Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Pretty sure he was referring to PartyBear's citation of Levitical ordinances as a "gotcha" against any and all other prohibitions in the Bible as being a poor, uneducated argument. He was right, if so.

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Those cave-dwellers birthed the civilization that produced modern astrophysics. If that civilization loses its way, don't expect an astrophysicist to be able to explain why.

Edmond Bear said:

---

Why would this be considered surrendering to an agenda and not an attempt to love people that Christ loves?

Should gay people not be around people of faith?

---

Agreed, if that is ALL this is.

Based on the author's writings, however, I am not sure that is ALL this is.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Those cave-dwellers birthed the civilization that produced modern astrophysics. If that civilization loses its way, don't expect an astrophysicist to be able to explain why.

---

Those cave dwellers are so far removed from today's world they couldn't explain it in any way except supernaturally.

bearassnekkid said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Pretty sure he was referring to PartyBear's citation of Levitical ordinances as a "gotcha" against any and all other prohibitions in the Bible as being a poor, uneducated argument. He was right, if so.

---

The necked bear is correct.

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Those cave-dwellers birthed the civilization that produced modern astrophysics. If that civilization loses its way, don't expect an astrophysicist to be able to explain why.

---

Those cave dwellers are so far removed from today's world they couldn't explain it in any way except supernaturally.

---

It's the same world with the same rules of logic. Relying on technicians for moral insight will always be a fallacy.

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Those cave-dwellers birthed the civilization that produced modern astrophysics. If that civilization loses its way, don't expect an astrophysicist to be able to explain why.

---

Those cave dwellers are so far removed from today's world they couldn't explain it in any way except supernaturally.

---

It's the same world with the same rules of logic. Relying on technicians for moral insight will always be a fallacy.

---

It is a very different world.

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Those cave-dwellers birthed the civilization that produced modern astrophysics. If that civilization loses its way, don't expect an astrophysicist to be able to explain why.

---

Those cave dwellers are so far removed from today's world they couldn't explain it in any way except supernaturally.

---

It's the same world with the same rules of logic. Relying on technicians for moral insight will always be a fallacy.

---

It is a very different world.

---

The hierarchy of needs is still the same, they are just packaged differently. Our sins are still the same, they are just packaged differently.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

A quick summation of my view.

Being gay will not send a person to hell anymore than being straight will send a person to heaven.

Sin is what will place a person in hell. The wages of sin is death. That is why WE ALL need a Savior. My sin is not homosexuality but I have plenty of other sins. Because of those other sins, I have a debt to pay but it is a debt I cannot pay. Christ paid it for me.

Do I still sin? Yes. Do I advocate for a sin and try to say it is not sin? I sure hope not. Do I still have sins of omission? Yep. Do I tell the world my omissions are not sin? I sure hope not.

---

Sounds like to me you're saying gay Christians should not have to concern themselves with what anybody thinks about them, but trust in the mercy and providence of God.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Those cave-dwellers birthed the civilization that produced modern astrophysics. If that civilization loses its way, don't expect an astrophysicist to be able to explain why.

---

Those cave dwellers are so far removed from today's world they couldn't explain it in any way except supernaturally.

---

It's the same world with the same rules of logic. Relying on technicians for moral insight will always be a fallacy.

---

It is a very different world.

---

The hierarchy of needs is still the same, they are just packaged differently. Our sins are still the same, they are just packaged differently.

---

Clark's Third Law.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

sacrificial laws do not apply as Jesus was the last sacrifice.

---

Thanks for sharing, not an easy watch but I did. Still don't understand your strong hyperbole when you are just replacing one ancient text script with a newer one then making a loud "how dumb are you!" statement.

Why did the direct line to God stop for authoring texts back when we didn't know anything? Shouldn't we be updating texts as a dynamic book like you just did to eschew OT commandments? We want to advance in literally every aspect of life except organized religion. Seems odd to me and alot of trust put in people who couldn't tell ya where the sun went at night but knew how to get to a magical afterlife!
Christians can't even agree on what makes a Christian (denominations), not thrilled to use scripture as some litmus test on what we should be doing with campus groups in 2019.

Edmond Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

Those cave-dwellers birthed the civilization that produced modern astrophysics. If that civilization loses its way, don't expect an astrophysicist to be able to explain why.

---

Those cave dwellers are so far removed from today's world they couldn't explain it in any way except supernaturally.

---

It's the same world with the same rules of logic. Relying on technicians for moral insight will always be a fallacy.

---

It is a very different world.

---

God's economy hasn't changed. We have.

---

God's economy. OK.

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

sacrificial laws do not apply as Jesus was the last sacrifice.

---

Thanks for sharing, not an easy watch but I did. Still don't understand your strong hyperbole when you are just replacing one ancient text script with a newer one then making a loud "how dumb are you!" statement.

Why did the direct line to God stop for authoring texts back when we didn't know anything? Shouldn't we be updating texts as a dynamic book like you just did to eschew OT commandments? We want to advance in literally every aspect of life except organized religion. Seems odd to me and alot of trust put in people who couldn't tell ya where the sun went at night but knew how to get to a magical afterlife!
Christians can't even agree on what makes a Christian (denominations), not thrilled to use scripture as some litmus test on what we should be doing with campus groups in 2019.

---

Knowing where the sun goes at night doesn't make you any wiser or more intelligent. It just means you've had access to information on that particular topic.

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

bearassnekkid said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

How many plan to punish Baylor by refusing to send your kids to Baylor because of them admitting to the pews that homosexuality actually exists at a place like Baylor?
What minor league Baptist colleges will you consider instead of BU?

---

Are you feeling ok? You keep repeating this same thing over and over again, and it's like you're having an argument with yourself.

Nobody. Has. Ever. Argued. That. Homosexuals. Don't. Exist. At. Baylor.

Please read that 20 more times, and say it loud each time so it really sinks in. You are making an irrelevant point that no one disputes or even cares about.

Pre-marital sex exists at Baylor. Drunkenness exists at Baylor. Liars exist at Baylor. Greedy people exist at Baylor. Porn exists at Baylor. SO THE HELL WHAT. The point is that the University doesn't formally recognize, sanction, endorse, and facilitate "groups" who wish to celebrate and tout and participate in those behaviors. That's what this is about. Is Baylor going to condone and facilitate Biblical sin by formally encouraging and "welcoming" and "including" etc etc etc groups who participate in it or "orient" around it, yada yada. Not whether they "exist." That is a non-issue.

---

It's not going to effect the brand. The general alumni don't care. It's towards the bottom of the list concerning improving the school. It's all how you view Baylor.

---

^^^ You completely missed his point

I'm not surprised though

---

Don't care. I get the fact some will not like it.

---

Who? No one is arguing that there are not homosexuals at Baylor. Even blue hairs know it.

---

I suppose you do not want the group allowed. Times are a changing, imo.

---

I don't but not for the reasons you're thinking.

I think homosexuals should be at Baylor for the same reasons that homosexuals should be around church and ideally Christians who actually love other human beings the way Christ loves them.

I don't think it's a good idea for Baylor to recognize an LGBTQ group (not because it would be a show of supporting homosexuality) but because it would be a foothold for activists to make Baylor ground zero for their "rights" argument.

---

Lmao! Baylor isn't going to be ground zero for any social movement or protest. Have you met our alumni and student body over the past 50 years?
The LGBTQ group will be watched and monitored like no group has been before and possibly protested by groups at Baylor (a first for many of these protest groups' members).

A student dying to be a social activist is not going to pick Baylor. Those people like to be in their comfort zone (it's why the young Republicans were protesting anti gun curriculum and trying to tie into the Bible at Baylor...even the gun lobby frowns on that nonsense...Jesus didn't bring up guns in the Bible or gun control).

---

I love X logic.

First X tries to convince everyone that gays actually exist on campus. When there is no counter argument, he laughs at the suggestion that an LGBTQ student group might be activist or invite activists to campus.

Cause you know what guys, our gays are not soooo gay that they'd be activist. We really do have gays guys. But, not X-treme gays. Just complacent gays. You know, the happy go-lucky gays.

Glad to hear that X thinks that there would not be a slew of Brittney Griner like articles by ESPN or mainstream media. Or that an LGBTQ community looking to label Christians as haters would not find a convenient target in Baylor. We've seen such favorable coverage by the media that there is no way we could all be labeled as haters. /s

---

Things change from the business perspective. It might attract a few more quality students and raise our rank.
You just want to keep the pro church side ahead of the pro Texas side.

Edmond, does news travel slow after we cross Waterloo? You are worried about gay protests. What are they going to protest? Marriage? Sounds like politics to me. Did you get angry when the mayor blessed gay pride and gave an "attaboy" to the Stonewall Inn? He's a new diverse type Republican.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

sacrificial laws do not apply as Jesus was the last sacrifice.

---

Thanks for sharing, not an easy watch but I did. Still don't understand your strong hyperbole when you are just replacing one ancient text script with a newer one then making a loud "how dumb are you!" statement.

Why did the direct line to God stop for authoring texts back when we didn't know anything? Shouldn't we be updating texts as a dynamic book like you just did to eschew OT commandments? We want to advance in literally every aspect of life except organized religion. Seems odd to me and alot of trust put in people who couldn't tell ya where the sun went at night but knew how to get to a magical afterlife!
Christians can't even agree on what makes a Christian (denominations), not thrilled to use scripture as some litmus test on what we should be doing with campus groups in 2019.

---

Knowing where the sun goes at night doesn't make you any wiser or more intelligent. It just means you've had access to information on that particular topic.

---

If you don't know where the sun goes at night there's a lot of the world you will never understand. As Sagan called it, the demon haunted world. A genius who worships river sprite will never use his genius to define gravity. Or germ theory. Or hydrofracking.

cinque said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

A quick summation of my view.

Being gay will not send a person to hell anymore than being straight will send a person to heaven.

Sin is what will place a person in hell. The wages of sin is death. That is why WE ALL need a Savior. My sin is not homosexuality but I have plenty of other sins. Because of those other sins, I have a debt to pay but it is a debt I cannot pay. Christ paid it for me.

Do I still sin? Yes. Do I advocate for a sin and try to say it is not sin? I sure hope not. Do I still have sins of omission? Yep. Do I tell the world my omissions are not sin? I sure hope not.

---

Sounds like to me you're saying gay Christians should not have to concern themselves with what anybody thinks about them, but trust in the mercy and providence of God.

---

If I'm a greedy SOB and I make my greed my god, if I convince myself that greed is what makes the world work and God understands that, then I have created my own god and do not worship the one true Creature God. I am not a Christian no matter what I call myself.

We all need to trust in God's mercy and grace. We need to know God. The best two things I know of to do that work hand-in-hand, together; prayer and the Bible.

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

bearassnekkid said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

How many plan to punish Baylor by refusing to send your kids to Baylor because of them admitting to the pews that homosexuality actually exists at a place like Baylor?
What minor league Baptist colleges will you consider instead of BU?

---

Are you feeling ok? You keep repeating this same thing over and over again, and it's like you're having an argument with yourself.

Nobody. Has. Ever. Argued. That. Homosexuals. Don't. Exist. At. Baylor.

Please read that 20 more times, and say it loud each time so it really sinks in. You are making an irrelevant point that no one disputes or even cares about.

Pre-marital sex exists at Baylor. Drunkenness exists at Baylor. Liars exist at Baylor. Greedy people exist at Baylor. Porn exists at Baylor. SO THE HELL WHAT. The point is that the University doesn't formally recognize, sanction, endorse, and facilitate "groups" who wish to celebrate and tout and participate in those behaviors. That's what this is about. Is Baylor going to condone and facilitate Biblical sin by formally encouraging and "welcoming" and "including" etc etc etc groups who participate in it or "orient" around it, yada yada. Not whether they "exist." That is a non-issue.

---

It's not going to effect the brand. The general alumni don't care. It's towards the bottom of the list concerning improving the school. It's all how you view Baylor.

---

^^^ You completely missed his point

I'm not surprised though

---

Don't care. I get the fact some will not like it.

---

Who? No one is arguing that there are not homosexuals at Baylor. Even blue hairs know it.

---

I suppose you do not want the group allowed. Times are a changing, imo.

---

I don't but not for the reasons you're thinking.

I think homosexuals should be at Baylor for the same reasons that homosexuals should be around church and ideally Christians who actually love other human beings the way Christ loves them.

I don't think it's a good idea for Baylor to recognize an LGBTQ group (not because it would be a show of supporting homosexuality) but because it would be a foothold for activists to make Baylor ground zero for their "rights" argument.

---

Lmao! Baylor isn't going to be ground zero for any social movement or protest. Have you met our alumni and student body over the past 50 years?
The LGBTQ group will be watched and monitored like no group has been before and possibly protested by groups at Baylor (a first for many of these protest groups' members).

A student dying to be a social activist is not going to pick Baylor. Those people like to be in their comfort zone (it's why the young Republicans were protesting anti gun curriculum and trying to tie into the Bible at Baylor...even the gun lobby frowns on that nonsense...Jesus didn't bring up guns in the Bible or gun control).

---

I love X logic.

First X tries to convince everyone that gays actually exist on campus. When there is no counter argument, he laughs at the suggestion that an LGBTQ student group might be activist or invite activists to campus.

Cause you know what guys, our gays are not soooo gay that they'd be activist. We really do have gays guys. But, not X-treme gays. Just complacent gays. You know, the happy go-lucky gays.

Glad to hear that X thinks that there would not be a slew of Brittney Griner like articles by ESPN or mainstream media. Or that an LGBTQ community looking to label Christians as haters would not find a convenient target in Baylor. We've seen such favorable coverage by the media that there is no way we could all be labeled as haters. /s

---

Things change from the business perspective. It might attract a few more quality students and raise our rank.
You just want to keep the pro church side ahead of the pro Texas side.

Edmond, does news travel slow after we cross Waterloo? You are worried about gay protests. What are they going to protest? Marriage? Sounds like politics to me. Did you get angry when the mayor blessed gay pride and gave an "attaboy" to the Stonewall Inn? He's a new diverse type Republican.

---

I'm not worried about gay protests. I'm concerned about media.

If you want some heavy gay action, just try out the new student orientation at UCO.

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

bearassnekkid said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

How many plan to punish Baylor by refusing to send your kids to Baylor because of them admitting to the pews that homosexuality actually exists at a place like Baylor?
What minor league Baptist colleges will you consider instead of BU?

---

Are you feeling ok? You keep repeating this same thing over and over again, and it's like you're having an argument with yourself.

Nobody. Has. Ever. Argued. That. Homosexuals. Don't. Exist. At. Baylor.

Please read that 20 more times, and say it loud each time so it really sinks in. You are making an irrelevant point that no one disputes or even cares about.

Pre-marital sex exists at Baylor. Drunkenness exists at Baylor. Liars exist at Baylor. Greedy people exist at Baylor. Porn exists at Baylor. SO THE HELL WHAT. The point is that the University doesn't formally recognize, sanction, endorse, and facilitate "groups" who wish to celebrate and tout and participate in those behaviors. That's what this is about. Is Baylor going to condone and facilitate Biblical sin by formally encouraging and "welcoming" and "including" etc etc etc groups who participate in it or "orient" around it, yada yada. Not whether they "exist." That is a non-issue.

---

It's not going to effect the brand. The general alumni don't care. It's towards the bottom of the list concerning improving the school. It's all how you view Baylor.

---

^^^ You completely missed his point

I'm not surprised though

---

Don't care. I get the fact some will not like it.

---

Who? No one is arguing that there are not homosexuals at Baylor. Even blue hairs know it.

---

I suppose you do not want the group allowed. Times are a changing, imo.

---

I don't but not for the reasons you're thinking.

I think homosexuals should be at Baylor for the same reasons that homosexuals should be around church and ideally Christians who actually love other human beings the way Christ loves them.

I don't think it's a good idea for Baylor to recognize an LGBTQ group (not because it would be a show of supporting homosexuality) but because it would be a foothold for activists to make Baylor ground zero for their "rights" argument.

---

Lmao! Baylor isn't going to be ground zero for any social movement or protest. Have you met our alumni and student body over the past 50 years?
The LGBTQ group will be watched and monitored like no group has been before and possibly protested by groups at Baylor (a first for many of these protest groups' members).

A student dying to be a social activist is not going to pick Baylor. Those people like to be in their comfort zone (it's why the young Republicans were protesting anti gun curriculum and trying to tie into the Bible at Baylor...even the gun lobby frowns on that nonsense...Jesus didn't bring up guns in the Bible or gun control).

---

I love X logic.

First X tries to convince everyone that gays actually exist on campus. When there is no counter argument, he laughs at the suggestion that an LGBTQ student group might be activist or invite activists to campus.

Cause you know what guys, our gays are not soooo gay that they'd be activist. We really do have gays guys. But, not X-treme gays. Just complacent gays. You know, the happy go-lucky gays.

Glad to hear that X thinks that there would not be a slew of Brittney Griner like articles by ESPN or mainstream media. Or that an LGBTQ community looking to label Christians as haters would not find a convenient target in Baylor. We've seen such favorable coverage by the media that there is no way we could all be labeled as haters. /s

---

Things change from the business perspective. It might attract a few more quality students and raise our rank.
You just want to keep the pro church side ahead of the pro Texas side.

Edmond, does news travel slow after we cross Waterloo? You are worried about gay protests. What are they going to protest? Marriage? Sounds like politics to me. Did you get angry when the mayor blessed gay pride and gave an "attaboy" to the Stonewall Inn? He's a new diverse type Republican.

---

I'm not worried about gay protests. I'm concerned about media.

If you want some heavy gay action, just try out the new student orientation at UCO.

---

Oh yeah, 1 in 7 at UCO are gay. I've heard it is one of the biggest gay student ratios in the U.S. They commute to the Plaza District on weekends. I'll be your body guard after 10 p.m. down there to experience the new wave of diversity at the Plaza District. We can get a brief experience at Saints. Play guess the transgendered.
We can run over to the original Scorecard Bar. Straight, white, over 35 is socially acceptable if it gets too strange.

Lady Linda will handle the media.

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

bearassnekkid said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

How many plan to punish Baylor by refusing to send your kids to Baylor because of them admitting to the pews that homosexuality actually exists at a place like Baylor?
What minor league Baptist colleges will you consider instead of BU?

---

Are you feeling ok? You keep repeating this same thing over and over again, and it's like you're having an argument with yourself.

Nobody. Has. Ever. Argued. That. Homosexuals. Don't. Exist. At. Baylor.

Please read that 20 more times, and say it loud each time so it really sinks in. You are making an irrelevant point that no one disputes or even cares about.

Pre-marital sex exists at Baylor. Drunkenness exists at Baylor. Liars exist at Baylor. Greedy people exist at Baylor. Porn exists at Baylor. SO THE HELL WHAT. The point is that the University doesn't formally recognize, sanction, endorse, and facilitate "groups" who wish to celebrate and tout and participate in those behaviors. That's what this is about. Is Baylor going to condone and facilitate Biblical sin by formally encouraging and "welcoming" and "including" etc etc etc groups who participate in it or "orient" around it, yada yada. Not whether they "exist." That is a non-issue.

---

It's not going to effect the brand. The general alumni don't care. It's towards the bottom of the list concerning improving the school. It's all how you view Baylor.

---

^^^ You completely missed his point

I'm not surprised though

---

Don't care. I get the fact some will not like it.

---

Who? No one is arguing that there are not homosexuals at Baylor. Even blue hairs know it.

---

I suppose you do not want the group allowed. Times are a changing, imo.

---

I don't but not for the reasons you're thinking.

I think homosexuals should be at Baylor for the same reasons that homosexuals should be around church and ideally Christians who actually love other human beings the way Christ loves them.

I don't think it's a good idea for Baylor to recognize an LGBTQ group (not because it would be a show of supporting homosexuality) but because it would be a foothold for activists to make Baylor ground zero for their "rights" argument.

---

Lmao! Baylor isn't going to be ground zero for any social movement or protest. Have you met our alumni and student body over the past 50 years?
The LGBTQ group will be watched and monitored like no group has been before and possibly protested by groups at Baylor (a first for many of these protest groups' members).

A student dying to be a social activist is not going to pick Baylor. Those people like to be in their comfort zone (it's why the young Republicans were protesting anti gun curriculum and trying to tie into the Bible at Baylor...even the gun lobby frowns on that nonsense...Jesus didn't bring up guns in the Bible or gun control).

---

I love X logic.

First X tries to convince everyone that gays actually exist on campus. When there is no counter argument, he laughs at the suggestion that an LGBTQ student group might be activist or invite activists to campus.

Cause you know what guys, our gays are not soooo gay that they'd be activist. We really do have gays guys. But, not X-treme gays. Just complacent gays. You know, the happy go-lucky gays.

Glad to hear that X thinks that there would not be a slew of Brittney Griner like articles by ESPN or mainstream media. Or that an LGBTQ community looking to label Christians as haters would not find a convenient target in Baylor. We've seen such favorable coverage by the media that there is no way we could all be labeled as haters. /s

---

Things change from the business perspective. It might attract a few more quality students and raise our rank.
You just want to keep the pro church side ahead of the pro Texas side.

Edmond, does news travel slow after we cross Waterloo? You are worried about gay protests. What are they going to protest? Marriage? Sounds like politics to me. Did you get angry when the mayor blessed gay pride and gave an "attaboy" to the Stonewall Inn? He's a new diverse type Republican.

---

I'm not worried about gay protests. I'm concerned about media.

If you want some heavy gay action, just try out the new student orientation at UCO.

---

Oh yeah, 1 in 7 at UCO are gay. I've heard it is one of the biggest gay student ratios in the U.S. They commute to the Plaza District on weekends. I'll be your body guard after 10 p.m. down there to experience the new wave of diversity at the Plaza District. We can get a brief experience at Saints. Play guess the transgendered.
We can run over to the original Scorecard Bar. Straight, white, over 35 is socially acceptable if it gets too strange.

Lady Linda will handle the media.

---

Have been to Saints many times. We did guess the trans at The Patriarch last week after watching the Oklahoma Victory Dolls in Roller Derby.

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

bearassnekkid said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

How many plan to punish Baylor by refusing to send your kids to Baylor because of them admitting to the pews that homosexuality actually exists at a place like Baylor?
What minor league Baptist colleges will you consider instead of BU?

---

Are you feeling ok? You keep repeating this same thing over and over again, and it's like you're having an argument with yourself.

Nobody. Has. Ever. Argued. That. Homosexuals. Don't. Exist. At. Baylor.

Please read that 20 more times, and say it loud each time so it really sinks in. You are making an irrelevant point that no one disputes or even cares about.

Pre-marital sex exists at Baylor. Drunkenness exists at Baylor. Liars exist at Baylor. Greedy people exist at Baylor. Porn exists at Baylor. SO THE HELL WHAT. The point is that the University doesn't formally recognize, sanction, endorse, and facilitate "groups" who wish to celebrate and tout and participate in those behaviors. That's what this is about. Is Baylor going to condone and facilitate Biblical sin by formally encouraging and "welcoming" and "including" etc etc etc groups who participate in it or "orient" around it, yada yada. Not whether they "exist." That is a non-issue.

---

It's not going to effect the brand. The general alumni don't care. It's towards the bottom of the list concerning improving the school. It's all how you view Baylor.

---

^^^ You completely missed his point

I'm not surprised though

---

Don't care. I get the fact some will not like it.

---

Who? No one is arguing that there are not homosexuals at Baylor. Even blue hairs know it.

---

I suppose you do not want the group allowed. Times are a changing, imo.

---

I don't but not for the reasons you're thinking.

I think homosexuals should be at Baylor for the same reasons that homosexuals should be around church and ideally Christians who actually love other human beings the way Christ loves them.

I don't think it's a good idea for Baylor to recognize an LGBTQ group (not because it would be a show of supporting homosexuality) but because it would be a foothold for activists to make Baylor ground zero for their "rights" argument.

---

Lmao! Baylor isn't going to be ground zero for any social movement or protest. Have you met our alumni and student body over the past 50 years?
The LGBTQ group will be watched and monitored like no group has been before and possibly protested by groups at Baylor (a first for many of these protest groups' members).

A student dying to be a social activist is not going to pick Baylor. Those people like to be in their comfort zone (it's why the young Republicans were protesting anti gun curriculum and trying to tie into the Bible at Baylor...even the gun lobby frowns on that nonsense...Jesus didn't bring up guns in the Bible or gun control).

---

I love X logic.

First X tries to convince everyone that gays actually exist on campus. When there is no counter argument, he laughs at the suggestion that an LGBTQ student group might be activist or invite activists to campus.

Cause you know what guys, our gays are not soooo gay that they'd be activist. We really do have gays guys. But, not X-treme gays. Just complacent gays. You know, the happy go-lucky gays.

Glad to hear that X thinks that there would not be a slew of Brittney Griner like articles by ESPN or mainstream media. Or that an LGBTQ community looking to label Christians as haters would not find a convenient target in Baylor. We've seen such favorable coverage by the media that there is no way we could all be labeled as haters. /s

---

Things change from the business perspective. It might attract a few more quality students and raise our rank.
You just want to keep the pro church side ahead of the pro Texas side.

Edmond, does news travel slow after we cross Waterloo? You are worried about gay protests. What are they going to protest? Marriage? Sounds like politics to me. Did you get angry when the mayor blessed gay pride and gave an "attaboy" to the Stonewall Inn? He's a new diverse type Republican.

---

I'm not worried about gay protests. I'm concerned about media.

If you want some heavy gay action, just try out the new student orientation at UCO.

---

Oh yeah, 1 in 7 at UCO are gay. I've heard it is one of the biggest gay student ratios in the U.S. They commute to the Plaza District on weekends. I'll be your body guard after 10 p.m. down there to experience the new wave of diversity at the Plaza District. We can get a brief experience at Saints. Play guess the transgendered.
We can run over to the original Scorecard Bar. Straight, white, over 35 is socially acceptable if it gets too strange.

Lady Linda will handle the media.

---

Have been to Saints many times. We did guess the trans at The Patriarch last week after watching the Oklahoma Victory Dolls in Roller Derby.

---

A purple haired one?

Baylor ain't no transgendered resort. SMU is not either.

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Prairie_Bear said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

If y'all were seriously sincerely rigid adherents to what ancient people thought, you would be raising issues about shrimp being served in the cafeterias. Stop picking and choosing what to ignore as to what ancient people wrote and what to rigidly adhere to.

---

This is perhaps the poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the bible that exist. Do just a little bit of reading on your own and then delete your post before others read it.

---

Why is it the "poorest, most uneducated, most overused argument regarding the Bible"? Because you don't like it nor have a good retort?

If we had a complete solar eclipse tomorrow, would you want a 500 B.C. sheep herding cave dweller to explain it to you or a current day educated astrophysicist? How do you feel naturally occurring phenomenon like that was interpreted and past down orally? Accurately?

I'm curious how questioning the judgement/context of people who knew nothing about the world/environment/science around them is "uneducated"? Willing to be educated...

Couldn't care less about LBGTQ groups or whatever at Baylor. Being a loving example will gain you more influence than a preachy moralist, IMO.

---

sacrificial laws do not apply as Jesus was the last sacrifice.

---

Thanks for sharing, not an easy watch but I did. Still don't understand your strong hyperbole when you are just replacing one ancient text script with a newer one then making a loud "how dumb are you!" statement.

Why did the direct line to God stop for authoring texts back when we didn't know anything? Shouldn't we be updating texts as a dynamic book like you just did to eschew OT commandments? We want to advance in literally every aspect of life except organized religion. Seems odd to me and alot of trust put in people who couldn't tell ya where the sun went at night but knew how to get to a magical afterlife!
Christians can't even agree on what makes a Christian (denominations), not thrilled to use scripture as some litmus test on what we should be doing with campus groups in 2019.

---

Knowing where the sun goes at night doesn't make you any wiser or more intelligent. It just means you've had access to information on that particular topic.

---

If you don't know where the sun goes at night there's a lot of the world you will never understand. As Sagan called it, the demon haunted world. A genius who worships river sprite will never use his genius to define gravity. Or germ theory. Or hydrofracking.

---

Isaac Newton: "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."

Louis Pasteur: "Posterity will one day laugh at the foolishness of modern materialistic philosophers. The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. I pray while I am engaged at my work in the laboratory."

Can't find any quotes from George P. Mitchell, but evidently he was a member and generous supporter of Trinity Episcopal Church in Galveston.

---

Newton is (a) not fifth century BC and (b) not a sprite worshipper. Was he right to reject the Trinity? To point out that passages had been added to scripture?

I think some of you went to the wrong school actually. You went to Baylor when you meant to go to Liberty. Baylor is finally getting its act together at the top and beginning to do things to get research grants pouring in from the federal govt and private foundations and to help increase the endowment. They are also doing things to join elite academic associations required by 2 or 3 of the P5 conferences for membership. Y'all should be happy the idiots who have run the place and terribly for the most part over the past 20 years are finally being pushed out and real serious university Regent types are moving in.

By the way Teaff's daughter was one of the leaders regarding the petition.

I said the past 20 years. And yes you folks who want to be alums of Liberty should have gone there.

Sam Lowry said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I said the past 20 years. And yes you folks who want to be alums Liberty should have gone there.

---

I'd say you folks who want to be alums of UC Berkeley should have gone there...but of course I know you're kidding. X has assured us that no liberal would ever come to Baylor and try to tell us what to do.

---

Lol at the irony this whole thread is about you fundy types trying to tell us "Baylor" what to do as if your personal political views are central tenets of Christian theology. They aren't.