Intimidation
There’s nothing like intimidating people to get your way. Some bosses employ that technique to get employees to do their biding. Couples do that to each other as well as brothers and sisters. It doesn’t matter who intimidates who because the root is always founded in selfishness.
La Shawn Barber pointed out one such case in Massachusetts.
It appears that a couple of gay-rights advocates have threatened to post the name, addresses and phone numbers of anyone who signs a petition that could lead to a ban on gay marriages and civil unions. And that’s not all. One of the men has already paid a personal visit to one of the first signers of the petition.
Are they trying to embarrass people by doing this or are they doing this so that they can go door to door interrogating those who signed the petition. Who knows their true motives but one thing’s for sure, the mere threat of doing this is an act of intimidation. Nothing more and nothing less.
My uncle died of AIDS during the mid-80s and in the end he regretted his choices. Because of that no one and nothing can convince me that the gay lifestyle is physically, emotionally or spiritually healthy in any way, shape or form.
If you or anyone you know is gay or even thinks (s)he is gay, check out Exodus International to learn more about freedom through the love of Jesus Christ as related by former homosexuals. Jesus can change you. You just have to let him.
Perhaps the decisions your uncle who died of AIDS made were those related to dangerously promiscuous behavior. That you were unclear if he was *** or not is a subtle telling of your beliefs. That you imply that being *** is a “choice” is a more blatant proclamation of your latent homophobia and bigotry. I have to agree with you though on one point - gathering the names for publication of people who sign petitions is a gross attempt to intimidate and is always the wrong the to do. Of course, that the men who are gathering those names for
Comment by Todd — September 13, 2005 @ 2:45 pm
Interesting - your site blocks the standardized alternate use of the word homosexual - the word beginning with “g” and ending in “y” with an “a” in the middle of it. That’s actually fairly cool software. I’m impressed.
Comment by Todd — September 13, 2005 @ 2:47 pm
I have no doubt that my uncle’s death was result of his participation in the *** scene in San Francisco during the 70s. I also have no doubt that he was a practicing homosexual. It is unclear to me how you got the idea that I was uncertain about my uncle’s sexual preferences.
I have always found is somewhat amusing that people will accuse others of being homophobic and a bigot just because they have a different view of the issue. In a way, that’s really no different what the two *** rights advocates are doing with the publishing of people’s name, etc on the Internet. To try to shame someone into believing the way another does is a rather hostile act. Of course, with today’s politically correct mentality, to which I do not subscribe, it is easy to discredit another with the label of intolerant homophobe. Yet, by pointing your finger and exclaiming intolerance, you and others who believe the way you do are demonstrating your own lack of tolerance for my view point. Thus, you discredit your own argument by your own argument.
As far as the filtering software goes, I cannot claim credit for it is only a WordPress plugin called Polite-ifier. It doesn’t censor but it does take a list of words and converts them, on the fly, to
values. I do this in case someone posts something that is not appropriate. I do have some younger visitors (namely, my children).Comment by Larry — September 13, 2005 @ 8:24 pm
I forgot to comment on the “choices” remark. The choosing of the word “choices” in my entry should have been in quotes because those are not my words but my uncle’s words.
Participation in the homosexual lifestyle is not something someone is born with. One may have leanings or preferences one way or the other but that is not acting on those leanings. Choice comes in when a person chooses to engage in *** with another. Let me say that is not a homosexual only issue. *** is not essential to life the way breathing, eating and having shelter is concerned. *** is only essential to the continuation of the human race. Sure, we find pleasure in that activity but that does not make it necessary for life in the USA or any other country and to say otherwise is show ignorance in the matter.
I believe that “choice” is an appropriate word in this case even if my uncle didn’t say it because sometime in a person’s life they will have to choose to have *** with another person. To experience their “first time” with another person independent of gender, if you will. The only exception to this is forcible rape, which is outside the scope of this discussion. So, before someone actually has *** they have to choose to engage in the activity or not. If someone chooses to have *** they have made their choice. If they choose not to they have again made a choice. I think the logic is very clear and does not in any way imply a phobia or bigotry.
Comment by Larry — September 13, 2005 @ 10:18 pm
Dear Larry,
I wish my comment can reach you as it had been a few months since you posted your essay and feedback. Recently, I have been thinking on what reactions and attitude Christians should hold against intimidation. You highlighted that intimidation exists among couple, boss and even between brothers and sisters. I had read some bible study materials about handling intimidation. As expected, it teaches people to forgive as God holds justice. I agree with 1 Peter 2:15, it says, ‘It is God’s will that your good lives should silence those who make foolish accusations against you.’ However, I got some reservation in applying another verse which is also from 1 Peter, 2:19, ‘For God is pleased with you when, for the sake of your conscience, you patiently endure unfair treatment.’ This seems to apply particularly to situation when the unfair treatment happens from those in authorities, as 1 Peter 2:13 say, ‘For the Lord’s sake, accept all authority …and the officials he has appointed.’ I am not challenging the good teachings and intentions behind all those messages; however, I would like to discuss how Christians should respond when the intimidation is getting overwhelming and unlawful. Take an example, if a boss uses his authority to sexual harass his sub-ordinates, what should they react, assuming that they are Christians. Should they simply tolerate and keep silent? While thinking on this topic, I recall the story of Lincoln; he saw the injustice of the slavery system, so he spent lots of efforts to release them from their sufferings, if he kept quiet by showing respect to those in authorities, such historical redemption would never had happened. I am thinking if reporting intimidation that is already abusively overwhelming to the one higher in the hierarchy is against the teaching in the bible, could you share your view on it?
Moreover, regarding your views upon practising homosexual lifestyle, I am quite sad to know that a recent movie called *** Mountain had won the best director award in Oscar. This triggered lots of praises, and surely promote the developing Gxx culture. Besides, I totally support your argument that one day they might regret their ‘choices’ if they die from AIDS. However, I do wonder if this high potential danger will stop them from practising that, lots of people know that smoking can cause lung cancer, but they don’t really care. Lastly, I am more concern about those that are bisexual, especially among Christians. In order to cover up their greed of having both sexual orientations, as it is normally not accepted in the Christian communities, a man will usually have a proper relationship or even a marriage with a girl. To me, that is the most selfish behaviour, as this will bring ‘unexpected’ punishment (AIDS) to the innocent, that do not made the same ‘choice’ as they did. In conclusion, I would expect those that cannot change their orientation for whatever reasons be at least honest. Don’t cheat! Don’t let those truly love them to suffer for their selfishness.
Comment by Esther — March 11, 2006 @ 11:27 am
That’s very true!
Comment by flora — March 11, 2006 @ 6:15 pm