I went to 711, here in Canada it's Slurpee day or something.
I couldn't help noticing all the rainbows on all the posts then I saw a sign that read "all flavors welcome" with the rainbow as well.
So... you can't even get a Slurpee OUTSIDE OF PRIDE month without being bombarded by Pride.
I went to the till with my daughter where they are offering stickers TO KIDS of course.
She says "aww your daughter is so cute, would she like a sticker"
I looked down at the selection of Rainbow and "all flavors welcome" stickers.
I said (catching myself off guard) "No, I'm not interested in all this pride crap. Would she like a sticker... OF COURSE. But not this one. I won't allow it."
The woman looked both disappointed but not surprised. Clearly this had already happened today, and the large stack of stickers on the counter indicated they were hoping to hand them out to every kid coming through the door, but were not successful in their efforts.
I will speak up more. If you don't have a non-pride coffee cup to serve me with, or bag or whatever, I'll be taking my business elsewhere.
STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM THE CHILDREN YOU SICK FUCKS!
DO THE SAME!!!! STAND UP TO THE "PRIDE" BULLSHIT AGENDA!
I think we can come to some middle ground. You're looking at the 1% pulling the strings, I'm looking at the gays next door who want to live their lives in peace.
You're right that the 1% wants to push LGBTQXYZ ideology in order to normalize that which healthy people find appalling. I'm with you in that observation.
I'm right that the average gay who observed actual injustices such as the targeting that precipitated the Stonewall riots, the mishandling of the AIDS crisis, the murder of harmless innocents like Matthew Shepard, discrimination in the workplace and in the marketplace, unequal treatment under the law, or any number of other examples which collectively operated to drive gays underground, just wanted to be left alone. Hiding wasn't getting the job done, so the response, understandably, was to say, in effect, "Hey, listen up you cruel fucks, I'm here, I'm your neighbor, and I'm sick of being treated as subhuman." So, pride events started up as a way to peaceably say this, the first being on the one-year anniversary of Stonewall.
Granted, they've gotten well out of hand over the last decade or so, and I'd agree this phenomenon is driven by the agenda of the 1%. But the motivation of the rank and file gay population was not sinister, and still isn't. Those of us awake enough to think are appalled at what is being done in our name.
"You advocate for a society free to 'do what thou will'" No, and don't hit me with that straw man argument. You're insinuating that Satanic influence has led me to my position, and I don't appreciate it. I have done nothing but denounce bad behavior. I think gay men are happiest when they find a good man to commit to and live a peaceful, monogamous life. That's what I advocate, and in my experience that's what the majority of gay men are looking for. So don't feed me that bullshit.
I used to think like you - that there was something wrong with being gay. I tried to be straight for 20 years of my adult life, because that's what I was told God wanted of me. It didn't work; it did a lot of damage. But it also forced me to seek my own relationship with God rather than trust those who claim to know him. For that, it was worth it.
You know what God told me, once I had enough faith to listen? That he doesn't care about homosexuality. He expects us to love one another and to respect each others' agency, and to act in accordance with those values. He also showed me how the traditional Christian view of the Bible is incorrect on the topic, being based off of mistranslations and out-of-context interpretations. We can go into that if you like, and I can show you exactly how each passage cited from scripture is incorrectly applied. Suffice to say, after millennia being passed through the hands of men, both honest and deceitful, the original truths have not survived unscathed in the arbitrary compilation that we today call the Bible. To say that "the Bible has never been wrong" is to read it in an exceedingly selective fashion. God's word has never been wrong, but not everything in the Bible is God's word, and not every Christian tradition and dogma is found in the Bible.
After 20 years of trying to see it your way, I have identified every flaw in your thinking, because they used to be flaws in my thinking.
"Sexual deviancy is the #1 cause of declining birthrates..." Yes, and it ain't because of the gays. Gays are 4-5% of the population and always have been. You have rightly mentioned heterosexual deviancy; if you want to address declining birthrates, you ought to be focusing on that rather than turning gays into the scapegoat for heterosexual misbehavior - it's a really bad argument to say that there aren't enough babies because too many straight people get tricked or led into being gay. It's utterly ridiculous. If you're born straight, you're straight. I wouldn't ever try to persuade you to think otherwise, and I expect the same respect for the fact that I was born gay. I wouldn't have chosen it, believe you me, particularly with my Christian upbringing. My life has been filled with loneliness that I didn't want, and Christian tradition told me that it was because something was wrong with ME, even though I am one of the kindest, most loving, most God-fearing people you're likely to meet in real life.
If I, a gay man, were to fool a woman into being my beard, marry her, and have kids with her, that would be a supreme act of cruelty. What woman deserves to be tied to a man who doesn't really want to touch her and can't truly be her lover? What child deserves to be born to parents who are alienated from each other, just going through the motions because one of them is trying to fulfill societal expectations? By living a lie of being "straight," I would hurt people. Better to let her find a good man who will be able to love her at every level; let their children have parents who truly trust and love each other. Would it be fair to you if a lesbian were to lie to you and get you to marry her? Would you be happy in a marriage where she regards you as physically revolting? Would it be fair to your children for her to harbor such a secret? No, you want a woman who is absolutely enthralled by you. Is it fair of you to expect me to live a different standard?
So the choice your philosophy leaves me with is: 1) Be deceitful and build a life on a lie, resulting in innocents being deeply harmed, or 2) be lonely for the rest of my life (which also does nothing to address your concern of declining birthrates). Are YOU displaying God's love by leaving me trapped in that choice? Or are you choosing your traditional dogmas over God's commandment to love your neighbor?
"A number of gay men report incontinence after repeated encounters, meaning they need diapers because of anal sex." Agreed, it's not healthy. It's also a myth. There is a fetishist subculture, maybe about 5-10% of gays, who just want bigger and bigger stuff shoved into them. These guys damage themselves and can have the problems you mention. Run of the mill anal sex causes no such issues. An erection is smaller than that firm poo you had the other day. If pushing one of those out on a daily basis doesn't cause you permanent damage, then neither will anal sex cause a gay man permanent damage. Find a straight woman who's into anal and ask her if she's incontinent. There's your answer.
"Marriage is the model between Christ and man, played out between man and woman." I absolutely agree, and I have two parents, five siblings, and 14 niblings whom I adore who are all practitioners or products of that model. It's an ideal, one that needs to be the norm if society is to survive. But that's not the path God set me on when he built my brain structure. Your ideal should be the norm, but to say that God expects it as an absolute is Christian dogma, cannot be supported from scripture, and has been utterly refuted in my mind by means of painful personal experience. He expects us to be moral people, but homosexuality isn't a factor in that standard.
I appreciate your conciliatory tone. I respect your desire to serve God. I also think that you put more faith into dead traditions than you do into a living God.
I'll address the scriptures in question, some of which you've pointed out:
• The story of Sodom and Gomorrah - Ezekiel makes clear that the sin of Sodom was cruelty, specifically how they treated the poor. The word "know" wasn't about homosexuality. It was about the threat of gang rape, an intolerable evil regardless of the genders involved.
• Leviticus 18:21 and 20:13 - These are provisions of the Levitical Law. Christians are not bound by the Levitical Law. It is of no effect. It is an all-or-nothing proposition - we don't get to pick and choose. So if you take these passages seriously, you had better stop eating pork and shellfish. You'd better throw away all your cotton-poly clothing. Better stop shaving. Be sure to ask your wife if she's on her period before you have sex, otherwise you'll be cut off from the people. And don't forget, she'll need to you watch the kids afterward while she purifies herself. I think you get the picture.
That leaves three passages in the New Testament, all found in the Epistles of Paul. Interestingly, in 2 Corinthians, Paul clarifies that every word of God shall be established by two or three witnesses. Yet he's the only NT author that says anything at all about homosexuality. Where are the other witnesses? Where is Jesus weaving that tHe GheYs ArE bAd into the Sermon on the Mount if it matters so much to him? Anyhow, if you're taking Paul seriously then you better make sure your woman doesn't speak up in church.
Anyway, we have:
• Romans 1:21-31 - When read in context, Paul is not condemning homosexuality. He's condemning Paganism and the accompanying debauchery.
• 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 - These passages originally used the word "arsenokoitais." This is an interesting word because it doesn't really appear in other Greek literature. It appears to have been period slang. So the translators didn't have an exact translation and were free to make it say whatever they wanted. They went with a condemnation of homosexuality. But if you actually break the word into its etymology, it translates literally to "man of many beds." This is not an injunction against homosexuality; it is a condemnation of promiscuity. And if Paul wanted to say what it's claimed he said, he was a Roman citizen writing in Greek. He had plenty of more precise words available if he wanted to be clear about his views on homosexuality.
So, yeah, the Bible in context does not condemn homosexuality. Adultery, fornication, promiscuity? Sure. But there is no applicable passage regarding homosexuality. It's nothing but Christian dogma based off the presumed opinion of a guy named Paul.
To some of your points:
"God is incapable of being wrong; it it is the word of God; it is correct." Agreed, God is not wrong. But the Bible has been adulterated. We've also taken the opinions of individuals, Paul being the prime example, and turned that into God's word because it's included in an arbitrary compilation that didn't exist until hundreds of years after Christ's ministry. Paul's opinion is not binding as God's word. The Sermon on the Mount? The rest of Jesus' teachings? Sure, absolutely, but not one time in all of that does he mention homosexuality, and neither do any of the disciples who were with him during his ministry.
God does not stand against himself. But you're assuming that God's view is the one that agrees with you and calling it discernment. That is a very perilous practice. I had to learn the hard way to stop doing that.
"Why then would God bother writing it?" I'm not sure he did. I think the Old Testament is very much not what the Christian world thinks it is. Take a look at "The Eden Conspiracy" by Paul Wallis if you're curious about that rabbit hole.
"1 in 5 of Gen Z refer to themselves as LGBTQIA+" Yeah, I'm not quite sure what to make of that yet. My guess is that 75% of them are feeling societal pressure not to be the "bad guy" and think that turning themselves into a member of the politically correct group can absolve them of their guilt and make them the "good guys." They can't make themselves black - but they can make themselves gay! Problem is, while you can behave however you want, you don't just get to choose to be gay. It takes brain wiring in utero. (Here's a brief overview of that neuroscience: https://youtu.be/QCX2PJJ-2BA)
So I'm convinced that they'll revert to identifying with their natural sexuality by early adulthood. But we'll see. Honestly, my gut tells me that we're on the cusp of the pendulum swinging back to a full-on revival among Gen Z. Loving Jesus is counter-culture these days, and that always attracts youth. I'm seeing so many teens sporting crosses, especially young men. It's an encouraging sight.
"Lord Jesus said that abstaining was better than than taking a wife." No, Lord Jesus did not say that. Paul said that, and he expressly stated that it was merely his opinion. In any case, where would the widespread adoption of that philosophy leave your concern about crashing birth rates?
"I wish you all the best. Take care." Likewise.