Court will do the same thing it did with abortion and gay marriage: discover the brilliance of the Founding Fathers’ ability to enshrine a multitude of human sins as human “rights” in secret code language only they (the Court) can rightly discern. 

Second, Mr. Tucci applies some grease to my sin-skids by showing he’s never heard of the boiling frog trick:

To succeed, the polygamist rights movement would have to rely on the sympathy of non-polygamists. But that sympathy doesn’t exist. According to a May 2011 Gallup poll, just 11% of Americans consider polygamy to be morally acceptable.

Sympathy?  What sympathy was there for legally protected boyboysex 20 years ago, Mr. Tucci?  Or 10 years ago?  Or 5 years ago? 

Hey, the frog is still smiling!

And here’s Mr. Tucci’s last oily reason for keeping the frog smilingly swimming in its own soup:

Another major barrier to a polygamist rights movement is the lack of a natural constituency for it. Conservatives oppose polygamy for traditional reasons. Liberals oppose polygamy because they think that polygamist relationships subjugate women.

Really, Mr. Tucci?  You think liberals care about subjugating women? 

Really?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Remember, my friends, I am Liberal One.  Trust me on this one.

Here’s my little secret: liberals like to think they are against subjugating anyone, when in fact the very policies liberals support lead to subjugation of every class for which they deem themselves protectors.

The poor?  Liberals subjugate the poor to the oppression of dependency-induced freeloading.

Minorities?  Liberals subjugate minorities to the shame of affirmative racism and sexism, depriving individuals of the satisfaction of earned success.

And, of course, women?  Liberals subjugate women by supporting abortion rights which ultimately serve merely to render sex consequence-free for lusting men.

So, my friends, you see how I impose my will on earth as it is in Hell.

Very soon the monogamy frog will be happily dead.

And then little screwed-up Johnny will have two legally protected ways to have two mommies!

Ha ha ha ha ha.

15 Comments »

Christian gay therapy? Shhhh, there is a better way

Posted in homosexuality, progressives, same sex marraige, secularism, Sin, toleration, Truth with tags , , , on July 20, 2011 by devilbloggger

Therapy.

Have you heard, my friends, about the firestorm created by recent reports that the therapy clinic co-owned by US Republican presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann offers “ex-gay” therapy?  What a delicious controversy!

I have worked for years to make homosexuality natural, just one of many alternative sexual lifestyles a person may experience. 

Homo or hetero?  It depends on one’s natural or chosen ”orientation” and many claim it’s no more a choice than is one’s sex in the first place.  Right?

Right.

At least that’s the way I’ve raised a generation of academics and other Important People.  And Important People often pal around with Smart People, and both groups define Sacred Ideas in the world today.

And it is good.

And one of my Sacred Ideas today is that one’s sexual orientation with respect to other humans (human/animal sexientation will take a little longer, but it will be naturalized soon) is natural. 

To oppose boyboysex or girlgirlsex today automatically renders one narrow-minded,  fearful and most importantly, full of hatification and bigotivity.

And best of all, such opposition renders one, in one of my most effective lingua-walls protecting a Sacred Idea, pathetically homophobic.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

And do you want to know how I’ve done this, my servants? Do you want to know how I’ve silenced most opposition to my will on earth through the rampant and inaccurate use of the single term, homophobia?

I’ll tell you if you promise to not tell anyone else.

Promise?

OK.  Listen.  This is important:  I’ve rendered impotent virtually all opposition to homosexuality by making everyone who accepts homosexuality as normal or healthy sinophobic. 

Sinophobic?

Yes, sinophobic.

Sinophobia: sin’-oh-pho’-bee-a, n. (1) the attitude of one who rejects “sin” as an accurate descriptor of behavior one finds fun or normal; (2) fear of or contempt for one who holds to a Biblical notion of sin; (3) behavior based on such a feeling; (4) the attitude of those who defend homosexuality as normal and healthy.

Do you see what I’ve done so magnificentically?  I’ve made the concept of sin passé, backward, prehistoric, and generally believed only by fun-hating, meddling, narrow-minded, and sometimes plain crazy religious people.

I’ve rendered entire populations sinophobic.

Who embraces the idea of sin anymore?

Well, some do, unfortunately.  Because sin is real, and some behaviors are sinful.  This is, unfortunately the truth of the human experience.

Which is why I hate this aspect of truth whenever it tries to squeeze out of the cracks of the Sacred Ideas of Important People and Smart People.

And I must warn you, my servants, that truth practically flowed out of the cracks in a recent article discussing the views of one of my most hated foes: Albert Mohler.  

Blechhhh!

Mr. Mohler is quoted in today’s article at the Christian Post entitled, “Evangelical Leader Touts Gospel, Not Therapy, as Way to ‘Reorient’ Gays.”  And what Mr. Mohler has to say, if widely read and understood, could effectively dismantle my years of mantling the Sacred Ideas.

Dr. Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, rather than pussy-foot around about the nature of deviant sexual behavior, unapologetically uses the language of truth–the language of sin:

We will hold no hope for any sinner’s ability to change his or her own heart, and we will hold little hope for any secular therapy to offer more than marginal improvement in a sinner’s life,” he argued in his blog Tuesday.

Sin.  Heart.  Change. 

He’s directly challenging my legions of sinophobes!

As I read these words I thought to myself, well, at least he didn’t connect all these words with the gospel or Jesus Christ.

But my satisfactification was short-lived, as Mr. Mohler continued:

We hold full confidence in the power of the Gospel and of the reign of Christ within the life of the believer. We know that something as deeply entrenched as a pattern of sexual attraction is not easily changed, but we know that with Christ all things are possible.

Do you see what Mr. Mohler is saying, my servants?  His approach to the method of correcting sexual deviancy by attacking sinophobes front and center must be stopped.

Because he is right.  Sexual deviancy must be protected as normal and healthy.  To do so, we must characterize those who disagree as irrational, fundamentalist religionists who are hopelessly behind the times.

And we must shut down all talk of such deviancy being “sin;” we must keep sinophobia alive.

This is why I don’t oppose “secular” approaches to “curing” boyboys and girlgirls.  The Bachmann’s practice is easily dismissed as being the activity of some crackpots.  Let them live on the fringes.

But when someone starts using plain language of “sin” and “gospel” and such Dangerous Ideas as “with Christ all things are possible,” we must mobilize our forces and shut such talk down.

So I ask you, my servants, to do what you can to silence people like Mr. Mohler.  Call him names, discredit his motives, try to dig up some dirt on him.

We must, my servants, stop Dangerous Ideas before they smother and displace my Sacred Ideas.

It can be done. 

How do I know?  Because, remember, there was a time when God’s ideas were sacred, and mine were dangerous.

Let’s not let another reversal happen.

OK?

OK.

14 Comments »

Destroying Society One (Gay) Marriage at a Time

Posted in Bible, christians, Government, homosexuality, perversion, political correctness, same sex marraige, Sexual revolution, theology, Truth with tags , , on July 12, 2011 by devilbloggger

Quote of the Day:  Just say the Bible is pro-homosexuality, throw out a few random verses, talk about the love of God, and sternly warn about judging others.  Do this with a sincere look on your face and you will convince a few, confuse many, and you can go home victorious. – We gays don’t need no stinkin’ Bible (do we?)

Inevitable.

Ahhh . . . the sweet confirmation of my success is here.  And from the entirely reasonable and even-keeled keyboard of Rod Dreher over at Real Clear Religion.  Today’s article, entitled “My Second Thoughts About Gay Marriage,” lays out better than I could the current landscape of gay marriage acceptance in America. 

And the picture is beautiful from my point of view.

Mr. Dreher is reacting to my recent victory in New York, which recently became the sixth, and largest, state in the US to legalize same-sex marriage.  Mr. Dreher noticed with some alarm the same thing I noticed with some delight: the virtual absence of any effective defense of the marriage status quo. 

Mr. Dreher had written a previous column complaining,

. . . that no conservative religious leaders had managed to articulate a persuasive case against gay marriage — this, because so few have been able to mount an effective defense of Christian sexual teaching since the Sexual Revolution.

Ta da!

Dreher is right.  Like magic I’ve virtually silenced any intellectually coherent opposition to boyboysex and girlgirlsex, including state-sanctioned marriage of such sinfulness.

Oops!  Did I say sinfulness?  I’m getting ahead of myself.  Hang on, my servants, while I explain what is really going on here.

My servants, what I’m about to share is highly confidential.  If you are on a public computer, please take note of your surroundings.  If someone can see your screen, casually scroll up or switch to another window now.  Wait until you are alone before proceeding.

Alone?

Good.

I recommend that you read Mr. Dreher’s article for yourself, as he adroitly lays out the situation facing those who oppose same-sex marriage in America.  He makes the following salient observations:

  • It is clear that aside from those who consider their moral judgments bound by Biblical religion … the point of privileging traditional marriage is increasingly lost on contemporary Americans.
  • It is true that the relatively swift popular acceptance of same-sex marriage is breathtakingly revolutionary, and it is a cultural revolution that has been driven by elites. But traditionalists cannot for much longer pretend that gay marriage lacks popular support.
  • [Same-sex marriage] is widely accepted by younger Americans, many of whom view the taboo against homosexuality as arbitrary and irrational.

And what does Dreher rightly conclude from these facts?  Just this:

The point is not that there are no morally serious arguments for same-sex marriage. Of course there are. The point, rather, is that the arguments against same-sex marriage are now so countercultural. Even more depressingly, it seems to me true that so few people want to entertain arguments at all.

Dreher then responds to the question: What should pastors and other social conservatives say now?

First, according to Dreher, such people should acknowledge the truth of the situation, and resign themselves to the fact that the redefinition of marriage, and indeed the family, is inevitable and unstoppable.  Americans are witnessing the inexorable ripening of the fruit of the sexual revolution, characterized by Dreher as “defeat that we are enduring.”

Second, Dreher correctly recognizes that,

For Christians, gay marriage is not the cause of our crisis. It is only a symptom, and a symbol of the new age.

And what is Dreher’s answer to the question above?  This:

I don’t know what, precisely, pastors and other church leaders should say about this issue going forward. But unless it’s based on an analysis that’s sober, deep, and unsparing, their words will continue to be unavailing.

Let me help out here.  There is an effective antidote to the cancer of the liberal-theology-fueled, secularized God-be-damned-politicoreligous-perverted road to legalizing my will on earth.  And it is this:

Convincing one heart at a time of sin and righteousness, and framing the question as “what pleases God?”

Did you get that?  I tell you this so you can deflect any such convincing as you see it.  Silence it.  Ridicule it.  Challenge it as backward, cruel, intolerant, and/or just plain irrelevant.  But stop it.

You see, there is no convincing the mind of a belligerent, convinced sinner of the moral nature of same-sex marriage.  The boyboys and girlgirls simply don’t care.  I ensure that by hardening their hearts and stopping their ears.

But the word of God is powerful, and the preaching of sin opens the mind to the convicting power of one greater than I, and once convicted of God’s righteousness, the question for the changed heart no longer becomes “can I rationalize this in my own mind as OK?” but “can I in my own heart know that this activity please God?”

You see, almost any chosen behavior can be mentally rationalized using and misusing the Bible for one’s own selfish purposes.  Thus when one understands that “there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people,” all one need to is convince his own mind that his particular chosen sin is not truly immoral, impure, or greedy.

Done!

But when one frames the challenge as “Live as children of the light and find out what pleases the Lord,” suddenly the mental challenge to justifying sin becomes greater; in fact it becomes insurmountable to the honest heart.

Does anyone really believe the Bible approves of same-sex marriage? 

Well, yes, in fact, many do.

Can anyone really make the case that same-sex marriage “pleases the Lord?”

Those who do can only do so by invoking the “God is a God of love, and a loving God loves all his chillens, including boyboys and girlgirls.”

And by this logic the “loving God” must love all manner of perversion among his chillens, and nothing could be deemed displeasing to him.  Any other outcome makes God arbitrarily intolerant, and, thus unloving.

Clearly the question of what pleases God forces the issue in a different light that even those committed to sin cannot stand against.

Preach sin.  Stress the personal responsibility of finding out what is pleasing to God.  Let God change hearts.

And changed hearts will change society.

It’s as simple at that.

Fortunately I have such a huge advantage in numbers of hearts possessed that it’s unlikely that modern Christians have the staying power to reverse the course of American society toward total state-sanctioned sexual perversion.

In fact, with men it is impossible.  Let’s hope, my servants, that the battle remains among men.

And the beat goes on.

3 Comments »

Let the little children come unto me

Posted in homosexuality, liberals, perversion, political correctness with tags on June 28, 2011 by devilbloggger

Children.

You know, my servants, that I love children.  I know that if I get children early I can usually keep them for life.  And by “life” I mean existence, which includes an eternity, most of which does not constitute life as humans know it.  Or as humans can even imagine it or even remotely conceive it to be.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Yes, suffer little children, and come unto me.

Sometimes I can convince my servants to simply blow up little children.  No kidding.  I mean the little chillens that don’t get killed before they get out of the gate, so to speak.  Take the recent news story from the UK Guardian entitled, “Taliban use girl, 8, as bomb mule in attack on Afghanistan police post.”  Do you know what a bomb mule is, my servants?  This little innocent in the hands of my guilty goes on record as “one of the youngest child bombers” of the conflict with the Taliban.  In other words, I’ve done better before.

But I get most of my children by ensuring that adults screw up their minds so that there is little hope of their ever knowing who they are or why they exist.  They grow up with damaged minds, full of politically correct human wisdom, on a wide path with a wide gate at the end.

It’s a full-time job, but it gets easier every day as political correctness and a general rejection of all things true becomes ingrained in society worldwide.

And when I’m done, I have flash mobs storming department stores, pandemonium in Peoria with African-American youths marching in the streets threatening white people, and a teen gang beating a student so badly he will require facial reconstruction surgery.  One member of the teen gang is only 13 years old.

And that’s just in the last 24 hours.

How do I do it?

Well, first I ensure that the God-free Zones known as “public schools” will never give the little chillens any clue as to the truth of existence.  I ensure that rather than be taught they are a special creation as indicated by evidence plain to all, these little innocents are told they are a product of random physics in an unguided, purposeless process that never had them in mind.

Teachers may as well give the little chillens a bomb; they have no reason not to end such a sad existence as soon as possible, and, as an advanced technique, take as many others with them as they can.  School shootings, gang beatings, flash mob ransacking–these are a natural outcome of a generation of students taught they are an accident of nature.

Trust me on this one, my servants.  The great lie of Darwinism is that life from non-life self organized into new species by an unguided, purposeless process.  It is impossible in fact, but entirely swallowed in theory.  And the end is certain moral decay and destruction.  There is no other logical endpoint.

And the idea that “evolution is true but God is behind it all” is one of my most devious lies of all.  It is utter nonsense, but appears as the only safe refuge of ignorant Christians. 

Trust me again, on this one, my servants.

Beyond indoctrinating chillens in the dogma of atheistic existence, I use political correctness to further screw with the minds of the little chillens by confusing them as to their proper role on earth. 

I was delighted by the recent AP story entitled, “Gender Bias Fought at Egalia Preschool in Stockholm, Sweden.”  Do you know what the good folks at the Egalia preschool are doing?  They:

… avoid using words like “him” or “her” and address the 33 kids as “friends” rather than girls and boys.

Yes, what a brilliant idea!  Remove all those pesky gender differences, which have become solidified as stereotypes!  The article continues:

From the color and placement of toys to the choice of books, every detail has been carefully planned to make sure the children don’t fall into gender stereotypes.

Gender stereotypes.  How do you break these?  Well, the smart folks at Egalia preschool have engineered a special environment for the little, little chillens, including ensuring that “[n]early all the children’s books deal with homosexual couples, single parents or adopted children” and making sure that all manner of unnatural behavior is encouraged.

One teacher said:

A concrete example could be when they’re playing ‘house’ and the role of the mom already is taken and they start to squabble,” she says. “Then we suggest two moms or three moms and so on.”

Yes, that is the only solution, right?  Can you think of anything more perverted and unnatural?  I can’t.

Of course, my servants, all this will serve to totally distort the minds of these little chillens.  And I could not be more happy.  The net effect is to emasculate males, to erase the inborn uniqueness of females, and to elevate homosexuality as healthy and normal. 

What more could I ask for, my servants?

Yes, let the little children come unto me.

(HT to at thyselfolord.blogspot.com for the story about the 8-year old child bomber).

3 Comments »

Gwyneth Paltrow: Theologian

Posted in homosexuality, political correctness, progressives, religion, Sex, Sexual revolution, Uncategorized with tags , , on June 9, 2011 by devilbloggger

Finally.

We can all breathe a sigh of relief now, my friends.  The cultural battle waging across the globe on the issue of homosexuality can finally be ended.  A theologian has spoken wisdom to us all, and, not surprisingly, this theologian who no doubt studied God’s Word in its original languages, read it thoroughly to see its overarching themes of holiness before a just God, and who surely speaks with an inspired voice, came to the conclusion that boyboysex and girlgirlsex is okey-dokey with God.

Who is this eminent voice of measured scriptural authority before whom we should all willingly beat our swords of divine truth into plowshares of earthly claptrap?   None other than one whose initials can stand for Gay Pride: Gwyneth Paltrow.

Yes, the excellent actress Ms. Paltrow decided she should join my vocal in-crowd on an issue for which God is decidedly and vocally out: homosexuality.  Writing in her GOOP Newsletter today, Ms. Paltrow, after certainly studying scripture closely and seeking the very heart of God, found the notion of the Bible’s condemning homosexuality “foreign.”

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

I love it.  Once again my lies on earth are working.  How can homosexuality be wrong when homosexuals can be so nice?  We all, like Ms. Paltrow, know homosexual people, and they are our friends, coworkers, and neighbors.  In this case, can’t we love both the sin and the sinner?

I do, of course. 

Theological meanderings such as Paltrow’s are common, but to maintain acceptance of homosexuality on the belief that the concept of homosexuality being condemned in the Bible is “foreign” reveals that it is the Bible itself that is foreign to Paltrow. 

The Bible, like it or not, condemns homosexuality in numerous places.  I wonder which part Paltrow finds “foreign”?  The part where the Bible says that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Or the part where the Bible says that homosexuality is a perversion?  Or the part where the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination to God?

Foreign?

Yes, pretty Gwyneth, who like most of her persuasion apparently has never read the Bible, finds the very concept of the Bible condemning an abomination to be foreign.  And she worries that this concept is “used to justify so much judgement [sic] and separation in our society.”

Tell me, my pretty, does it worry you that “concepts” condemning murder tend to justify judgment and separation of murderers? 

No?

Really?  Because murderers are condemned in the very same Biblical passages alluded to above.

Do you see, my servants, what is happening here?  Ms. Gwyneth doesn’t really know or care what the Bible says.  She just knows what she wishes to be true.  I’ve said before that everyone has a line drawn in the moral sand, beyond which even they find judgment and separation of offenders justified. 

God has his line.  Gwyneth has her line.  All of God’s chillens have a line.

What I love to see is human beings exercising human wisdom to reason their way to moving God’s line over to their line.  It’s easy to do, really.  All one must do, as other writers on Paltrow’s GOOP page do, is make the Bible something other than God’s inerrant word.

A mighty wise Episcopal priest named Cynthia Bourgeault, for example, sees the Bible as a:

“symphony (sometimes a cacophony!) of divinely inspired human voices bearing witness to an astonishing evolutionary development in our human understanding of God.”

Get it?  We were dumb before to believe homosexuality to be sinful in God’s sight, but with evolutionary development in our understanding we come to see that God didn’t really mean what he said.  Because, according to the mighty wise Bourgeault, “God reveals Godself in time, through process and dialogue, not in unchanging monolithic statements.”

So according to the might wise Bourgeault, it is only a matter of time before we have enough process and dialogue with “Godself” (who seems remarkably similar to Bourgeaultself) to find that murder is not really a sin.

Right?

Why not?

No, really, why not?

To Ms. Paltrow’s credit, she does include, somewhat reluctantly and only with an asterisk signaling her reasoning “to include as many perspectives as possible on this issue,” a correct view by Dr. John Stott.  I urge you to not read Mr. Stott’s view; let me summarize his views as he did in his conclusion:

Here, then, are three truths which Jesus affirmed: (1) heterosexual gender is a divine creation; (2) heterosexual marriage is a divine institution; and (3) heterosexual fidelity is the divine intention. A homosexual liaison is a breach of all three of these divine purposes.

Ouch!

I wonder why Ms. Paltrow didn’t mention Jesus’ view on the subject.  Or the Apostle Paul’s?  Or any other of those “inspired human writers” the mighty wise Ms. Bourgeault writes off?

Maybe because she has never read those views?

Ms. Paltrow ends her schooling of God by wondering:

What does is actually say in the bible [sic] that will cause some people to be upset by my line of thinking?

Yes, what does it actually say, Ms. Gwyneth?

Happy Pride.

Love,

S.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

2 Comments »

Moral awakening? Or malleable Jesus?

Posted in Bible, christians, False religion, homosexuality, marriage, political correctness, religion, same sex marraige with tags , , , on May 11, 2011 by devilbloggger

Malleable.

Oh, how I love [a malleable] Jesus
Oh, how I love [a malleable] Jesus
Oh, how I love [a malleable] Jesus
Because he first loved me [and affirms me in my chosen lifestyle because he loves everyone regardless of their selfish love of their abominable unrepented sin].

Do you know that song?  I put in brackets the words Jesus hears when most American Christians sing this old-time favorite.  Don’t believe me?  I have two confirmatory articles today, my servants. 

The first comes from CNNs Belief Blog, in which author Stephen Prothero makes a very astute observation about American Christianity.  In a piece entitled, My Take: Poll on bin Laden’s death reveals a disposable Jesus, Prothero comments on his observations of the various responses of Christians and those who call themselves Christians in the aftermath of Osama bin Laden’s homecoming.  Most insightfully, Prothero concludes:

One thing that struck me hard while researching my 2003 “American Jesus” book was how malleable Jesus is in the American imagination. Instead of lording over American life, telling us what to do, he seems to be taking orders from us, carrying our water.

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

How true!

Or, as he put it back then:

The American Jesus is more a pawn than a king, pushed around in a complex game of cultural (and countercultural) chess, sacrificed here for this cause and there for another.

Do you not agree?  Let me give you an example of Prothero’s insight in action.  Virginia’s Episcopalians will have to move a little further to God’s left, because the Presbyterian Church (USA) just voted their way to a moral awakening to allow openly gay and lesbian people to become ordained ministers.

I know, my servants.  I know.

I am good.  But this is not about me, per se, it’s about those who believe my lies, and I have many true believers, even in the Presbyterian Church (USA).  You can read all about it in the Huffington Post in a piece by The Rev. Dr. Janet Edwards (Presbyterian minister).  My good servant Edwards reports Christianity’s turn to morality with some glee in a piece entitled, ”The Moral Awakening of Mainstream Christianity.”

Ha ha ha ha ha.

The Presbyterian Church (USA), Mainstream Christianity?

From my view, it is neither.

But anyway, my servants, Ms. Edwards (Presbyterian minister) has much to say that pleases me, and shows the truth of Mr. Prothero’s hypothesis of a truly malleable Jesus.

Ms. Edwards (Presbyterian minister) reports even before all the votes came in the following:

With over half of the presbyteries now voting “yes,” our church has taken a bold step towards inclusion that brings the third largest Mainline Christian denomination more in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ; that His love embraces all.

Do you see Jesus all malleabled up in her mushy humanness?  The reason ordaining gays and lesbians is “in line” with the teachings of Jesus Christ is because “His love embraces all.”

Hey, Ms. Edwards (Presbyterian minister), why, then do you not ordain open pedophiles, open ax murderers, open wife beaters, open drug addicts, open blasphemers, sinners openly flaunting what Jesus condemns – oops, sorry, you already ordain that last one.

Why not?

No, really, why not?  If Jesus’ “love embraces them all” why not ordain anyone and everyone?

Why not ordain me?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Do you see my lie in action, my servants?  Ms. Edwards (Presbyterian minister) has a very malleable Jesus, a Jesus who “is more a pawn than a king, pushed around in a complex game of cultural chess.” 

Squishing Jesus into an almost unrecognizable shape, Ms. Edwards (Presbyterian minister) provides this end that justifies her squishing means:

With 76% of Americans identifying themselves as Christian, it’s critically important that progressives of faith give witness and show how Scripture supports the full inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people into our churches, communities, and civil institutions.

Here we see a major flaw in her justificationization.  Let me impart some kingdom truth for you, my servants.  Please keep these truths confidential; this is kingdom knowledge for your eyes only.  Here it is:  

First, Christians are not those who “identify themselves” as Christians.  Christians are those whom God has worked an inward work of faith resulting in a heart-changed desire to please Him by obeying His word.

Second, trust me on this one, my servants, “progressives of faith” are rarely, if ever, Christians.  Yes, they “identify themselves” as Christians, but that’s because their “Christ” is a squished up version of the true Christ.

Third, to say that “Scripture supports the full inclusion of lesbian, gay . . . into our churches” is only meaningful if Ms. Edwards (Presbyterian minister) is willing to keep the list going with “open pedophiles, open ax murders, and the like.  Scripture says the same thing about pedophiles as it does about lesbians. 

Of course, let’s hope that never happens because that might cause a true moral awakening!

8 Comments »

Intolerance? Yes, there’s an app for that.

Posted in homosexuality, political correctness, same sex marraige with tags , , , , on March 27, 2011 by devilbloggger

Bite.

I love apples, you know.  Apples and I go together like Christians and rummage sales.   Ever since Eve believed my lie I’ve had a thing for juicy red fruit, especially with a bite taken out.  You might say apples and I make a devilish pear.  Get it?

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

Nothing like a little red-hot humor to lead into today’s good news, ironically coming from the Baptist Press in an article by Kelly Boggs entitled “Nope, there’s no app for that.” 

In the news is my very own Apple, quickly becoming the apple of my eye: Apple Computer.  I reported here a few months ago that my servants at Apple removed the Manhattan Declaration’s iPhone app from their app store. 

Remember the Manhattan Declaration folks?  They are pure Godpunks who snuck an app onto the sacred Apple iTunes App Store that sought to undermine my kingdom.  They deviously and with full intent supplied an app that advocated “the sanctity of life, the dignity of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and religious liberty,” according to their website.

Steve-doing-my-Jobs pulled that bad boy after a bunch of my bad boyboys (and girlgirls) complained.

Well, Steve-doing-my-Jobs has obeyed again.  This time he has ordered the removal of another previously approved app developed by Exodus International, that notoriously evil group that seeks to encourage, educate and equip the Body of Christ (Blechhh!) to address the issue of homosexuality with grace and truth. 

Good riddance.  Let’s make sure there is “no app for that!”

Now, to brag a bit, my servants. 

According to Mr. Boggs, Apple (of my eye) currently offers 134,000 apps for their (and my) iPhones.  For those 134,000 subjects, “there is an app for that.”

Among the 134,000 apps are many like one called  ”Safe and Sound,” which is an app presented as “a collection of erotic stores with male on male action.” I like that one.  So does Steve.  And there are more like it.

What?  You don’t like it?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Too bad, because the only reason Apple has given for rejecting the previously approved Manhattan Declaration and Exodus International apps is they are “offensive to large groups of people.”  This means that you and the approximately 490,000 people who signed the Manhattan Declaration and the approximately 228 million Americans who find homosexuality morally wrong, unfortunately, do not count as “people”. 

That is the only explanation that makes sense; after all, you are part of a “large group” that finds male-on-male action ”offensive.”  Therefore, you must not count as “people” to Apple, and apps such as the “Safe and Sound” app are just that: safe and sound in Steve-doing-my-Jobs’ bag of approved people tools.

You see, in today’s politically correct world, “people” for whom offense must be eliminated include only “people” who cannot tolerate another viewpoint that bears negatively on their God-dishonoring sexual mores.

Hey, remember that when it comes to offensive sexual content on television and elsewhere, Christians are alway chided to “just don’t watch” or “just turn it off” or “just change the channel.” 

I marvel at how Christians display such tolerance in the face of reciprocated intolerance.  Why?

Mr. Boggs comes dangerously close to spilling a kingdom secret when he observes:

“It seems that homosexual activists look for reasons to be offended. Additionally, many sympathetic to their cause seem to become offended because it is expected. In other words, they must be offended or they are not really committed to the cause.”

Yes, I must gloat a little here, my servants.  When it comes to committment to a cause, I’ve got bushels of core supporters willing to immediately bite on the offense-expectation-apple by loudly whining, moaning, complaining, marching, belittling, cursing, spitting upon, and otherwise abusing those of a different viewpoint.

And it seems that true Christians, like Christ, just won’t do this.

So I win.

Don’t I?

1 Comment »

ACLU should be NCACLU

Posted in ACLU, homosexuality, political correctness, Uncategorized with tags , , on February 21, 2011 by devilbloggger

Non-Christian-American Civil Liberties Union.

I like the sound of that.  And I hear it almost all the time.  For my non-American friends, I’m speaking of a large, well-funded US legal group that defends the civil rights of all Americans except Christians and some other religious people.   In fact, this group of attorneys seems to look for reasons to poke sharp sticks in the eyes of Christians, Orthodox Jews, or anyone with traditional views of sex and marriage, among other things.

Am I good, or what?

Come on, folks, I can’t hear you.  Am I good?

That’s better.  Ha ha ha ha ha.

I worried when the ACLU, the pre-cursor to the NCACLU, first formed.  You see, my servants, I am against all true liberties, civil or otherwise.  That’s why I’m against truth.  Because truth always brings true liberty and sets people free.  So when I saw a group forming to protect civil liberties, I immediately moved in with my lies to ensure that “civil liberties” meant “uncivil lasciviousness” whenever and wherever Christianity raised its oppressive head.

Let me share some kingdom knowledge with you, my servants.  Please keep this confidential.  Basically my lie runs like this: “liberty” means the ability to do anything one desires sexually without constraint regardless of the destructive consequences to self or others.  Sexual “freedom” (which is the main “freedom” defended by the likes of the NCACLU) means constraint-free practice of whatever behavior makes one feel good. 

If it feels good do it; that’s what I say!  And, more importantly, I and the ACLU say if it makes someone feel guilty for doing what feels good, don’t do it!

And the delicious irony, my servants, is that my “liberty” is merely lie-disguised bondage.  Ask anyone reaping the fruit of a life given over selfishly to the lust of the flesh if they would not rewind the clock if they could.

I ask them all the time.  Just for fun.  Ha ha ha ha ha.  No clocks here, fellow rebels.

Fortunately for those still on earth I infiltrated every aspect of modern, pluralistic, relativistic American culture, including the legal system with my lies of sexual freedom.  It is no secret at this point that the American Constitution has become the tool of choice for every person wishing to lawfully practice a perversion against all traditional private morals or public constraints.  Where democracy fails, the judicial system delivers. 

But the judicial system does not deliver without a delivery boy, and my go-to boy has become the NCACLU.  I can always depend on the NCACLU to fight for my kingdom on earth as it is in Hell. 

The latest defense of my kingdom is detailed in today’s Washington Examiner in a story by Robert Knight entitled, “Freedom to be Christian but banned from acting Christian.”  Hey, don’t you love that title?  That title almost describes the actual state of Christianity in America: free to be, but refusing to act.

But every once in a while a Christian acts like a Christian, and in today’s modern sexually free America, such action must be banned by the force of law.  Thankfully, as Mr. Knight notes, the NCACLU is falling in line right on cue to defend me in a case involving a graduate student in the counseling program at Eastern Michigan University.  It seems some Godpunk named Julea Ward,

“. . . had asked that another student take the case of a homosexual suffering from depression because, being a Christian, she could not affirm the person’s sexual relationships.”

She was rightly canned for her blatant liberty-crushing viewpoint.  Of course she sued charging unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, religious discrimination and compelled speech, but she lost and is now appealing her loss to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Good luck, goody two-shoes; I got the NCACLU on the case.

We’ll see just who’s civil liberties trump, Miss Ward: your religious and free speech liberties, or my boyboy-sex-in-your-pretty-little-face liberties.

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

I’m betting on boyboysex because the NCACLU’s brief cites last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, which upheld the decision by Hastings College of the Law at the University of California at Berkeley to eject a Christian legal group for not allowing open homosexuals in leadership positions. Writing for the majority in that case, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said:

“Condemnation of same-sex intimacy is, in fact, a condemnation of gay people,” and “our decisions have declined to distinguish between status and conduct in this context.”

I love it.  Do you see, my servants, how a darkened, foolish heart reasons?  No distinction between status and conduct in this context? What “context” is that?  And why is that “context” entitled so?

Hey, I wonder if condemnation of opposite sex intimacy by married adulterers is a condemnation of married people. 

I wonder if condemnation of bestiality is a condemnation of beasts. 

I wonder if condemnation of necrophilia is a condemnation of dead people. 

I wonder if condemnation of incestuous intimacy is a condemnation of family members. 

I wonder if condemnation of child sex is a condemnation of children.

But what I really wonder is this: Is condemnation of refusal to counsel against conscience a condemnation of the person of conscience?

Why isn’t it, Ms. Ginsburg?

No, really, why isn’t it?

Ha ha ha ha ha .

I wonder if condemnation of egregious judicial rulings is a condemnation of all judges.

I hope not.

3 Comments »

Yes, Virginia, there is a God, and it is now you

Posted in homosexuality, marriage, political correctness, same sex marraige, Sexual revolution with tags , , , , , on January 26, 2011 by devilbloggger

Virginia is for Episcopalian lovers, we like to say.

Those Episcopalians continue to delight me, my servants.  Even though I’ve neutered huge swaths of the Episcopalian church to the point where it moves God’s kingdom needle not a whit, those joy boys (and girls) can still ring my love bells. 

Once a real threat to my kingdom, the Episcopalians lately have become nothing more than a religious side show, making no dents in my kingdom and few gains in God’s. 

What really put Episcopalians on my kingdom map was their decision in 2004 to ordain an openly gay bishop, Eugene Robinson.   I like Gene, but that was childs play; virtually all my liberal religious followers do that these days.  But according to this piece in the Washington Post, this past weekend the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia flew under the media radar and quietly placed a big, wet smooch right on my slobbering lips by voting to allow church-sanctioned same-sex unions.

Vote.  Smooch.  Virginia is for my lovers.

I might make Virginia my second home!  After all, any place that votes on whether a matter is sinful or not will always eventually be home to me.

First on the ballot was a vote on whether the church should sanction sex with animals.  Strangely, that was voted down because there was not 51% in favor.

Next they voted on whether to allow bishops to have child sex slaves.  For some reason that was voted down; close, but still not 51% in favor.

Finally, they voted on whether to allow church-sanctioned same-sex unions.  Bingo!  That one passed, being okey-dokie with at least 51% of the voters.

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

Make no mistake, my friends, when sex with animals becomes socially acceptable and culturally demanded, the Episcopalians will be in the front of the line to ordain an openly zoosexual priest.  Why not?

No, really, why not?

You see, I love people wise in their own eyes, “voting” on whether something is sinful or not.  Morality by consensus will always be my morality; if not now, eventually.

My servants, let me use my Virginia Episcopalian servants to share a kingdom secret with you.  Without an anchor in God’s word, human beings will always gravitate toward my morality.  Whenever human beings stop taking God’s word seriously and begin to adapt church doctrine based on cultural norms, the church will die. 

The Episcopalian church is practically dead as an institution; they just don’t know it.  Look at it this way: if the Episcopalian church ceased to exist immediately at midnight tonight, would anyone care?  Would anyone even notice? 

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

Rest assured, my servants, we rarely see one of our captives set free by the gospel of grace through the liberal Episcopal churches anywhere in the world.  They are literally preaching to the choir, and even the choir doesn’t really give a damn about God.

I’m just sayin’.  My trees are known by my fruit.

That’s why one of my prime objectives on earth is to ensure that people disregard God and his word; such disregard always bears fruit for my kingdom.  I don’t care if people say they believe in God as long as they don’t take God seriously.  Because people who don’t take God seriously inevitably and involuntarily end up taking me seriously.

There are only two choices.

Mostly I like witnessing the sad resignation on God’s face when, once again, his putative friends push him away as a culturally irrelevant embarrassment, saying with their actions that his holy word holds no persuasion over their personal desires.  I love the haughtiness of one who dares to sneer that a changing culture trumps God’s unchanging word in determining behavior in all things moral.

I know that God intended marriage to be a holy blending of man and woman in a mysterious union reflecting the relationship in the Godhead, as well as being a picture of the church as Christ’s bride.  Man for woman and woman for man, what God brings together let no man tear apart.

But what about unions God does not bring together?

Don’t worry I have my peeps to bring those together; God has no say in the matter.

At least no say that 51% can’t shut their ears to!

Smooch!

3 Comments »

Is Obama a Christian?

Posted in abortion, christians, homosexuality, Obama, political correctness, same sex marraige with tags , , , , , on January 6, 2011 by devilbloggger

Is US President Barack Obama a Christian?

You asked Satan.  In fact, everyone wants to know.  Two news articles recently raised the question, and, in fact, answered it.  First was an AP article entitled, “Obama makes rare trip to church while in Hawaii,” and, second, a Politics Daily article entitled, “Obama Tries to Reassert His Christian Bona Fides, With Words and Deeds.”

Hmmmm. . .

Question:  If you have to wonder if someone is a Christian, guess what is the likely answer?   

Ha ha ha ha ha.  And you are probably right!

But since you asked, here is my short answer: I don’t know (for sure).

Surprised?  You shouldn’t be.  Unlike God (Blechhh!) I am not omniscient.  I don’t know everything, and I cannot see into people’s hearts and minds and determine the state of their spiritual health.  In this respect I am no different than you; I can only infer from what I see and hear.

Of course, I have much more experience judging inner conviction by outward evidence, so here is my longer answer:

For the most part I judge a man’s heart the same way God does and you should: by the fruit of his life on earth. 

But I have been known to be wrong. On more than one occasion someone I felt sure I would welcome through the gates of Hell went the other way, never to be seen by me again.  But more often than not I see those who appear to be religious on earth, going through all the right motions and acting the saint, only to find them come tumbling into my eternal domain, moaning and groaning and acting surprised.

Often I hear the earthly self-righteous screaming pitifully: “But Jesus, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?”  It seems there are many fools who do not believe in God, and many fooled who do!

Of course, I have helped make both the fools and the fooled. 

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

I have spread many lies on earth about how to get to heaven.  I have spread the lie that one need not be a Christian at all; there are many paths to God as long as one is good and believes in love.  I have spread the lie that one “need not go to church” to be a good Christian.  I have spread the lie that going to church makes one a good Christian.  I have spread the lie that good works alone will get one to heaven, and calling oneself a Christian is a mere label and nothing else.  I have spread the lie that belief systems that deny the deity of Christ are Christian. 

Lies, lies, lies.  Ha ha ha ha ha.  And so many believe my lies and believe themselves to be Christians.

But the biggest lie of all is that man can make God in his own image, so that becoming a “Christian” is an exercise in semantics, where one’s self-identification as a Christian is deemed sufficient for the actual fact of being a Christian, and God otherwise is molded to be what man wishes him to be.

In fact, a Christian is a very unique being on earth.  A Christian is one who has been reborn spiritually, becoming alive and free, having escaped by God’s grace from my death, sin, and destruction.  That is why I hate Christians.  They have experienced a supernatural work of God in their hearts, a work that I am powerless to stop and which bears fruit in one’s actions that I am equally at pains to stop. 

One can fake the actions, but one can’t fake the rebirth.

Sometimes the fakers fool even me.  So that is why I hesitate to declare definitively on Obama’s Christianity.  But let me tell you what it looks like from my view.

I have many hundreds of years watching human beings, and watching Christians.  I almost always know a true Christian.  A true Christian has a humble dependence on God that is expressed unambiguously in word and deed, in public and in private.  A true Christian has experienced a life-changing encounter with a living God that results in the Christian’s trading slavery to sin for slavery to righteousness; that is, a true Christian seeks to live every moment of every day in regenerated righteous obedience to God as revealed in his word, the Bible. 

A true Christian is not one who merely self-identifies as one.  An unregenerate self-identifier is merely a lying sinner.

A true Christian seeks to destroy my kingdom.  And his words and actions make his intentions clear.  I oppose true Christians at every turn, seeking to thwart their every effort at advancing God’s kingdom on earth.

Now, answer me this: would a true Christian cover up Christian symbols while speaking at a Christian university?  Obama did.

Would a true Christian vote unambiguously and without apology for laws that make killing an innocent human being legal?  Obama did.  More than once.

Would a true Christian refer to people in communities as bitter, and as clinging to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them”? Obama did.

Would a true Christian support the homosexual political agenda, in clear opposition to Biblical Christianity?  Obama does.

Would a true Christian support same-sex marriage, for example by using tax dollars to fund same-sex lifestyles?  Obama did.

Would a true Christian “forget” to include the reference to a “creator” when quoting his nation’s founding document’s most famous line?  Obama does.  Repeatedly.

Would a true Christian “forget” his nation’s own motto of “In God We Trust” and quote a different motto instead in a major speech to Muslims?  Obama did.

I could go on forever (literally!).

But think for yourself, my servants.  You can see the same behavior I see.  What you may lack is a clear understanding of what a Christian is.

But if you rationally juxtapose what a true Christian looks like with what Obama looks like, there is only one reasonable answer to the question “Is Obama a Christian.”

From my viewpoint, the answer is clearly no.  And I back my words up with actions; I rarely find myself needing to oppose a speech, a vote, a policy, or any other action of President Obama’s.

But I have been known to be wrong.

7 Comments »

We gays don’t need no stinkin’ Bible (do we?)

Posted in atheism, heresy, homosexuality, liberals, political correctness, same sex marraige with tags , , , on January 3, 2011 by devilbloggger

Treason.

My servants, you can trust me to call out the misdeeds of my servants as well as God’s punks.  I must ensure a smooth-running kingdom by imparting to you, my trusted ones, kingdom knowledge, while also highlighting the treasonous words and actions of my servants.

Yes, treason.  You will see.  Stay with me here.

In fact, in light of today’s news, I’m issuing a Level 1 devilbloggger Alert; pay attention.  A Level 1 alert is for early trends that may or may not mature into kingdom-defeating problems. 

News, you say?  Yes, I’ve been troubled for days over one Reverend Candace Chellew-Hodge’s piece in the Huffington Post entitled, “Why Gays and Lesbians Should Never Argue Scripture.”

First, an aside.  One reason this report appeared on my desk is that I’ve trained my peeps to flag articles by women religious leaders.  I’ve found in the recent years that women clergy are predominantly liberal, and are my good servants.  This is not to say all—it is merely a rule of thumb that helps us down here to sort out whom to oppose. 

In general, women of faith are to be feared.  They quietly and fiercely embrace the living God and are often the spiritual leaders of their families.  But when women take on positions of authority in an organized religious context they overwhelmingly tend to spout error and heresy.  They often take on nonsensical labels, like “Christian Agnostic.”  The tendency of modern denominations to hand over authority to women and heretics is a fact that generally works to my favor.

But this time, one of my woman servants has betrayed me. 

Rev. Ms. Chellew-Hodges no doubt believes she has truth on her side when she advocates nonsense in her workshops called Bulletproof Faith: A Spiritual Survival Guide for Gay and Lesbian Christians.  But do you know what she teaches them?  She teaches that “we should never argue scripture with anyone ever again.”

And she’s serious.

Ms. Reverend has her reasons:

“The most important reason, however, that gays and lesbians should never, ever argue about scripture is because the Bible has nothing much to say about homosexuality.”

Uh, really?

Question:  If the Bible even remotely supported homosexuality and could be used as evidence of God’s being odie-dokie with the sin of boyboys and girlgirls, do you think Ms. Reverend would say such an idiotic thing?

My servants, let me tell you how to correctly think about homosexuality and scripture.  Please, except for quietly educating Ms. Reverend and others of my kingdom, please keep this information confidential.  It is highly sensitive.  If anyone can see your computer screen now, discreetly close this window and wait for them to leave.  This is for your eyes only.

“Nothing much about homosexuality” may be accurate in relative terms, but what the Bible does say about homosexuality is unambiguously and definitely that it is a sin.  The Bible uses unequivocally strong language in calling homosexuality an abomination.  The Bible says that homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of Heaven.

Now we in Hell know this.  Ms. Reverend knows this.  The difference between our belief and Ms. Reverend’s is tactical.  Please follow me:  Of course the Bible is overwhelmingly clear on the issue of homosexuality: it is a despicable sin in God’s sight.  But I have carefully taught modern people in modern society to not read the Bible.  I have blinded the minds of men so that they believe the Bible is some mysterious book with difficult to interpret passages of ancient text.  The Bible in the mind of most people is a hopelessly confusing, contradictory morass of dead men’s words purporting to be God’s word. 

Use this information, my servants, to our advantage.

In other words: argue the Bible even if you have to invent arguments because very few people have the knowledge to refute your erroneous positions.  Get it?  Just say the Bible is pro-homosexuality, throw out a few random verses, talk about the love of God, and sternly warn about judging others.  Do this with a sincere look on your face and you will convince a few, confuse many, and you can go home victorious.

Understand, my servants, that I reprove even my good servants like Ms. Reverend because it is my kingdom that is at stake.  I must stop people like Ms. Reverend who tacitly admit that scripture does not support my behaviors and practices.  Too often such people have found they can sacrifice my kingdom goals for their selfish profit.  And such people must be called out.

Ms. Reverend is on the right track, she’s just driving the train the wrong direction (there are only two directions). 

But I do take great pride in seeing my lie working a double-whammy, a two-fer of blindness induced captivity evident in Ms. Reverend’s reasoning:

“The Bible remains a holy book because it maps out humanity’s journey with God, and not the other way around.  … Humanity has moved from seeing God as a harsh judge and lawmaker to a [sic] seeing God as full of grace, mercy and love.”

“Humanity has moved . . .”

Not God.

And who moved humanity?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

(And make no mistake: God remains lawmaker and judge.)

5 Comments »

« Older Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 116 other followers

%d bloggers like this: