Lesbian high school cheerleader...

[Omicron]

So where is lesbianism condemned in the bible?

You know, in the UK, for a long time sodomy between guys was illegal, but lesbianism was not.

What happened was, a bill was presented to Queen Victoria for royal ascent, that would ban both male and female homosexuality.

Victoria took a pen, and scratched out the phrase about women, saying "There is no such thing as lesbianism!"

The legislators were all men, so they didn't care.

 

[hunboldt]

You know, in the UK, for a long time sodomy between guys was illegal, but lesbianism was not.

What happened was, a bill was presented to Queen Victoria for royal ascent, that would ban both male and female homosexuality.

Victoria took a pen, and scratched out the phrase about women, saying "There is no such thing as lesbianism!"

The legislators were all men, so they didn't care.

She had a point. In biblical times, marriage consisted of young polygamy maidens 'bartered' to powerful hairy old geezers who were off on the warpath or chasing , ahem, 'inspecting' herds of sheep. a whole lot of female bonding was inevitable.

 

[Omicron]

In any case... hmm... I was seduced by a woman in her 20's when I was 15, so, if I was in Florida, does it mean I can charge her with pedophelia if she's a dyke, or would her defence be that she was bi-curious, such that doing it with me made her decide to be lesbian?

 

[hunboldt]

In any case... hmm... I was seduced by a woman in her 20's when I was 15, so, if I was in Florida, does it mean I can charge her with pedophelia, or would her defence be that she was bi-curious, such that doing it with me made her decide to be lesbian?

You poor lil fellow!:lol:. Damaged for life?

 

[L Gilbert]

Paedophilia is paedophilia. I don't give a damn who you are.

This has nothing to do with pedophilia, you poor, dumb Brit, as pedophilia is a sexual attraction to prepubescents. The closest thing this comes to is ephebophilia.

Jesus would forgive.. provided she fully Confesses her sin.. makes a good Act of Contrition..sais an Our Father and 10 Hail Mary's.. AND casts off and repudiates her homosexuality and commits herself not to sin again. That's not scripture but it is dogma, backed by scripture.

The problem is she thinks she's done absolutely nothing wrong.. and she has an entire social movement with all of its political and judicial tentacles who are supporting her in this self delusion (not to mention her parents).

It's difficult to redeem yourself if you refuse to see the error of your ways.

What sin? NOWHERE does the Bible say anything about lesbianism or even just girls being curious. Any azz that says different is using their interpretation as fact. It's fuking nonsense.

Actually:
Jesus would advise her to 'go her way and sin no more'- for adultery which is rather more serious.

Jesus says, “If you hate your brother, if you judge him to be worthless, thinking that the world is a better place without him, then you already have the attitude which lies at the heart of murder.” What is the big problem? It is the mindset which thinks, “Raca [empty one] … You fool!” (Matthew 5:22)
Jesus would advise us to 'keep it out of the courts'
(Matthew 5:25). It seems that no one loves to go to court more than legalists. The Pharisees were the ones who loved the nit picky rules. They loved to go to court. We sometimes hear people say, “I’ll see you in court!” Jesus says, “On your way to court, you’d better settle up quickly.” I have never seen a court of law solve a problem of the heart. Going to court doesn’t facilitate reconciliation

Jesus would advise us to 'resolve it within the community'


L:ittle short on research, there, coldstream...

Italics from https://bible.org/seriespage/avoiding-sin-adultery-matthew-527-30 a pretty conservative site..

Nope, adultery is infidelity.

THAT passage says nothing abut Lesbianism. It does not demand a 'judicial circus ' for a private affair between female teens.

'Helping Jesus out' is not scriptural.

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

And that seems to mean, according to biblical scholars, that if one is naturally hetero one commits a shameful act for doing a homosexual act. And If one is homosexual, having sexual relations with a member of the opposite gender is unnatural. Coldslime is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out-to-lunch as usual.

Jesus does condemn adultery, which is what Romans refers to.

That is infidelity.

 

[hunboldt]

This has nothing to do with pedophilia, you poor, dumb Brit, as pedophilia is a sexual attraction to prepubescents. The closest thing this comes to is ephebophilia.

What sin? NOWHERE does the Bible say anything about lesbianism or even just girls being curious. Any azz that says different is using their interpretation as fact. It's fuking nonsense.

Nope, adultery is infidelity.

And that seems to mean, according to biblical scholars, that if one is naturally hetero one commits a shameful act for doing a homosexual act. And If one is homosexual, having sexual relations with a member of the opposite gender is unnatural. Coldslime is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out-to-lunch as usual.

That is infidelity.

Yep. You're right:lol:

Coldstream is promoting what we used to call "bush Catholicism' - and bush - C has driven a lot of women out of the Catholic fold.

Jesus was leading his flock in a time and place where drought could wipe you out- and the Tax farmers would still grab their 10-20 %. He knew that sometimes, desperate women would screw Horny Festus the Centurion to get enough grain to get through to harvest.

 

[hunboldt]

Yep. You're right:lol:

Coldstream is promoting what we used to call "bush Catholicism' - and bush - C has driven a lot of women out of the Catholic fold.

Jesus was leading his flock in a time and place where drought could wipe you out- and the Tax farmers would still grab their 10-20 %. He knew that sometimes, desperate women would screw Horny Festus the Centurion to get enough grain to get through to harvest.

Jesus is telling his flock to organise their communities so this 'abomination' is no longer necessary in order to feed the kids
http://www.gaychristian101.com/does-romans-126-condemn-lesbians.html

explains it quite eloquently.
.

hopefully CS reads the link...

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

In any case... hmm... I was seduced by a woman in her 20's when I was 15, so, if I was in Florida, does it mean I can charge her with pedophelia if she's a dyke, or would her defence be that she was bi-curious, such that doing it with me made her decide to be lesbian?

You have an. . . interesting. . . fantasy life.

 

[Omicron]

You poor lil fellow!:lol:. Damaged for life?

Well, come on... there I was on my back playing with her jugs while she did all the work.

 

[Blackleaf]

A hundred years ago, 13 year olds were getting married and starting families. When did humans stop growing up at puberty?

I don't care about 100 years ago. I mean, if you think we should follow all the laws of 100 years ago then we should made homosexuality illegal again, like it used to be in Britain until recently.

These days it's against the law for an adult to have sex with a 13 year old, whether that adult is a man, woman, straight or nufter.

You know, in the UK, for a long time sodomy between guys was illegal, but lesbianism was not.

What happened was, a bill was presented to Queen Victoria for royal ascent, that would ban both male and female homosexuality.

Victoria took a pen, and scratched out the phrase about women, saying "There is no such thing as lesbianism!"

The legislators were all men, so they didn't care.

I've heard those rumours, but I don't know how true they are.

But regardless of that, lesbian sex has an age of consent in the UK now.

All though it's difficult for a woman to engage in sodomy unless she gets a strap-on.

In any case... hmm... I was seduced by a woman in her 20's when I was 15, so, if I was in Florida, does it mean I can charge her with pedophelia if she's a dyke, or would her defence be that she was bi-curious, such that doing it with me made her decide to be lesbian?

Surely she can be charged as a paedophile ANYWHERE that has age of consent laws, not just Florida.

She's a paedophile.

 

[Omicron]

I don't care about 100 years ago.

These days it's against the law for an adult to have sex with a 13 year old.

Aside from how you're sounding like Queen Buttrickets of Belgium, and aside from how first thing you need to ask is how come a hundred years ago before they started pumping artificial plastics into the environment women didn't hit puperty 'till 16-17, the third thing you need to ask is why you need something to be illegal to make yourself behave.

 

[Blackleaf]

Aside from how you're sounding like Queen Buttrickets of Belgium, and aside from how first thing you need to ask is how come a hundred years ago before they started pumping artificial plastics into the environment women didn't hit puperty 'till 16-17, the third thing you need to ask is why you need something to be illegal to make yourself behave.

The only thing that I'm sounding like is a normal person who can't stand paedophilia.

I'm disturbed by the amount of people here who support paedophilia. It's disturbing. I feel like I'm posting on the Butterflies website. Or incarcerated in a sex offenders' institute.




The myth

Lesbianism was never made illegal in Britain because when Queen Victoria was shown the proposed legislation she refused to sign it, as she wouldn’t believe that lesbians existed: “Women do not do such things.” In other versions of the story, government ministers struck out all references to women in the Act, because they couldn’t think of a way of explaining matters to the dear old queen.

The “truth”

The idea that Victoria refused to sign the Labouchere Amendment to the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885, until it had been de-lesbianised, is easily dealt with: the British monarch in the late 19th century did not have the power to overrule parliament – any attempt to do so would have triggered a political earthquake. The myth apparently started in Wellington, New Zealand, in 1977, to explain why a demonstration for lesbian equality centred on a statue of Vicky. Labouchere’s true motives for criminalising male homosexuality are still disputed; what seems certain is that banning female homosexuality never crossed his mind. Some historians suggest that the male establishment avoided legislating on lesbianism, for fear of drawing women’s attention to its existence.


Sources

Inventing the Victorians by Matthew Sweet (Faber, 2001); www.mikedash.com/extras_victoria.htm; Latest news, world news, sport and comment from the Guardian | theguardian.com | The Guardian notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-19315,00.html

Victoria and the Lesbians | Myth Busters | Strange Days | Fortean Times UK

 

[Omicron]

Surely she can be charged as a paedophile ANYWHERE that has age of consent laws, not just Florida.

You're joking. You're telling me you never dealt with the rat-brat kids of the tribal chieftans who took over Papaue New Guini after Australia let them go?

Their attitude was/is that a female is fair game when the flesh around her v*gina starts looking like what plant biologists call a stomata.

They also couldn't figure out why westerners get so hung up about women having to cover their breasts.

Does it mean that we, compared to Papaue New Gineans, are like Afghani-Muslims compared to us, in terms of our ability to see female beauty without going nuts?

Hmm, let's think... If an Afghani woman is not covered in full burka it's her fault if she gets raped, because of the natural lust of men, and in Papaue New Guini, it's unnatural to stop a man from raping a girl when her pre pubic-hair v*gina starts looking like a stomata, which means...

... It means it's okay to go to either place and kill all the cretin-idiot males so the women can get sperm dontations from the well-controled invaders.

 

[Blackleaf]

You're joking. You're telling me you never dealt with the rat-brat kids of the tribal chieftans who took over Papaue New Guini after Australia let them go?

Their attitude was/is that a female is fair game when the flesh around her pubesco-****** starts looking like what plant biologists call a stomata.

They also couldn't figure out why westerners get so hung up about women having to cover their breasts.

Does it mean that we, compared to Papaue New Gineans, are like Afghani-Muslims compared to us, in terms of our ability to see female beauty without going nuts?

Hmm, let's think... If an Afghani woman is not covered in full burka it's her fault if she gets raped, because of the natural lust of men, and in Papaue New Guini, it's unnatural to stop a man from raping a girl when her pre pubic-hair ****** starts looking like a stomata, which means...

... It means it's okay to go to either place and kill all the cretin-idiot males so the women can get sperm dontations from the well-controled invaders.

I'm talking about places that have a sexual consent.

I'm not talking about some primitive Papuan tribe.

 

[Omicron]

I'm talking about places that have a sexual consent.

I'm not talking about some primitive Papuan tribe.

"Places that have a sexual consent"...

If a 14 year old girl wants to have sex with a 16 year old boy, is she not consenting?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

I don't care about 100 years ago.

Shall I post links to all the posts where you use things that happened 100 (or more) years ago to bolster your pathetic English ego?

 

[captain morgan]

If a 14 year old girl wants to have sex with a 16 year old boy, is she not consenting?

You ought to try that logic in front of a judge... You can report back after you sentence is done

(remember: 15 gets ya 20)

 

[Omicron]

Sounds to me like if there's any situatin where a "jury of peers" is required, "peers" being defined as a group of elders who know the kids and their circumstances, it's this one.

Why?

Hmm... le'me think. First there was the case I know of where a grown-up choir boy gloated about how it was he who seduced his priest when he was a kid, such that somewhere out there was walking around an old priest wondering when the sex-police were going to knock on his door. Who was doing the molesting there?

Second, there was the case of a 9 year old boy and his same-grade buddy who'd read sex-books and got into practicing sex with 9 year old girls from the same class before any of them could have orgasms. Who was guilty of peadophelia there?

It's a jury situation that has to be decided by adults who know the kids.

 

[captain morgan]

I don't mind mentioning that you're creeping me out

 

[Omicron]

You ought to try that logic in front of a judge... You can report back after you sentence is done

(remember: 15 gets ya 20)

Whatever... all I know is I got first-time seduced by a university woman when I was 15, and all it did was make me more confident doing it with girls my own age.

There's some sort of gender-disparity here.

If a pubescent guy gets seduced by an older women it's good for his training, whereas if a pubescent girl gets seduced by an older guy it damages her.

>shakes head< All I know is if I had created this universe, that's not how it would work.

But if people want to get legalistic about it, why not just make it that if you've stopped growing, you can't have sex with someone who is still growing, whereas if you are still growing, it should be within two years for physical-size reasons.

We have the biochemical tests able to tell if someone's cell's are dividing in a growth-verus-maintenance way.

It tells you something about how harsh natural selection must have been that we as a species are hitting puberty before we're grown up.