UN Gay Rights Envoy: Religious Freedom ‘Not an Absolute Right’

[Kindle]

The United Nations envoy for gay rights has declared that when there is a clash between homosexual rights and religious liberty it must be recalled that “freedom of expression and religious freedom are not absolute rights and may be limited if necessary.”

 

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2017/02/06/un-gay-rights-envoy-religious-freedom-not-absolute-right/

[OakWood]

Absolutely diabolical.

So, let me see. Are they going to go for Muslim countries first? Should they not be telling Saudi Arabia and Iran that religious freedom is trumped by gay rights?

I doubt if they will.

[OneLight]

Another good reason to give the UN the boot. 

[OakWood]

2 hours ago, Cletus said:

Well if freedom of expression can be limited, why dont they limit expressing anything about gay rights?

Because they work for Satan and gay rights have to be shoved in everybody's faces until we all shut up, bow down, and embrace homosexuality.

It started with legalisation.

Next they wanted a few more rights.

Then they wanted total acceptance.

Now they want obedience, reverence, and privileges that they are not entitled to - such as 'gay marriage', adoption of kids and homosexual propaganda in schools.

 

[B3L13v3R]

worthy in the OP mentioned the most disturbing portion of the article. The Christian can never "yield" to their LGBT sin:

Snip:

"When challenged about the clash between LGBT rights and religious freedom by Henk Jan van Schothorst of the Transatlantic Christian Council, Muntarbhorn said that religious freedom is not absolute and must yield to homosexual rights."


Rom 1:24-32 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[Bible2]

Regarding Cletus's comment: "they want to label some as bigots": That is exactly right. Yet someone may ask: "But has not homosexuality been proven to be genetic?" The answer would be that even if it could be, so could alcoholism, criminal violence, and schizophrenia. Human genes in their current, fallen, corrupted state have nothing to do with proving what is moral, or what is good mental health. ---------- But while homosexual acts are sinful (Romans 1:26-27), we too easily forget that homosexual acts (Genesis 19:4-5) were not the only sin of Sodom. For "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy" (Ezekiel 16:49). How many of us who love to rail against homosexuals are nonetheless "just like Sodom" with regard to our pride, our fullness of bread, our abundance of idleness, and our refusal to strengthen the hand of the poor and needy? How many of us who in our self-righteousness love to place ourselves above homosexuals, even if we are completely free from all sin, will still be judged for our self-righteousness (Luke 18:9-14)? ---------- But, at the same time, the truth must never be discounted that homosexual acts, if they are not repented of, will, like any other unrepented sin, keep someone from ultimate salvation (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). But people are not set free from homosexual desires, or any other sinful desires, through legal restrictions placed upon them. For legal restrictions have no power at all against sinful desires, but can even help to revive and inflame them (Romans 7:8-9). Only Jesus has the power to set people free from the sin of homosexual acts, just as any other sin (John 8:34-36). ---------- The list of sins which will ultimately keep even Christians out of the kingdom of God (if they do not repent from them) is quite long (Galatians 5:19-21), and some of these sins are quite common within the church today. So why is there such a focus by some Christians upon homosexuality alone? Why does not the church also focus on, for example, its own very-widespread practice of divorce and second-marriage adultery (Mark 10:11-12)?

[Bible2]

Regarding the OP, someone might ask: "Could Christians be persecuted in the future simply for asserting from the Bible that homosexual acts are sinful?" The answer would be "Yes". For such an assertion could become an illegal act of "hate speech", punishable by fines and imprisonment. ---------- A move toward this point could even have started. For example, recently the New York Times (98% of its readers say that they never pray) held a forum for evangelicals, the point of which was to basically accuse evangelicals of causing the Orlando shooting (against homosexuals), because of the evangelical teaching against homosexuality, which it is said puts homosexuals "in danger". Of course, the Orlando shooting was done by a Muslim, not a Christian. But in the twisted, Satanic world of political correctness, no evil can ever be ascribed to Islam (even though Islam, even in its moderate forms, opposes homosexuality no less than evangelical Christianity), whereas any evil whatsoever can be ascribed to evangelical Christianity. ---------- Also, political correctness loves to paint any evangelical teaching against homosexuality as "homophobic" or "hateful", as if evangelical Christians are actually fearful (phobic) of homosexuals, or actually hate them, when in fact evangelical Christianity simply states (from the Bible itself) that homosexuality is sinful (Romans 1:26-27). It would be like pedophiles saying that Christians (or even New York Times readers, for that matter) are "pedophobic" or "hateful" for being against pedophilia, which pedophiles prefer to call "man-boy love". Or it would be like people who are into bestiality saying that Christians are "beastiphobic" or "hateful" for being against bestiality, which people who are into bestiality prefer to call "inter-species love". ---------- So, along with the acceptance of homosexuality, do not be surprised if the world (in the name of "love") eventually begins to accept pedophilia and bestiality as well, so long as (in the world's words) "the child or animal involved in each case is okay with the activity, showing no signs of distress, but instead consent, and even actual enjoyment". ---------- And then pedophiles and people who are into bestiality will walk around with "Love wins" signs at anti-Christian rallies.

[Guest Thallasa]

3 hours ago, Bible2 said:

Regarding Cletus's comment: "they want to label some as bigots": That is exactly right. Yet someone may ask: "But has not homosexuality been proven to be genetic?" The answer would be that even if it could be, so could alcoholism, criminal violence, and schizophrenia. Human genes in their current, fallen, corrupted state have nothing to do with proving what is moral, or what is good mental health. ---------- But while homosexual acts are sinful (Romans 1:26-27), we too easily forget that homosexual acts (Genesis 19:4-5) were not the only sin of Sodom. For "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy" (Ezekiel 16:49). How many of us who love to rail against homosexuals are nonetheless "just like Sodom" with regard to our pride, our fullness of bread, our abundance of idleness, and our refusal to strengthen the hand of the poor and needy? How many of us who in our self-righteousness love to place ourselves above homosexuals, even if we are completely free from all sin, will still be judged for our self-righteousness (Luke 18:9-14)? ---------- But, at the same time, the truth must never be discounted that homosexual acts, if they are not repented of, will, like any other unrepented sin, keep someone from ultimate salvation (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). But people are not set free from homosexual desires, or any other sinful desires, through legal restrictions placed upon them. For legal restrictions have no power at all against sinful desires, but can even help to revive and inflame them (Romans 7:8-9). Only Jesus has the power to set people free from the sin of homosexual acts, just as any other sin (John 8:34-36). ---------- The list of sins which will ultimately keep even Christians out of the kingdom of God (if they do not repent from them) is quite long (Galatians 5:19-21), and some of these sins are quite common within the church today. So why is there such a focus by some Christians upon homosexuality alone? Why does not the church also focus on, for example, its own very-widespread practice of divorce and second-marriage adultery (Mark 10:11-12)?

 

3 hours ago, Bible2 said:

Regarding the OP, someone might ask: "Could Christians be persecuted in the future simply for asserting from the Bible that homosexual acts are sinful?" The answer would be "Yes". For such an assertion could become an illegal act of "hate speech", punishable by fines and imprisonment. ---------- A move toward this point could even have started. For example, recently the New York Times (98% of its readers say that they never pray) held a forum for evangelicals, the point of which was to basically accuse evangelicals of causing the Orlando shooting (against homosexuals), because of the evangelical teaching against homosexuality, which it is said puts homosexuals "in danger". Of course, the Orlando shooting was done by a Muslim, not a Christian. But in the twisted, Satanic world of political correctness, no evil can ever be ascribed to Islam (even though Islam, even in its moderate forms, opposes homosexuality no less than evangelical Christianity), whereas any evil whatsoever can be ascribed to evangelical Christianity. ---------- Also, political correctness loves to paint any evangelical teaching against homosexuality as "homophobic" or "hateful", as if evangelical Christians are actually fearful (phobic) of homosexuals, or actually hate them, when in fact evangelical Christianity simply states (from the Bible itself) that homosexuality is sinful (Romans 1:26-27). It would be like pedophiles saying that Christians (or even New York Times readers, for that matter) are "pedophobic" or "hateful" for being against pedophilia, which pedophiles prefer to call "man-boy love". Or it would be like people who are into bestiality saying that Christians are "beastiphobic" or "hateful" for being against bestiality, which people who are into bestiality prefer to call "inter-species love". ---------- So, along with the acceptance of homosexuality, do not be surprised if the world (in the name of "love") eventually begins to accept pedophilia and bestiality as well, so long as (in the world's words) "the child or animal involved in each case is okay with the activity, showing no signs of distress, but instead consent, and even actual enjoyment". ---------- And then pedophiles and people who are into bestiality will walk around with "Love wins" signs at anti-Christian rallies.

You seem to contradict yourself profoundly from the last post, in which you  stated that homosexulity nowadays and it's promotion  is no worse than 'other sin' . I refute this, and so does the bible ,and then you go on to tell us, that yes we will all be forced to accept it as 'good', and teach our children this too .

[OakWood]

5 hours ago, Bible2 said:

Regarding Cletus's comment: "they want to label some as bigots": That is exactly right. Yet someone may ask: "But has not homosexuality been proven to be genetic?" The answer would be that even if it could be, so could alcoholism, criminal violence, and schizophrenia. Human genes in their current, fallen, corrupted state have nothing to do with proving what is moral, or what is good mental health. ---------- But while homosexual acts are sinful (Romans 1:26-27), we too easily forget that homosexual acts (Genesis 19:4-5) were not the only sin of Sodom. For "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy" (Ezekiel 16:49). How many of us who love to rail against homosexuals are nonetheless "just like Sodom" with regard to our pride, our fullness of bread, our abundance of idleness, and our refusal to strengthen the hand of the poor and needy? How many of us who in our self-righteousness love to place ourselves above homosexuals, even if we are completely free from all sin, will still be judged for our self-righteousness (Luke 18:9-14)? ---------- But, at the same time, the truth must never be discounted that homosexual acts, if they are not repented of, will, like any other unrepented sin, keep someone from ultimate salvation (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). But people are not set free from homosexual desires, or any other sinful desires, through legal restrictions placed upon them. For legal restrictions have no power at all against sinful desires, but can even help to revive and inflame them (Romans 7:8-9). Only Jesus has the power to set people free from the sin of homosexual acts, just as any other sin (John 8:34-36). ---------- The list of sins which will ultimately keep even Christians out of the kingdom of God (if they do not repent from them) is quite long (Galatians 5:19-21), and some of these sins are quite common within the church today. So why is there such a focus by some Christians upon homosexuality alone? Why does not the church also focus on, for example, its own very-widespread practice of divorce and second-marriage adultery (Mark 10:11-12)?

The reason Christians focus on homosexuality is because it is the only sin (to my knowledge) that is declaring itself to be a moral virtue.

The moment that adulterers start marching in 'adultery pride' parades, or thieves start demanding 'equal rights for thieves', or murderers insist on being blessed for their activities, will be the moment that Christians speak out against them.

It's one thing to commit sin (we're all guilty of it), it's another thing to expect people to accept your sin, even embrace it. Once society fully embraces a sin, then it becomes iniquity.

Historically, entire societies were punished for iniquity. Sodom and Gomorrah were punished for it, and you can say that the reason for the Flood was the same thing.

It's something to be sinful and know it, be ashamed of it, and curse yourself for doing it - it's a far worse thing to wish to have your own sin declared legitimate. When you start saying that a sin is not a sin, you are declaring that black is white, and that good is bad, and bad is good. This not only affects you but also affects others by giving out the wrong message.

 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Isaiah 5:20

[Bill16652]

Had not heard that but it does not surprise me in the least, sad