欧阳文风回马举行婚礼的目的，如果真的是为了“鼓吹同志文化”，那他首先应该感谢雪州马华公共投诉及服务中心主任汤木、还有陈亚伦、林坚术、邓志升及甘信誉几位牧师。
要不是上面几位人士召开那场谴责欧阳文风“伤风败俗、荼毒青少年思想”的记者会，后者回马办婚礼的新闻也不会二度占据报纸版位。汤木和几位牧师想必都是老实人，一个不小心就上了欧阳文风的圈套，免费替他这场败坏社会道德的同志婚礼卖广告了。
过去，我以为只有色情网站、暴力电玩等会荼毒青少年的思想；可是根据几位抗议者的说法，原来欧阳文风的婚礼也会带来同等的威力。我其实不太清楚区区一场同志婚礼如何荼毒青少年的思想，是不是一听到欧阳文风要办婚礼，一些原本喜欢女生的男生会突然转变口味喜欢男生、一些本来喜欢男生的女生会突然改变性向喜欢女生？
其中一位还说，根据马大医学讲师研究报告指出，同性恋与生俱来的说法并不正确，因为目前尚未有科学证据证明此说法。既然“尚未有科学证据”，何以他偏偏又相信那为马大医学讲师的“研究报告”呢？如果同性恋不是一种当事人无法选择的性取向，为何有人会故意选择一个明知道会备受歧视和排挤的身份？贪好玩吗？
就算再退一步认同同性恋是有其先天因素，也有后天因素，问题是，同性恋者伤害了谁呀？有人是不是看了太多八、九十年代的低能港产片所描述的那些一看到壮男就毛手毛脚的娘娘腔同性“基佬”，进而以为所有同性恋者都是色情狂啊？那么这个世界上的每一个异性恋者（包扩上述几位抗议者）是不是也一看到异性就狂性大发呢？
最幽默的还是那个“拉布条抗议欧阳文风婚礼”的建议。我觉得如果有心要搞的话，就干脆搞大一点，不如发动一场“Bersih3.0 - 赶尽杀绝同性恋”的大集会，大家一起替天行道，好不好？
稿投中国报《凌志纵文》专栏
70 comments:
那么这个世界上的每一个异性恋者（包扩上述几位抗议者）是不是也一看到异性就狂性大发呢？<<---LIKE它千遍也不厭倦！哈哈！
不過其實同性戀有些部分是天生的心理因素，完全對異性沒有來電。而有些是在異性戀時受了創傷，而才覺得同性的好，因為和自己相同性別的人，才更容易了解，也就是女人常說，女人比較懂女人的啦～
再有些就是雙性戀者，我身邊都很多這樣的朋友，他們都有同樣的特徵，就是說：我還沒決定我會選擇怎麼樣的對象...
抱歉，我比较老古董，我接受不到。。
同性恋是个人的私事，不是十恶不赦的大事。
上报公告天下、大事渲染自己的同性恋私事的行为才是极度令人反感的事。
如你赞同你可以大力去支持嘛！！！！！自由言论嘛！！！！！
这些人是思想还不开放，在外国同性恋很普遍了，只是马来西亚....
马华公会那群人的『道德』，是看$$$$$$$$的。 如果欧阳文风是亿万富翁，你说马华公会那些废才，会如何反应？
国文兄，写得好！同性恋跟道德有什么关系？为什么要把人家讲到像奸淫掳掠那样？
这里有谁领教过Shemale吗？
听说那牧师西班牙籍前男友Angel其实是个Shemale呢！乖乖不得了！
“I believe homosexuals are just like heterosexuals, they should be treated with respect and dignity. I announced my wedding just like my straight friends, have no intention to make it different, but in a homophobic society, it is highlighted.” ~ 欧阳文风
我不赞成同性恋， 但不会这重方式来反对。又不见那些人如此反对污桶吃钱？。真的假道德
这不是道德问题吗？？？？哇。。。反马华的人万岁。。。那我们是不是应该教育我们下一代同性可以相爱。。。我想如这样以后也没所谓的下一代了。。。那民联的政纲又要加多一项了。。。
It is his own personal issue but many, including myself, do not condone him to distort the Bible to suit his personal preference.
True Christians acknowledge all are sinners and God loves sinners but not sin. God wants sinners to repent and to be regenerated.
To non Christians, it sounds a load of rubbish and it is their choice not to accept it. However, if one wants to claim himself as a Christian pastor yet wants to hold on & preach something not conform to the Holy Scripture, it has gone overboard. It sounds like some politicians who like to hypocritically twist facts to suit their likings.
If he disagrees with the Bible regarding the preaching on homosexuality, it would be more honorable for him to leave the church and the Bible, use his own distinctive 'holy scripture' and not to confuse the non believers and those who are not well versed with the Bible.
Corruption is a public issue but homosexuality is personal issue. The former involves public well beings but the latter is something between the person and his God.
August 21, 2011 1:03 PM那位马华忍者，好心懂一懂脑筋，不反对、尊重同性恋就等于鼓励大家都成为同性恋？
那么马华不反对以赌养校，是不是要鼓励大家都去买大彩？
脑残，真的是马来西亚最严峻的考验。
至于宗教的问题，我不是基督徒，无法置评。
不过欧阳文风倒是写过不少从圣经出发解释同性恋的文章及书籍，要从宗教角度辩论的话，可以直接挑战他，可是不用鞭笞。
大家好
请问基督反对贪污吗？
同性戀是兩個人的私事，婚外情則影響到兩人以外的人。馬華不認為婚外情不道德，卻又遣責同性戀為不道德？
Mostly Crooks Association, better clean your own house, filled with liars, adulterers, corrupters ..... sure has homosexuals in closets, before you open the foul mouth to talk about morality.
Though we don't condone homosexuality, we won't vote for hypocrites, liars and corruptors. Worst is, those from Mostly Crooks Association are sycophants without real capabilities. Just a load of poppycocks.
大家好
请问马华反对贪污吗？
大家好
请问基督反对婚外性交？
请问马华反对婚外性交？
大家好
请问基督反对口交吗？
请问马华反对口交吗？
大家好
请问在基督反对的＂不好＂行为中， 同性念排第几？
请问在马华反对的＂不好＂行为中， 同性念排第几？
世界人多，就有各式各样的生活方式和喜好。只要不妨害到他人的生活，就有他们的自由。楼上有人说同性恋会绝后，那相比佛教的出家人又如何？讲到道德，贪污滥权，婚姻出轨又如何？至少同性恋者没有伤害到别人，两个人开心的生活在一起，关你屁事？吹皱一池春水，何苦来哉！
大家好
请问基督反对赌博吗？
请问马华反对赌博吗？
不好易事，今天觉得基督和马华有一樣高的道德水平。
大家就事论事就好了，不要一竹竿打翻一船人，更别牵扯人家的宗教。
＂大家好＂朋友
卖华反对欧阳是因为欧阳一直以来都反狗阵，
无关基督或同性或睹的问题，如果今天欧阳是狗阵打手，不管是同性或双性或跟动物卖华他们都一个狗样支持的，他们不会有立场只有钱和好处，所以我们应该放下，不看他们的新闻或文告，铁了心要他们下台,不管民联好或烂，我们只要换一次。
加油，努力
国文，高道德水平是好事。没问题。
那几个卖华的有种就去欧阳文风的婚礼踩场。
同性戀是可憎的罪
聖經。利未記十八：22『不可與男人茍合，像與女人一樣，這本是可憎惡的』
聖經。利為記二十：1-3『人若與男人茍合，像與女人一樣，他們二人行了可憎惡的事，總要把他們治死，罪要歸在他們身上』
這兩段經文把同性戀定義為可憎惡的罪，必須治死。
從聖經的角度來看同性戀是一種逆性。保羅在羅馬書一：26-27中提到：『因此上帝任憑他們放縱可羞恥的情慾，他們的女人把順性的用處，變為逆性的用處；男人也是如此，棄了女人順性的用處，慾火攻心，彼此貪戀，男和男行可羞恥的事，就在自己身上受這妄為當得的報應。』
在這裡，保羅直言，同性戀的行為乃是逆性。
性既是上帝給人的禮物，必須取之有道，否則，就是『妄為』。『妄為』的結果是──不能承受神的國（林前六：9-10「你們豈不知不義的人不能承受神的國嗎?不要自欺，無論是淫亂的、拜偶像的、姦淫的、作孌童的、親男色的(就是男同性戀者)‧‧‧都不能承受神的國」）。
copied from "從聖經的觀點看同性戀"
http://www.cccbc.net/message/ethics-2.html
mtchair
但是。。。。。
聖經如何看貪污?
（申10：17）因為耶和華你們的神，他是萬神之神、萬主之主、偉大有力和可 畏的神；他不徇情面，也不受賄賂。
（志下19：7）現在你們要敬畏耶和華；你們要謹慎行事，因為耶和華我們的神沒有不義，不偏待人，也不受賄賂。
（申27：25）“‘接受賄賂殺人，流無辜人的血的，必受咒詛。’眾民都要說：‘阿們。’”
（出23：8）不可受賄賂，因為賄賂能使明眼人變瞎，又能歪曲義人的話。
（傳7：7）勒索會使智慧人變為愚妄，賄賂能敗壞人心。
（箴17：23）惡人暗中接受賄賂，為要歪曲公正。
（彌7：3）他們雙手善於作惡，官長和審判官都要求報酬；達官貴人說出心裡的慾望；他們歪曲了一切。
（箴15：27）貪愛不義之財的禍害自己的家；恨惡賄賂的必可以存活。
（結22：12，22）在你裡面有接受賄賂而流人血的；你借錢給人，收取利息，並且多要；你用欺壓手段向你的鄰舍榨取不義之財；你更忘記了我。這是主耶和華的宣告。……銀子怎樣在爐中熔化，你們也必照樣在城中熔化；你們就知道我耶和華把我的烈怒倒在你身上。
所以陈亚伦、林坚术、邓志升及甘信誉几位牧师找上以贪污闻名的马华汤木是同样“伤风败俗、荼毒青少年思想”。
所以陈亚伦、林坚术、邓志升及甘信誉等支持貪污的马华是教会的无耻之徒!
mtchair
Introducing...The return of Sodom and Gomorrah,right from Malaysia !
Ready to stock up loads of lubes and go tell your 黄脸婆们 to stay aside ?!
Anon of 2.56pm.
You hit the nail on the head.
拜托~圣经里面哪一节哪一章教你们这些人去批判同性恋~同性恋到底为什么会扯上道德问题我真的不理解耶~
如果说，尊重同性恋就代表鼓吹同性恋~
那每次大家都说尊重女人，不见得全部人都是女人~
愚蠢至极~
道德？道德是不是说，爱一个人有罪？
只是爱一个人而已，干嘛把礼仪廉耻都挂在嘴边了？
不能接受的就别看吧，能接受的就祝福吧，都廾一世纪了 ，hallo 思想视野也应该进步了吧，就一个欧阳马来西人的思想就被毒害，太低能了吧
对的，对的。
杨牧师是被受害者，受戳害者，大家应该与他同在。
那些教会实在真胡来！大家站起来反，反，反！
根据卖华天才的逻辑， 那菜卖华头子公开有情妇就是鼓励有太太的马来西亚男人乱搞性关系？！
卖华人果然是天才。
菜总果然是性外高人。
哇，馬華很棒，同性戀也政治化。這次有救了。可以來個百万人反同性戀大遊行。大馬近來好像一個沒有法制的國家，什麼事都無原無故扡進政治茶杯裏
真是大業扛不上，小事多多管。真無聊呀。看看下來論到某人是政治化的清算受害者。有些政黨也好像變成私會黨一樣。可惜。
大家好
其实我不能接受同性念，也不喜欢欧阳的方式。 但那卖华不汤不水的猪头提醒我，他那性能力强的菜总有很大的道德问题。
（柔佛‧東甲20日訊）馬華總會長拿督斯里蔡細歷今日提醒黨員，民聯有一定的資源和組織來取代馬華，而非只是成為反對黨。
提外話，IQ零蛋的人都懂，有七十多席的早己超越十五席的。
蔡总果然是聪明过人。
奇怪，菜老头搞婚外情可以做马华头子木头先生可以接受哦！也不见其他党员也反对
先不说世界对同性恋的看法，圣经对同性恋是明明的反对的。（世界赞同，不等于圣经赞同，请先暂且别对此作出攻击）
欧阳先生自称“牧师”却反对圣经权威，违反基督教教义。这应该是那几位牧师发出“伤风败德”言论的愿意，作出反对的愿意。
凌先生因为一马华党员，大力杯葛攻击牧师的作为，是否过火了点呢？
纯属小人个人意见看法，在这个鼓吹言论自由的平台，请先别忙着对我发出猛烈愤怒评击。
大家好
请问基督反对贪污吗?
请问基督反对婚外性交?
如果反对与赞同是绝对的对立，这个世界根本不需要对话。
简单的说，赞同同性恋的是否也认为每一个反对同性恋的都是反对人权、反对做人的基本责任呢？
是否有许多不了解同性恋而反对同性恋就等于全部反对同性恋的都是非理性的呢？
是否反对同性恋就等于打压同性恋者呢？
是否与马华同台就没有表达反对同性恋的个人立场呢？
是否暂时（或某些时候）与马华同台就一定是支持贪污滥权呢？
如果我们真正要反对贪污滥权是否应该从教育开始，从政治醒觉开始从认识什么是政治开始呢？
回到根本大家是准备理性对话来解决矛盾还是激化矛盾？
"Just Share With You", you are right.
If Malaysians can be more matured with rational thinking, they wouldn't have to suffer for decades to bear with this corrupted BN and made use of by those 'politicians' to promote their individual's agendas and to blur the vision of the public from the major public policies which is the real issue which will affect each taxpayers' welfare.
People, let the church deals with those who want to promote homosexuality ( Or adultery, divorce, abortion etc anything against the church's doctrine ) using the church's name. Isn't it not appropriate for non Christians to be the critics of church's doctrines? The church never force your conversions and neither does the church punish apostasy more than expulsion from the church.
Think of it, had this Mr A Y write his own 'scripture' and be a guru of his own religion, what will be the reactions of the Christians/church , the Buddhists, the Muslims, the society at large and the politicians from the various parties?
Anonymous at august 21 1.15pm, Why does teaching for Gay's right are against the bible? As a Liberal Christian I must say that there are many kind of faith in Christianity.
Bible is not a book that suddenly appeared in the human world. It was written by (Jewish) men as a religion, cultural and historical teaching. The values of human being are constant changing. Gay in nature is not harmful to anyone else as long as they are happy. Besides, Jesus told us that “Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven". (Luke 6:37) Who are we to judge whether that gay is right or wrong?
西风东渐，就单凭那一句Human rights可食过山矣！
马来西亚佛教界的洪祖丰，以及出了家的我的学姐，妙赞法师，日前也在一场讲座会上，问了这句：“人家同性恋，关你甚麽事？”
我中学时代读佛学，受到贯输不可批评出家人的思想束缚，但以一个佛教徒的身份，也想发表一下我的意见。
佛说，人生於世，带着业障而来，唯有修行消除业障，方可登极乐彼岸。
佛也说，欲知前世因，今生受者是，欲知来世果，今生做者是。
是福还是祸，皆因缘和合。
一个人天生有同性恋取向，不应被歧视，但也是业障深重带来的果报。
我想，这和基督教说的，人皆有罪，耶稣须以自己的血赦免人类的罪，异曲同工。
佛陀知道人类皆有无穷业障，以致不能证得正果，於是委以僧伽使命，助使人类消除业障，离苦得乐。
怎麽可以说，各人业障，关你甚麽事？
出家人，学佛人，修行人，都在做着不关自己的事，但关着众生的事！
政治人物讲的话，那就能听则听，不能听则不听。算了！
It is really not much point to discuss the stand of the church of this same-sex unions in this blog. It is nothing unusual for the church and the world holding different opinions in issues of this kind. Indeed it is expected.
For those of you who are open minded and/or really curious/interested of wanting to know more or hear opinions/arguments different from what has been proclaimed or written by Mr A Y, there is an article written by J I Packer :
http://www.banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?344;
And other relating articles :
http://www.banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_select.php?art_search=homosexuality&offset=15;
N.B. J I Packer -Board of Governors' Professor, Theology, Regent College. MA, DPhil ( Oxford ) and is one of the preeminent evangelical theologians.
Paul H, please read mtchair ie anonymous of August 21, 2011 5:51 and 6:02 pm to answer your "Why". Luke and Acts were written by Jewish men. The church believe the Bible is Holy Spirit inspired and written accordingly.
My understanding of Anonymous of August 21, 2011 1:15 condemned sin not sinners and therefore your quotation of Luke 6:37 is out of context. It is dangerous to quote out of context else one day the politicians will tell you not to judge them for their wrongs in public eyes but acceptable to them and their supporters.
Hopefully your saying of "The values of human being are constant changing" is referring to tradition, dressing/fashion, not the basic values e.g bribery. According to your logic, the one who bribes and the the one receives bribes are both happy because they get things done according to their desire and so they 'have the right' to tell others that so long they are happy it won't affect others!
Correction to "Luke and Acts were written by Jewish men." Should be
"Luke and Acts were written by Jewish men?"
我不赞成同性恋婚姻，也不能接受欧阳文风歪曲圣经真理解释同性恋，更抗议他以基督教牧师身份公开行同性婚礼。
令我百思不解的是：使用“阿拉”字眼，扣押几千本圣经，基督教国，闯进教会骚扰晚宴等等有关基督教的事件上却不见这几位尊贵的牧师与马华领袖在马华公会召开记者招待会！？
在极端宗教保守势力横行，个人和政治自由受到严重钳制的社会，作为有影响力的博客，国文兄愿意挺身理性为同志发言，实属难能可贵。只可惜从读者的回复看来，国文兄的看法仍算是太超前啊（叹）
What I want to say is why should you define gay as a sin as a christian? As long as it doesnt affect me I wont judge him.
Anonymous at August 22 11.50, I am not Jesus to judge whether Gay is a sin or not. But for the politician stuff you mention, I am able to and will always judge from a point of man not god nor according to bible.
For me Christianity is not perfect. They always tend to judge like they are saints while they aren't hence the story of "let him who is without sin, cast the first stone". The time you judge, you cast the stone.
What i want to say to the people who likes to judge using the so-called Christian authority that “The last Christian died on the cross”~Friedrich Nietzsche
May god bless every people, Amen
To Anonymous at August 23, 2011 12:35 AM. Sry you are right, some of the New Testament's Gospel were written by Greeks.
Oh and the so called believe that holy bible written through holy spirit things? Let me remind you that there are many Biblical apocrypha that also believed by some people that they are "books proceeding from godly men"
And not to mention the Famous Book of Mormon.
Paul H,
Is the Book Of Mormon included in the Bible?
Indeed when you said there are many kind of faith in Christianity, you have revealed yourself .
Go and the read the confession of faith of the Methodist, the Presbyterian, the Assembly of God, the Baptist church, the Calvary church etc will explain clearly to you of the faith in Christianity and ask them to explain to you what is Mormon.
Have you read what mtchair ie anonymous of August 21, 2011 5:51 and 6:02 pm quotes from the Bible? If you have, you would not have argued in such manner. If you have not, then read it and make sure you understand the difference between sin and sinner before you 'judge' others' judgment of sin but not sinner which is according to the Bible.
Christians are sinners seeking mercy and grace from God and wanting to be sanctified by the power of the Holy Spirit through God's WORD. Therefore, you have totally mistaken them as throwing the stone but 'avoid' what the Lord Jesus told the sinner to repent and sin no more.
( John 8:11 "Then neither do I condemn you" Jesus declared. " Go now and leave your life of sin." Take note of the difference between 'leave' and 'live')
Let me remind you that Christians take the Bible as the WORD of God and you ought to read the Doctrine and understand the Book as a whole, else it can be very 'dangerous' to quote here and there and ended up in confusion. I can understand your thought because I was once at that stage until the Holy Spirit illuminate my mind and lead me to some very good preachers and their writing on doctrines. If you do not learn and understand doctrine, anybody can find many contrasting statements in the Bible to support one's argument, even the corruptors.
Just wish to apologize to Mr Leng for using your blog to do my duty as an ordinary Christian to clarify some points which may not be to the favour of non Christians which is not unusual because that is what make us as Christians and non Christians. Thank you for your tolerance to allow us to express our view here. Best wishes to you.
其實同性戀這個課題在美國也爭議不息。但同性戀運動一直曾加。有更多的城市通過同性伴侶合法的法制。但共和黨和荼黨份子也加強反同性合法運動。
我本人思想保守，不明同性怎能相愛成夫妻。但我無權去批評別人。如果他們犯子十戒，只有上帝有權。
从佛教的轮迥说和三世论可以了解为何佛教(相较其他宗教)从不强调或涉入同性恋和变性课题。
先从轮迥说起,其他宗教信"一世论"，既人只有一世(既没有前世和来世)。,佛教却认为人有轮迥，而我们的无数的过去世可能是男，女，畜生。另外也强调一切实相也只是暂时性。所以同不同性这一点也就不怎么强调和著重了。
以佛教的三世论来说(前世，今世，来世),所谓的前世和来世是指你前一秒的你(前世)和后一秒的你(来世)。因为果业(好与坏)的累积是随身的，是从你的无数的过去世累积至你的今世的前一秒。
好了！应该进入正题了！我这里以一个故事和几个问题来解释为何佛教(相较其他宗教)从不强调或涉入同性恋和变性课题。
如果在不久的将来，医学科技足够发达的话。你遇上这样的遭遇，你会如何取舍？
如果你因车祸而自颈部以下全部被毁,医院用仪器为你维持30分钟的寿命。但庆幸的是医生告诉你刚巧有位因脑死亡的同年龄死者愿意捐献整个身躯。如你同意的话将立即进行移植手术。问题是对方是个异性躯体。你要移植脑袋生存下去还是等待死亡？
如果你对家人有太多的不舍而选择移植。那请问你是男还是女？(记住:对方是个异性躯体)这时你又算不算同性恋？(如果你已婚,你算不算和你的另一半搞同性恋？
如果经过了十多年后的适应(异性躯体)后，医院告诉你，已有你原来性别的适合躯体供移植。你又否愿意再次转换性别？
对于同性恋和变性者来说,他们更是处于这种状况。尤其是变性者，他们这一世却要经历两次轮迥，而无法尽忘过去地背负着过去的身份生活。
而幸运的我们，为何就不能以慈悲的心去接纳他们，平等地对待他们？让他们享有的基本人权？
The person up stair wrote a very good perspective using Buddhism principles. Rather than live the principles and teaching of our religion, we often started to play God ourselves and pass judgment on others.
我們在講人權，在提倡人權，在喊著提倡人權，自由選擇宗教和性向不是人權嗎？為何大家在正義凜凜的喊著人權至上時，在另一方面對同性戀者窮追猛打，狗咬不放？每個人有自己選擇的路，那管同性戀是不是天生，這就是他人的選擇。我們可以選擇不接受同性戀，但不應該對他人做出批評，甚至以宗教的角度去批評，如果有審判之日，就由上帝去判歐陽文風的罪，這是他和上帝的事情，和我們無關啊~那群牧師應該比任何人相信有審判之日，那就由上帝去判啦~為何要透過發表這種言論來判他人的罪，難到歐陽文風就不是上帝的孩子嗎？如果他們說不是，那，請問這是否是上帝的旨意？還是有人自我詮釋上帝的話？
Yian, would you care to sit back and read the following?
http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=18156:true-christians-support-neither-homosexuality-nor-hatred&Itemid=2
I agree that those pastors should not have approached a political party to express issues that is pertaining to their faith. The whole issue has been badly handled and politicized. Since Mr O Y is a 'pastor' and claimed himself as a Christian, so it is the Christian family affair and should be dealt with by the church.
Just like you, expressing your support of gay rights, the Christians here are only expressing their support of their faith. Christians are also human being, can't they have their rights to express their understanding of the Scripture? Are you also one who can't differentiate between sin and sinner? Christians referring to sin in the context of their religion, no right to do so? Don't the Muslims and the Jews have the right not to eat pork? Won't you grant the Buddhists' rights to express their views on eating meat and their beliefs? How much is your understanding of Christian teaching and faith or have you researched the subject or just relying on 1 source of information?
Can you not look from another angle that the Christians really believe what is written in the Bible and out of love they hope sinners like themselves will repent and enjoy God's blessings? Just like a wife or parents because of love will keep persuading their loved ones from activities that they believe will harm him and the family, don't they have the right to do so?
Your post "狗咬不放？每個人有自己選擇的路，那管同性戀是不是天生，這就是他人的選擇。我們可以選擇不接受同性戀，但不應該對他人做出批評" You mean Christians have no right to object their Scripture being twisted according to what they know? So, you don't mind if your house or party's rule being twisted by others or your political enemies? So, it is back to somebody can have more rights than others?
http://justsharevyou.blogspot.com/2011/08/blog-post_3190.html
-- Paul H said, “The values of human being are constant changing. Gay in nature is not harmful to anyone else as long as they are happy.”
-- Anonymous, August 23, 2011 1:09 said “我本人思想保守，不明同性怎能相愛成夫妻。但我無權去批評別人。如果他們犯子十戒，只有上帝有權。”
Few years ago, in Germany, a brother and a sister of the same parents, claimed they love each other and live together and have children. They were charged in court.
Not long ago in one of our neighbouring country, a father and his daughter had consensual sexual relationship and were charge in court.
Paul H and the above-mentioned Anonymous and those who share their views, can you say heartily that you won't be judgmental in the above-mentioned 'relationship' ( Not the person ) if they were your family members?
If you can, then you truly hold your principle of not judgmental in any relationship so long the parties involved are happy. Then be prepared to accept the next group of people who have sex with animals ( Who can tell if the animal is not consent to it? ). This is already happening in this world though they are rare, only few cases being reported because the society does not condone such behaviour. ( Like homosexuality in the old days.)
If you cannot, why not? Who set the limit of liberalism? To those people, you are playing God also.
Paul H,
your quote 'The last Christian died on the cross~Friedrich Nietzsche'
Do you know that Friedrich Nietzsche died of mental breakdown?
I totally agree with the "而幸运的我们，为何就不能以慈悲的心去接纳他们，平等地对待他们？让他们享有的基本人权？" and the "Rather than live the principles and teaching of our religion, we often started to play God ourselves and pass judgment on others."
Anonymous AUGUST 25, 2011 12:20 PM,
I respect your right as a Christian to judge with your value. As for me the so-called doctrine mean nothing to me. Religion to me are imperfect as they were created by human. The God's will and holy spirit things? I knew it since I was born.
And yes I do notice that Nietzche was died of mental breakdown and I fully understand what Book of Mormon is. What I want to say is, it works both way. How you see the Book of Mormon, that is how atheist and skeptic sees the Bible.
Thanks for your sharing and god bless you.
Sry for bothering you.
其实鼓励同性恋出柜不一定等于鼓励同性恋。
Paul H,
Christians or those who don't consent to same sex union or homosexuality also doesn't mean they don't encourage them to come out of the closet either.
The point is it is not the right way to condemn people who want to defend their faith but allowing oneself more right to criticize other's faith.
It is also not appropriate to comment or even pervert Christians' faith without sufficient knowledge.
Christians are taught to be meek, tolerant and patient but it doesn't mean they are not to defend their stand.
Paul H,
"The God's will and holy spirit things? I knew it since I was born."
If you have known God's will since you were born, does it mean you know how to read God's word soon you come out of your mother's womb? Then you must be a genius exceeding Einstein's IQ. If you know the 'holy spirit thing' then you should know not to use the word 'thing'. Have you experience it?
Load of poppycock!
"而幸运的我们，为何就不能以慈悲的心去接纳他们，平等地对待他们？让他们享有的基本人权？"
如 Anonymous August 25, 2011 12:20 PM 說的，你們可以以慈悲的心去接纳那些親兄妹結為夫妻生下一代，親生父女有 ‘你情我願’ 的親密性關係，人與獸的 親密性關係嗎？他們也是人，也有 基本人权呀！
如不能，為什麼不能？他們現在也是如同性戀以前的少數一樣呀！ 他／她們也會質疑你們假衛道，扮上帝或 佛主或。。。。
這個世界的法理 總該有根源，有所本的吧!
To dear Anonymous,
Sry I lose. Every words of Christian is true and holy. Holy Spirit called me to shut up and go live my normal life.
Sry mr. Leng for flooding your blog.
FSM bless the world. May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage RAmen
LV 名牌有很多冒牌貨，而這些仿製的也分等級。如果製造這 A 級的 仿製商說正牌的 LV 不完美，他的 A 貨比 正牌的好，所以可以用 正牌的名義賣，如果LV 公司企圖糾正，那是鞭撻，打壓嗎？
為何自認製造的更好的 A 貨 仿製商不要或不敢自創自己的品牌，寧可不避魚目混珠之嫌而用 LV 的名呢？
Post a Comment