Kinsey & Homosexual Movement

[Dale]

  Those who advocate homosexuality often mention the research of Alfred Kinsey (1894-1956). Kinsey interviewed thousands of people about their sex lives, although the subjects were not scientifically selected. Kinsey did create a sensation by claiming that homosexuality and bestiality were widespread.
*
  Large numbers of people seem to have drawn the erroneous conclusion that a widespread activity must be okay, morally neutral. Yet one of the most basic priniciples of logic is that there is no connection between the number of people who believe something and its truth. Likewise, there can be no connection between the number of people who have performed an act and whether it is moral or desirable.
*
  What kind of man was Kinsey? He encouraged his wife to have sex with his colleagues and gave similar advice to his colleagues’ wives. We are told that Kinsey was bisexual, falling in love with at least two men, and a masochist. He was sympathetic to sex criminals, defending incest and pedophiles. Biographer James H. Jones brings out these facts in a book reviewed by Alan Wolfe in New Republic, November 24, 1997.
*
  In addition, we are told that Kinsey was “frustrated and angry” and “consumed by demons.”
*
  Kinsey’s research is scientifically worthless because of poor sampling methods, shoddy statistics. “Kinsey’s approach to sex was as scientific as Peyton Place,” Wolfe tells us. Scientifically, Kinsey’s main claim to fame was being funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. Perhaps this explains why Kinsey received criticism, not support, from scientific figures as liberal as Margaret Mead.
*
  Some would say that Kinsey’s research is supplemented by later research by Masters and Johnson. At one time Masters and Johnson operated a chain of gotcha147 clinics. What happened to them? Local authorities shut them down when they found that their methods of treating sexual problems can hardly be distinguished from prostitution.

[Symphony]

Thank you, Dale.

But does anyone care?

I think the same was true of (Margaret) Singer, or was it Sanger, of Family Planning?  That is, apparently a virtual prostitute, encouraging all sorts of sexual mayhem, 100 years ago?

I'm not sure the facts are welcome though--the deadly underbelly side of things.

[Dale]

  They ought to care, Symphony.
  Only recently, a Methodist minister, the senior pastor of a large church, gave Kinsey as the reason that he supports the homosexual movement.
  Many trace the origins of today's loosening of values, trashing of marriage, to Kinsey's books, the first of them published in 1948, as I remember.

[JudgeNot]

Only recently, a Methodist minister, the senior pastor of a large church, gave Kinsey as the reason that he supports the homosexual movement.

There have been threads on this forum asking if Catholics are Christian and asking if Baptists are Chritstian - maybe it is time we started a couple of other threads covering Methodists and Episcopalians.  
(But we don't want to leave out Presbyterians, Church of Christ, Church of God, Greek Orthodox, Adventists, Grace Fellowship, Nazarines, Lutherans...)  

[Dale]

  JudgeNot:
               My mother was a Methodist. Although my membership is elsewhere, I have attended Methodist churches for considerable periods of time. The minister I am speaking of here is one I have had lunch with on a number of occasions.
  There are many signs of life in the church that this man heads. For instance, there is a class that meets after the service and discusses the sermon. I've been in that class on a number of occasions.
  Nevertheless, I have heard Methodist ministers say some alarming and startling things on a number of occasions, both in their sermons, in classes, and in private. It is my impression that the great majority of Methodist ministers today do support the homosexual movement. If you don't believe that, ask one.
  In short, JudgeNot, I don't mean to be judgmental, I'm just passing on what I know, what I've seen with my own eyes and heard with my own ears.

[JudgeNot]

Dale - I'm not disagreeing with you at all.  There are numerous Methodist Churches in my area "recognizing" homosexual unions as marriage.  It makes me glad I belong to a non-denominational, Bible believing church that condemns homosexual practice.

I guess that my point is, that there are those on this website that choose to single out Catholics and Baptists for their practices (or non-practices) while ignoring denominations that are overtly accepting teachings that are quite obviously non-Christian.

Yours in Him,
JN

[tony350]

Hello folks,
I have heard of Kinsey but never read any of his books.
I was raised in Methodist Church since i was about 7 years old. We got about 5 other Churchs in town. My town, the population is only 1200+   I have known everyone at my Church since i was young. Everyone here knows everyone else good. It's that type of small country town. Anyway we have had a number of preachers both male and female in my Church. Some of my preachers tought things that was not in the Bible or that was false. When that happened, everyone at Church used the Scriptures to point that out. 99% of the preachers agreed with the Scriptures, the ones that didn't got mad and left.   But at no time in my lifetime at my Church, agreed that the gay lifestyle was ok. But I have never believed ANY Church was perfect. I know that all Churchs are God's (those Churchs that are true and teach what Jesus taught.) I go to Church to have followship,etc.. but I use God's Word for my guild. I have bee to all the Churchs at one time or another in my town. I don't know about other Churchs that are far away from my town that are Methodist. But my Church does condemns homosexual practice. Well the whole town here condemns homosexual practice.   as it should. And we only have one cop here.  
Thats what type of town I live in. You may have heard about the race ploblems in Mississippi? It ain't that way here where I live though. About 20% at my Church is black. Half my friends are black. I grew up with blacks.
I think I got off track here...
What im trying to say is I fear in the future 2+ years from now the gays will have the same rights as the rest of us. Now think of kids growing up then not knowing that the gay lifestyle is wrong. That itself is one sign of Christ return.
Men being lovers of themself. Unless God does something, gays are gonna be allowed to marry all across America.
Becouse the courts (which is suppose to uphold God's laws) tossed out everything us Christians believe. They already took out the 10 Commandments out of the schools, among other things. I could talk hours here but ya'll know how the world is today. I often think about the great heros of the Bible, David,Paul,etc...and just think if they were here today. We know Paul would be hated by most of the world, yet with his boldness and faith he would stir up things big time.
Ploblem is non-christians just don't care. And it seems to be more non-christians then Christians today. And  then when we Christians try to help..we are pushed down.
How many of you here have tried to help a non believer? and the person says "its none of your business" or "don't preach to me." People just won't listen today. Yet, we all know when we stand before God, ALL will listen and bow to the true, living, God! Anyway sorry I got off track to much my mind was wondering as I wrote.

[JudgeNot]

I go to Church to have followship,etc.. but I use God's Word for my guild.

Amen Tony350.

[Dale]

  JudgeNot:
              << There have been threads on this forum asking if Catholics are Christian and asking if Baptists are Chritstian ... >>

  It would be interesting to know how the Christianity of Baptists would be questioned.

[Dale]

  JudgeNot:
               << I guess that my point is, that there are those on this website that choose to single out Catholics and Baptists for their practices (or non-practices) while ignoring denominations that are overtly accepting teachings that are quite obviously non-Christian.  >>

  You probably know that the United Church of Christ, UCC, or Congregationalists, have accepted homosexual unions for well over ten years now. Interesting, since the Congregationalists are the surviving remnant of the Puritans.
  Of course, the Metropolitan Community Church, was founded as a church for homosexuals. I'm told that their doctrine is rather conservative except for the thing about homosexuality.
I know that the Metropoliltan Community Church met on a college campus, state or county property, in Georgia, near Atlanta.

[JudgeNot]

Dale,
When I was young (a loooooooooong time ago) the UCC was one of the most conservative "you can lose your salvation at any time" churches in my community.  They preached the ‘use it or lose it’ (concerning salvation) message often and loudly.

I'm surprised they have bent to the homosexual lobby.  I didn’t know that.  

[Dale]

  Symphony in post #2:
<< Thank you, Dale.
But does anyone care? >>

  Perhaps the question is, will the papers print it? Last fall, while the controversy over the homosexual Episcopal Bishop was at its height, folks argued the matter in the letters column of our local papers. Then one of our two local papers, which happens to be owned by the New York Times, came out with a statement that they would print no more letters on that subject. Why? The New York Times has supported homosexuality for decades. Where I live most people are against it. So a paper that supports homosexualilty has nothing to gain by debate. They know their side would lose.
  Our other paper is not quite so supportive of homosexuality, but they also have a limited tolerance for the whole subject. Their columnists have devoted about two sentences to homosexuality in the past year, unless I missed something. Likewise, they seem to have a quota of letters to the editor on that subject. I've been able to get some letters in, then they stopped printing them.
  It would seem to me that we haven't scratched the surface of what needs to be said on the subject. But even our most conservative editors only want so much. They apparently think, ho hum, enough.