Wrong: "Biden: Gay rights takes precedence over culture"

The Obama administration is pulling out all the stops in promoting homosexuality on a global basis. See: Biden: Gay rights takes precedence over culture - The Washington Post.


Tom Usher

Men sodomizing each other is a disgusting, filthy perversion. Nothing good has ever, or will ever, come from it. It is always harmful to one degree or another. Anyone willingly engaging in it or promoting it, as many members of the Obama administration are, is promoting immorality and the destruction of the obviously correct family structure that is best: A father (born male), a mother (born female), and their children. Where such structure is not a choice because someone has died or the like, it is completely different than the choice of attempting to form a family around the fundamental error and lie that is homosexuality.

Homosexuality is a mental and spiritual disorder. Homosexuals need help to overcome their disease state. Such help is available and has worked for many thousands. Homosexuals should not be encouraged in, or celebrated in, homosexual sex acts at all for any reason whatsoever.

Nations that cave into the degradation that is homosexuality will suffer further degradation as a direct result. It is not possible to wall off homosexuality and its negative impacts upon society where it is allowed, tolerated, celebrated, etc.

I am not advocating violence against homosexuals. I am advocating that people tell the truth about homosexuality rather than spew homosexual false propaganda. Joe Biden and Susan Rice and Barack Obama and others are spreading untruths. They are misleading youth into falsely believing that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, that engaging in it will not lead to any problems, that becoming homosexual is not the result of something gone wrong, such as for one, homosexual sexual abuse perpetrated upon impressionable and vulnerable children.

Jesus Christ taught that marriage is one man and one woman. Anything else is either adultery or fornication, both of which he condemned and rightly so. He taught a stricter code of morality. He relaxed no sexual standards whatsoever. He closed hypocritical holes in what was considered the law of God at the time. His closest disciples marveled at how much stricter he, Jesus, was making things.

The homosexuals would have you falsely believe that Jesus relaxed everything and was silent on homosexuality. What Jesus did and said, what he taught, what he preached, logically results in a complete prohibition against homosexual behavior and even calls upon those inflicted with it to overcome the spirit of it, to cast it out and to not allow it to return ever again.

You can cave into homosexuality and loosen the moral standards, but do not be surprised when things go from bad to worse as a result.

As for those societies that have outlawed homosexuality, Jesus outlawed it too. The question is how to deal with homosexuals, not whether to pronounce what they do as fine and good and more than acceptable.


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.