There is an agenda, which is far beyond the lifestyle, to force non-homosexuals to embrace homosexuality as the norm no matter what you believe; to force churches, businesses, schools, etc, to have to embrace, accept, believe in, and teach homosexuality as a normal lifestyle no matter what. That’s the real issue.

God loves everyone. He wants freedom for each individual. That’s why He sent His Son, Jesus, to pay the penalty of our sins. We ALL have issues, we ALL sin.

…and He loves us.

Abortion stands as a vivid and valid example of this. People within the same congregation often held differing views and tended to view the other through the lens of that issue only. AND we haven’t thoroughly decriminalized abortion…neither extreme is totally happy with the end result.

I don’t want to detour the conversation to abortion; I merely used it as an example of the dynamics of involvement. It went directly to Warren’s musing re how could Engle say and even suggest that it might warrant restraint without having a clear picture of what those restraints might be.

Oh, and to be correct, we really shouldn’t be talking about the ‘criminalization of homosexuality’. By the laws already on the books in Uganda, it’s already criminal. So the more appropriate term would be ‘decrimininalization’. If and when this bill gets shot down, there will still be existing laws to contend with.

Eddy….. Let’s say that a country was proposing the death penalty for abortion ….

How about we just say homosexuality, ok? Why do people insist on analogizing the sexuality of gay people with anything other than what it is, sexuality? We get murder, killing, abortion, robbery, what have you – never sexuality, plain old human sexuality.

___________________________________

.

Seems about a week ago I figured out Engle’s meaning – nothing like an old queen’s intuition.

I expect Engle would like to see laws enacted which would make any ’sodomous act’ between either straights or gays and even fornication (outside of marriage) to be a criminal offense – to take the civil criminal law up to “true biblical standards.” His supposed “deep love for the homosexual community” likely then means that the law reflects “compassion for those struggling with same-sex attraction” probably by instituting forced therapy (else prison?) or ‘whatever’ along the lines of Scott Lively.

…

That would seem to be a rational response under the circumstances. Make an appeal to have the bad thing stopped. Identify with the concern that exists. Figure that once the bad thing is stopped, there would be time to discuss a more reasoned approach.

I realize that the undercurrent here is that any ‘criminalization’ is wrong. But Engle doesn’t believe that so I’m not sure why his response strikes you as incongruous. He only had two cents to throw in and he threw it. He doesn’t support the death penalty or hard labor as punishment and he also feels the reporting restrictions would hamper the work of the church….but he does see validity in Uganda’s concerns over legitimization…a lot to sort through and he admits he doesn’t have the answers.