Lesbian, the ACLU Ruin Prom for Mississippi Town...

I would like you to point out these verses that condemn Nova's decisions.

Async: I will still get to your post, it just deserves a better response than I can give half asleep at 2.30 am.

Didn't she get arrested instead of getting to ride to her destination?
Did she really get to enjoy her bus ride?

So is Volpone still claiming the Prom being canceled is all the fault of the evil, evil 18 year old girl for being a lesbian?

Of course not. He's claiming it's her fault for not pretending that she's straight. That's something completely different.

alright bailey here goes

Mark 7/23 says For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.' "

his attire would be considered sexual immorality


Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged
natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural
relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed
indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their
perversion. (Romans 1:26-27)



ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers,
for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers…(1
Timothy 1:9-10)



and there is also a verse that speaks out against effeminate behavior that Ill have to do more research on

1 Corinthians 9 and 10 says "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Written by a guy raised in the Greek tradition, who never married, and had some rather bizarre notions about women.

Cracks me up every time some quotes him...

Take away your inflammatory wording and try to show me otherwise.

Fact: She made an issue of wanting to wear a tux and bring a same sex date.

Fact: When the school said that she couldn't she brought the ACLU in to sue the school.

Fact: One of the options, based on the actions of the girl and the ACLU, was to cancel prom.

Fact: For a lot of teens, prom is an important part of growing up.

Therefore I think it is a fair conclusion to say that a lesbian and the ACLU ruined prom for a Mississippi town.

Unless you can show me the that my facts are incorrect (or explain why my conclusion is).

Dancing and music? No. The Bible condemns divorce more vehemently than it has condemned homosexuality but I would bet good money you don't go around blasting all the divorced adulterers you know...heck, you could be one of those sinners for all I know. And if you don't condemn them with the fervor you condemn Nova then you are a hypocrite, because God sees no difference in the sin and your notions of a "sin scale" is irrelevant.

If you have no compassion for hypocrites then you do not understand Christ and it just illustrates even more starkly your complete inability to pass judgement on Nova. The fact that God doesn't want you to should be enough of a reason to accept Nova, love Nova as a person and move on. You can accept reality without condoning the choice. You can love the person and disagree with them.

As for the kind of Christian Nova is...well, the only business that is, is God's. Period. It isn't your place to even begin to make pronouncements in that area.

As the final heap of coals on your head, I find it incredibly ironic that you doubt and have no idea about the prohibition against pork or mixed fabrics...since it is just a few lines down from your much-touted prohibition against wearing women's clothing if you're a man in Deuteronomy 22.

Dancing and music (especially rock and roll) promote lustful thoughts and lustful actions, things that many churches preach against.

oh I do say you shoudnt get divorced. Its against the teachings of the Scriptures.


alright read deuteronony 22-5

show me that passage Tamar that you are taliking about

Brides who are found to not be virgins are to be stoned:

Wow, there's lots of hateful, violent stuff in Deuteronomy.

Fact: It is illegal for the school to tell her she couldn't bring another woman as a date.

Fact: Rather then comply with the law the school decided to cancel the prom.

Everything else is superfluous flummery.

You do remember he was a Pharisee, right?
All Pharisees had to be married.

Funny, the waltz or the Tango is more erotic (at least in my mind) than rock and roll

I really hate to get into a competitive proof-texting event, but unless someone can show me a single person other than an orthodox Jew who keeps the Mosaic law to the letter, then that person need not quote me from Deuteronomy.

Anyone who presumes to cite that verse in D22 to me and isn't aware that the same set of laws prohibits the consumption of pork, and shellfish, among many other things, is frankly too ill-informed to be citng any verse from that book, or indeed, any of the books of the law.

So at the very least, the conversation has to be confined to the New Testament.

Beyond that, the very same passages cited against me above include an equal condemnation for liars and covetous people - sins common to a wide range of people beyond the obvious freaks and perverts.

The NT also specifies that those who remarry (save for divorce which is Biblically sanctioned) are adulterers. Yet few who would judge me would counsel their divorced friend to remain unmarried and celibate the rest of their lives lest the commit adultry.


(Interestingly, I know a certain pastor who will not preform a wedding for a divorced person - yet this same man believes my wife should divorce me)

In any case, all these lists of "sins" should also be understood in the context of the fact that none of them - when indeed they be sins - are the unforgiveable sin, and pretty much any Baptist will tell you that once God has saved you, he will not forsake you when you sin again (as we all do). So if it were indeed true that i am sinning, I am not willfully and defiantly doing so (since I do not believe it to be sin) and his grace is sufficient to cover my ignorance.

Furthermore, I plead this case - I begged god for basically thirty years - 20 of those with great fervor and intensity - to take this from me if it was his will that I not be like this. I for one do not and cannot believe in a God that would say "though shalt not" and then refuse to heal when one of his children begged with tears to not be this way and THEN judge that person for that which he refused to take away.

If he is such a being, he is most certainly wildly different from what all the God fearing folks around me THINK he is.

(albeit, a lot of those folks - very well intentioned though they may be - say a lot of very goofy things about God...i sometimes wonder if they realize how nonsensical some of it sounds - but that's a large tangent)

finally, I decline to specifically try to explain or refute the verses posted because so long as the erroneous assumption that the KJV is the authoritative "last word" is the starting point, that discussion will certainly arrive at impass.

That said, I'll note that I've never had a KJV-only person, no matter how learned, explain to me how it is that an all-powerful being could and did superintend his word for thousands of years only to arbitrarily stop doing so in the early 17th century for no apparent reason.

Or how it is that God thought it necessary to see to it that his word MUST be translated into English....and then updated several times in a relatively short period....only to then take the position that it was wisest to leave his word then preserved static in a formt filled with archaic words, syntax, and translations rather than providing his people with the clearest possible reading of his intended message.

if one argues that God wants his people to work hard and study to understand him, then why was it translated (by his leave) from the original languages?

If on the other hand one argues God wanted his people to have a clear understanding of his word, even on the layman's level, then why would he cease to superintend the transmission of his intent 400 years ago?

If one argues that the reason the KJV is the last which can be trusted is because it is the one based on the recieved text, then one is arguing that god is incapeable of moving some of his people to do a modern translation based on the exact same text, or that he is unwilling to.

All this and so VERY much more demonstrates that the notion that the KJV is the only and last authoritative version of the Bible is clownishly illogical. Any minister which holds and preaches this view is an embarrassment to his profession, and I say that with all due respect to my current and former friends in the ministry who do so. If a preacher tells you he is "KJV only" then one should consider carefully whether to accept his position on any other Biblical point.

So, in summation, so long as the view that I am sinning and/or condemned for my current behavior is supported by arguments which are founded on "The King James Version says..." i decline to debate the matter. A case built on such a faulty proposition cannot be successfully discussed.

Im not judging you or condemning you despite what others think or have said. Shepnova will tell you himself that I have always had an adversarial relationship with those who do.

now then back on topic if everyone is finished fucking with nova

This from a Jackson , Mississippi newspaper

Lesbian high schooler who sued over prom gets $30,000 scholarship on 'Ellen'
The Associated Press
March 19, 2010 2:48:00 PM

JACKSON — The lesbian high school student embroiled in a legal flap over her school’s prom policy was presented with a $30,000 scholarship on Friday when she appeared on “The Ellen DeGeneres Show.”

Constance McMillen was speechless after the talk show host pulled out an oversized check from the Web site, Tonic.Com, a digital media company.


DeGeneres said she admired McMillen for challenging the Itawamba County School District rules that would prevent her from escorting her girlfriend to the prom. The school district canceled the April 2 prom in response to McMillen’s requests.

A hearing is scheduled Monday in federal court in Aberdeen on the American Civil Liberties Union’s motion to force the district to hold the prom.

Married in name only, though?

Traditionally, yes, the family probably matched him up with a nice girl, but there's no evidence of her existence beyond Phil. 4:3, which is sketchy at best.

With Peter, it's clear-cut. Jesus tells him point blank, "Leave the nets, leave the ball and chain. Road trip!"

Of course I suppose it could be argued that Paul's animosity toward women was the result of having been matched up with a latter-day Xantippe and being ever so eager to get out of Dodge. But if there's any concrete evidence that the man who preached as if he thought all sexual relations were evil actually had a woman in his past, I'd invite someone to bring it forward.

I do not think that Pharisees were required to be married, or at least, not during the early Christian era, anyway.

That said, I am not even remotely sure about that.

Yeah, I'll file this business under the "who gives a shit, let the lesbians do prom" category. What is this, the fucking dark ages?

And yet, because he is not married at the time he wrote the one letter EVERYONE assumes that he hates women.
Have you read up on later commentaries on those verses that "put down" women? There are those that do NOT attribute them to Paul at all; he does not put down Pricilla, a teacher, Phoebe for being a deconness nor to Junia who was considered to be an apostle and if he opposed women in any sort of power he would have put them down hard.
I find it so amusing that folks who don't believe that the Bible is fact decide that it is fact that Paul hated women.

Not believing something is factually true does nothing to affect a persons ability to analyse it.

It's a popular thing to hear from Christians (or indeed members of any organised religion) that someone cannot have a proper understanding or conduct solid questioning of aspects of that system without first believing in it.

If you were to put forward other supporting evidence that only believers are given access to, then sure, but while everyone is working from the same textbook they can get exactly the same amount of information out of it.

No, there's a "firestorm" against you because either you're a horrible, twisted person, or a pathetic dual of someone who is really bad a trolling.

Everyone here has access to the same evidence I had looking this up on the internet.
If someone is so damned lazy that they can't look up things on the internet to either support or refute their claims, it's their problem, not mine.
Folks here tend to have an opinion about Paul - he's a women hater, he's a traditional Jew. Who the hell do you think told Peter to shut up and quit being a hypocrit about his diet in front of the Jewish Christian council?
(or to put it another way: who do you think told Pete he had ham on his breath?)

I don't know enough to have an opinion on the matter, I was just responding to the specific claim that the fact you believe the Bible is true somehow gives you some better insight into it.

And I said I find it amusing that those who don't believe the Bible is fact...
Somehow those who say the Bible is not fact are given a free ride, whereas those who say the Bible is fact are required to support every word they say with footnotes and extrabiblical sources.

So what do you suppose happened to her? His alleged wife, I mean.

How convenient. Yet someone wrote them, and they were accepted as part of the canon, which means they were accepted by the hierarchy.

Wow. Three women out of...what was the population of Palestine at the time, do you suppose?

Well, either he wrote those things or he didn't. If he didn't, someone in the hierarchy has tried to frame him...very Christian of them.

And if he *did* write them, are we supposed to pretend he was just kidding?

maybe thats true too

I didn't realize Cap'n X was a fag. Huh.

Gee - how many folks do YOU thank? Did you ever think he didn't know all the others' names????? Oh wait, that's only allowed for folks such as you; Paul had to know everyone's names all the time.

You are always the one that complains when things are taken out of context.
I am so sorry that the Biblical canon is ONLY 66 books, and ONLY those few letters written by Paul since there is ample evidence in those few letters that he wrote many others which would probably explain all this and more. Sadly those letters and books are missing.
As you would say, we only can go by what we have. True.
But that is no reason to create a monster when one may never had existed.