An explanation and clarification

[JTFenthusiast2]

I think many of us came to JTF after realizing our previously held beliefs were, in fact, terribly incorrect.   I am a lot less worried about Daniel's free thinking than I am other member's speaking styles.  No one seems to want to 'get this,' but for the good of this forum, I hope they do. Daniel's behavior on this forum has not been nazi-like from anything I recall.  This is in STARK STARK contrast to rare rare other members here who really have a vicious fascist, and ultimately anti-Jewish mindset, who think nothing of engaging in rancid pornographic comments to defile other members.  Think about it.

[Ari Ben-Canaan]

Thank you Daniel for sharing your explanations and opinions.

AsheDina, and Dr. Dan, I agree with what you have said.

[AsheDina]

jtf;

When people get attacked FIRST, you should not be upset when they retaliate. 

Pascifism is not supposed to be part of our lifestyle here.

WE got called NAZIS first, afraid you have the facts confused.

WE were called the 'brain WASHERS', not the vc versa. therefore, WHO is the fascist? Not us.

People should be allowed to not only retaliate with false allegations, but the aggressors should be well enough prepared to get it back--even WORSE than how THEY attack.  Like that one person opening a thread with my name on it, when this person KNOWS that I work hard hfor jtf.  He could have IM'd--that was nasty, inconsiderate, and IMs are OPEN for this person to have talked with me, or cooled his little jets. I explained to this person OVER AND OVER about homosexuals in my life, and he REFUSED to listen. Just attacked, so I attacked back.
----
If is VERY fascistic for people to come and FORCE THEIR ways in an already established forum and movement.

Lastly, and this is it for me, since these 2 others ones have screwed up my day;

This is a forum of religious Jews, spiritual Jews, right wing Jews, Christians and righteous gentiles.

I highly doubt that you are going to find people that want to be BOUND UP in the left wing indoctrination and fascism of FORCING us to accept lifestyles of homosexuals and immorality when it is AGAINST what we believe.

THAT should have been recognized by ANYONE that came here, and if YOU all dont like it (or at least the other 2 'gay' friendly people that hate truth), THEY should NOT have FORCED US to succomb to THEIR beliefs, or therefore LACK OF.

Sin and abomination is BOUND UP and NOT free. 

[JTFenthusiast2]

Ashedina, 

I understand what you are saying and you've made it clear exactly how you stand in regard to this issue: non-violence/bullying to the individual vs. Promoting sexual behavior that is in direct violation of biblical commandment.

[Meerkat]

while i disagree with a lot of people on JTF on a lot of things, accusing people here of being nazis is uncalled for.

[Dr. Dan]

while i disagree with a lot of people on JTF on a lot of things, accusing people here of being nazis is uncalled for.

unless they are nazis of course.

[JTFenthusiast2]

while i disagree with a lot of people on JTF on a lot of things, accusing people here of being nazis is uncalled for.

unless they are nazis of course.

LOL (not funny in it's truest of course)

[Dr. Dan]

while i disagree with a lot of people on JTF on a lot of things, accusing people here of being nazis is uncalled for.

unless they are nazis of course.

LOL (not funny in it's truest of course)

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

So are we going to get a definition of homophobia and how daniel is using that term?

I have to wonder if Daniel includes the very idea that the behavior of homosexual acts are morally wrong, as being homophobic.

[JTFenthusiast2]

So are we going to get a definition of homophobia and how daniel is using that term?

I have to wonder if Daniel includes the very idea that the behavior of homosexual acts are morally wrong, as being homophobic.

KWBRT,

I dont think this subject if pursued will have a happy ending.  I'm not saying that to silence anyone.  Please dialogue.  In light of the past few threads, I am thinking that more talk on this might not help bridge the divide. When most people use the term homophobic, they use it to imply that someone is anti-gay, which you, and many other forum members have countered by stating that there is no fear or hatred of the person, but rather there is strong disagreement with their sexual object choice.  Biblically, it's a sin.  Gays would argue that their innate desire to love someone of the same sex is not inherently sinful.  They cite nature, others cite morality and there is an endless back and forth that usually goes nowhere.  I have to agree with Dr. Dan's last post in it's entirety I think.
I think if some people can genuinely come out of homosexuality, then I wish them the best.  I do not think that is a feasable option for most and so in my mind we are left with a scale.  I also think those with a naturally low sex drive are at an absolute advantage here.  It doesn't remove the need for companionship, but it does decrease the need for sex which often goes hand in hand with companionship.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

So are we going to get a definition of homophobia and how daniel is using that term?

I have to wonder if Daniel includes the very idea that the behavior of homosexual acts are morally wrong, as being homophobic.

KWBRT,

I dont think this subject if pursued will have a happy ending.   

Not all things do, but I'm asking for a reason.    I want the terms to be clear and known.   I mean really, the guy accuses "JTF" of violating his sensibilities -so shouldn't he at least define for us what they are?    Then we can determine if his accusation is accurate.   Or even if it is accurate, whether or not his "sensibilities" are sensible at all!    It seems to me that any of this is above consideration according to him.   But I'm still waiting to find out if I'm wrong in that interpretation.

  I'm not saying that to silence anyone.  Please dialogue.  In light of the past few threads, I am thinking that more talk on this might not help bridge the divide. When most people use the term homophobic, they use it to imply that someone is anti-gay,

True, and I'm wondering how Daniel is using the term since he brought it up and he even equates it with antisemitism .  I don't want to make assumptions about his view based on what others (even most others) say or do.

which you, and many other forum members have countered by stating that there is no fear or hatred of the person, but rather there is strong disagreement with their sexual object choice.  Biblically, it's a sin.  Gays would argue that their innate desire to love someone of the same sex is not inherently sinful.  They cite nature, others cite morality and there is an endless back and forth that usually goes nowhere.

Actually, their innate desire is not sinful.   It's acting on it that is sinful. 

Aside from that though, the part in bold I think is probably true.   But I don't see that this happened with Daniel.    I see that there were strong accusations made, but made in a cowardly way.  It seems the person is unwilling to state outright the logic behind the accusation.   I am trying to bridge THAT gap and get the real views out in the open.    I do so by asking questions and asking for clarifications.    It's then up to him to let his real views be known (whatever they may be).

  I have to agree with Dr. Dan's last post in it's entirety I think.
I think if some people can genuinely come out of homosexuality, then I wish them the best.  I do not think that is a feasable option for most and so in my mind we are left with a scale.  I also think those with a naturally low sex drive are at an absolute advantage here.  It doesn't remove the need for companionship, but it does decrease the need for sex which often goes hand in hand with companionship.

What do you mean by "we are left with a scale"  (sorry, I didn't read all of what Dr. Dan said in this thread).

Your point about sex drive certainly rings true.

[Lisa]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

Indeed, that last part is also quite relevant.   He did say he's going to give us a long story when he comes back so hopefully that will be covered.

[Meerkat]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

not sure about Daniel, but seeing as i am the other big lib on here:

i agree with the JTF platform on where to send the arabs
i agree that the jewish people have exlusive rights to the land of israel (everything between the nile an the euphrates)
     and therefore should have exlusive voting rights
i agree that foreign aid is foreign AIDS
i disagree on JTF's position on the blacks
i slightly disagree on immigration, we should allow 3rd world immigration, as long as its legal
i disagree on the drug policy, we should legalize weed and decriminalize the other things.
      we should allow more personal choices in general
i think israel should be semi-secular

[muman613]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

not sure about Daniel, but seeing as i am the other big lib on here:

i agree with the JTF platform on where to send the arabs
i agree that the jewish people have exlusive rights to the land of israel (everything between the nile an the euphrates)
     and therefore should have exlusive voting rights
i agree that foreign aid is foreign AIDS
i disagree on JTF's position on the blacks
i slightly disagree on immigration, we should allow 3rd world immigration, as long as its legal
i disagree on the drug policy, we should legalize weed and decriminalize the other things.
      we should allow more personal choices in general
i think israel should be semi-secular

Why do the Jews have to have land in Palestine? Without Torah there is no imperative to have Jews in that land.

This weeks Torah portion contains the covenant between Hashem and Abraham, where the land of Caanan was promised to the descendants of Abraham through Yitzak. If not for this Parasha there would be no Jewish people nor an Eretz Yisroel.

If you just want to accept one part of the Torah while rejecting all the moral and civil laws, then you are not being honest and should reconsider your position.

[Meerkat]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

not sure about Daniel, but seeing as i am the other big lib on here:

i agree with the JTF platform on where to send the arabs
i agree that the jewish people have exlusive rights to the land of israel (everything between the nile an the euphrates)
     and therefore should have exlusive voting rights
i agree that foreign aid is foreign AIDS
i disagree on JTF's position on the blacks
i slightly disagree on immigration, we should allow 3rd world immigration, as long as its legal
i disagree on the drug policy, we should legalize weed and decriminalize the other things.
      we should allow more personal choices in general
i think israel should be semi-secular

Why do the Jews have to have land in Palestine? Without Torah there is no imperative to have Jews in that land.

This weeks Torah portion contains the covenant between Hashem and Abraham, where the land of Caanan was promised to the descendants of Abraham through Yitzak. If not for this Parasha there would be no Jewish people nor an Eretz Yisroel.

If you just want to accept one part of the Torah while rejecting all the moral and civil laws, then you are not being honest and should reconsider your position.

i think that people should voluntarily follow the Torah instead of having the government force people to do it.

[muman613]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

not sure about Daniel, but seeing as i am the other big lib on here:

i agree with the JTF platform on where to send the arabs
i agree that the jewish people have exlusive rights to the land of israel (everything between the nile an the euphrates)
     and therefore should have exlusive voting rights
i agree that foreign aid is foreign AIDS
i disagree on JTF's position on the blacks
i slightly disagree on immigration, we should allow 3rd world immigration, as long as its legal
i disagree on the drug policy, we should legalize weed and decriminalize the other things.
      we should allow more personal choices in general
i think israel should be semi-secular

Why do the Jews have to have land in Palestine? Without Torah there is no imperative to have Jews in that land.

This weeks Torah portion contains the covenant between Hashem and Abraham, where the land of Caanan was promised to the descendants of Abraham through Yitzak. If not for this Parasha there would be no Jewish people nor an Eretz Yisroel.

If you just want to accept one part of the Torah while rejecting all the moral and civil laws, then you are not being honest and should reconsider your position.

i think that people should voluntarily follow the Torah instead of having the government force people to do it.

Then why force Jews to live in Israel? Why not in Ethiopia or Uganda?

I think people should voluntarily obey the laws of physics and the laws of gravity...

[Meerkat]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

not sure about Daniel, but seeing as i am the other big lib on here:

i agree with the JTF platform on where to send the arabs
i agree that the jewish people have exlusive rights to the land of israel (everything between the nile an the euphrates)
     and therefore should have exlusive voting rights
i agree that foreign aid is foreign AIDS
i disagree on JTF's position on the blacks
i slightly disagree on immigration, we should allow 3rd world immigration, as long as its legal
i disagree on the drug policy, we should legalize weed and decriminalize the other things.
      we should allow more personal choices in general
i think israel should be semi-secular

Why do the Jews have to have land in Palestine? Without Torah there is no imperative to have Jews in that land.

This weeks Torah portion contains the covenant between Hashem and Abraham, where the land of Caanan was promised to the descendants of Abraham through Yitzak. If not for this Parasha there would be no Jewish people nor an Eretz Yisroel.

If you just want to accept one part of the Torah while rejecting all the moral and civil laws, then you are not being honest and should reconsider your position.

i think that people should voluntarily follow the Torah instead of having the government force people to do it.

Then why force Jews to live in Israel? Why not in Ethiopia or Uganda?

no one is forcing anyone to go anywhere

notice how i said semi-secular.

[muman613]

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

not sure about Daniel, but seeing as i am the other big lib on here:

i agree with the JTF platform on where to send the arabs
i agree that the jewish people have exlusive rights to the land of israel (everything between the nile an the euphrates)
     and therefore should have exlusive voting rights
i agree that foreign aid is foreign AIDS
i disagree on JTF's position on the blacks
i slightly disagree on immigration, we should allow 3rd world immigration, as long as its legal
i disagree on the drug policy, we should legalize weed and decriminalize the other things.
      we should allow more personal choices in general
i think israel should be semi-secular

Why do the Jews have to have land in Palestine? Without Torah there is no imperative to have Jews in that land.

This weeks Torah portion contains the covenant between Hashem and Abraham, where the land of Caanan was promised to the descendants of Abraham through Yitzak. If not for this Parasha there would be no Jewish people nor an Eretz Yisroel.

If you just want to accept one part of the Torah while rejecting all the moral and civil laws, then you are not being honest and should reconsider your position.

i think that people should voluntarily follow the Torah instead of having the government force people to do it.

Then why force Jews to live in Israel? Why not in Ethiopia or Uganda?

no one is forcing anyone to go anywhere

notice how i said semi-secular.

If the 'Jewish State' is in Palestine, then you are forcing those Jews who have no place to go to go to Palestine. If you make the 'Jewish State' in Africa then Jews will go to Africa...

Why should we force arabs to leave the land of Palestine if there is no imperative that Jews dwell in that land. The fact is that Eretz Yisroel is the HOLY LAND for the Jewish people, and that is the ONLY LOGICAL reason that a 'Jewish State' or 'Zionist Entity' exists.

[muman613]

Liberal,

I assume you also support assisted suicide and abortion also... Because your moral ground has no basis in morality.. At least it is my opinion that you too believe that you are smart enough to know what is moral based on your own wisdom. Those who believe this usually realize when they grow older that they have erred.

Look at our wisest sage Solomon, he too erred because he thought he was smarter than Hashem... He realized it, but it was virtually too late..

[Meerkat]

.............

If the 'Jewish State' is in Palestine, then you are forcing those Jews who have no place to go to go to Palestine. If you make the 'Jewish State' in Africa then Jews will go to Africa...

Why should we force arabs to leave the land of Palestine if there is no imperative that Jews dwell in that land. The fact is that Eretz Yisroel is the HOLY LAND for the Jewish people, and that is the ONLY LOGICAL reason that a 'Jewish State' or 'Zionist Entity' exists.

again, notice how i said SEMI-secular, meaning there will be some religion, enough so that people are aware of it, but will leave them the ultimate choice of weather to follow or not.

Liberal,

I assume you also support assisted suicide and abortion also... Because your moral ground has no basis in morality.. At least it is my opinion that you too believe that you are smart enough to know what is moral based on your own wisdom. Those who believe this usually realize when they grow older that they have erred.

Look at our wisest sage Solomon, he too erred because he thought he was smarter than Hashem... He realized it, but it was virtually too late..

i support assisted suicide in case of terminal illness or a chronic and painful one, this is so that the person in question does not have to suffer tremendous agony. i would definitely have that be a highly bureaucratic process so that the patient has a chance to think it through.

abortion should not be allowed in most cases. it should definitely be allowed if it endangers the mother's life, im split on weather it should be allowed in case of rape or teenage pregnancy, and i don't think we should allow abortion in any other case.

i think that when a government is legislating morality, it should only be for mediation between multiple individuals.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Rodell Vereen is the schvartze man in South Carolina who was convicted twice of raping the same horse.

[cjd]

Rodell Vereen is the schvartze man in South Carolina who was convicted twice of raping the same horse.

Yes, You made me laugh with that name.... Two times with the same horse!! I hope he at least bought it some flowers or a few cubes of sugar on the second date   

[Dr. Dan]

One minor point: its not the love between men or the attraction. It's acting on it with sexual deeds which is the issue. That's the point I try to drive at. Religously the act is a no no. The other part might be nature. I acknowledge that changing that part takes an expert, Gd, and a very motivated person. I don't believe all will succeed and definitely in one shot.  Bullying a homosexual instead of approaching them with kindness will not do any good. I would think the way to look at it us how some born again Christians pray for non Christians according to their theology to find Jesus Christ.

So are we going to get a definition of homophobia and how daniel is using that term?

I have to wonder if Daniel includes the very idea that the behavior of homosexual acts are morally wrong, as being homophobic.

KWBRT,

I dont think this subject if pursued will have a happy ending.  I'm not saying that to silence anyone.  Please dialogue.  In light of the past few threads, I am thinking that more talk on this might not help bridge the divide. When most people use the term homophobic, they use it to imply that someone is anti-gay, which you, and many other forum members have countered by stating that there is no fear or hatred of the person, but rather there is strong disagreement with their sexual object choice.  Biblically, it's a sin.  Gays would argue that their innate desire to love someone of the same sex is not inherently sinful.  They cite nature, others cite morality and there is an endless back and forth that usually goes nowhere.  I have to agree with Dr. Dan's last post in it's entirety I think.
I think if some people can genuinely come out of homosexuality, then I wish them the best.  I do not think that is a feasable option for most and so in my mind we are left with a scale.  I also think those with a naturally low sex drive are at an absolute advantage here.  It doesn't remove the need for companionship, but it does decrease the need for sex which often goes hand in hand with companionship.

[Dr. Dan]

Kahanist liberal these will make great discussions. Perhaps bring up your points and disagreements on ask jtf.

Well I'm just curious as to how JTF violates his sensibilities.  I would also like to know what part of JTF's platform he agrees with. 

not sure about Daniel, but seeing as i am the other big lib on here:

i agree with the JTF platform on where to send the arabs
i agree that the jewish people have exlusive rights to the land of israel (everything between the nile an the euphrates)
     and therefore should have exlusive voting rights
i agree that foreign aid is foreign AIDS
i disagree on JTF's position on the blacks
i slightly disagree on immigration, we should allow 3rd world immigration, as long as its legal
i disagree on the drug policy, we should legalize weed and decriminalize the other things.
      we should allow more personal choices in general
i think israel should be semi-secular