Courageous American Pastor Scott Lively receives death threat on voicemail

The inspiring and courageous US Pastor Scott Lively has received more than one death threat in recent times. One of the most recent threats has (unusually) been left on the Pastor’s voicemail.

The Pastor has made it possible for concerned individuals to listen to the threat on MP3, and he has given this link,
http://www.scottlively.net/2012/12/23/2012-the-year-of-the-smear/

We must inform our readers that the death threat contains offensive, vulgar language. However, we believe people need to hear (or read) the threat because it exposes the danger posed by “gay” activists to any/all who oppose them!

29 thoughts on “Courageous American Pastor Scott Lively receives death threat on voicemail

  1. You forgot to mention in your piece (although the caller obviously is aware) that Scott Lively is one of the people credited (is that what you mean by inspired) with stoking up the Ugandans christian religious fervour to introduce a bill which would create the death penalty for gay men who are serial homosexuals (ie do it more than once) which I guess will be after the 14 years spent in prison for doing it the first time.

    Or did you mention it on the earlier thread when you were going on about gay people threatening christians at London Pride. Oh you conveniently forgot to respond to that.

    Scott Lively may get the odd phonecall threatening his life which, although no one should be threatening anyone, will be the worst that will happen to him – unlike the gay people in Uganda who will and do suffer because of the missionary work carried out by right wing evangelical preachers of hate from the US (and here too it seems he has a fan base)

    • Golfie,
      Here is a quote from Pastor Lively, ” Now that Uganda’s so-called “kill the gays” bill has been revised to drop the death penalty and reportedly add provisions for prevention and therapy for homosexuality I think there may be room for tentative support in the Christian community in the West, even though it retains jail terms for offenders.” (our quote ends here, Golfie but you may continue reading the post on http://www.scottlively.net ) (see December 11th, 2012)
      A Pastor in San Francisco, Chuck McIlhenny and his family, were targeted by homosexuals in the 1980’s in a firebomb attack on their home, so the death threat was no idle threat and there are dangers associated with opposing the “gay” lobby.

      • You don’t just oppose the gay lobby however – you oppose gay people and promote hatred of them and support criminalisation of them. I do not support violence whether real or threatened against anyone (not even christians who would want me to be killed in line with their bible). You cannot say the same as you espouse a belief which calls for not just the threat of violence but actual violence and death against homosexuals and you have the arrogance and hypocrisy to whine and feign persecution when it gets thrown back in your face.

        You have heard of reaping and sowing I assume?

      • Certainly Glenn,

        This blog shows support of Scott Lively and in

        https://thetruthshallsetyoufreeblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/25/scott-lively-does-not-support-the-death-penalty-for-homosexuals-the-lie-that-he-does-is-oft-repeated-by-the-malevolent-left/

        references part of Scott Lively’s blog in which he states

        “In my opinion, the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill is still too harsh in the letter. I would prefer something closer to the approach several American states have taken toward marijuana: criminalize it but minimize the penalty and turn a blind eye toward discrete violations. Indeed, this would be my prescription for dealing with homosexuality (and all sex outside of marriage) in the United States.”

        I think that is fairly clear in showing support for criminalisation as I would never have read it if it was not for the support (Lively is described as “The inspiring and courageous US Pastor” in this very blog post we are commenting on) this blog shows for Lively and his views.

        • golfieni, on 26/12/12, you posted these words, “You don’t just oppose the gay lobby however – you oppose gay people and promote hatred of them and support criminalisation of them.”

          Presumably you are referring to us, the Whites. Then you quote Pastor Lively from a post on his own blog and this is supposedly evidence that WE (the Whites) “oppose gay people and promote hatred of them and support criminalisation of them?”

        • Golfieni,
          Well, you showed that he had SOME support for criminalization, but you still have shown where he has “hatred” for homosexuals.

          I think homosexual recruitment and seduction should be criminalized, and I think adultery should be criminalized. Both have a degrading effect on society, and both were at one time illegal.

      • Mrandmrswhite,

        You are promoting Scott Lively on your blog, you call him courageous and inspiring and you link to the passage I quoted before. Are you now saying that you do not agree with the blog post you linked to and do not agree with Scott Lively (and it now appears Glenn too).

        Glenn,

        At one time protestants were illegal, is that justification to return to that criminal code.

        As for criminalising homosexual recruitment – go ahead as it will have no effect as homosexuals are not recruited. Is this another barmy idea of yours to go along with your denial of the existence of mental illness? As for criminalising adultery just how big a government are you proposing?

        • golfieni,
          We believe that homosexual practice should be criminalised (as it was in times past) and adultery also. We do not believe that either (gays and adulterers) should be executed. You quoted Pastor Lively and made it appear that his words were ours, so, in future, let us speak for ourselves. By the way, at a Gay Pride parade in Belfast several years ago, a placard was carried with these words,” 10% is not enough, Recruit, Recruit, Recruit.” Now golfieni, are you still going to argue that no-one is recruited into the homosexual lifestyle?

        • Golfieni,
          Being a protestant is not a behavior – it is a philosophy. You don’t criminalize philosophies.

          Homosexuals do indeed recruit, and their own literature promotes it. Homosexual behavior is always chosen. One might have a sexual desire, but no one ever has to act on a sexual desire, especially when one knows it is immoral and against the design for human sexuality.

          Criminalizing adultery would bring back the idea that it is immoral and against marriage, and that one can have divorces where the guilty party is punished – the way it used to be. Punishment would be alimony every time and other financial punitive measures against the guilty party. When the laws against adultery were dropped, it left women with less protection. But then, you’d have to know a wee bit about social history to understand the ramifications of no-fault divorce laws, etc.

          You are in denial to claim there is such a thing as mental illness. Show me a mind that can be touched! It is intangible, and neither science nor medicine has ever been able to treat something intangible.

      • If you do support criminalisation of homosexuality then what was the all the nonsense about linking your posting of a statement to your support of it.

        As for banners at Pride – there was also one that said **** do you by implication think that has to be true too, I see all the placards you lot hold up and I don’t believe a word of them – maybe you need to be a bit more circumspect of things you read and get some supporting evidence.

        Glenn

        Protestantism is a philosophy – don’t make me laugh. Bill O’Reilly already tried all that nonsense and was corrected by a clergyman. It is a religion and yes religions have been banned.

        As for the rest of your post – complete nonsense and doesn’t even warrant a response.

        • Hey, guess what – religion is a philosophy, a belief system. It is not a behavior. Just because some countries have banned beliefs, that doesn’t make it right. Behaviors are what laws are supposed to control, not beliefs.

      • Well Glenn guess what – homosexuality is not a behaviour it is an orientation.

        Interesting take on protestantism being a philosophy not a religion. That should make the taxman very happy as philosophies don’t get the tax breaks that religions do. Good luck with that (I would suggest staying away from Fox News if you are going to go with every bit of dissembling that O’Reilly comes up with)

        The law is only there to control behaviours which are harmful (manly but not solely) to others. Homosexuality and the behaviour of two loving same sex people harms no-one, Now the behaviours of some people infected with religiosity – there is a debate on the harm principle.

        • Golfieni,
          Can you read and comprehend? You aren’t demonstrating the ability to do so.

          Homosexuality is neither orientation or behavior – if anything it describes a lifestyle. Someone may be “oriented” towards homosexuality, but they do not have to act on that orientation any more than a pedophile has to act on his orientation. Homosexual behavior is what people choose to do. No one is forced to have sex (rape is not the topic), but rather chooses whether or not to have sexual relations. No one is suggesting anyone punish someone for feelings of homosexuality, i.e. the orientation to homosexual lust. Homosexual behavior – the actions – is what is condemned, and what should not be given sanction by the state.

          Protestantism, as any other religious belief, is indeed a philosophy. Not all philosophies are religious beliefs, but religions are philosophies. The point is that you implied that because sometime in the past (and even currently if living under Islam) religions were punished, therefore by the analogy of previous punishment for homosexual behavior or adultery, religion could also be punished. My point is that a religious belief is one’s philosophy – what they believe and how it affects their world view. It is not a behavior to be controlled by the state. (some practices – i.e. behaviors – of some religions should be controlled because they are dangerous and immoral).

          Homosexual behavior is harmful to not only the participants, but to society as a whole. The medical findings of physical harm with caused by homosexual behavior – especially male on male – are well-known and easily found on the ‘net. The psychological harm of homosexual behavior is also well-known, affecting both male and female homosexual practitioners.

          Giving homosexual relationships the same sanction as real marriage has caused great harm to the family unit it every country which has legalized fake marriage. To deny that would demonstrate either ignorance of the subject or total self-denial.

      • Now Glenn you are just showing your ignorance of both the definition of words and your ability to understand even the basics of sexuality.

        “Homosexuality is neither orientation or behavior – if anything it describes a lifestyle” do you mean in the same way that heterosexuality describes a lifestyle as opposed to an orientation which defines opposite sex attraction.

        For your info homosexuality is defined as the orientation which is characterised by same sex attraction. That is what the word means. It has nothing to do with lifestyle no matter how much you want it to. A homosexual is a homosexual no-matter what lifestyle they lead.

        “Homosexual behavior is harmful to not only the participants, but to society as a whole. The medical findings of physical harm with caused by homosexual behavior – especially male on male – are well-known and easily found on the ‘net. The psychological harm of homosexual behavior is also well-known, affecting both male and female homosexual practitioners”

        No it is not – some sexual behaviours are harmful but they are not exclusive to homosexuals and many behaviours between people of the same sex are less harmful than common heterosexual ones and the only psychological harm is caused by societal oppression and homophobia such as you promote.

        “Giving homosexual relationships the same sanction as real marriage has caused great harm to the family unit it every country which has legalized fake marriage.”

        Rubbish and you know it.

        • Golfieni,

          The only “rubbish” is what you profess about homosexuality. Homosexuality as a word describes a lifestyle, a way of living in perversion and personal destruction. Period. When one is “oriented” towards homosexuality, they are “oriented” towards that lifestyle – sexual lust for someone of their own gender.

          I fully understand the basics of human sexuality, and homosexuality is a perversion of it. You are in denial.

      • “Homosexuality as a word describes a lifestyle, a way of living”

        No it does not and your attempts to pervert the English language to suit your prejudice is laughable.

        “I fully understand the basics of human sexuality”

        You clearly don’t as you don’t even know what the different terms describe. You have a knowledge of the nonsense put together by christian apologists to try and justify their bigotry but that is not the same thing. You know as much about sexuality as you do about mental illness or frankly being human.

        • Golfieni.
          So when homosexuals are having sex, are they not practicing the lifestyle of homosexuality?

          So it is now “bigotry” to tell the truth that homosexual behavior is perverse and an abuse of human sexuality?

          You have demonstrated by your self-denial that you know nothing about human sexuality other that whatever feels good is okay, and that you know nothing about “mental illness” other than the porridge of propaganda you’ve eaten from the pscychobabble industry.

      • When homosexuals are having sex it is sex – it is neither a lifestyle nor is it practising anything. When they are not having sex they are still homosexuals.

        If it were true then it would not be bigotry, as it is not then it is. It always has been too.

        All I have demonstrated is an ability to understand scientific evidence and my own personal experience. What I have failed to show is an ability to be blinkered by crazy theories and delusions backed up by the world view of goatherders from 3000 years ago.

        You have your opinions (not truth) which are there to validate the prejudices contained within you bible and deny any evidence which contradicts it. You are welcome to it but thankfully the rest of us have moved on to the extent that surgeons can re-stitch sides after they have split laughing at you. You make the Luddites look progressive.

        • Golfieni,
          Actually, there is no such thing as a homosexual. That term was originally an adjective to describe the behavior, but to get victim status, those who practice such behavior took it on as a noun. But really there is no such thing as “A” homosexual. They are merely people who practice homosexual behavior. But calling themselves by their sexual behavior puts them in a category which can claim special rights based on being a minority group, etc. Sorry, but rights aren’t about sexual preferences.

          It is NOT bigotry to call homosexual behavior what it is: sin, perversion, abuse of human sexuality, deviant, unhealthy, etc.

          There is no scientific evidence to support your position. If there was, then it would be out there in the public media.

          There are no prejudices in the Bible – only truths. WHat I have written is not opinion, but facts.

  2. It’s wrong for anyone to threaten anyone with death, but he wants gays dead. So what does he expect? At least all he has to fear from them is the threat. They have to fear actual death from him and his ilk.

      • Pastor Lively should mind his own business. It is not for him to decide what I need based on his delusions.I have not requested him to desire anything on my behalf so he can keep his repentance, salvation and deliverance to himself.

  3. If you threaten people with eternal damnation why should you not be threatened in return? no sympathy for him at all. He is not a christian. He works for Satan.

    • James,
      How do you determine that Lively is not a Christian? Because you say so?

      Lively isn’t the one threatening people with eternal damnation – GOD is. Those who are not Christians will be eternally damned. That is what the Bible says.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s