is the common denominator?
"homo-sex" (the top set of images are all men with women)!
The common denominator in what
the Apostle Paul
describes in Romans 1, is:
can we be sure?
Because the Old Testament has no law against female/female sexual
intimacy; And the only prohibition on male/male intimacy is in the
case of man laying with mankind
HE LIES WITH
(Penetration) Lev 18:22/20:13
See: Fundamentalists don't want to admit that Romans
chapter 1 denounces ANAL*SEX* because
'self-righteous' bigots want to be able to give it to their female
partners up the poop-chute without having to worry about being
labeled abominations themselves
(although it has been suggested by some that this
very act is what spawns fundamentalists).
By the time you've been through this site &
visited some others, we hope that your thinking will be so different that
you'll have genuine peace of mind & know that the loud booming voices from the
& right are those of blind leaders - leading the blind. It's also hoped
that you'll become involved with
spreading the truth! This can
lives, & build real self-esteem.
It's also interesting to note that Hebrew tradition
human excrement as "unclean" (grievously sinful to
come into contact with). It literally is the same
word as translated "abomination". A fascinating look into
this matter can be found in the book of Ezekiel where God was
instructing the prophet on how to conduct his life in the open
as a testimony AGAINST Israel's rebelliousness. This is
what the text says (& I will use color to highlight
germane to my point):
Use dried human waste to start a fire, then bake the bread
on the coals where everyone can watch you.
Eze 4:13 When I scatter the
people of Israel among the nations, they will also have to
eat food that is unclean, just as you must do.
Eze 4:14 I said, "LORD God,
please don't make me do that! Never
in my life have I eaten food that would make me
unacceptable to you. I've never eaten anything that
died a natural death or was killed by a wild animal or
that you said was unclean."
Eze 4:15 The LORD replied, "Instead
of human waste, I will let you bake your bread on a fire
made from cow manure.
There is a massive lesson here. First, Ezekiel was
extremely distressed because as his mission as a prophet, he had
been instructed by God to use dried human waste as a fire source
to prepare his food over. He objected & God respected that
objection by letting him use cow manure instead. (Yes,
that is a fuel source in many parts of the world).
From the text - we can conclude the following:
- Since God does not command to sin (Jam
1:13), the conclusion is that the
FIRE would have purified the human
dung. Amazingly ... today we know fire will sterilize
- killing all microorganisms - in addition to snapping the
very molecules to constitute the waste by the process of
super-oxidation . Ezekiel did not know this - hence his
objection. Because of his weak conscience on the matter,
God made a provision for a substitute (which parallels what
Saul/Paul taught about weak consciences. See
I Cor 8:7 ). Seamless continuity.
- Glaringly obvious however is the general belief that human
waste was viewed with extreme contempt.
Those wishing to partake in
anal-acts may be able to justify their actions if they first
light a fire inside the arse of the recipient; -- & then
appeal to Ezekiel 4.
- Anal sex (Male/Female or Male/Male) was undoubtedly viewed
as an "abominable" practice (as it involves direct contact with
- This belief is in harmony with Romans 1, & the sections of
the Law of Moses that condemn men laying with mankind
AS HE LIES with a woman. (Men
don't penetrate men & women have appropriate physiology so as
to not require contact with that which is the 'abomination').
Men & Men? The Prohibition
According to the Torah, the
following commandment was given to Moses,
by God. Violating it brings about a death penalty (under
In this respect, the commandment is similar to the very first given in
Genesis. According to
the Scripture, God gives law intending for life (I.E: for the same
reason we command children not to play in traffic). Because of the nature of this commandment, we
need to bind the reading of it very closely with the actual
words, & within the greater context of the other Laws of God.
Many Christian "scholars" [sic] do not follow those very
important principles in this subject area. Why? Bad company
corrupts good character; -- Too much time with the snake!
"And a man who lies with a
mankind as one lies with a woman, both of them have done a detestable
thing, dying they shall die; their blood on them."
- Lev 20:13
the acts shown in the frame above or to the right violate
The Law of Moses
describes exactly "how" man can "lie" with a woman. Yes,
"sex" with women has
a legally recognized specific form under Moses' law. In the
Law of Moses, the only lawful way "sex" was recognized with a
woman was penetrative - vaginal. It was evidence of that very
thing that was checked for when a marriage was arranged & consummated
under Moses Law. The very fact that the Law
forbids intercourse during a woman's menstrual cycle confirms this (Lev
20:18). After all, if lawful sexual relations could be done apart
from penetrative vaginal sex, then the prohibition on sex during
menstruation is moot! Under Moses law, sex with women was limited to
penetration in the 'proper' hole. This understanding becomes an
used to define the exact prohibition in Leviticus 20:13 above. The
phrase "as he lies with a woman" means "penetrative"; And since men have
no "front hole" to 'penetrate', then only one other "hole" in
the pubic region remains (for those bent on penetration). Moses law simply makes it clear that "You
don't do that thing!". Note from the 2nd proof
above: Contact with human
feces was also considered an "abomination". The text is in agreement with
itself - as it must be! God is not the author of confusion.
What was considered "sex' under Moses Law was not the slithering-love
free-form of the Karma-Sutra! So part of the problem in
interpreting the Scripture happens when the interpreter uses his own
"Karma-Sutra" standards (forming unjust measures) of behavior to misjudge what the phrase "as he lies with
a woman" literally means under Moses' Law! They err not knowing the
Scriptures! The commandment forbids a man from using a man's
anus as a proxy for a woman's vagina. And by creating the
prohibition - it bans the
single most dangerous fetish-act that we know of: AnalSex.
And that is PRECISELY/ONLY what Leviticus 20:13 forbids (Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius).
does NOT OUTLAW same
gender intimacy (But the specific act of AnalSex). And that
prohibition makes PERFECT sense because of how incredibly
dangerous we know that act is. And because
it is so perilous and good at spreading diseases that entire
populations can become infected - even fatally and not even realize
that they are spreading diseases themselves (often incurable &
deadly) to other people until it is far to late and the inevitable
damage will unstoppably manifest! AnalSex destroys entire
civilizations once in widespread practice. This is the REASON WHY
the Torah names the practice a capital crime!
Paul wrote: "Flee fornication.
Every sin which a man may practice is without the body, but he that
commits fornication sins against his own body." - I Cor 6.
OBVIOUS: Anal sex is a major vector for disease (STD's
like AIDS). It's not very
pleasurable for the recipient; & the mechanics of the act cause other
problems -- well documented. To quote a man who loves men,
but is not
into anal sex: "Anyone who thinks sticking you penis into a hole full of
bacteria & shit constitutes 'sex', - probably keeps their head up there too!"
Just as God had said in Genesis that they could
not eat of the one tree, - but, that single commandment was
to "neither shall ye touch it"; -- Likewise has a commandment been issued
men "lying with mankind as
one lies with a woman", -- likewise, been lawlessly
expanded to "not touch"!
It is a CAPITAL CRIME under
Moses law to falsely accuse another person/s of a capital crime (Dt.
19:16-19)! Read that until it sinks in.
the Law in Lev 20:13 is specifically forbidding anal penetration --
the same form that male/male rape takes!
doesn't "gay sex",
mean "anal"? 0riginally, N0 ... BUTT today...
If you say "Gay Sex"; -Virtually everyone hears: "Anal Sex"...
"And the commandment,
which was for life, was found, as to me, itself to be unto death: for sin,
getting a point of attack by the commandment, deceived me,
and by it slew me." - Paul. Or in other words: "And
I made the discovery that the law whose purpose was to defend life - had
become a cause of death: For I was tricked and put to death by sin,
which found an opportunity to deceive by misrepresenting the law's intent."
of my teachers at yeshiva decided to introduce me to his
Rabbi – who was one of the big godol’um in Jerusalem;
--someone who’s regarded worldwide as a po’se.
When he talked about the
specific prohibition in Torah,
-you know: against
-& wanted to make that very clear to me.
And when I told him that I did understand that, and that
I did not have
He was a little perplexed and said “Then
what is the problem?
So you don’t have sex with men…”.
And I said, "Well, I do;
-but we don’t do that."
This is a godol, -learned in Torah – learned in so many
worldly facts as well; -but he suddenly was at a loss.
as far as he knew…
The fact is that many, many men who have had relationships with other men
involving physical intimacy (eros)
have never desired nor participated in anal penetration. Most are initially repulsed by the idea!
repulsion is a proper feeling. "Homo" "sex" does
"anal sex" by default, -- but society has swallowed a lie (pushed heavily
by the gay-community itself) that asserts the two are
synonymous. Does the image below look like anal sex is part
"Male/Male intimacy" in this context? No! What the picture shows is
called "FR0T" - in which 2 guys make full body contact, & enjoy
each other slow-cudl'n & luvn.
It's male-to-male, completely equal & contrary to common
teaching, is NOT forbidden by
the Scriptures! Consider: The Scripture says that David loved
Jonathan as he LOVED HIMSELF. So, what ACT does a guy do with
himself if he's need'n some lov'n? So when the Scripture says that
these guys loved each other as they loved themselves; - What is being
implied as to the nature of the relationship? Take the blinders off!
The Hebrew texts virtually always veil intimate descriptions in terms that
make you consider the textual implications. That's why people who
understand Song of Songs know that it's soft-core porn veiled in similes,
metaphors & allegories.
Fact: 2 out of every 3 guys find this image to be visually
stimulating to some degree.
stark contrast -Anal sex is an extremely dangerous behavior; - A behavior that many self-professed "Hetero"sexual
couples engage in as well as "gAys". It's bad judgment to have anything to do with it
no matter what a person's "orientation" supposedly
is. Ironically, regardless of how dangerous the act of ass-sex is,
are people who will staunchly defend their "right" to partake in it.
That shouldn't be surprising ... after all, it was men who fuck'd sheep
who were responsible for the spread of syphilis into human populations in the first place;
anyone who wants to look can find groups of people who will staunchly defend their
"right" to fuck all sorts of animal species. Interestingly, but not
surprisingly, these same people seem to insist that spreading their
death-disease buffet into the rest of humanity is their "right" as well.
You see, evil/undiscerning people simply don't care who they hurt as long
as they get what they want. What G0YS promote is mutual
affection, safety & considering the other person first. Anal
sex, by the very nature of what it consists of, -- is something that
G0YS absolutely do not engage in (the
rejection of which is what
starkly defines us as G0YS)!
It's primarily 3 main groups who promote the message that "gay sex = anal".
And society for the most part no longer questions the assertion. These are:
religious right is a major spreader of the gangrenous teaching
that "gay sex =anal sex"; Look at the
signs in the picture to the right. The sign on the far right that reads:
"FAG = ANAL SEX = |DEATH-SYMBOL|" summarizes their message that all
men who luv men are into "anal-sex". (G0YS are pleased to expose
them as the liars they are.)
Then we have the gay-media & porn industry
on the 'liberal left' (with their
"anything goes" selfishness, -- unchecked by any healthy aversions);
Finally the "health" establishments backed by
government/s who promote the so-called concept of "safe-sex" with
slogans like "Use a condom EVERY time". (See how the unspoken
lie is built into the slogan. After all: If you need a condom
every time, there must be penetration every time, - which
implies that gay-sex = anal).
Just as Eve was deceived that simply
touching was a forbidden act (subject to death) , so are those
who believe the lie that male/male intimacy "NAWGAH" (touching) is
what was forbidden by the Scripture; --
Or worse, - that male/male intimacy must always be "anal
penetration" . It's a deadly buffet of lies spread by those who
claim to be the "experts" of everything social ("Professing themselves
wise, they became as fools..."! - Paul) Who do you suppose is ultimately
behind these murderous messages?
The devastation of prejudice (prejudgment
based on bad information), disease & death is the result of an
accomplished liar! See, sexual affection is a natural appetite.
In the garden of humanity (fleshed & dressed by God), the Serpent still
insists that God has said that same-sex attracted people cannot eat from
ANY of the trees. The fact is, that we are only commanded not to
eat from a
'tree' (used figuratively) that brings harm. See, the entire
law is summed up in a couple of commandments:
1) Love God.
2) Love people. Love works no ill toward its neighbor -- therefore
it fulfills the law (Gal 5:14)!
sex (not homo-sex) is forbidden under Moses' law because
it has a tremendous affinity to cause harm in so many ways. Would
you let a child play in a septic tank? See: It's not 'God
being controlling for the sake of control'! God forbade certain acts
(I.E: anal-sex) because such acts can be absolutely devastating -- often deadly.
However, other forms of loving expression that are not forbidden, - are
not forbidden (Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius ;-)
Men who luv men, but abstain from anal-sex have as their testimony:
One of the lowest rates of sexually transmitted diseases among any
demographic. Lesbians are probably the only group that is lower
in STD incidences (And you'll notice the Law of Moses says
NOTHING forbidding female/female intimacy, - despite how
rabidly fundamentalism assails it)! Some may argue that Paul forbids
it in Romans 1. That would be a neat trick: The man who instructed "not to
go beyond what was written" (I Cor 4), suddenly going beyond what was
written?! Not at all! In Romans 1, Paul describes acts that
were part of pagan idolatry practices often done in clear public forum
(how else would he have known of them to describe so fully)! In
describing acts of both men & woman, he uses the term "likewise"
(v.27 or "in the same way"). Since the
Law of Moses does not mention female/female sexual intimacy, Paul's use of
the term "likewise" CANNOT be a blanket
condemnation on acts that are called "homosexual" by today's standards; --
because if it was, he would be contradicting a basic principle of law - of
NOT going beyond what is written in the statute. Paul is saying that the acts that
are worthy of death are both forbidden under the Law of
Moses (laws which we can look up). So, what act/s would "likewise"
apply to in Paul's exposé? It is writtten: "You
must not bring the earnings of a female
prostitute or of a
into the house of the LORD your God to pay any vow, because the LORD your
God detests them both." - Dt
23:18. Now, if you look carefully at the verse
allegedly condemning what many incorrectly label as "homosexuality", from
Leviticus 20:13, -- it now becomes obvious that this is probably about a
form of male prostitution in which men take on a passive, feminine role: "If
a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both
of them have done what is detestable.". It's not a
blanket prohibition of male/male intimacy: It's about specific practices that
the man (via anal penetration)!
In CONTEXT, Paul's use of the terminology "women put aside the natural
use" does not mean lesbianism (as there is no Law in Moses against that)!
Paul is talking about women who were having anal sex with men!
The meaning is made clear in the next verse where Paul discusses men who
burned their lust toward other men RECEIVING IN THEMSELVES THE
PENALTY (How did it [the death-penalty / disease] get
IN them)! If it
was Lesbianism Paul was critiquing, his description, coupled with the term
"in the same manner", would make no sense. However, a woman who puts
the "natural use" & has Anal-sex with a man, - does indeed "RECEIVE
WITHIN" (get it?)! In this light, it becomes painfully obvious that Paul's expose' on
anal-sex in Romans 1, - has been used for centuries to baselessly
condemn a group of people - to whom it was never intended!
Paul's condemnation (germane to the discussion here) is about the perverse practice of anal sex!
Romans 2:1 right back at
ya religious reicht!
saw that coming! The misrepresentation of Paul's writing by those who
condemn mere same sex affection is precisely what Peter wrote
would happen! Check this out: "His letters contain
some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable
people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own
destruction." - Peter discussing Paul's writing/s, & those who distort
them. How does this "destruction" happen? That's easy to
see: When the act which is often deadly (anal sex) is not identified for what it
is, - but instead, ANOTHER act (same-sex intimacy) is named as the
"abomination", - a deadly dynamic is set up on several levels:
God's character becomes marred -- as He is
portrayed as an arbitrary rule maker, unable to acknowledge the needs
& affections of
people; -- but just on a power trip as "God". (This is precisely
what the Serpent proposed in Eden by suggesting that God had forbidden
eating from ALL of the trees.)
By changing the command, the forbidden act
is not seen for the deadly peril it is. So at this point, you'll
hear about self-pronounced "holy-straight" couples engaging in anal sex
(the 'abomination'), & ironically, pointing
the finger of judgment at same-gender couples & calling them
'abominations' (for simply being same gender attracted).
An evil irony, yes? God is not mocked. The "straight judgemental
arse-fuckers" will end up in the very place they so callously
threatened the same-sex couple with!
Men who love men are told by
so-called "Christians" that God rejects all same-sex intimacy &
that they must 'change' to be accepted. These self-righteous
judges with a flawed view of holiness effectively shut up the kingdom of
God in men's faces -- just as Jesus said the religious hypocrites of his
day did. So, feeling rejected by God for who they pair-bond with,
the victims of that misinformation often (in an attempt to deal with
horrible depression about being allegedly rejected by God) indulge in all sorts of revelry
(after all ... if you're damned for just existing, then why follow any
code of ethics?). Self righteous bigots then seize on observing
those shattered lives to use as alleged "evidence" against same-sex "lifestyles"
-- once again missing the point that it isn't same-sex attractions that
cause the misery, but violating Godly principles (having analsex for
observed that it was the offspring of the Devil who so religiously
promoted lies that destroyed people. So next time you see
Phelps, Falzarano, Hinn, Falwell,
Robertson, Kennedy, D'Aandrea & other "evangelists" playing the "anti-same-sex
you'll understand who they really speak for! Deadly
Because the forbidden act (anal sex) is not
against by these bigots, but lumped together with something not
forbidden (same gender intimacy) by their lax, unjustified prejudice; -concepts simultaneously end up being
subtracted from the word of God.
Here is the result: "I
warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If
anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues
described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book
of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life
and in the holy city, which are described in this book." -
Paul explains in the chapter directly after
the one these unstable men use to lawlessly judge people with
for merely loving their own gender: "You,
therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for
at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself,
because you who pass judgment do the same things!" - Rom 2:1
in action: "ExGay" Liars exposed!).
Paul continues ..."Now we know that God's
judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. So when
you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things
(Ex-gays: "Such as a man thinks in his heart so
is he"!), do you think you will
escape God's judgment? Or do you show contempt for the riches of his
kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads
you toward repentance? But because of your stubbornness
and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for
the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed."
- Paul's message to those who condemningly judge the ones he
describes in Romans I because there were those in the church doing
the same sort of things! That message is sooo deep & on several
levels. Paul's writing was one that encouraged love, respect & stopping
the endless critical-judgmentally of the outsiders! (I don't know where modern fundamentalism
thinks God is going to come up with 144,000 men who are undefiled with
women [Rev 14], but lots of G0YS have a good idea ;-)
Oh, one last point. Paul says that those who judge others condemn
themselves because they do the same things. I had one legalist ask
me how that could be true if he didn't ever have sexual activity with
another guy. My answer devastated him. Paul wrote: "There
is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free,
male and female, for you are all one in
Christ Jesus.." - Gal 3:28 Paul taught that in Christ, there
is no MALE & FEMALE;
-- therefore that fundamentalist & his wife are the "same type of genderless spirit being"
in Christ. Since this legalist's condemnation was on same-gender
sexual activity, & Paul teaches that he & his wife are the same
(HOMO) in Christ; - Then his own standard of
judgment against people of (HOMO)-gender
having sexual relations, -- turned against him! The measure he was
using came right back to judge him!
This concept of "same-sex" also applies to self-stimulation
(masturbation), since the one giving the 'pleasure' is the same gender
as the one 'receiving' it! It is written: "By the law will no flesh
be justified!" So, we G0YS
appeal to common-sense, -- not to use our freedom as a license (- never to hurt
other people); -- But, as a foundation for living life as men free to
express deep & physical affection to other men - while greatly respecting
the image they were made in. "Love works no ill toward his neighbor,
therefore: Love is the fulfilling of the Law!" -