Chinazor's Reply To An Earlier Statement Of Mine (the Last Message You Saw)

Festus Adibe you quoted an introduction to his well constructed and well written anti gay article. And then just like him,
you went ahead to nicely write on how I "falsely condemn" his article and how I'm "being discriminatory ". Before I quote
anything from that article, I'll have you know that everyone has an opinion and it's alright to put it out. Your journalist or
pastor or whatever he is first wrote about how Ellen has a gay agenda.it's like saying you have a food agenda just
because you eat food.
"To give you a glimpse into my life, a while back my friend John wrestled with his sexual identity until he found the path to
wholeness and healing in Christ. We walked the journey together as he battled the ravages of AIDS." - This means that
his being gay isn't whole and thus being a Christian saved him from this unwholesome behavior....sexual discrimination
covered with his religion.
"I listened, encouraged and reassured him, along with his precious daughter, prior to his premature death. Later I was
able to take care of his memorial service in a way that I trust inspired all of his former gay friends who attended to reflect
on his life and theirs." - again pointing to his belief that something is wrong with the gay people.
"Ellen, hasn't the time arrived for everyone involved in this dialogue on gay-related issues to lower our voices and
approach one another with respect and civility even though we have our differences? I know there's a lot of shouting and
accusation and name-calling on all sides of the gay debate, but how about you and I model something positive?" - he
realizes that there is a lot of name calling yet he called her out first to accuse her. "something positive" meaning that
being gay is definitely negative.
"Let me put you to the test. Even though you'll probably disagree passionately on what I say, can you grant me the
freedom to be forthright with you and faithful to biblical teaching for which I'll one day give an account?" - again a
reference to the bible and his religion to cover this argument.
"In the quote you shared on TV I want to reassure you that I never thought or implied that you were trying to purposefully
influence young girls into lesbianism. Instead, my point was that, as an out and proud lesbian womanprobably the
best-known and most-loved in the worldyou wield tremendous influence over these girls, and your influence is
decidedly pro-lesbian. Wouldn't you agree?" - in order words she is influencing the young girls by being who she is which
is gay of course. And he says he hasn't implied that she is "purposefully" doing this but he on the other hand is saying for
a fact that it is wrong.
"Here are just five of many reasons why gay "marriage" is morally wrong and cannot be called a righteous, authentic
marital union.
1) It violates the clear and unambiguous moral teaching of the Scriptures, which serve as the basis for our JudeoChristian laws and foundations as a nation.
2) It is contradictory to the self-evident truths of "Mother Nature" or "Nature's God" (as our Founding Fathers expressed
it) wherein men and women are designed and function differently, complement and complete each other and through the
wonder of marital union are able to procreate to perpetuate the human race.
3) It is contrary to the explicit teaching of every major world religion, which upholds the integrity of marriage and family.
4) It is an injustice and unequivocably harmful arrangement wherein our most precious entrustment, our children, are
denied the love and nurture of a father and a mother who complement each other in a healthy family.
5) It redefines and devalues the sacred institution of marriage exclusively between a man and a woman, opens the
floodgates for other arrangements and legitimizes a lifestyle replete with dangerous, at-risk sexual behavior, such as
HIV/AIDS and over 30 STDs that are endangering lives, jeopardizing healthcare and impacting our economy.
There are multiple times in the Hebrew-Christian Bible where homosexual behavior is explicitly prohibited as dishonoring
to God and natural order plus destructive to those involved with them. Scripture throughout forbids us to be sexually
involved with:
Parents
Children

 Siblings
Another person's spouse
Animals
Deceased
Same-sex" - everything in the above quoted is sexual discrimination covered with his religion. The only point made here
is the one about Std's and Hiv which heterosexual individuals are also at risk of. So why the double standards? Why the
finger pointing?
Please explain to me how like you said, I'm falsely condemning the author and being discriminatory. Thanks

My Reply To Her Which She Deleted Apparently

Good, thanks for finally deciding to actually have a discussion rather than writing off the entire
article by branding it fanatical and discriminatory at first glance.
The reason I posted the first paragraph was to refute your claim where you said that the ENTIRE
ARTICLE was sexual discrimination and religious fanaticism.
Now let us consider the points you raised.
JULIA: Before I quote anything from that article, I'll have you know that everyone has an opinion and it's alright to put
it out.....
FESTUS: I totally agree with you on this but I must point out that while it is alright to express an opinion, it doesn't mean
that all opinions are right. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion.
JULIA Your journalist or pastor or whatever he is first wrote about how Ellen has a gay agenda. it's like saying you have
a food agenda just because you eat food.

FESTUS: No it is not just because you eat food. If you were on the cover of the Times
magazine too declaring that you eat food and was also an active participator in Food campaigns
and food advocacy groups, I think it would be fair to say that you have a food agenda. Wouldn't
you agree? You are always welcome to tell me what else you think a food agenda would look
like.
JULIA: ...This means that his being gay isn't whole and thus being a Christian saved him from this unwholesome
behavior....sexual discrimination covered with his religion.
FESTUS: Actually no. Sexual discrimination is discriminating against someone based on his/her sexual preference. This
does not mean that one must affirm all sexual preferences rather one must not deny another person his/her rights based
upon the person's sexual preference. This is an important distinction here which you are failing to recognize.
You take issue with the author referring to his friend John's homosexual behaviour as unwholesomeness from which he
was healed. You think it is sexual discrimination. That's like saying it is discriminatory to against disabled people to say
John was lame and now he has been healed and made whole so that he now walks.
I wonder if you would have thought it sexual discrimination to say any of the following
1. John was healed of his paedophilia and now he is no longer attracted to little kids
2. John was healed of his incestuous feelings and now he is no longer sexually attracted to his siblings
3. John was healed of his zoophilia and now he no longer tries to have sex with sheep and goats

All of the above are sexual preferences and my point is that not affirming John's sexual
preference does not in any way discriminate against him or deny him any of his human rights or
reduce his human dignity.
Perhaps what you didn't notice while you were busy describing the author as a discriminator is
that he was lovingly caring for and supporting his sick friend until the time he passed away. How
very discriminatory of him indeed.
Frankly, I am quite surprised that you having been exposed to the teachings of Christ would
have difficulty grasping the popular Christian phrase hating the sin but loving the sinner as
expressed beautifully here by the life of this author.

JULIA: ....he realizes that there is a lot of name calling yet he called her out first to accuse her. "something positive"
meaning that being gay is definitely negative.
FESTUS: Actually I think he meant something positive as opposed to name-calling being negative.

JULIA again a reference to the bible and his religion to cover this argument.
FESTUS: I take it that you do not respect what the bible has to say on sexual sin . . . .but then again what did you expect
the pastor to do? Deny Christ?
As a Christian pastor, I don't see anything wrong with him expressing his desire to stay consistent with what the bible
says.
JULIA: ...in order words she is influencing the young girls by being who she is which is gay of course. And he says he
hasn't implied that she is "purposefully" doing this but he on the other hand is saying for a fact that it is wrong.
FESTUS: No, she is not influencing the young girls by being who she is (that's if being gay is who she is rather than
what she does), she is influencing them by actively celebrating and promoting homosexuality. She may not intentionally
be targeting young girls but being a public figure and a role-model young girls would try to imitate her.
And yes, he is saying (and I agree with him) that homosexual behaviour is wrong but I still don't see how saying this is
sexual discrimination in the very same way that the fact you think that he is wrong implies that you are discriminating
against him. The fact that someone disagrees with another's lifestyle doesn't automatically imply discrimination. That's
the distinction you are missing.

JULIA: - everything in the above quoted is sexual discrimination covered with his religion. The only point made here is
the one about Std's and Hiv which heterosexual individuals are also at risk of. So why the double standards? Why the
finger pointing?
FESTUS: While I admit that both heterosexual and homosexual couples are at risk of STDs, the point he was making is
that STDs like HIV are more prevalent in homosexual sex than in straight sex which is true. I don't see how any of his
points are an example of sexual discrimination as none of the points he made deprives anyone of their rights or treats
anyone as less human based on sexual preference. He gave reasons why gay marriage cannot be regarded as an
authentic righteous marriage and I think the points are sound.
Marriage is not defined based on what one prefers to have sexual relations with. If that was the case, then it would be
okay to marry your parents, siblings, multiple people, little children, or anything else ranging from animals to inanimate
objects as long as it is your sexual preference. Do you think this is okay?

JULIA : Please explain to me how like you said, I'm falsely condemning the author and being discriminatory. Thanks

FESTUS: I think I have sufficiently met your demand in my response above. If you think that a
person is being discriminatory by expressing his disapproval, then it would also follow that you
too are being discriminatory by expressing your disapproval of his position.
The interesting fact is that you recognize that when you air your opinion and disagree with him,
you are not being discriminatory but when he airs his opinion disagreeing with homosexual
behaviour, you think he is being discriminatory against homosexuals even when he was actively
caring for his dying homosexual friend.
I don't think branding someone a sexual discriminator because you don't agree with his position
is in line with your earlier statement that it is alright to express differing opinions. Don't you
think so?

My Message To Her On Google+ After Finding Out That She Had Blocked Me On
Facebook.
Hello Chinazor,
I noticed that you have now blocked me on facebook after our little chat. I am not offended in
the least but I must say I was surprised because I thought you were the one who said that it is
alright for people to have differing views only for you to block me because I have a different view
from you. Ironic wouldn't you say?
I remember you from your days in FECA Enugu, and I am happy by how far you have come and
how much you have grown but judging from our last conversation, I must confess that I fear that
you seem to have drawn far from God and this made me very alarmed for your sake.
The bible teaches us to examine ourselves if we are still in the faith, I would like to urge you with all the love I have for you as my sister in the faith - to examine your life not through what
your feelings tell you but in the light of His Word and where you find yourself in sin to repent and
turn back to Him because He loves you and gave Himself for you.
I do hope that you do not read this as being "judgmental" on my part but that you see this for
what it truly is which is Love (for if I did not love you, I wouldn't care enough to try to reach out to
you). I do not want to "win an argument" with you rather I hope that perhaps by this message,
your heart might be worn back to your Saviour and my Saviour, Jesus Christ.
I hope this message finds you well, and that you think about what I have written. My prayers are
always with you. And may God's love be with you always.
Lots of Love,
Festus Adibe