home
RSS
Malaysia's openly gay pastor
August 31st, 2011
09:26 AM ET

Malaysia's first openly gay pastor to marry

By Elizabeth Yuan, CNN

(CNN)– Malaysia's first openly gay pastor has chosen Wednesday, coinciding with the country's Independence Day, to get married to his American partner in New York, barely a month after same-sex marriage became legalized there.

"It means a lot to be married that day, to honor my country and people in Malaysia," said Rev. Boon Lin Ngeo, who also goes by his pen name O.Young or Ouyang Wen Feng, in a telephone call from Kota Kinabalu, the capital of Malaysia's Sabah state, during a visit there last week.

He said the date was chosen to remind others that "we need to keep fighting for our rights and be independent from all kinds of oppression."

Read the full story about Malaysia's first openly gay pastor getting married
- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Malaysia • Pastors

soundoff (312 Responses)
  1. Bo

    ==========@LOL12:21==================== I don't know if this is an an attempt to answer my question with a question, but I really don't know the answer to your's either. ==========================

    August 31, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
  2. John Stefanyszyn

    Malaysia's first openly gay pastor to marry
    By Elizabeth Yuan, CNN
    August 31, 2011 9:38 a.m. EDT

    A quote from this pastor in the interview…"we need to keep fighting for our rights and be independent from all kinds of oppression."

    It is clear that the primary and core belief of this pastor is the desire to serve his own interests, as justified to be right in his eyes….that he believes it is right to live this lifestyle.

    This same belief in freedom of rights, in freedom of religion, in freedom of lifestyle (etc.) is embraced by almost all of mankind, each according to their own particular desires.

    All “religions” also promote, defend, and live by this belief. It is their first “belief of defense” when socially persecuted or legally pursued.

    Why is this so?.....
    The One and Only Creator’s words in II Thessalonians 2: 10-12 explain why…
    …because the love of the truth they received not …, and on account of this will send to them God a working of error, for to believe them what is false, that may be judged all who believe not the truth but delighted in unrighteousness.
    In other words…
    …because man has rejected the True and Only God, His Christ, and the One and Only True Way, The Creator will remove himself from them and give them over to their false belief in self-will, so that they will receive the judgment due for rejecting the truth and for their love for and justification in unrighteousness.

    August 31, 2011 at 1:54 pm |
    • Stevie7

      god seems totally fine with polygamy, so I assume that you would have no problem allowing polygamy legally, correct? And should people also be free to own slaves, since that's not a problem either?

      August 31, 2011 at 2:00 pm |
    • LOL

      “so that they will receive the judgment due for rejecting the truth and for their love for and justification in unrighteousness.”

      Yes, Christians will won’t they. They have been shown that what people knew in the past about gays was done by bias and prejudice people. Science has shown that people are born gay, they were created by God. When you put the bible into historical context, it’s not about gays as we know and understand it today, it’s condemning male prostitution, ra pe and idolatry. The bible does not condemn the loving saved married gay partnership.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:04 pm |
    • James

      The bible also says a woman has to marry her rapist, so you're ok with that right?

      August 31, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
    • sean

      If God intended for polygamy, he would have given Adam 7 wives....

      September 2, 2011 at 12:18 pm |
    • Stevie7

      @sean – god has no problem with David having 700. There are MANY instances of polygamy in the bible. You actually have to read more than the first book, though.

      September 2, 2011 at 12:28 pm |
    • sean

      God never commands polygamy. He never says you can take as many wives as you like. Solomon had 700 wives not david. Solomon also had 300 concubines. God never commanded this and if you read ecclesiastes, you will realize solomon knew the error of his ways and declared all to be meaningless.

      September 2, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
    • sean

      @ James The Old Testament nowhere records a r*pe victim being forced to marry her r*pist. Even if that is the correct interpretation of Deuteronomy 22:28-29, the Bible nowhere records the command being enforced. Further, if a r*pe victim being forced to marry her r*pist is the correct interpretation, it must be viewed in light of the culture of the time. In the case of Tamar, she would have rather have married her r*pist than remain single the rest of her life. Taking modern Western social mores into ancient Israel twists the meaning of the passage.

      September 2, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • J.W

      So why is that passage part of the culture of the time, but other passages were not?

      September 2, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
    • Stevie7

      So god only allows things that are specifically permitted in the bible? Does that mean that walking my dog is a sin? That's not expressly permitted. You should also note that despite the MANY instances of polygamy in the bible, nowhere is it ever expressly forbidden.

      Deuteronomy 21 strongly suggest that polygamy is fine since it lays out rules for how first borns are to be treated when one has multiple wives. Why define this if god thought it wasn't ok?

      Here's a nice little nugget from 2 Samuel: "“You are the man! This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms." God explicitly gave someone multiple wives. Why would he do that if he thought it was a sin?

      September 2, 2011 at 12:46 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      The Deuteronomy passage, deals with consenting adults ,unattached to anyone else.The New Testament parallel would be the instruction to marry rather than burn(with lust)The solution put forth was simple,restore dignity to the girls family,(pay a pre determined dowry)and marry the girl properly.A practical common sense solution.Read the passage again, there is no mention of force or crime.

      September 2, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
    • Stevie7

      "So why is that passage part of the culture of the time, but other passages were not?"

      Because people love to cherry pick their chosen religious text to conform to their own preconceived notions of the world. See: slavery

      September 2, 2011 at 12:50 pm |
    • Stevie7

      @herbet: "The Deuteronomy passage, deals with consenting adults ,unattached to anyone else."

      What bible are you reading? Here's how the text reads:
      If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
      29Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

      What part of "lay hold" is consensual to you? Do you think that no means yes?

      September 2, 2011 at 12:53 pm |
    • Flash

      sean,
      "Taking modern Western social mores into ancient Israel twists the meaning of the passage."

      Well, there goes the entire OT then. It is the story of a Middle Eastern tribal god. There is not one shred of verified evidence of the supernatural beings or events of that book.

      September 2, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      @stevie
      "which is not betrothed"." lay hold of "(is intimate with),is describing the act ,not the use of force.There are a lot of gentle euphemisms used in the Bible....Uncover the feet for example.If you are focusing with the intent to find fault,you appear to be succeeding.

      September 2, 2011 at 1:00 pm |
    • Stevie7

      @herbert – you're really stretching. You're also wrong. Here's the description of the original hebrew from Strong's

      :1) to catch, handle, lay hold, take hold of, seize, wield
      a) (Qal)
      1) to lay hold of, seize, arrest, catch
      2) to grasp (in order to) wield, wield, use skilfully
      b) (Niphal) to be seized, be arrested, be caught, be taken, captured
      c) (Piel) to catch, grasp (with the hands)

      Where in any of that do you get "to be intimate"? FAIL

      September 2, 2011 at 1:05 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      @stevie You are determined to find fault,English is not Hebrew and A.D.2011 is not B.C.2011 .You wouldn't recognize truth if it hit you in the...Enjoy your fault finding it's what you do best.

      September 2, 2011 at 1:11 pm |
    • Stevie7

      Strong's uses reliable, english tra.nslations (not: plural) of the ori.ginal hebrew. Still waiting on you to provide anything to back up your claim that 'lay hold' means be in.timate, other than you want to con.t.ort the bible to fit your own morals. I won't be holding my breath. Nice try. Fail.

      September 2, 2011 at 1:21 pm |
  3. Lucy Fur

    God intended s*x for procreation and thought it was good
    Man uses s*x for reacreation and thinks it is good

    August 31, 2011 at 1:03 pm |
    • DamianKnight

      ...so if a married couple doesn't want children and uses birth control to prevent it, but still wants the intimacy of se.x, that's not in alignment with God?

      August 31, 2011 at 1:25 pm |
    • Stevie7

      "God intended s*x for procreation and thought it was good"
      -–
      This implies that s** outside of marriage, so long as it's for procreation, is ok.

      August 31, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
    • J.W

      And if a couple is married but cannot have children can they not have se.x?

      August 31, 2011 at 1:54 pm |
    • Lucy Fur

      see children Stevie., that was my intention to confuse thine grand mommy/pappy Eve/Adam..

      I was there in the Garden at that time...

      God intended s*x when he created Adam and and Eve was for them to be fruitful and multiply now you can find all the excuses to recreate yourself outside of God's intentions and i will continue to give you brilliant ideas about s8x outside marriage.

      Marriage is not a term i lucy fur likes it is God's intention.

      JW., what a brilliant question my child , why would you lose hope?

      August 31, 2011 at 2:23 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      If "God" intended s.e.x for procreation, why did he make some men and some women infertile?

      If "God" intended s.e.x for procreation, why do some couples have to try for years before having a child?

      If "God" intended s.e.x for procreation, why did he create the cli.t.oris which serves no purpose in procreation?

      August 31, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • sean

      God created Man and Woman and said it was good. The object of s*x is procreation, but it a married couple want to use birth control, that is not sin. Dont confuse people and make stuff up.

      September 2, 2011 at 12:17 pm |
    • Stevie7

      "The object of s*x is procreation, but it a married couple want to use birth control, that is not sin. "

      According to you. Others have a different view.

      September 2, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
    • J.W

      So where does the Bible say that se.x is only for procreation?

      September 2, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
  4. Terry

    Lady Gaga sings, "Born this way..." referring to the out working of ones lifestyle preferences. Katie Perry sings, "I kissed a girl and I liked it..." shedding light on the motivation to do it again...she liked it.

    Both of these artists have expressed truth to a certain degree...we are born contrary to God, and justify our behavior based on the pleasure it brings us. So taken by the pleasure that our preferences bring us, we conclude Scripture must be false, or God must hate certain special interest groups.

    Fact is, we are born contrary to God. Scripture serves to reveal what God intended for mankind. Anything contrary to His intentions is condemned. Mans free will choice produced the mess we are in. But, God loves each one of us so much, He gave His all...Jesus...the Deliverer, Savior, Redeemer...in an effort to save us from the condemnation our preferences produce.

    The challenge for each and every one of us originates in a question posed by the serpent in the Garden of Eden, "Did God really say....?" ~ Your choices reflect your answer to that question...and you will stand accountable.

    August 31, 2011 at 1:02 pm |
    • Erik

      Being gay is not a choice. I hate to burst any bubbles, but science, in fact, is actually not in dispute on this matter.

      All major medical professional organizations concur that sexual orientation is not a choice and cannot be changed, from gay to straight or otherwise. The American, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and European Psychological, Psychiatric, and Medical Associations all agree with this, as does the World Health Organization and the medical organizations of Japan, China, and most recently, Thailand. Furthermore, attempts to change one's sexual orientation can be psychologically damaging, and cause great inner turmoil and depression, especially for Christian gays and lesbians.

      Reparative therapy, also called conversion therapy or reorientation therapy, "counsels" LGBT persons to pray fervently and study Bible verses, often utilizing 12-step techniques that are used to treat sexual addictions or trauma. Such Christian councilors are pathologizing homosexuality, which is not a pathology but is a sexual orientation. Psychologically, that's very dangerous territory to tread on. All of the above-mentioned medical professional organizations, in addition to the American and European Counseling Associations, stand strongly opposed to any form of reparative therapy.

      In my home country, Norway, reparative therapy is officially considered to be ethical malpractice. But there are many countries that do not regulate the practice, and many others that remain largely silent and even passively supportive of it (such as the Philippines). Groups that operate such "therapy" in the Philippines are the Evangelical Bagong Pag-asa, and the Catholic Courage Philippines.

      The scientific evidence of the innateness of homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgenderism is overwhelming, and more peer-reviewed studies which bolster this fact are being added all the time. Science has long regarded sexual orientation – and that's all sexual orientations, including heterosexuality – as a phenotype. Simply put, a phenotype is an observable set of properties that varies among individuals and is deeply rooted in biology. For the scientific community, the role of genetics in sexuality is about as "disputable" as the role of evolution in biology.

      On the second point, that there is no conclusion that there is a "gay gene," they are right. No so-called gay gene has been found, and it's highly unlikely that one ever will. This is where conservative Christians and Muslims quickly say "See, I told you so! There's no gay gene, so being gay is a choice!"

      Take this interesting paragraph I found on an Evangelical website:
      "The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there's no homosexual "gene" – meaning it's not likely that homosexuals are 'born that way.'"

      But that's not at all what it means, and it seems Evangelicals are plucking out stand-alone phrases from scientific reports and removing them from their context. This is known in academia as the fallacy of suppressed evidence. Interestingly, this is also what they have a habit of doing with verses from the Bible.

      This idea of sexuality being a choice is such a bizarre notion to me as a man of science. Many of these reparative "therapists" are basing this concept on a random Bible verse or two. When you hold those up against the mountain of scientific research that has been conducted, peer-reviewed, and then peer-reviewed again, it absolutely holds no water. A person's sexuality – whether heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual – is a very deep biological piece of who that person is as an individual.

      The fact that a so-called "gay gene" has not been discovered does not mean that homosexuality is not genetic in its causation. This is understandably something that can seem a bit strange to those who have not been educated in fields of science and advanced biology, and it is also why people who are not scientists ought not try to explain the processes in simple black-and-white terms. There is no gay gene, but there is also no "height gene" or "skin tone gene" or "left-handed gene." These, like sexuality, have a heritable aspect, but no one dominant gene is responsible for them.

      Many genes, working in sync, contribute to the phenotype and therefore do have a role in sexual orientation. In many animal model systems, for example, the precise genes involved in sexual partner selection have been identified, and their neuro-biochemical pathways have been worked out in great detail. A great number of these mechanisms have been preserved evolutionarily in humans, just as they are for every other behavioral trait we know (including heterosexuality).

      Furthermore, there are many biologic traits which are not specifically genetic but are biologic nonetheless. These traits are rooted in hormonal influences, contributed especially during the early stages of fetal development. This too is indisputable and based on extensive peer-reviewed research the world over. Such prenatal hormonal influences are not genetic per se, but are inborn, natural, and biologic nevertheless.

      Having said that, in the realm of legal rights, partnership rights, and anti-discrimination protections, the gay gene vs. choice debate is actually quite irrelevant. Whether or not something is a choice is not a suitable criterion for whether someone should have equal rights and protections. Religion is indisputably a choice, but that fact is a not a valid argument for discriminating against a particular religion.

      This is not an issue in dispute. According to modern science: baby, you were born this way.

      August 31, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
    • Rick

      Terry: You seem to be playing fast and loose with "facts". For example, that we are born contrary to God. It may very well be a widely held OPINION, but that doesn't make it a FACT

      August 31, 2011 at 2:22 pm |
  5. Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

    I have to chuckle at christians quoting their bible as if it has authority. lol

    August 31, 2011 at 12:42 pm |
    • Awkward Situations

      They will never understand why that is inherently flawed.

      Then they get mad at the likes of us for quoting Mother Goose as a source of authority.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:50 pm |
    • Terry

      Chuckle at the fact that you have just fulfilled Bible prophecy...it is written in 2 Peter 3:3

      "...knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts..."

      An honest and humble investigation of the validity of Scripture will silence all sceptics.

      God Bless You.

      August 31, 2011 at 1:19 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Terry

      Hey -Terry...

      You Said to -Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics: " Chuckle at the fact that you have just fulfilled Bible prophecy...it is written in 2 Peter 3:3

      "...knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts..."

      How convenient. You have just engaged in what is known in debate and logic as a 'self-sealing' argument. Everything is used as 'proof' that your Bible is correct.

      The 'scoffers' have 'always' been around. And as for the "last days," well, many have been stating we are in the "end times" for a long time now.

      But, I'm sure you can point out more Bible verses that 'support' or 'self-seal' your argument that we are in the "end times", yes...?

      Regards,

      Peace...

      August 31, 2011 at 1:47 pm |
    • J.W

      It seems to me that the end times should be in the early 3000s somewhere. Jesus said I will tear down the temple and rebuild it in 3 days. And to God 1 day is like 1000 years. So if we take Jesus' word as meaning when he is coming back it should be in like 3030 or around there.

      August 31, 2011 at 1:58 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      Terry

      Chuckle at the fact that you have just fulfilled Bible prophecy...it is written in 2 Peter 3:3

      "...knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts..."

      An honest and humble investigation of the validity of Scripture will silence all sceptics.

      God Bless You.

      ------
      Apparently you do not realize how foolish and naive you sound and how va gue your scripture is to fit any situation. I guess you are not familiar with fortune teller tactics. Try looking outside the box of your bible.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:14 pm |
    • J.W

      I figured everyone would be excited about my theory. I guess nobody liked it. I will have to come up with something else.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:18 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      J.W

      It seems to me that the end times should be in the early 3000s somewhere. Jesus said I will tear down the temple and rebuild it in 3 days. And to God 1 day is like 1000 years. So if we take Jesus' word as meaning when he is coming back it should be in like 3030 or around there.

      ----–
      Should be interesting to see what is left of the catholic church and christianity by then. When you look at the groups that have broken off from the original church to creat new cults to now mormonism. You have to wonder what the jesus version will look like in 3030? The Catholic church is already dying....When USA collapses so will a large part of christianity. We would be foolish to think that the USA will be around in another 1000 years. If Islam becomes the new raging religion, I am sure they will try to wipe christianity from history.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:19 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      J.W

      I figured everyone would be excited about my theory. I guess nobody liked it. I will have to come up with something else.

      ------
      Well if jesus comes back in 3030, there might only be 300,000 (whatever the figure is in the bible) christians left on earth. Current day religions are just active mytholical beliefs. When we deactivate them we put them in books and read about them in the library.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:22 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      Okay I am stupid today meant mythical

      August 31, 2011 at 2:23 pm |
    • J.W

      But if he did come back then it would not be completely mythological. I dont think Christianity will die out I just think it will become more liberal.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      J.W

      But if he did come back then it would not be completely mythological. I dont think Christianity will die out I just think it will become more liberal.
      ----
      I was being sarcastic about him coming back to a couple hundred thousand.That woudl be a funny skit....Angels blaring their trumpets...Jesus floating down....W T F where is my welcoming party???...He stops to ask somebody where the christians are...they direct him to the library to read about them. lol

      When the supporting empires of a religion fall, something steps in. Don't be so proud to think that it won't meet the same fate as the Roman gods.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
    • J.W

      Well I guess I can't predict the future. Anything could happen. Maybe the world will end when the last Christian dies. Who knows?

      August 31, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      J.W

      Well I guess I can't predict the future. Anything could happen. Maybe the world will end when the last Christian dies. Who knows?

      ---–
      We can't predict but we can get an idea by observing history. In another 1000 years there might be christians but the size might be what we see of pagans today for an example. Small minority.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:41 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > An honest and humble investigation of the validity of Scripture will silence all sceptics.

      Like curing leprosy by burning sacrificed animals.

      August 31, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  6. Proof

    @mwiw

    You do bring up another set of people the 'Bi' will society be required to accept this? it is not a choice remember, it is part of the oneself, they were pretending to be hetro have children and they are gay and they are attracted to man/woman one day depending on which side of the bed they got up that morning..

    August 31, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • wakey

      Hold on world you are going too fast for me...lil head is spinning am I in the 23rd century already???? how many varieties of s*x do we have in this world..wow my 21st century folks were soooo backwards

      August 31, 2011 at 12:45 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      Proof

      I hate to confuse you but there are bi-s-exual people walking the world today who do engage in relationships with people of both genders. I am bi myself. I am attracted to both men and women. It has nothing to do with "how I'm feeling" at any given moment. It has to do with who I'm attracted to.

      I am also polyamorous, meaning that I believe I can love and engage in relationships with more than one person at a time. And yes, I would support a marriage bill that recognizes such relationships, even though I already know I have no desire or need to marry.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:25 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      Is a BI considered gay? If so, how?

      August 31, 2011 at 2:37 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      @ACTS, I don't consider myself "gay" though i do consider myself a part of the larger community of Lesbians, Gays, Bis.exuals and Transgender people.

      As do most bi.se.xuals I know.

      August 31, 2011 at 2:44 pm |
  7. BJJSchecter

    I am sure the church would love to go back to the good old days of "auto de fe" and burning at the stake for anyone who wasn't doing what the church expected.

    August 31, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
  8. Bo

    =========== Question, and I'm not sure how to word this question: Is a person gay/lesiban if they don't practice their preference?

    August 31, 2011 at 12:18 pm |
    • DamianKnight

      Is a person straight if they choose to remain celibate?

      August 31, 2011 at 12:20 pm |
    • LOL

      Are you a heterosexual if you don’t practice your preference?

      August 31, 2011 at 12:21 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      Am I no longer bi if my chosen partner is one gender or another?

      Can I only be bi if I am not partnered or having a relationship with one of each gender?

      Being gay or lesbian is about the natural state of attraction. If a gay man is married or "passing" as straight, but is still attracted to men, he is gay. If a gay man is celibate, and is still attracted to men, his is gay.

      It isn't like you stop being attracted to that which you are naturally attracted to just because you chose to behave as though you are not.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:27 pm |
    • J.W

      Actually Bo brings up a good point I think. At what point is being gay a sin, if it is a sin? Is it only a sin if they are sleeping together? If so then gay marriage itself would not be sinful.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
    • I = rubber, U = glue

      @J.W.

      Lusting for your neighbor's wife is a sin, even when you don't engage in the activity. I would assume that Christians would believe that even the thought of lusting for another man is a sin.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      J.W

      Actually Bo brings up a good point I think. At what point is being gay a sin, if it is a sin? Is it only a sin if they are sleeping together? If so then gay marriage itself would not be sinful.

      --------–

      Does "sin' have any relevance to law??????

      August 31, 2011 at 12:44 pm |
    • J.W

      Lusting after your neighbors wife would fall into the category of coveting, which would be a sin. But if it is someone you are married to that you are lusting after that is different.
      ACTS I wasnt suggesting that we base our law after it because of that. I have always said we should not legislate moral issues. I was simply talking from a Christian perspective of what should and should not be a sin.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Bo

      In answer to your question, the general response would be...'yes.'

      A person's 'desires' or who/what s-e-x they are attracted to is key. A person, may or may not be 'acting' in the moment on those 'desires'... but again, in general the answer to your question would be...yes.

      Regards,

      Peace...

      August 31, 2011 at 1:11 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      J.W

      Lusting after your neighbors wife would fall into the category of coveting, which would be a sin. But if it is someone you are married to that you are lusting after that is different.
      ACTS I wasnt suggesting that we base our law after it because of that. I have always said we should not legislate moral issues. I was simply talking from a Christian perspective of what should and should not be a sin.

      ----
      Got it 🙂

      August 31, 2011 at 1:17 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @J.W

      Hey -dude... !

      " Actually Bo brings up a good point I think. At what point is being gay a (sin), if it is a sin? "

      So, my FUN-dy friend, what do you think, since you are 'not' really a Christian...? 😀

      Regards,

      Peace...

      August 31, 2011 at 1:17 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      Peace2All

      @J.W

      Hey -dude... !

      " Actually Bo brings up a good point I think. At what point is being gay a (sin), if it is a sin? "

      So, my FUN-dy friend, what do you think, since you are 'not' really a Christian...?

      Regards,

      Peace...

      ----
      Curious how do you come to this conclusion??????????

      August 31, 2011 at 1:20 pm |
    • J.W

      Well Peace I tend to agree with what LOL has said. First of all the original translations never used the word hom.ose.xual. Also it was a common practice during pagan rituals at the time. Not to mention back then they thought it was a choice because they did not have the scientific knowledge about it we have now. I do not think the idea of two consenting gay adults having a relationship even existed back then.

      August 31, 2011 at 1:27 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      Hey -ACTS !

      Actually, it has been an ongoing fun discussion with J.W., myself, Laughing, and a few others teasing -J.W. that he really 'isn't' a Christian, especially in the traditional sense, because a good many of his views are more liberal than most Christians certainly are. He calls himself more of a FUN-dy, than anything close to a 'fundie' as we use the term.

      Just playful banter... that's it. 😀

      Hope that you are well, ACTS !

      Regards,

      Peace...

      August 31, 2011 at 1:34 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @J.W.

      So... your position is... it's a 'sin' if they actually engage in the h-o-m-o-s-e-x-ual (acts)...? But, they are not 'sinning' if they remain celibate...?

      Peace...

      August 31, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
    • J.W

      No Peace actually I dont think it is sinful at all really. I was just saying IF it is a sin, then at what point does it become a sin. If I type to you right now hey peace I am gay, is that a sin? If I say to a man 'wow you look handsome today' is that a sin? Or would it only be a sin in the case of a s.exual act? And if the last one is the case then why would gay marriage be sinful? Just because they may do something together every now and then?

      August 31, 2011 at 1:44 pm |
    • J.W

      I think as far as se.x outside of marriage can be a sin. Sometimes it is used for manipulation or as some sort of a game. Some people also do not take into account the dangers involved, such as sTDs or pregnancy.

      August 31, 2011 at 1:51 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @J.W.

      Fair enough.

      Regards,

      Peace...

      August 31, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
  9. Rainer Braendlein

    G-ay Pastors

    Everybody reading this following article should be aware that Jesus Christ was baptised by John the Baptist. What does that mean? Answer: Of course Jesus was no sinner, who had needed John’s baptism, but he was holy. Nevertheless he wanted to get baptised by John. By getting baptised, Jesus expressed: I want to join the community of the sinners, and I am not ashamed of the sinners. Jesus accepted to be labeled as sinner. The very meaning of John’s baptism was it to give people the following label: “this man is a sinner needing forgiveness!” Why gots Jesus himself baptized, when he was no sinner??? Jesus didn’t want to be a proud Pharisee with an egoistic Holyness (I am the only holy man on earth), but wanted to equate with the sinners that means he was ready to get the status: “sinner”. Jesus was the very opposite of a Pharisee because he considered himself as sinner and not as a righteous one. Jesus got himself baptized, that shows, how much he loves us. By getting baptized, Jesus joins us.

    The EKD (German Evangelical Church) is so down and out that she allows ho-mos(e)xuals to be official pastors of the EKD

    Even some little years ago in Germany practiced ho-mos(e)xuality was punishable: paragraph 175. Nearly for 2000 years there were no ho-mos(e)xual pastors in the Holy Christian Church, and suddenly now it shall be lawful??? This is impossible.

    Even when state and society become more and more tolerant concerning ho-mos(e)xuality, in the eyes of God it is a heavy crime.

    For the Christian Church it never can be crucial, which opinion state or society have got about a certain subject, but solely the opinion of the Hl. Scripture.

    First must be stated that this article is not about ordinary human beings having a v-ice, but about pastors. What is the task of the pastor? The task of the pastor is it to take care of the salvation of the church members soul. The pastor should preach: “Jesus Christ wants and is able to free you from slavery of every sin” (Matthew 1, 21), hear the gospel: “For God so loved the world, that he gave is only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3, 16).

    Please note, God doesn’t want solely to forgive, but to save from sins and give everlasting life. Romans 6, 1-3: Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live anylonger therein?

    As a result of which, we are dead to sin? We are baptized in the name of Jesus Christ!

    The true gospel is a gospel of freeing and releasing from sins.

    As-sumed, it would actually happen that a g-ay pastor would pronounce: “Jesus can set you free!”, then at the same time his body would preach: “The gospel is the biggest nonsense of all ages, it has no releasing power!” or “Grace is for free, consequently continue in sin”.

    Because it is out of question (impossible) that someone says yes (gospel sets free) and no (gospel doesn’t set free) at the same time, a ho-mos(e)xual is never allowed to become pastor, because by his way of life he perverts the gospel. He preaches, so to speak: “God forgives you, even when you continue in sin”, but he should preach with words and body: “Jesus sets you free!”

    It is written repeatedly in the Epi-stles of St. Paul that an examplary life is absolute basic condition for reaching out for an ecclesiastical office (1.Tim. 3, 1-13). Sinners in the Church are suggested to repent, but they are not called to ecclesiastical offices (Romans 6, 19-23).

    Proof that God particularly hates s(e)xual sins:

    Very long ago in Palestine lived peoples which experienced such a downfall that even their names have been forgotten and today nobody knows that they have ever existed.

    It were seven peoples: the Hetti-tes, the Girgash-ites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites (Deuteronomy 7). This peoples lived excessively in most heavy s(e)xual sins: s(e)xual intercourse between father and daughter, mother and son, man or woman with animal, men with men, woman with woman etc.. One day God had enough of it, and he mandated his people Isreal to exterminate this peoples. Deuteronomy 20, 16-20: But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: but thou shalt utterly destroy them …

    Leviticus 18, 1-30: God warned his people Israel of living in the sins of the peoples, which he was about to drive out. The peoples had made unclean (defiled) the land, and the land sp-it them out. Isreal would have the same fate like the peoples, when they would live in the sins of the peoples (Leviticus 20, 22-23).

    By the way, the Chruch is the heavenly Isreal. When God required his earthly people (Israel) not to make unclean themselves, how much more he will require his heavenly people (the Christian Church) not to make unclean themselves.

    Some verses of the Hl. Scripture, where intercourse between man and man is condemned: Leviticus 18, 22 und Leviticus 20, 13: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

    Romans 1, 26-27: … men with men working that which is unseemly … .

    The statements of the Hl. Scripture are absolutely clear. The Holy Scripture doesn’t solely condemn same-s(e)x love of pastors, but of everybody.

    About everybody trying to bend the Hl. Scripture to make it possible for example to justify the blessing of same-s(e)x couples, Dr. Martin Luther had said: “He is possessed by many devils!”

    At last: Everybody practising same-s(e)x love, should stop it right now, because it is an offence against God. When he cannot get rid of his longing, despite of his efforts, then he should ask Jesus Christ for help. It is the very office of Jesus Christ to deliver (set free) sinners from their sins. Jesus will set him free.

    By the way, everybody having received sacramental infant baptism, can refer back to his infant baptism and believe that by this infant baptism he has got deliverance and New Life in Christ. Re-baptism is strictly prohibited because it seperates from the one Holy Christian Church. Infant baptism is valid!

    When someone (who repents his sins) has the possibility, he should confess his sins to a Christian brother, and the brother should forgive and release in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ gave authority to the Church to forgive sins in his name: “Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained” (John 20, 23).

    Jesus loves us!!!

    August 31, 2011 at 12:18 pm |
    • Sporkify

      Jesus loves us and that's why if you devote your life to love and kindness, philanthropy and the betterment of society, but you didn't accept a 2,000 year old Arabian Jew as your eternal lord and master YOU'RE GONNA BURN BABY...FOREVER. That's just how god shows his divine love and mercy.

      I know it's useless to point out the fallacies and outright idiocies of your belief system because you're too brainwashed and/or dimwitted to understand anyway, but I try.

      You people are nuts, your time is done and your mythology is dying. We won't miss you.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:25 pm |
    • James

      Keep showing people you're nuts by repeating yourself. Take your meds!

      August 31, 2011 at 12:30 pm |
    • LOL

      Being gay is not a sin but male protitution, rape and idolatry is an abomination.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:32 pm |
  10. Bo

    ============Apparently with my cellphone I don't get all the info that others get. I didn't even know that this was apparently a female pastor. Nonetheless, this pastor must not have the same Bible I read.

    August 31, 2011 at 12:11 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      I'm pretty sure that a gay man is a man...and both of those people in the picture look like men. The article says he's a man...not sure what info you're getting.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
  11. Pam

    Pastor congratulations! This is great to see, it's nice to know the world is changing for the better.

    Each of you is called to respond to God's urgency for love and life. So whether you are in South Africa, the United States or anywhere else, humanity needs to accept its own diversity as a gift from our Creator. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are part of our family of God. I have always striven for a life of love in action. Many told me to stop. They called me a communist or they told me that I might be killed. Now, I have lived long, and one choice that comes with age is how to deal with our own mortality. Should we be more careful or be more bold? Should we rest on our laurels or respond to the urgency of justice? Boldly, I urge all faith leaders and politicians to stop persecuting people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Every day people live in fear because of who they love. We are talking about our family members, our flesh and blood, our humanity. LGBT people are in our villages, towns, cities, countries - and our whole world. In South African churches we have sung, "Oh freedom! Freedom is coming, oh yes, I know." We sang this chorus at the lowest points of our journey toward freedom against the racist and colonialist system of apartheid, and we still sing it to this day. Freedom is coming - and those of us who have freedom must speak out for those whose freedom is under attack. We can and must make a difference. “

    August 31, 2011 at 12:03 pm |
  12. Proof

    Can science prove that someone who was once married and had children can all of a sudden discover they are gay?

    August 31, 2011 at 12:03 pm |
    • Science

      No, it can't because it is a choice.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:07 pm |
    • LOL

      They probably always knew they were gay but tried to suppress it and fit in, but deep down they have to accept who they are and come to terms with it. Society is full of hate and violence toward gay people which makes it difficult for some to come out of the "closet."

      August 31, 2011 at 12:08 pm |
    • Proof

      So a person can pretend to be hetro bring forth children into this world and then discover they were gay all along??

      August 31, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
    • LOL

      "No, it can't because it is a choice."

      The experts disagree with you. Human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. For most people, sexual orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
    • DamianKnight

      I don't think "discover" is the correct word. It's not like they stumbled upon being gay. I think, as "LOL" stated, being gay is as built into one's genes as hair color or eye color. We see gay people getting married in a hetero-se.xual marriage as a way to conform to society's norms. It's not a choice. I don't think anyone can say there was a moment when they woke up and said, "Gee, I like people of the opposite gender." or "Gee, I like people of the same gender."

      It's not a choice. It's the way they are "hard-wired." And as soon as we accept that, things suddenly there's a whole new perspective on the whole gay marriage argument.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:19 pm |
    • Proof

      @LOL

      So what you are saying is that a Gay person can have s*x with both thier gender and opposite gender succesfully if they decided to remain in the closet. On the other hand a straight person cannot have s*x with their own gender because their orientation was such?

      August 31, 2011 at 12:23 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      There are a couple of things to consider here.

      1) A gay man may marry a woman and even produce children. Being gay does not preclude a man from having heteros-exual relations. He might even love his wife, being gay doesn't mean you can't love women. It means that you are first and foremost attracted to men. It does make it difficult, and it harms the relationship if he is untruthful about his orientation.

      2) There is also a chance that he is actually bi, and thus attracted to both genders. In this case it can be a sort of "waking up" moment to suddenly realize that he finds some man in his life attracted and wants a relationship with him. Because of the newness of it and the fact that most people do not think about bi-s-exuality as a part of the spectrum, he might think for a brief time that he is gay and behave accordingly.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:33 pm |
    • LOL

      “So what you are saying is that a Gay person can have s*x with both thier gender and opposite gender succesfully if they decided to remain in the closet.”

      Why are you so focused on the sex part there is more to a relationship than just that. The person is not being truthful to himself or herself if they remain in the closet, nor are they leading a personally fulfilled life by denying to themselves who they truly are. The issue is that our society is to full of hate and even violence towards gays and lesbians. The past has been filled with bias and prejudice reports that weren’t true. Plus they have also proven conversion therapies don’t work.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
    • Proof

      @LOL

      are we changing topics to friendships ? we were talking about gay vs straight it is not friendship orientation it is s*zual orientation?? must be missing something fundamental here...

      August 31, 2011 at 12:52 pm |
  13. Rainer Braendlein

    G-ay Pastors

    Everybody reading this following article should be aware that Jesus Christ was baptised by John the Baptist. What does that mean? Answer: Of course Jesus was no sinner, who had needed John’s baptism, but he was holy. Nevertheless he wanted to get baptised by John. By getting baptised, Jesus expressed: I want to join the community of the sinners, and I am not ashamed of the sinners. Jesus accepted to be labeled as sinner. The very meaning of John’s baptism was it to give people the following label: “this man is a sinner needing forgiveness!” Why gots Jesus himself baptized, when he was no sinner??? Jesus didn’t want to be a proud Pharisee with an egoistic Holyness (I am the only holy man on earth), but wanted to equate with the sinners that means he was ready to get the status: “sinner”. Jesus was the very opposite of a Pharisee because he considered himself as sinner and not as a righteous one. Jesus got himself baptized, that shows, how much he loves us. By getting baptized, Jesus joins us.

    The EKD (German Evangelical Church) is so down and out that she allows ho-mos(e)xuals to be official pastors of the EKD.

    August 31, 2011 at 11:34 am |
    • Rainer Braendlein

      .

      Even some little years ago in Germany practiced ho-mos(e)xuality was punishable: paragraph 175. Nearly for 2000 years there were no ho-mos(e)xual pastors in the Holy Christian Church, and suddenly now it shall be lawful??? This is impossible.

      Even when state and society become more and more tolerant concerning ho-mos(e)xuality, in the eyes of God it is a heavy crime.

      For the Christian Church it never can be crucial, which opinion state or society have got about a certain subject, but solely the opinion of the Hl. Scripture.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:36 am |
    • Rainer Braendlein

      First must be stated that this article is not about ordinary human beings having a v-ice, but about pastors. What is the task of the pastor? The task of the pastor is it to take care of the salvation of the church members soul. The pastor should preach: “Jesus Christ wants and is able to free you from slavery of every sin” (Matthew 1, 21), hear the gospel: “For God so loved the world, that he gave is only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3, 16).

      Please note, God doesn’t want solely to forgive, but to save from sins and give everlasting life. Romans 6, 1-3: Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live anylonger therein?

      As a result of which, we are dead to sin? We are baptized in the name of Jesus Christ!

      The true gospel is a gospel of freeing and releasing from sins.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:38 am |
    • Rainer Braendlein

      As-sumed, it would actually happen that a g-ay pastor would pronounce: “Jesus can set you free!”, then at the same time his body would preach: “The gospel is the biggest nonsense of all ages, it has no releasing power!” or “Grace is for free, consequently continue in sin”.

      Because it is out of question (impossible) that someone says yes (gospel sets free) and no (gospel doesn’t set free) at the same time, a ho-mos(e)xual is never allowed to become pastor, because by his way of life he perverts the gospel. He preaches, so to speak: “God forgives you, even when you continue in sin”, but he should preach with words and body: “Jesus sets you free!”

      August 31, 2011 at 11:41 am |
    • Rainer Braendlein

      It is written repeatedly in the Epi-stles of St. Paul that an examplary life is absolute basic condition for reaching out for an ecclesiastical office (1.Tim. 3, 1-13). Sinners in the Church are suggested to repent, but they are not called to ecclesiastical offices (Romans 6, 19-23).

      Proof that God particularly hates s(e)xual sins:

      Very long ago in Palestine lived peoples which experienced such a downfall that even their names have been forgotten and today nobody knows that they have ever existed.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:48 am |
    • Rainer Braendlein

      It was seven peoples: the Hetti-tes, the Girgash-ites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites (Deuteronomy 7). This peoples lived excessively in most heavy s(e)xual sins: s(e)xual intercourse between father and daughter, mother and son, man or woman with animal, men with men, woman with woman etc.. One day God had enough of it, and he mandated his people Isreal to exterminate this peoples. Deuteronomy 20, 16-20: But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: but thou shalt utterly destroy them …

      Leviticus 18, 1-30: God warned his people Israel of living in the sins of the peoples, which he was about to drive out. The peoples had made unclean (defiled) the land, and the land sp-it them out. Isreal would have the same fate like the peoples, when they would live in the sins of the peoples (Leviticus 20, 22-23).

      By the way, the Chruch is the heavenly Isreal. When God required his earthly people (Israel) not to make unclean themselves, how much more he will require his heavenly people (the Christian Church) not to make unclean themselves.

      Some verses of the Hl. Scripture, where intercourse between man and man is condemned: Leviticus 18, 22 und Leviticus 20, 13: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

      Romans 1, 26-27: … men with men working that which is unseemly … .

      The statements of the Hl. Scripture are absolutely clear. The Holy Scripture doesn’t solely condemn same-s(e)x love of pastors, but of everybody.

      About everybody trying to bend the Hl. Scripture to make it possible for example to justify the blessing of same-s(e)x couples, Dr. Martin Luther had said: “He is possessed by many devils!”

      At last: Everybody practising same-s(e)x love, should stop it right now, because it is an offence against God. When he cannot get rid of his longing, despite of his efforts, then he should ask Jesus Christ for help. It is the very office of Jesus Christ to deliver (set free) sinners from their sins. Jesus will set him free.

      By the way, everybody having received sacramental infant baptism, can refer back to his infant baptism and believe that by this infant baptism he has got deliverance and New Life in Christ. Re-baptism is strictly prohibited because it seperates from the one Holy Christian Church. Infant baptism is valid!

      When someone (who repents his sins) has the possibility, he should confess his sins to a Christian brother, and the brother should forgive and release in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ gave authority to the Church to forgive sins in his name: “Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained” (John 20, 23).

      Jesus loves us!!!

      August 31, 2011 at 11:50 am |
    • LOL

      Nowhere in the bible does the saved gay man get condemned. What is condemned is male protitution, rape and idolatry. When reading the scriptures you don't take it literally, you put it into historical context to get the true meaning of what was written, that is reading comprehension 101. The experts in science and psychology have shown that being gay is not a choice, it's not a mental illness, and it can't be voluntarily changed. People are born gay, just like you were probably born straight. They are God's creation which is why many churches, pastors, rabbis, etc.. have gone on record stating what we NOW know and understand about gays, homosexuality is NOT a sin.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:50 am |
    • James

      LOL haven't you notice that Rainer Braendlein is talking to themselves, their schizo and can't be taking seriously by their constant ramblings.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:55 am |
    • DamianKnight

      Someone call for a sermon?

      August 31, 2011 at 11:56 am |
    • Awkward Situations

      tl;dr!!

      August 31, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
  14. Reality

    From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, gay se-xual activity is still mutual masturbation caused by one or more complex se-xual defects. Some defects are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell.

    Yes, heteros-exuals practice many of the same "moves" but there is never a doubt who is the female and who is the male.

    August 31, 2011 at 11:14 am |
    • Where

      anyone seen loinly lamb lately????

      August 31, 2011 at 11:18 am |
    • Reality

      Then there is this:

      "Abrahamics" believe that their god created all of us and of course that includes the g-ay members of the human race. Also, those who have studied ho-mo-se-xuality have determined that there is no choice involved therefore ga-ys are ga-y because god made them that way.

      To wit:
      o The Royal College of Psy-chiatrists stated in 2007:

      “ Despite almost a century of psy-choanalytic and psy-chological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heteros-exual or hom-ose-xual orientation. It would appear that s-exual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of ge-netic factors and the early ut-erine environment. Se-xual orientation is therefore not a choice.[60] "

      "Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab state in the abstract of their 2010 study, "The fe-tal brain develops during the intraut-erine period in the male direction through a direct action of tes-tosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hor-mone surge. In this way, our gender identi-ty (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and s-exual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender ident–ity or s-exual orientation."[8

      Of course, those gays who belong to Abrahamic religions abide by the rules of no adu-ltery or for-nication allowed.
      And because of basic biology differences, said monogamous ventures should always be called same-s-ex unions not same-se-x marriages.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:20 am |
    • William Demuth

      Reality

      Declaring it an illness seems what it would be called if it wasn't so politicaly charged.

      If it IS in fact genetic, and a test can be developed, MILLIONS of Asian women would abort a gay child, and many would look for a cure.

      Gene therapy as a means of "curing" them wont be far off.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:27 am |
    • Awkward Situations

      Hom-ose-xuality is as natural as left handedness. To say it is some sort of genetic "defect" only opens the door to scrutinizing heterose-xuality as a genetic "defect" as well. Some people are gay, some are not. Some people are born trans-gender, what does that make them? Gay and/or straight?

      The "wrongness" of hom-ose-xuality only exists in the minds of people who have been brainwashed into believing it is a bad thing since they were young. Put all that aside and examine it for what it is... Hom-ose-xuality has existed persistently throughout our evolutionary history and can also be seen in the animal kingdom.

      It really is barbaric and shameful the way some people react towards others just because they are born a certain way.

      August 31, 2011 at 12:45 pm |
  15. no

    waiting for that day when silly willy and billy will be on their knees praying 5 times a day towards mecca!!!!
    and ofcourse ham will banished from their life as well!

    August 31, 2011 at 11:03 am |
  16. DamianKnight

    Such a strikingly different culture. In the U.S., you might face social persecution (wrong, in and of itself), but in Malaysia you face 20 years imprisonment and a whipping! I can't imagine what it must be like to be gay in a country like Malaysia.

    August 31, 2011 at 10:54 am |
    • William Demuth

      Shoplifters as young as eight have been caned.

      Scary place for sure.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:22 am |
    • DamianKnight

      Yeah, it was in Singapore where that American kid got caned for graffiti. Scary place to live, but you know what, I'll bet you it's a lot safer place to live.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:26 am |
  17. mylifemyway

    So full of hate, so typical of Adelina.

    August 31, 2011 at 10:09 am |
    • Laughing

      I think she's from Asia, somewhere so this probably hits especia.lly close to home because she's always ra.ili.ng against the West, this sort of puts a dent in her case.

      As to where she's from, she seems to know some stuff about Mal.ay.asia (Gra.nted it could have been just a quick google search). I think she's East Asian, she's clearly a christian which means she's probably not Ja.panese, solid chance she's not chi.nese either. If I had to make a guess I would say........South Korean? (She has a lot of hate for North Korea as seen from a lot of her posts which could be because they're com.munists, but she hasn't given the same hate to China)

      August 31, 2011 at 10:15 am |
    • William Demuth

      Laughing

      I suspect Korean as well.

      Lets put out some Kim Chee and a bible and see if we can catch her and return her to her hospital.

      August 31, 2011 at 10:26 am |
    • sherlock holmes

      Elementary my dear Watson!

      August 31, 2011 at 10:50 am |
    • Look

      silly willy is the super sleuth of the belief blog!!!!

      August 31, 2011 at 10:53 am |
    • Laughing

      HEY!

      I was the Sleuth! Willy was my Watson!

      August 31, 2011 at 10:54 am |
    • caution

      ok, ok... granted laughing is the Sherlock Holmes and silly willy is the Watson and Happy Meal is the 'Elusive One'

      August 31, 2011 at 10:58 am |
    • DamianKnight

      @Laughing,

      Do you get the long, curved pipe and the deerstalker hat?

      August 31, 2011 at 11:09 am |
    • Laughing

      Not to mention, the place on Baker St.

      August 31, 2011 at 11:17 am |
    • CrystalRiver

      @Laughing: Korea is a part of me. Both Koreas and China suffer/ed greatly under atheism. Atheists made the life in Asia literally like hell. You Americans should maybe taste it to knock off your sleepy stupidity. You all belong to North Korea.

      September 1, 2011 at 2:25 am |
    • CrystalRiver

      "You all" = American atheists

      September 1, 2011 at 2:26 am |
    • CrystalRiver

      When we were all small, we were told there was a dream country like Heaven somewhere far away where Christian principles are lived out and Christians are not persecuted. Opening the lid, you atheists are doing the very unthinkable on the America soil. You evil parasites do not belong to USA.

      September 1, 2011 at 2:34 am |
  18. KeninTexas

    He said "It means a lot to be married that day, to honor my country and people in Malaysia," ,,, I don't think this would do anyone any "honor".

    August 31, 2011 at 9:53 am |
    • Sporkify

      And there's Texas' input...would you guys just secede already?

      August 31, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
  19. William Demuth

    So Christian of you!

    Your blessings are consistent with your faith.

    August 31, 2011 at 9:50 am |
  20. CrystalRiver

    Asians think it's cool to mimic anything whites do. A racial disease. And the ocean that surrounds Malaysia is much polluted by now. Among Malaysia's 28 million people, 63% is Muslim, 13% is Chinese religion, Hindu and Buddhists 6% each, and Christian is close to 10%. This is one sick couple who lost life's direction from pollutions is an exempt. In Malaysia, infidels face discrimination from Muslims time to time. Muslims give no breaks but they are far better than the Western perverts, of course.

    August 31, 2011 at 9:46 am |
    • William Demuth

      SO this is your blessing for them?

      August 31, 2011 at 9:51 am |
    • myweightinwords

      What, exactly, is "Chinese Religion"?

      And what does the ocean and pollution have to do with an article on a gay pastor marrying his fiance?

      August 31, 2011 at 12:38 pm |
    • Laughing

      @myweightinwords

      Fun fact: Chinese religion is actualy the traditional religion of ancestor worship. There are no gods per se, well sort of but more as protector gods, they don't do A LOT. To use a great example is actually the movie Mulan. She practices the Chinese Religion

      August 31, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
1 2 3
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.