Neutral Name
Active Member
I don't believe that Christians lie but I do believe that "Christians" lie. That is, people who call themselves Christians but aren't lie and it's Q+ or QQ. God is the + since God is non-binary.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Mat Staver: The “Q” in LGBTQ Stands for Pedophilia
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
I don't believe that Christians lie but I do believe that "Christians" lie. That is, people who call themselves Christians but aren't lie and it's Q+ or QQ. God is the + since God is non-binary.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I always thought Q just meant queer.Never heard of this Mat Staver fellow before, but he raises an interesting question about the "Q" in LGBTQ.
First though is his take on it.
Now, if the LGBT community is harboring pedophiles and wants to let it be known in their acronym why would they pick the letter "Q" instead of "P"? Evidently the logic escapes Staver, or, more likely, he doesn't care because he 's ready to hitch his bigotry to whatever horse is handy, which, in this case, happens to be the letter "Q." Ridiculous as it is."Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver is one of those conservative Christians who routinely ignores the truth to spread whatever lies might help his side.
Like when he claimed the LGBTQ Equality Act would open the door to pedophilia or how having a fifth conservative on the Supreme Court (which he now has) would lead to the end of abortion and marriage equality within a “few months.”
Last week, Staver was on the right-wing radio show Crosstalk to discuss a resolution in California that urges compassion towards LGBTQ people. It asks religious leaders specifically to counsel LGBTQ people “from a place of love” and with the awareness that conversion therapy is harmful.
But even if religious leaders disagree… that’s (theoretically) fine. There’s no punishment.
Staver was still furious, claiming this non-binding resolution would “discriminate” against Christians. He also said the Q in LGBTQ meant pedophilia. Because letters aren’t really his thing.
That’s… not how anything works. Why is legal consent such a hard concept for Christians like him to understand?But Staver went even further, charging that the addition of the “Q” to “LGBT” in the text of the resolution meant that it was promoting a “spectrum” that includes not only those who are homosexual or “gender confused,” but also “minor-attracted individuals” which he described as “somebody who wants to have sexual relationships with someone under the legal age.”
But that’s how Staver operates. When he doesn’t understand things, he just makes up lies because the Christians who take him seriously aren’t smart enough to realize he’s bull****ting them. They fall for the lie when he says it just like they believe it when a pastor says it in church. Meanwhile, talking to actual LGBTQ people is out of the question. Those people have an agenda."
source
In any case, just what does the "Q" stand for? Because the question raised my curiosity I decided to look into it a bit and found there is no clear answer. Some believe it stands for "queer," which seems a bit odd in as much as the "L" and "G" already cover queers. Far more likely is the claim that it stands for "Questioning," as in those who haven't committed to their gender identity, but question it.
What have you heard? . . . . . . . . Oh yes, feel free to take a swing or two at the bigot of the week, Mat Staver. ---------------------------------OR maybe you feel he's right and is worth defending.
.
nPeace
Veteran Member
You refer to it as worrying about? So it is perfectly normal for people to see someone grab another's baby, and drop it from a high-rise apartment building, and the crowd below just walk about their business - even stepping on what's left of the corpse? That's normal. It's only that we worry, when we should not. So we are abnormal, when we do. ?
I think you believe in magic more than any religious person, whether you want to admit it, or not.
You deny any possibility of a divine creator, yet you don't know how or what caused a singularity - an imagined speculated "dot" containing all the energy and matter in the universe to suddenly expand at super impossible speeds, and bring all matter to order, with such precision that, baffled scientists, to the point where one commented that, "someone must have monkeyed with physics".
Then from there, you don't know how, what, or where it became possible for the building blocks for a living cell, to possibly "arrived" on earth... alone, with precisely coded instructions for living organisms - dependent on particular circumstances, otherwise they would cease to exist... and you don't know if or what, or how would have been this so-called LUCA, and how, or when it could possibly have produced, or evolved to complex organisms...
Yet you believe.
...and you want people to take you seriously when you accuse others of believing in magic, and superstition?
Come on. You believe in impossibilities for which no evidence supports - only opinions, which you swallow down gladly and willingly.
Of course, I have no problem with your choice of religion, or belief.
When you deny the truth though, I think I ought to let you know.
By the way, speaking of truth... why do you accept a system that cannot and does not prove truth, over one that explicitly presents itself as the truth?
It seems to me, the latter merits our attention, to prove it to ourselves. You can't deny any of it to be not true, so why be against it?
For example, you cannot disprove Genesis 1:1. What reason(s) do you have for dismissing God, and "supernatural" events?
I understand you believe that. On what basis you believe it, is another story.
For example, to say no God is needed, is simply a denial - like saying, "I don't want to believe in a divine intelligent being, therefore, I will believe that nature is the creator - despite the fact that I do not know whether a God exists or not, and have no evidence that nature did it all." ?
How cool is that?
nPeace
Veteran Member
I was not aware that I picked one thing.
I responded to the OP, which mentioned one thing, and all of a sudden, someone jumped on me, attacking me, and indicating I was a hater.
Perhaps you can show me where exactly in my post, I picked out one thing, and how I am hating.
Then what you are saying may seem reasonable to me.
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
You did not, but generally the two things that the religious right freak about are abortion and homosexuality. Pretty much two trick ponies, imo.
nPeace
Veteran Member
So you jumped on me because of your experience with other people?
What do we call that? How do you feel about people doing such things to you? Is it right?
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
Okay then, what is your stance on these two issues?
nPeace
Veteran Member
I follow the Bible - the teachings of God, given through the prophets, Christ, and his apostles.
What do you mean what is my stance, on these two issues - what issues? Do you consider them issues? Why? Why does it matter what others think about what others choose to do?
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
The Bible has conflicting information in the Bible, so it's hard to pinpoint. The two issues that I mentioned. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks, as long as they don't harm anyone, physically or psychologically.
nPeace
Veteran Member
When you say the Bible has conflicting information, do you mean that on the issues you have in mind, the Bible contradicts itself?
Can you point out just one of those conflicts, because I don't know of any.
Murder - Condemned
Drunkenness - Condemned
Homosexuality - Condemned
Bestiality - Condemned
Fornication - Condemned
Prostitution - Condemned
Adultery - Condemned
Rape - Condemned
Theft - Condemned
Spiritism - Condemned
Extortion, Fraud, and Bribery - Condemned
Did you have something else in mind, which I left out?
Edit @Thirza Fallen
By the way, the two issues you mentioned (abortion, homosexuality) seem to exclude the OP - Pedophilia.
The Bible principle here, Exodus 21:22-25, allows one to see how God views life - even the life of an unborn child. Murder is wrong in his eyes, and the eyes of his servants. (Nu 35:22-24, 31)
Last edited:
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Hosea 9:12 ; Hosea 13:16 ; Numbers 5:21 ; Numbers 31:17 ; Leviticus 20:9 ; 1 Samuel 15:3 ;Psalms 135:8 ; Psalms 136:10 ; Psalms 137:9 ; Deuteronomy 21:18-21
Where does your god care about children, be they born or unborn? Let us not forget he is the angry god who butchered the first born of Egypt, killed countless children in Sodom and Gomorrah, and drown countless more when he flooded the world.
nPeace
Veteran Member
Where does Jehovah care about children?
I don't want to fill this page with scripture. They are too numerous.
Is Jehovah an angry God?
Again, they are too many scriptures to the contrary.
Did Jehovah butcher the firstborn son of Pharaoh?
I never read that in the Bible.
However, as life giver, Jehovah has the right to show mercy to whom he chooses. He chose to remove the heir to the throne of a false worshiper, who only continued to exist by God's allowing him to.
He likewise remove a world of people who he decided were not fit to live.
How can God determine who is not fit to live?
Not only is he life-giver and judge, but consider...
1 Kings 14:12, 13; Romans 9:10-18
Obviously, if humans had the insight and wisdom of God, they would have solved half their problems by now, but how can man with such limited wisdom and understanding, try to play the judge over a a vastly superior, entity?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Several passages in the Bible refer to him as jealous and highly provokeable to anger.
Yes, you did, except here you changed "first born of Egypt" into "first born of Pharaoh."
If god had half of our wisdom and understanding he would have abolished slavery in the Bible. Child abuse and domestic rape would have been crimes in the Bible. And he would have known that violence and anger only begets violence and anger. We have grown and learned much. To the point if he wasn't called "god," we would view Jehovah as a blood thirsty tyrant who is guilty of numerous crimes against humanity. He's a blood thirsty savage. Many of us have learned the best way to win at fighting is to not fight at all.
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
Jesus calls someone a fool when he says that anyone calling someone a fool is in danger of hellfire.
No one can see God face to face, yet Jacob does. The gospels don't agree on so many things.
Jesus refutes it a few times in Matthew.
Etc, etc.
Edit @Thirza Fallen
Why is it okay for Yahweh to kill or order the killing of people, including pregnant women and fetuses, but not for us? He's kind of a "do as I say, not as I do" deity.
SugarOcean
¡pɹᴉǝM ʎɐʇS
nPeace
Veteran Member
Is there something wrong with jealousy and anger in a righteous way? No.
Those descriptions are not referring to unrighteous selfish jealousy, and uncontrolled anger.
We who love what is right, should have righteous jealousy and anger.
Can you imagine Josiah and his supporters, smiling and talking in a sing-song manner, "We will rid the land of all disgusting idols, and idolaters." ?
Now you are telling me that I read something I didn't read. Why?
Do you hate Jehovah? Then that would explain why you read butcher in a verse that simply reads, "killed all the firstborn".
I know for a fact, you were not there... unless... are you an immortal?
No. I did not read that God butchered every firstborn of Egypt.
Kill does not mean butcher. Do I need to reference a dictionary?
Well if one claims to be wiser than a supreme creator, they will also claim to know everything about every situation. In other words, they will claim to know all the facts about every situation... even though they didn't even exist in the time period, and don't know anything about the situation... which is evident from your comments.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
"Butcher" is about the best way I can describe the act of slaughtering innocent children. And I can't really hate what I don't believe exists. I can describe Jeoffrey Baratheon as barbarically cruel, but he too is nothing more than a fictional character, thus making any hatred very misplaced.
nPeace
Veteran Member
Verses may seem contradictory, if we look for them.
In the same way that they don't seem contradictory if we read the scriptures to understand what they are saying.
This can happen even in everyday speech. I have actually witnesses many times, someone says something. One person who is opposed to the individual heard something that I or another person did not hear.
Why is it they heard - or understood the person to be saying one thing, when it was not what the person was saying? It was because of their outlook, their thought processes being affected by their emotions, or viewpoint.
Have you not experienced this?
I find it no different where the Bible is concerned. However, it's even more so with the Bible, because a lot is said - they are many many words, and unlike people who can't get up and walk away, or slap the person over the head, and say, "That not what I am saying, or what I mean." the Bible can't walk away... but it does represent itself, as we read other parts, where it can be pointed out that it's not contradictory.
However, persons will argue otherwise, until "the great day of Jehovah". Zephaniah 1:14
Why is it okay for the government to determine that you are not justified to carry out vigilante killing, or to hire a hit-man to carry out a revenge killing?
You can't take it upon yourself to go after someone who murdered a family member, and put them to death, and then go to the cops and say, "Hey, I got the murderer." Why not? What will they do to you?
Yet, they determine that they can take that same person, and put them to death in a way that they decide. Why? Do you think it has anything to do with authority? Romans 13:1-4
Jehovah God is sovereign - the supreme authority.
Moreover, as life-giver, he is responsible for taking action to prevent anything that would destroy or cause lasting harm to his creation.
By destroying those in Noah's day, he took action to "put a spoke in the wheel" of evil, and he did it in a righteous and just way - that is, there was no favoritism involved, as is often the case with man, who allows his emotions to tarnish any justice he would show.
Do you think the government has a do as I say, not as I do mentality, in the case of law breakers? Are you of the view that people should be allowed to kill anyone who murders another?
nPeace
Veteran Member
Okay. I knew it before you said it.
You also decide the children were innocent, even though it was pointed out to you, why they weren't.... but... since you have all the facts...
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
They had nothing to do with the enslavement of the Jews or refusal to let them go. They were innocent, and yet god had them slaughtered like animals (and even the animals were massacred).