Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Oklahoma pastor: You can’t refrigerate homosexuality like pork, so it is still a sin

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Ok, this guy is just beyond any parody that I might care to dream up. Just barking insane!

    1. Tom Townsend 28 Jan 2013, 6:49pm

      Yeah, we’ve got lots of these idiots. Some of them run for president.

      1. I don’t think even Mitt was as bat-shit insane as this guy :)

        1. Liam the God 28 Jan 2013, 9:44pm

          It’s a Photo Finish!

        2. Romeny never told anyone he was a Mormon Bishop.

          Imagine what the country would be like in the USA for gays if he won.

          Realize how the repubs in the usa are going so bat – poo that they had to not only kiss the derrierer of the cath bishops, long ago sell their soul to the racist evangelical / southern baptists and now want to capture the mormon vote of the people who were the biggest supporters of prop Hate

    2. If you think Peter is bad, you should listen to Bryan Fischer! Pure madness!

  2. Staircase2 28 Jan 2013, 5:44pm

    What an ungodly idiot

    1. PantoHorse 29 Jan 2013, 2:18pm

      Quite:

      He continued: “So that’s the problem, they want to pick and choose what they want to have and then to dismiss it as this isn’t what the Bible says, it’s foolishness.”

      Hypocrisy much?

  3. Jock S. Trap 28 Jan 2013, 5:50pm

    Hypocrite, plain and simple!!

  4. BananaTwix 28 Jan 2013, 5:51pm

    This sounds desperate …

  5. Staircase2 28 Jan 2013, 5:56pm

    He should read this
    (Actually he should just READ…)

    http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/Leviticus.php

    1. Liam the God 28 Jan 2013, 6:08pm

      Good link: I love the interpretations bit, especially “(New English Translation, 2005): You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act.”. If we’re absolutely BIOLOGICALLY ACCURATE it’s completely impossible for a man to have sex with a man as a woman because of the lack of the Female Front Bottom (that’s the proper Medical term, right? ;) )!!

      1. You’re forgetting trans men, but, yeah.

        1. Liam the God 28 Jan 2013, 9:51pm

          Did they have them in the BCE days? It’s a shame these “Holy” commandments haven’t been updated since people started thinking “Hang on, how come God only speaks to some illiterate Shepherd in the Middle East WITH NO WITNESSES when he gives these Holy Commandments??”. I’m sure that God is just busy, I mean he can’t be everywhere at the same time…. Oh, wait, YES HE CAN! It SAYS SO in the BIBLE!!

          1. oh yea… they had them in BCE days… Check Ovid’s “Metamorphoses”, Book XII, 210-535.

            It’s the Pirithous and Hippodamia wedding scene where the mythical Battle of the Centaurs breaks out and the trans-sexual Lapith, Caenus, is crushed by the centaurs with rocks and tree trunks… but Caenus had a divine parent so he resurrected as a bird with sandy colored feathers on his head…

            The original marble art work is found in the British Museum in the Greek Sculptures section… no mention there about refrigerators though… no mention of Oklahoma either.. mmmm

    2. GulliverUK 28 Jan 2013, 6:53pm

      Oh Staircase2, that’s a fantastic link. Also ties in with those I gave further down. Well written and put together.

    3. For you even to post that link implies that you take it all seriously?! Surely, you must know that this is the rambling of some ancient priest with a vested interest in making the Israelite tribe bigger and stronger than any other? The catholics have done the same thing over the years … introduced ‘sins’ which outlawed anything that didn’t result in more little catholics. I think we need to get a grip on reality and stop giving such credence to an old novel. It’s caused more misery and death than anything else on the planet.

    4. Definitely an idiot that is beyond help. There is a verse in the bible he might have overlooked: “And there be eunuchs that have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of God’s sake”.
      1 in 200 people is born with some level of intersex condition, from the hormonal and biochemical to the metabolic, chromosomal, gonadal, or other types. Most won’t know unless they find out much later by accident.
      Jesus mentions a person who is a water carrier who is a man, a job normally done by women.
      Whoever wrote the bible did not know about snails, ants, parthenogenetic lizards, and clownfish where the mother can become the father to replace a lost female and vice versa. They’d never found bonobos, the pansexual primate most closely related to humans. Other human societies can be polyandrous (multiple husbands), so it’s not set in stone what anything/anyone is and should be.

  6. Sits back and smiles and watches the Christian fundies make complete t1ts of themselves, destroying the last shreds of rational argument about their religion and it’s place in the modern world… no seriously, do go on. How about tackling rape and slavery next? :gets popcorn:

  7. Liam the God 28 Jan 2013, 6:03pm

    “Is there anything else we can Pick and Choose from in the Bible?” “Well, we’ve managed to get around the ‘Thou Shalt Not Kill’ for a good few years just by saying ‘It’s ok if they worship in a slightly different way to you’, we got around the Shellfish and Pork thing because of the Fridge, we just ignore the “Cloth made from two different threads” thing because Polyester wasn’t around back then…..”

    1. “Let’s not forget we sailed around ‘Thou Shalt Not Kill’ by saying the death penalty is okay, because it only happens to bad people.”

      1. Not really the best argument, since the Bible is full of killing. It’s also translated “murder”, which makes more sense in context.

        The fridge thing is just ridiculous, though. Social anthropologists, theologians and the like have spent generations trying to work out the rationale behind Jewish dietary laws, as there is no one theory that fits all of them. And he thinks it’s about fridges.

  8. And this from a person whose job it is to interpret the bible. Based on his logic, we should be eating airplanes because they’ve been invented and they fly like birds – and we eat birds.

    1. Staircase2 4 Feb 2013, 2:49pm

      …I suspect ‘job’ is stretching it a bit far to be honest…lol

    2. yum – tasty wheel-arch!

  9. We’re living through christianity making its last belching sounds before it dies off.

    Next he’ll be telling us that the world was created in 7 days, well 6, because the man with the white beard who created it had a day off on Sunday.

  10. Toni Browning-Early 28 Jan 2013, 6:09pm

    The interesting thing about these idiots is that they ignore passages in the NT that state very clearly “If you follow the Israelite laws (meaning the book of Leviticus) Christ has become useless to you. (Gal.5:3,4) There are MANY more, yet the fundamentalists completely ignore them.

  11. So there we have it, we just need to move to one of the poles and presto, homosexuality is refrigerated, acceptance for all! Yay

  12. GulliverUK 28 Jan 2013, 6:30pm

    “porno pete” as he’s known by most of the US LGBT community.

    The word “abomination” in our language is not a good translation of the meaning of the two words used in the Bible. Generally dietary prohibitions use the Hebrew word “Shekets” for eating foods which are forbidden, and “To’evah” is used when something might offend religious people or is considered prohibited. There’s another word “piggul” which is also translated in to our English word “abomination”. But our word adomination has force and power far beyond the simple meanings of prohibited practice or ritually unclean of the original Hebrew use. One tribe eating with another was considered “To’evah”

    Have a read here;
    http://www.answers.com/topic/abomination

    1. Frank Boulton 30 Jan 2013, 9:42am

      Yes, the word “Piggul” is used in a couple of verses. Whereas, “SHE-qets” and “to-eh-VAH” refer to things that are unacceptable in any state. “Piggul”, judging from internal evidence, is used of things spoilt or gone off.

      The point about the word “abomination” is that it changed meaning, almost as soon as it came into our language in the 14 Century and has acquired greater and greater pejorative connotations ever since. The fact about homophobes is that they don’t want an accurate translation of the Bible but mistranslations that suit their own agenda. That’s why they won’t replace the word. The proliferation of references to sodomites in many modern English translations is through wilfull and hateful mistranslation. The evidence that we are exploring here can be used to discredit religious homophobes – as if we could discredit them any more than they do themselves.

  13. This made my day. The more that religious fundamentalism gets equated with insanity the better. So if we find a way to refrigerate homosexuality it’s no longer a sin? :P

  14. GulliverUK 28 Jan 2013, 6:37pm

    If you take some clobber passages, you can see they’ve been mistranslated.

    http://hoperemains.webs.com/leviticus1822.htm

    Lev 18 22 corrected translated says;

    “And with a male, thou shalt not lie down in a woman’s bed; it is an abomination.”

    But who is lying down in the bed – it doesn’t say which gender, it could be adultery, it could be two men — but why would two gay men be lying down in a “women’s” bed? Gay men have their own beds. If it was a married man lying with another man then the sin would be bisexuality and adultery, or just the adultery. Who can say for sure.

    Is the verse actually talking about Shrine Temple Prostitutes and the practices of child sacrifice and worship of Molech?

    http://www.gaychristian101.com/Shrine-Prostitutes.html

    That seems entirely possible, although Christians should perhaps not be referring to the Hebrew Bible as it was written for the Hebrews, their religion is really the New Testament (a lot of which is fake).

    1. I might also be talking about the bed a woman slept on while she was having her period. Touching anything that a woman touched during that time was considered to make the person unclean.

      1. Frank Boulton 30 Jan 2013, 9:16am

        I would dispute the assertion that the two anti-gay verses in Leviticus can be accurately translated at all.

        Firstly, the command-form of the verb in both verses is masculine singular. It has been interpreted throughout the ages as addressing a man. As the masculine is the default gender in Hebrew, it could be taken as a commandment addressing women, too. So, it condemns male homosexuality and female heterosexuality. Et voila, the Bible wants women to be lesbians. Seriously, though the point is that it’s gobbledygook.

        The verses say that you mustn’t lie with a “za-CHAR”, which isn’t exactly a man but a male of any species. This casts serious doubt on any modern translation making sense out of the original.

        For me the important words are “mish-ke-VEH Ish-SHAH”. Ancestral wisdom says that the mean “as you lie with a woman.” These words make no literal meaning and this leads to the conclusion that the text is very probably corrupted. The point is again that it’s gibberish.

    2. Frank Boulton 30 Jan 2013, 10:10am

      Neither of the two anti-gay verses in Leviticus use the words for male or female temple prostitutes.

      The Queen James Translation: http://queenjamesbible.com/gay-bible/ tries to make the th offense male temple prostitution by inserting the words “in the Temple of Molech.” This plays straight into the hands of fundamentalists, as the Hebrew text doesn’t justify such a mistranslation.

      The verses both say, “You shall not lie” with a masculine singular verb. However, it could refer to women as the masculine was the default gender in Biblical Hebrew. But is that were the case these two verses would condemn male homosexuality and female heterosexuality. Obviously, gobbledygook.

      The strongest argument in our favour is that the words translated as “as with womankind” in the KJV have no literal meaning, which strongly suggests that the text is corrupt and therefore not fit to put into practice.

    3. Frank Boulton 31 Jan 2013, 10:18am

      Lev 18:22 & 20:13 are not exactly gender non-specific. The command in both verses is a masculine singular verb. However, the default gender in Biblical Hebrew was the masculine. So, women could be included.

      However, both verses say that you can’t lie with a “za-CHAR”, i.e. a male (of any species). Neither verse uses a word meaning “man”. So, the subject could be of either gender but the object was definitely male.

      Taken literally, these two verses, therefore, condemn male homosexuality and female heterosexuality. Therefore, all women should be lesbians. Reductio ad absurdum.

  15. Well, technically you could refrigerate us…

    1. GulliverUK 28 Jan 2013, 6:56pm

      I think the best idea, and the kindest too, is to cryogenically freeze Porno Pete and when we find a medical cure for whatever it is that’s wrong with him, we can fix him. Might also be better for public health if his balls are removed so he can’t reproduce – I hate to think what horrendous Ridly-Scott “alient” might result if he was allowed to mate ! :D

  16. They quote Leviticus to us, and neither have beards. Is this a comedy performance???

  17. Buzz the Bear 28 Jan 2013, 6:59pm

    I got your refrigerator right here, Rev.
    Whadda maroon!

  18. And on the eigth day, god created the refrigerator tree… Zonk !

    1. Some of them think cars go to heaven and will follow you into the afterlife.
      You will be texting in heaven? Playing Xbox?

      I’m related to one who believes if you pray God will send you a new television! Oh according to this person the earth is 2,000-4,000 years old.

      The religious right need to aproach every female and ask her whether she is menstruating, as, if she is, they should not touch her. UNCLEAN! So are erections and ejaculation, even of old men and little boys. Don’t fry things in egg and milk batter if you are cooking meat, you must not mix them. Don’t cut your beard; eat fish on Fridays; cut off the hand of a woman who helps her husband in a fight by grabbing the opponent’s balls. If you have no wife, rape and impregnate your daughters. If your brother dies, rape his wife.
      If your female slave needs replacing she is cheaper than a male slave. If you are a deity whose grudge is against one leader, commit genocide against his people including all their kids and babies.

  19. if a person is a christian then they should know that hate is a most vile sin in the bible. They should also know that if you break one law, you break them all!

  20. Um. I think his reasoning is very commendable. Only if he think one step further.

    Refrigerator:Pork = Condom:Gay Sex. ;D

  21. They must be eating tripe.

    1. Liam the God 28 Jan 2013, 7:47pm

      He’s certainly talking tripe…

  22. Brett Gibson 28 Jan 2013, 7:35pm

    The bible really is a pick ‘n’ mix when it comes to morals. Religion makes me sick.

  23. Do’es anyone really care what some hick christian fools think ‘ i know i will not lose sleep over it

    1. Frank Boulton 31 Jan 2013, 9:49am

      The importance of what the religious right thinks is very important when winnning support for LGBTI rights, including marriage equality. They are a very large part of the anti-gay lobby and will get involved in the debate in the UK, as they have in New Zealand. Rational arguments that disprove their claims, many of which are based on the Bible, help to persuade people to abandon superstition and, hopefully, to view homophobia as what it really is – superstitious irrationality.

  24. Father R.Joseph Owles 28 Jan 2013, 8:00pm

    I was unaware that God qualified the commandment not to eat pork or shellfish, but in my Bible, God just gives the commandment without mentioning anything about refrigeration. the explanations of why God issued the commands are not biblical but rationalizations, as is this man’s attempt to claim he honors the Bible while ignoring it except when it comes to discriminating against homosexuals.

    1. …er… in your bible, it is written that god just gives the commandments without mentioning anything about refrigeration, right padre?

      in any bible, it is written that god says this, that and the other thing.

      Did you hear the one about what Gilgamesh is said to have said?

  25. Peter Robertson 28 Jan 2013, 8:00pm

    Who cares what the ‘correct’ translation is?
    It’s all nonsense anyway and we shouldn’t be paying any attention to bronze-age superstition.

    1. GulliverUK 28 Jan 2013, 8:42pm

      It’s Your opinion that it’s all nonsense.
      It also happens to be MY opinion too. But, to people who take these things seriously it’s important to point out what the correct translation is, how you can have different interpretations, how the word “homosexuality” was never written once in the Bible because they didn’t have that word in Hebrew, who were those passages intended for, can you really take a pick and mix approach to passages, who actually wrote various parts – the Gospels were not written by the disciples, 3+ letters written by Paul are fakes. They need to see that you can’t be sure what the original texts say because we don’t have the originals, only a series of copies, which show changes over time. People need to be educated about the authorship of the Bible and whether it is different than the originals. What was the culture of the time and how does knowing that change how the passages are interpreted. We’ve got to stop accepting it as some sort of fact-based text.

      1. Frank Boulton 31 Jan 2013, 9:59am

        I agree with you again GulliverUK. It’s all nonsense but the point is proving that it’s nonsense. People are being persecuted and killed on the basis of this nonsense. So, it’s very important to show it up for what it is.

        Peter Robinson, minutiae of Biblical translation may not be everyone’s cup of tea but we all have different skills and interests to contribute to the struggle for equality for all, including LGBT equality.

    2. Staircase2 4 Feb 2013, 2:53pm

      It’s not about ‘correct’ so much as demonstrating quite easily that the so called ‘biblical’ edict against gay people is in fact an artificial construct, a deliberate twisting of meaning in the first place.

      It’s one thing to argue about ‘what God wants’ its quite another to base that on something which is demonstrably false to start with…

  26. Marie Smith 28 Jan 2013, 8:27pm

    –I am not being sarcastic in these statements and questions. Honestly, Mr LaBarbera and Pastor Taylor are trying to defend what God says by doing exactly what they tell others not to do which is ‘picking and choosing’.

    –THE EQUIVALENT to the invention of refrigeration is the invention of acceptance — oh wait, there’s always been acceptance! — just look it up in the dictionary for the meaning.

    –Vague: “SOME THINGS are cultural and there are also SOME THINGS that have happened now in terms of refrigeration and health concerns and THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE THERE.” — Really? You’re educated, right?

    –God says pork is unclean, because it’s UNCLEAN.

    –HETEROSEXUALITY is a behaviour which leads to disease.

    –Why don’t you teach people to love one another instead of hating one another? instead of pointing out flaws in everyone else? instead of trying to explain the bible by picking and choosing?

    You are supposed to be our leaders & teachers, not dividers & conquerors.

  27. He says abomination is the worst sin possible but being gay never made it to the 10 commandments. Why aren’t they more upset with people breaking the commandments?

  28. Liam O' Brien 28 Jan 2013, 9:00pm

    Um, we have condoms, STD screening, and protection and cures for a variety of STIs, including HIV. So yes, we do have refrigerators :P

    See? You can even defeat these idiots when you go into their realm of whackjob biblical insanity!

  29. douglas in canada 28 Jan 2013, 9:00pm

    The bible poops on it;s own pages. After the 10 commandments bit about “Thou shalt not kill” [-funny how ancient Hebrew sounds like old English-], just read on through the books of Joshua and Judges, and do a tally of those killed by the Israelites. And if they couldn’t do it, god itself would step in to do the deed.

    As for “lying with a man as with a woman’ , if my bf and I both keep our plaid shirts and work boots on while we have sex, neither is of us doing the “woman” thing, so I guess we’re ok???

    1. Isn’t there something about doing it through a hole in a sheet or somesuch?…..Maybe that’s what you have to avoid….

  30. And this, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly how the religious cherry pick from their supposedly “holy” scripture so that the can live their life as they want and use their religious literature as justification.

  31. jesus didn’t want his followers to adhere to levitican law, or does the pastor NOT cut his hair?! what wing-nuttery is this? tell me people don’t actually follow thes shallow, incomprehensible buffoons?!

  32. jesus didn’t want his followers to adhere to levitican law, or does the pastor NOT cut his hair?! what wing-nuttery is this? tell me people don’t actually follow these shallow, incomprehensible buffoons?!

    1. Yeah, unfortunately, it seems as if church goers are brain-washed into believing whatever they are told, without question. Just look at how old they believe the world is and how we came to be here. When scientists have a 2 million yr old skeleton of a homonid, ans dinosaurs 50 million yrs old, we can’t only be 10,000 years old like so many christians believe. Or is science a tool of satan, just to try to corrupt them?

  33. Look, it’s really very simple. Refrigeration made it safe to eat pork and seafood. Atheism made it safe to love someone of the same sex.

    PS Someone should ask him to explain Deuteronomy 2:11 “Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.”

    1. Staircase2 4 Feb 2013, 2:56pm

      …you’re claiming far too much kudos for Atheism to be honest…

      Atheism did not ‘make it safe to love someone of the same sex’

  34. Shaey Turley 28 Jan 2013, 11:10pm

    The church carry on about gays and how bad we are, but their bible in Numbers 31, v17, 18, 25-40 tells of God saying to kill, rape and molest women and children. This is the Holy book and the God they follow? How ridiculous.

  35. Sadly just another homophobic pastor who has not done his research into the context of the clobber passages. Has he thought for a second why on earth Lot offered all the *supposedly* gay men of Sodom for example, virgin daughters? Doesn’t make sense right? (because it’s actually a story of attempted gang rape, not a condemnation of gays). Also it is our job to love unconditionally, and God’s job to judge, so I think that pastor needs to stop pointing the finger, as three of them are pointing right back.

  36. Interesting. So refrigerators validate sin now…? Apparently, some Christians don’t need Jesus anymore, as long as they have Frigidaire to save them. Forgive me if my response is “choke on your shrimp”….

  37. Mitt Romney 29 Jan 2013, 6:25am

    This is the USA… you’re allowed to freeze anything… including Oklahoma Pastors… the process is called “Pastorizing.”

  38. They continue to tailor god to suit their agenda.

  39. Frank Boulton 29 Jan 2013, 7:47am

    They don’t even know the Bible. Leviticus describes undesirable foods as “SHE-qets” and other undesirable things as “to-eh-VAH”. In the latter category were male homosexuality, wedding anniversaries and birthday parties(“keepers of times”), “Abomination” is too strong a word in modern English to translate either of these two Hebrew words. Between them, the two Hebrew words and the word “abomination” are used to describe some very innocuous objects and actions. Also, note that the Bible never even mentions lesbianism, let alone condemning it.

    1. His sneaking in ‘and vice-versa’ to cover women was most amusing….And I would have thought that the Hebrews had a simple expression referring to ‘sexual intercourse’ (if not ‘anal intercourse’) such that they could have made an unambiguous statement forbidding gay sex if they’d been so minded. They seem to have had no difficulties in being quite clear in the 10 Commandments…..

      1. Frank Boulton 30 Jan 2013, 9:50am

        It’s a pity they don’t live by their Ten Commandments. I love throwing “Thou shalt not bear false witness” at them. All of the mistranslations made in order to multiply the number of verses in the Bible that condemn homosexuality are quite simply “false witness.”

        1. Staircase2 4 Feb 2013, 2:58pm

          Well said

  40. And now that we’ve invented turkey-basters, there can be no justification for men having sex with women…..alleluia!…

  41. Dave North 29 Jan 2013, 9:34am

    We should rename that contemptible book, “Woolworths”

    The place to go for a “pick and mix”

  42. The phrase “lying with a man as with a woman” could mean pretty much anything. I.e. if you’re gay, don’t lie with your boyfriend as you would with a woman (i.e. on the other side of the bed trying to ignore her) but go for it. It’s a command for gays to have lots of sex.

    Praise Jebus!

    1. perhaps its about the deceit where some men live a lie with a wife and kids … rather then all gay people.

  43. Haha I just read the name of that group, lost for words.

  44. Stupid argument from a stupid man who believes in a stupid fairytale.

  45. This guy is barking. I couldn’t stop laughing….what a pratt!

  46. Has he never seen a walk-in fridge?

    1. Wasn’t it a club in Brixton?…I certainly spent many a happy weekend there in my youth….Not eating shellfish, though, I hasten to add:-)

  47. ...Paddyswurds 29 Jan 2013, 1:48pm

    Church Cults take note….The next “gay agenda” so to speak. Destroy religion…. Surely you didn’t think the Gay community would just fade away quietly once we had won our fight. Well I for one am here to tell you No. We will firstly fight for the disestablishment of all religion. Then the next battle will be to recind the tax free status of ALL religions and to make sure they pay all their taxes as the rest of the population and organisations do, including the Queen and her minions. The n the battle to have the Cult of Rome banned from having any thing to do with children and to ban anyone of a clerical bent (pun intended) barred from coming within 50 meters of a child under 16. Religion must also withdraw from public into those buildings they have intended for the purposes of indoctrination and brainwashing of the public. All outwardly signs of religion must be concealed and no religious clothing worn in public including those designed to humiliate and demean women.

    1. the catholic church still hates gays, Jews, and anyone else who dares to tell the truth about them. It uses (prison) rape all over the world humiliate and drive many youth to suicide while it babbles about protecting life.

      Renegade priests blame the kiddies for their rapes, and the church now supports the death penalty in Uganda for being / having gay sex.

      http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/roman-catholic-priest-blames-children-for-their-rapes/news/2012/08/31/47826

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/revealed-publisher-owned-by-the-catholic-church-sells-pornography-6257572.html

    2. The Catholics built their HQ on the site of the temple of the Phrygian fertility goddess Cybele. She was a deity imported to Rome. The priestesses of the goddess wore a long dress and a MITRED HAT. They were also women who had removed their penises or had done eachother’s. After the operation they could live basically as women. Some wore the Phrygian Cap instead, a symbol of the French Revolution later.

      When androcentric, patriarchal religion took over, the power of women was quickly squashed. In Arabia there were several goddesses, including Allat, the female equal of the original Allah. Jewish belief in the Kabbalah traditions, includes the story of Lilith who was Adam’s rebellious first wife, and who became a goddess. Early Christian priests could be women. The goddesses in Hinduism are all the female deity’s aspects, in turn half of the one god.

  48. ..what is this babbling twit on about? He obviously needs reminding that heterosexuals are bloody well sinful. Probably more so, but giving this mad person the benefit of the doubt–shouldn’t he ban straights also from his parish?!?!?!

  49. … and divorce … and adultery …. and wearing clothes made of two different materials .. and burning witches ….? Why have they all fallen by the ‘sin’ wayside but homosexiality hasn’t? This obsession with the subject is all VERY odd … it’s almost obsessive. And those with obsessions need treatment ….

  50. Points for coming up with a new argument, even if it is just as insane as the rest of them.

  51. As a gay man with a theology degree I have to appreciate how creative they are getting with these one liners. You have to admit this is a very creative usage of words.

  52. and they persecute and hate the same way the Romans persecuted them … to be christian is not to be compassionate and so to not follow the word of jesus.

  53. James Savik 30 Jan 2013, 8:33am

    WTF does that even mean?

    No seriously. I’m from the South and even I am baffled.

    That dog won’t hunt. (translation: your premise is invalid)

  54. David Nottingham 1 Feb 2013, 11:00am

    How funny!

  55. His real reference is to how we keep bodies of dead people from rotting for a few days until the funeral service and burial

    Welcome to the people who also justified slaver as per the bible – a slave shall obey his master.

    Recently one of these clowns was arrested outside a kids playground for being a mastur-bater. in his car.

  56. http://www.tulsaworld.com/ourlives/article.aspx?subjectid=426&articleid=20110719_Ob_obsl_8070961

    Pastor James Taylor of Oklahoma passed away in 2011 at the age of 77.

    Where is the source material?

  57. The Leviticus prohibition against sex between men is quite oddly phrased in the original, which tends not to be reflected in translations. The most literal translation would be, “You shall not lie on a man as with a woman.” “Lie on” usually means rape rather than consensual sex, which is described by “lie with”. So it could be a prohibition against raping men. It could also be about not misusing male slaves (can’t remember the reference for that bit), or perhaps saying that sex with a man counts as adultery just as much as sex with a woman does.

    Lesbians, incidentally, are left free to do whatever they like, since all of the laws in Leviticus are addressed to men only.

  58. Hehe, hilarious the absurds the bigots come with. Now I want to see the excuse for wearing clothing of differents kinds of fabric and a virgin woman who is raped having to marry her rapist and never divorce him they can come with.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all