Category Archives: homosexuality

Bill Nye Uses Ice Cream Cartoon to Teach About ‘Flavors of Sexuality’

In his new Netflix series, Bill Nye Saves The World, “Science Guy” Bill Nye presents a cartoon in which talking ice cream cones teach viewers about the many different “flavors of sexuality.”

“We are enlightened and forward-thinking, but not everyone sees it this way,” Nye says. “But there are lots of flavors to sexuality.”

In the cartoon, the vanilla ice cream cone is mocked as a representation of heterosexual, monogamous sex. The vanilla cone is presented as a Christian conversion therapist trying to convince the other ice cream cones that monogamous sex is natural, and will help them “get right with the big ice cream in the sky.”

Source: Bill Nye Uses Ice Cream Cartoon to Teach About ‘Flavors of Sexuality’


New York Toymaker to Sell 1st Transgender Doll Based on Transgender Teen – Breitbart

TRUTH BOMBS: The insanity of the idea of removing rational thought from the minds of the masses in order to push an illogical agenda. Gender is NOT a personal choice it is a biological marker.

Those who subscribe to gender identities are suffering from mental disorder that disassociates reality.

ARTICLE: A New York toy maker is set to debut what it says is the first transgender doll available on the market, modeled after a reality TV star.

Source: New York Toymaker to Sell 1st Transgender Doll Based on Transgender Teen – Breitbart


Texas Mayor Jess Herbst comes out as transgender woman | The Independent

TRUTH BOMBS: Image result for facepalm meme

ARTICLE: The mayor of a small town in Texas has come out as a transgender woman. Jess Herbst, the Mayor of a town in Collin County called New Hope, is believed to be the state’s first openly transgender official. Herbst, who been mayor for seven months, came out as trans in an open letter to residents on the town’s website. She has also been documenting her personal journey through transition on her own website.

Source: Texas Mayor Jess Herbst comes out as transgender woman | The Independent


‘Christian’ church in major U.S. city hires ‘married’ lesbians to lead flock

TRUTH BOMBS: WHAT PART OF THOU SHALT NOT DID WE NOT UNDERSTAND?

ARTICLE: Despite the Bible’s clear opposition to homosexual relations in both the Old and New Testaments, a Baptist church in the heart of the nation’s capital has just named a “married” lesbian couple to co-pastor its flock. Calvary Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., presented Maria Swearingen and Sally Sarratt to its congregation during morning worship on […]

Source: ‘Christian’ church in major U.S. city hires ‘married’ lesbians to lead flock


Ellen Degeneres nixes Kim Burrell’s performance after singer’s anti-gay sermon | Fox News

TRUTH BOMBS: Homosexuals act like they hold a monopoly on the truth. Yet they only have their arbitrary emotions as their standard for truth. Well that makes them hypocrites under their own standards. If their arbitrary emotions are to be accepted then why not someone elses emotions or point of view? This is only to show the incoherent absurdity of the homosexual moral stance and not to say that the Christian standard is arbitrary too.

ARTICLE: Ellen Degeneres won’t allow Kim Burrell to appear on her talk show after the gospel singer refused to apologize for a sermon in which she referred to gays and lesbians as perverted.

Source: Ellen Degeneres nixes Kim Burrell’s performance after singer’s anti-gay sermon | Fox News


Oxford Students Told to Use ‘Ze’ to Avoid Discrimination

TRUTH BOMBS: Again a small percentage of the population gets to dictate to us our own language. Say NO!

ARTICLE: Students at Oxford University have been told to use the pronoun “ze” rather than “he” or “she” to eliminate discrimination against transgender people.

Guidance offered in a leaflet by the students’ union advises against using traditional pronouns, arguing that doing so suggests there are only two genders. Deliberately using the wrong pronoun for a transgendered person is an offence under the union’s code of conduct.

Peter Tatchell, an LGBT rights campaigner, has welcomed the move, telling Mail Online: “It is a positive thing to not always emphasise gender divisions and barriers.”

He said: “It is good to have gender-neutral pronouns for those who want them but it shouldn’t be compulsory.

“This issue isn’t about being politically correct or censoring anyone. It’s about acknowledging the fact of changing gender identities and respecting people’s right to not define themselves as male or female.

“Giving people the ‘ze’ option is a thoughtful, considerate move.”

Cambridge University has also indicated that it would like to follow a similar path. Sophie Buck, welfare officer of the students’ union, said: “Events start with a speaker introducing themselves using a gender neutral pronoun.

“It’s part of a drive to make the union intersectional.”

And Franky Sissons, a transgender student at King’s College at Cambridge, said: “Gender neutral pronouns are good…It should happen in lectures too.”

But Canadian professor Jordan Peterson, who has made a stand against gender politics on his campus, warned: “UK universities should resist this. Whole disciplines have become irretrievable from these doctrines.”

Peterson made waves when he released a presentation on the internet kicking back against the Canadian government’s plans to implement legislation amending the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code to prohibit harassment and discrimination based on “gender identity and gender expression”.

At a free speech rally in October, the University of Toronto professor said: “The changes of the law scare me because they put into the legal substructure of the culture certain assumptions about basic human nature that, not only I believe to be untrue, but they’re also dangerous and ideologically motivated.”

The rally was targeted by transgender activists who tried to drown out the speeches with horns and other noise, while on campus he has been repeatedly heckled, and had his office door glued shut.

Source: Oxford Students Told to Use ‘Ze’ to Avoid Discrimination


Australia’s same-sex marriage bill voted down

TRUTH BOMBS: These people are smart. Moral decay leads to Civil unrest. Go Figure!

 

ARTICLE:

Australia’s parliament late Monday rejected the government’s proposal for a national vote on whether to legalise same-sex marriage.

The upper house Senate voted 33-29 against the coalition government’s bid to hold a plebiscite on the issue.

Attorney-General George Brandis introduced the bill into the Senate, where the government does not hold an outright majority, despite expectation the opposition Labor and Greens parties would scupper it.

The government has repeatedly warned that a defeat would delay same-sex marriage in Australia for years.

Brandis urged the upper house to “stop playing politics with gay people’s lives”.

“Get out of the way,” he said in a fiery debate.

The opposition said the plebiscite would have sparked harmful debate against the gay and lesbian community and demanded a direct vote in parliament instead.

Debate on gay marriage in Australia has gone on for more than a decade and conservative Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull hoped to resolve the issue via a plebiscite on February 11.

But Labor said the proposed plebiscite of 15 million voters would be expensive and divisive, and also potentially harmful to those in same-sex relationships and their families.

Despite strong popular support for marriage equality, Australia is seen as lagging behind other nations which allow homosexual couples the right to wed.

Same-sex couples can have civil unions or register their relationships in most Australian states, but the government does not consider them married under national law.

Turnbull, a long-time supporter of gay marriage, had argued that a plebiscite, costing some Aus$170 million (US$128.8 million), would allow all Australians to express their view.

He had insisted that if the vote was carried the lower house would ensure gay marriage became law even though the plebiscite would not be binding.

Labour leader Bill Shorten in October vowed to block the plebiscite, saying: “This country does not have the right in a plebiscite to pass judgement on the marriages and relationships of some of our fellow Australians.

“It is not what Australia is about. We could make marriage equality a reality today by having a free vote in the parliament and that is what should be done.”

Source: Australia’s same-sex marriage bill voted down


Fear sweeps churches over bathroom policy

TRUTH BOMBS: We better start cleaning our governmental house. Our Churches are being desecrated by these liberals.

ARTICLE: A move by the state of Iowa to classify churches as “public accommodations” and require them to allow men who say they are women to use women’s restrooms is causing an “objectively reasonable” fear that they will be prosecuted, a federal judge has ruled.

U.S. District Judge Stephanie Rose refused to dismiss a case brought by the Fort Des Moines Church of Christ against the state’s Civil Rights Commission, finding that the church already was self-censoring its statements because of a fear of prosecution.

“The court concludes the chilling of plaintiff’s speech constitutes an injury in fact for the purpose of standing,” she wrote.

The case is being pursued by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which said the ruling – even before the case advances further – provides “much-needed reassurance and clarification to churches.”

ADF explained the Iowa Civil Rights Commission claimed the Iowa Civil Rights Act applied to churches.

“The commission’s interpretation and application of that law could censor church statements on biblical sexuality in certain contexts and force churches to open their restrooms to members of the opposite sex under conditions that the government dictates. Fort Des Moines Church of Christ, which filed the suit through its Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys, also has showers, which the law also affects,” the organization said.

“The government acts outside of its authority when it attempts to control churches. Neither the commission nor any state law has the constitutional authority to dictate how any church uses its facility or what public statements a church can make concerning sexuality,” said ADF Senior Counsel Steve O’Ban, who argued before the court on behalf of the church in August. “As the court found, government bureaucrats don’t get to decide which church activities have a religious purpose; that’s for the church to decide.”

The government had admitted in the court hearing that the church’s restroom policy “likely” is permitted under its antidiscrimination laws.

But the court warned that “such acknowledgement does not prevent the state defendants … from seeking enforcement against” the church.

“That’s why this lawsuit has been so necessary,” said ADF counsel Christiana Holcomb. “Though the state admitted to the court that the church’s shower and restroom policy isn’t subject to the law, those words alone aren’t sufficient to ensure that the state won’t try to enforce it against churches.

“Churches should be free to talk about their religious beliefs and operate their houses of worship according to their faith without fearing government punishment,” she said.

The case arose when the Iowa Civil Rights Act banned places of public accommodation from expressing their views on human sexuality if they would “directly or indirectly” make “persons of any particular … gender identity” feel “unwelcome,” ADF said.

The state claimed the authority to define “bona fide religious purposes” as well as other critical issues.

In fact, the state claimed it could enforce its agenda in a church if “the place of worship engages in non-religious activities which are open to the public.”

It cited such events as child care or a spaghetti dinner.

WND reported last week a similar case is under way in Massachusetts against a “gender identity” definition adopted in the state. The measure makes “gender identity” a special class, with more protections than ordinary citizens. Under the provision, the attorney general has claimed “houses of worship” are places of “public accommodation” and members, therefore, cannot even express ideas concerning “religious expression regarding biological sex and gender identity.”

The case was launched by the Alliance Defending Freedom after the state commission interpreted the law “to force churches to open church changing rooms, shower facilities, restrooms, and other intimate areas [to people] based on their perceived gender identity, and not their biological sex, in violation of the churches’ religious beliefs.”

Four churches are plaintiffs: Horizon Christian Fellowship, Swansea Abundant Life Assembly of God, House of Destiny Ministries and Faith Christian Fellowship of Havarhill. Several individuals also are named: George Small, David Aucoin, Esteban Carrasco and Marlene Yeo.

“The government shouldn’t encroach on the internal, religious practices of a church,” said ADF Senior Counsel O’Ban. “Neither the commission nor the attorney general has the constitutional authority to dictate how any church uses its facility or what public statements a church can make concerning a deeply held religious belief, such as on human sexuality.”

At the Volokh Conspiracy legal blog, Eugene Volokh pointed out that “churches hold events ‘open to the general public’ all the time – it’s often how they seek new converts.”

“And even church ‘secular events,’ which I take it means events that don’t involve overt worship, are generally viewed by the church as part of its ministry, and certainly as a means of the church modeling what it believes to be religiously sound behavior.”

Volokh continued: “My guess is that most churches would not turn someone away from a generally open spaghetti supper. … But some religious leaders, as well as the church employees and volunteers, may refuse to use pronouns that they believe are inconsistent with God’s plan as revealed by anatomy.”

“Under Massachusetts law, refusing to use a transgender person’s preferred pronoun would be punishable discrimination. (At least this is true of ‘he’ or ‘she’ – I saw nothing in the document about ‘ze’ and other newly made-up pronouns.) The Massachusetts document … makes that clear in the employment context, and it also makes clear that the antidiscrimination law rules apply to places of public accommodations (including churches, in ‘secular events’ ‘open to the public’) just as much as to employment.”

Volokh warned: “Indeed, a church might be liable even for statements by its congregants (and not just its volunteers, who are acting as agents) that are critical of transgender people. Tolerating such remarks is generally seen as allowing a ‘hostile environment,’ and therefore ‘harassment.’ Indeed, the statement … specifically encourages people to ‘prohibit derogatory comments or jokes about transgender persons from employees, clients, vendors and any others, and promptly investigate and discipline persons who engage in discriminatory conduct’.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/fear-sweeps-churches-over-bathroom-policy/#YDAw8ZmRG1ojoP1A.99

Source: Fear sweeps churches over bathroom policy