How gay friendly are Rocklin and Roseville? (Sacramento, Elk Grove: price, dangerous)

[Ludachris]

Originally Posted by pba

I guess you and I are going to disagree on everything. Clearly 80srocker is an idiot but instead you called him a moron. Sheesh, looks like you and I are just polar opposites.

LOL!

Way to go pba.

[cityx]

Originally Posted by quasi888

Once again: Ludachris for President.

Yes!! I second that

[cityx]

Originally Posted by pba

Wow, what an idiotic, homophobic, racist, uneducated, ignorant bunch of crap that you just said. None of it is worthy of any kind of response as I can safely assume the overwhelming majority of the people in this forum will agree that you're simply an idiot. So there's no confusion, let's define idiot for a minute (in my opinion you're more likely to fit definition # 2):

1.an utterly foolish or senseless person. 2.Psychology. a person of the lowest order in a former classification of mental retardation, having a mental age of less than three years old and an intelligence quotient under 25.

PBA - your comments were great and I completely agree.
We obviously have not seen eye to eye on, well, just about everything. But this post was truly wonderful to read and it made my night.
I guess even people with a tremendous amount of differences can find common ground after all.
Thank You.

[ElenaF]

Originally Posted by pba

Also, homesexuality isn't a sin? Please read more of the Bible before you start pretending like you're capable of answering such questions. Here is just one of many examples of how God is against homesexuality:

1st Corinthians 9-10
9 Don't you know that those who do wrong will have no share in the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, who are idol worshipers, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals,
10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, abusers, and swindlers--none of these will have a share in the Kingdom of God.

That's weird - every single variation of the bible that is online at Bible.com shows 1 Corinthians 9-10 as:

" 9(R (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28373R - broken link))God is faithful, through whom you were (S (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28373S - broken link))called into (T (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28373T - broken link))fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.
10Now (U (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374U - broken link))I exhort you, (V (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374V - broken link))brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no (W (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374W - broken link))divisions among you, but that you be made complete in (X (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374X - broken link))the same mind and in the same judgment.
"
Bible Resources, Online Bible, Read the Bible, Search the Bible, Bible Study Plan, Passage Search, Keyword Search (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49 - broken link)

Says nothing about gays going to hell, in fact quite the opposite, it strongly urges the faithful to come to closer God through practicing togetherness and acceptance!

Kinda throws a monkeywrench into the whole anti-gay bible rant there...

[pba]

Originally Posted by ElenaF

That's weird - every single variation of the bible that is online at Bible.com shows 1 Corinthians 9-10 as:

" 9(R (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28373R - broken link))God is faithful, through whom you were (S (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28373S - broken link))called into (T (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28373T - broken link))fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.
10Now (U (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374U - broken link))I exhort you, (V (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374V - broken link))brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no (W (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374W - broken link))divisions among you, but that you be made complete in (X (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49#cen-NASB-28374X - broken link))the same mind and in the same judgment.
"
Bible Resources, Online Bible, Read the Bible, Search the Bible, Bible Study Plan, Passage Search, Keyword Search (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+&v ersion1=49 - broken link)

Says nothing about gays going to hell, in fact quite the opposite, it strongly urges the faithful to come to closer God through practicing togetherness and acceptance!

Kinda throws a monkeywrench into the whole anti-gay bible rant there...

I looked it up again and it turns out I had it slightly wrong. Here's the passage I was talking about - 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (I left out the 6 initially).

I would agree that Bible.com is a very good source for biblical research but it all depends on which version of the Bible you're following. I'm glad to see though that you chose to quote from the New American Bible Standard so we can start off by agreeing that everything in this version of the Bible is true and factual. Now go back and take a look at what it has to say in the passage that I was actually talking about.

The New American Bible Standard (the source that you are providing as the basis for your argument) says this about homosexuals in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (click the link (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+6% 3A9-10&version1=49 - broken link)).

Basically, it uses the term 'homosexual' and says they will not inherit the kingdom of God. Well that leaves Hell in my beliefs since I'm not a believer in Purgatory.

However, the King James version translates this passage differently (see this link) so that's why this gets opened to interpretation. This version uses the terms 'effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind' so it's this interpretation where even Biblical scholars differ in opinion. Is the King James version referring to homosexuality? Depends on what you believe in but since you were using The New American Bible Standard as your reference then you must agree with me right? Now you wouldn't just pick certain parts to believe in and not others would you??

That's partially in jest since the problem is that the original Hebrew texts have gone through so many translations over the centuries that it's difficult (if not impossible) to find the true and accurate recording of God's exact words and God's exact intent. This is why the Bible seems to contain so many contradictions...it's man's interpretation of God's word that is getting in the way.

To reiterate what I've said, Jesus commanded us to love our "neighbors" (Matthew 22:39), and I love gays just as much as any other "neighbor". However, does that mean I live in a gay friendly neighborhood? My point was that nobody can answer that question since you would have to presume to speak on behalf of hundreds (or thousands) of people you've never met before.

I'll throw that monkey wrench right back atcha!

[ElenaF]

"effeminate" as a disqualifier?

Sorry, ya lost me right there. When being like a woman is used as an insult and justification for marginalization, I really don't need to hear anymore.

Also, any writing that gets edited, revised and twisted around time after time after version after version can hardly be called the infallible word of anything.

Feel free to believe any crazy thing you like, brother. Have a nice day.

[Ludachris]

Elena,

You can't argue religion and expect to get anywhere. I think your best bet is to challenge those who use religion to condemn gays and lesbians and just make sure they're practicing the other values religion preaches... as pba said, the most relevant one here being "love thy neighbor". Treat everyone with respect and dignity and the world will be a better place. Those who choose to hurt others, either violently or through discrimination, will only cause us to become less civilized as a group.

As a people (or Americans at least), we've decided that being gay, or "acting" gay, isn't illegal. And if it isn't illegal, then there should be no negative treatment from others for being gay. Period.

[pba]

Originally Posted by ElenaF

"effeminate" as a disqualifier?

Sorry, ya lost me right there. When being like a woman is used as an insult and justification for marginalization, I really don't need to hear anymore.

Also, any writing that gets edited, revised and twisted around time after time after version after version can hardly be called the infallible word of anything.

Feel free to believe any crazy thing you like, brother. Have a nice day.

Infallible word of God? I didn't say it was. You make it sound like I wrote the bible so I have to defend everything it says. There are at least 30 different versions of the Bible with different translations so it would clearly be impossible for anyone to defend every word in each of those versions.

I was simply pointing out how each version of the Bible translated the same passage differently. It's true what was said many posts back about the term 'homosexual' being a relatively new term (50 to 100 years old if that) so the term that was actually used 2000 years ago was definitely different.

The word of God IS reflected in the Bible but it's up to one's individual belief to decide on your own what you believe the true interpretation to be. Believing in God and the Bible is not an exact science but instead it's a system of beliefs. Unfortunately, God didn't dictate His words into English 2000 years ago so we're kinda stuck with the situation that we currently have.

[Ludachris]

Originally Posted by pba

Infallible word of God? I didn't say it was. You make it sound like I wrote the bible so I have to defend everything it says. There are at least 30 different versions of the Bible with different translations so it would clearly be impossible for anyone to defend every word in each of those versions.

I was simply pointing out how each version of the Bible translated the same passage differently. It's true what was said many posts back about the term 'homosexual' being a relatively new term (50 to 100 years old if that) so the term that was actually used 2000 years ago was definitely different.

The word of God IS reflected in the Bible but it's up to one's individual belief to decide on your own what you believe the true interpretation to be. Believing in God and the Bible is not an exact science but instead it's a system of beliefs. Unfortunately, God didn't dictate His words into English 2000 years ago so we're kinda stuck with the situation that we currently have.

Very well said. I wish more people were this candid about that fact.

[david55838]

Originally Posted by pba

I guess you and I are going to disagree on everything. Clearly 80srocker is an idiot but instead you called him a moron. Sheesh, looks like you and I are just polar opposites.

Yes, I guess so. Yet, occasionally I've seen flashes of reasonableness (sp)? from you in your postings, so perhaps we're not quite POLAR opposites. And of course, a lot of real expression and nuance is lost in forum postings as opposed to real live conversation.

I guess our views on religion and Bible interpretation are the biggest areas of disagreement. Oh well. Happy Sunday.