ThinkProgress LGBT joins the long list of those who have censored me?

This page, on ThinkProgress LGBT, "Hate Groups Still Preach That Students Can Be 'Indoctrinated Into Homosexual Behavior'," in this thread, has seen my comment reply removed twice. Perhaps a word sent it to moderation and it will yet show up. I'm posting it here regardless:

Amelia Martin,

Identical twins are never identical. We all should know that. However, the fingerprint analogy is missing the point that they are both born with fingers, barring some major error. The idea that heterosexuality versus homosexuality is some subtle difference on the order of minor variations in fingerprints is simply not apt. It is more akin to being born with or without fingers.

In addition, if you were correct, it would fly in the face of all the homosexualist propaganda that has been spread about the various twin studies. The claim has been that those studies confirm a genetic basis, which is incorrect.

Paul Omar Lervåg,

Furthermore, just because some families are fully homosexual does not prove a genetic basis. It does not, of itself, rule out total environmental (nurture versus nature) causes. Families impact upon themselves generationally. You write as if that doesn't exist.

Also, there are many people who believed as you claim (about being exclusively homosexual) only to change. They were not considered, nor did they consider themselves, bi-sexual. The fact is that sexual attraction is something that can definitely be conditioned into people. All other things being equal, how else can homosexual pedophilic rape of non-homosexual youths becoming then same-sex attracted be fully explained? It happens all the time whether you conveniently choose to ignore it or not.

You are mistaken, ill-informed, and misleading others. You are suffering from cognitive dissonance. You have not undergone radical reconditioning only to remain exclusively attracted to the same sex. You also can't speak for those who want to undergo change and who don't give up but seek and find. I have heard from many of them.

You mentioned your upbringing, but what you mentioned is far from enough to rule out environmental causes versus genetic. You may very well fit the more typical patterns concerning family. The fact that one's parents professed Christianity doesn't explain everything. SOCE usually goes into father-son and mother-son relationships. Whether or not you were ever sexually abused would also factor in. It doesn't stop there though. There's a whole world of indoctrination, socialization, various forms of conditioning, to consider.


Are you for outlawing homosexually raped children from being able to receive psychological and psychiatric help for their unwanted same-sex attraction? Do you think a penis in an anus and up a rectum, using the rectum as a vagina, is wholesome and healthy whether physically or mentally (not that those two things are ever mutually exclusive)? If it is not, and I say it is not, then what does that mean for male homosexuality? It doesn't stop natural heterosexual procreation. It should preclude the main male homosexual sexual activity though. It is either that or all homosexuals would continue engaging in other sexual acts absent anal sex, but that would go against the vast majorities attraction, proving my point.

It will be interesting to see whether or not you actually answer the questions. As for how far you are prepared to go on the psychoanalytical couch right here, so to speak, well, just how far are you prepared to go to show that you don't fit the environmentally impacted pattern? Regardless, you don't speak for all of the people who are, or ever have been, same-sex attracted.


You are not speaking for me. The answer is truth, not killing people.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Reply on ThinkProgress:

      Wow, Paul [Paul Omar Lervåg], it has really become apparent how little you now and how much you think you know about that which you know nothing at all.

      "You are not an expert on biology. Me on the other hand, got an A+ on the Mather of DNA." So, you have my transcripts with grades and you are a DNA expert? I sincerely doubt it. I think this is a prime example of how false propaganda gets started and furthered by people such as you.

      Why don't you ask real experts whether or not it has been scientifically proven that homosexuality is genetic and not environmentally induced at all.

      So, you didn't answer the question as to whether or not it should be illegal for youths to seek and to receive the help of licensed, professional, mental-healthcare givers when those youths are suffering from same-sex attraction due to homosexual abuse, even rape, and not because they were born homosexual or bi-sexual at all (because they were completely averse to notions of same-sex attraction before the abuse or rape). Born that way had zero, repeat zero, to do with it! Do you understand, Mr. A+. Stop spreading falsehood.

      You ducked the question among many others in my comment -- standard operating procedure.

    • Another reply there:

      All you've managed to do, Paul, is the typical ducking job and attempts at changing the subject. You are all puffed up with yourself, and I'm sure that most people whether or not they are homosexual are able to see that you are not nearly as intelligent as you think you are or think other people think you are.It happens all the time with you people (yes, "you people" -- to whom the shoe fits).The issue is homo-sex. That's s-e-x. I didn't say anything about thinking about sex all the time or exclusively. That's simply you jumping to false conclusions, which is obviously your modus operandi. I'm sure you think about sex more than do I.What's the percentage of homosexual males who are out of the closet and practicing homosex but who do not and have not engaged in anal intercourse? If you think it's high, you're just continuing to demonstrate your unawareness.So, before you were a homosexual. Now you are a bi-sexual.You wrote, "I tried to see if i got turned on by girl, but it did not work. Because i'm gay." Now suddenly, you say of yourself, "I'm BI," and "...i fell in love in girl."Look, anthonycool2008 above has two comments that could have been removed while mine was censored twice (because of the intellectual challenges it presented?). I openly distanced myself from that anthonycool2008 screed.How many people of the left and perhaps pro-homosexuality here will tell you right here that you've exposed yourself for an imbecile rather than patting you on the back for, frankly, being a jerk? I rarely see that kind of honesty.Does anyone else here on ThinkProgress have the courage to be completely honest about you, Paul?As for my being right-wing, I'm a communist (that's what Christianity really is). Marx got most of his sharing ideas right out of Acts in the New Testament, but he was an ass -- promoting violence. I'm anti-militarism, anti-war, a pacifist in fact. So, tell me how left-wing you are versus that. I'll stack up my progressivism against yours any day of the week.So, you're fine with laws that leave homosexually raped kids suffering with their unwanted same-sex attraction. You don't understand the suffering. You don't know enough what to stand for and against. I can just imagine the rest of the garbage you're for although I really don't want to think about the cesspool so I won't use my imagination about the possible depths of your depravity and potential for harming and abusing those whose suffering you don't or wouldn't understand.

    • So, they did it again -- more censorship? How could it be otherwise?

      Here's my next comment I just posted over there. Will it survive?

      It's not difficult to see what goes on here on ThinkProgress: censorship not on the merits but of anything that truly challenges the false propaganda. My comments are up and even after refreshing the page and closing and reopening the browser only to have those comments disappear later. It's not mere automatic word filtering. It's most likely someone reading the comments and then trembling in fear that the truth might be seen and read here. It's called closed-mindedness: anti-truth.

      A wrap? Hardly. You will also note that your URL is a link while this system refused to make my URL in my comment above a link: anything to keep the masses from possibly waking up.

      What about this one:

      I'll even wrap it in html, which one doesn't have to do on Facebook.

    • That last comment disappeared too. Here's the one that followed it:

      Just as I thought, no hyper-linking for me but hyper-linking for you. Well, what goes around comes around. Most of you people wouldn't know freedom of political speech if it beat you over the head.I can understand censorship. Some things are beyond the pale, but I engaged here on a level that the only reason it was censored was because it was stronger than any of the pro-homosexual comments and it was feared hearts and minds would be changed by my statements. In the best sense of the term "liberal," those who did the apparent censoring are being ill-liberal: intellectual death.

    • Here's the next and last I'll be posting on that homosexual-fascist article:

      Well, I'm being heavily censored here and absolutely without reasonable justification. If you want to read all of my comments, including the ones that disappeared without cause, just visit the URL in my comment several comments above. It's too bad you'll have to copy and paste it in your browser, but false propagandists, those who don't want you to know about how they dishonestly manipulate people work that way. Shame on them: intellectual cowards -- not willing to engage in real dialogue to get at the unvarnished facts.

    • One last comment to the highly arrogant:

      Oh, I said I wouldn't be commenting here again, but I just can't let this go by [moved by the Spirit of Truth]. It's such a pattern here with Paul, who takes everything he says from some collective script: "I can't take you seriously anymore...": So worn out, Paul, and unoriginal. 

      Hey, Paul, wake up! Bob Dylan is still an openly professing Christian. During his last concert there not too many months ago, he sang praises to Jesus right in Israel. Imagine that. It means he believes in the God of Jesus, the one you openly disrespect here while calling one of his willing servants "a wise man." Get a clue, Paul.

      He believed in God when he wrote that song too, you ....

      Censor that. Blot yourselves out of The Book of Life.

      You're done with me? I know it's the other way around. I shake the dust.

      "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." (John 8:44)

      Spoken by a wiser man still and whom Bob Dylan says Bob follows. So do I.