The Editor’s Desk

Slavery was NEVER condemned in scripture. However Homosexuality was condemned, alot. Homosexuality is one of the expressions of the sinful nature inate in man. Some steal, some murder, some lie, commit adultery the list can go on and on. The compulsive liar will say he can't help it. Does that mean it is intrinsic and should be okay? Likewise for the rapist, murderer etc, etc. Each of these things are choices.Too many FORMER homosexuals will tell you that it was a choice. Public examples of homosexual choices: Anne Heche, Linday Lohan, (for now) There are others not so public. Homosexuality will never go away, but if the MAJORITY of the public do not want to legitimize Gay Marraige why should we? If you would be honest with yourself and Prop 8 had passed would you be quite so quick to support those of us who would protest that result?

Your support of Lisa Miller's arfticle is frightening. It reveals an underlying agenda to attack the Jewish and Christian community. To offer an alternative view would have been appropriate. To say that accepting the Bible's authority is the worst kind of fundamentalism is an apparent attempt to incite hate toward our communities. To say that it is intellectually bankrupt to take a position based on Biblical authority is offensive. To say that it is also unworthy of the great Judeo-Christian tradition is illogical because this tradition is based on the Bible!

Your arguments and Ms. Miller's arguments are so flawed it would take paragraphs and paragraphs to go through each point. Let me pick one: Proposition 8 was not a ban on gay marriage. It was an affirmation of one-man-one-woman marriage. On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court overruled the will of the people expressed by the passage of Proposition 22 in 2000. Prop 22 passed by 61%, yet that court thought they knew better. This is not taking anyone's rights away because no "right" had been granted in the first place. Proposition 8 is codifying the definition of the word "marriage" and explaining to our judicial system, yet again, that they cannot forcibly change that meaning without the consent of the people. Your slanted editorials clearly reveal your motives. We are not fooled.

The analogy of race to this issue is ludicrous and completely diminishes the struggles that persons of color had to endure. Persons of color in this country's history have been denied life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and it was all done legally. Gay's have never legally been denied any of this. The passage of Prop. 8 has not denied anyone of any rights. I notice your article doesn't mention that gay's have the same protected rights and benefits as they have always had. In fact Gay???s have more rights than most as they are a ???protected??? class. I also find it interesting that you end your editorial with a Biblical description of the word marriage. If you are so against the Bible, then you should leave "marriage" alone.

The hypocrisy of your idea of inclusion and tolerance is also interesting since you being your article with degrading remarks about Christians. I guess inclusion & tolerance only applies to those who agree with you.

Yes you are pushing your "agenda" on many of us, & you'll likely win, but not because you are correct but because you have a larger stage and a higher soapbox. You've been able to indoctrinate the next generation by printing one-sided arguments and passing them off as truth. I suspect that it irritates you to no end that despite an overwhelming flood of bias, you haven???t been able to squash the dissenting opinions. But if you have your way, it will soon be illegal to have a dissenting opinion with you. This will likely be called ???hate??? speech for which I could be prosecuted.

Finally, remember this. In an election with a record turnout in the most populous state in the Union where over 61% voted for the liberal candidate, Proposition 8 passed. This should tell you it wasn???t just the Evangelicals who voted for it.

After seeing Lisa Miller's article and that of the Editor, at first I was outraged. But, as a Christian I am bound to share the truth in love. I pray I'm not "casting my pearls to the swine." I am so sorry for everyone who doesn't know the joy, peace and contentment I have from knowing the LORD. I will pray for all of you, who in your own eyes are so wise. God loves everyone. It is sin that He hates. There are no degrees of sin. One sin is not worse than another. When we stand before our perfect, holy God we will be judged for all we have said and done in this world that is contrary to his Word. Our only hope is in the Lord Jesus Christ who took our sin upon himself and suffered the wrath of God for our sake. We have but to ask for forgiveness (from the heart) and believe that He died and rose again on the third day and He is coming again to judge those still alive and the dead.

The Bible does in many passages speak of marriage between a man and a woman and against being "gay". One must first have eyes to see and ears to hear. God created a man from the dust of the earth and woman from man to be his helpmate. It also says man shall not lay with man. Have you not heard about Sodom and Gomorah? These cities were destroyed by God for their sexual perversion. Their ruins have been found.

God and His Word have not changed since the beginning of time, my friend. The world has changed. To our detriment.

From Romans 1:" 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man......"

Professing to be wise, Newsweek has become foolish....

How dare you use only 'straw man' arguments!!!

You are as impoverished in the art of debate as you claim fundementalists are impoverished in intelligence for founding anything on the Bible.

You claim that only those will full relevation of culture, history, and context can oppose gay marriage. Then you use an IMPLICATIVE assertion that anyone that disagrees with you does not have full possession of blah blah blah.

You claim that anyone that bases anything on Biblical ideals is literally stupid. Then your reporter writes that the Bible is relevant only when interpreted in her fashion.

You claim that conservatives are crying about liberals imposing liberal values on a God-fearing nation, but then cry out that the same people are imposing their values on you.

You claim that history and demographics are on the side of those who favor inclusion, but carefully IMPLY an obmittance of any non-American history. World history is definitely on the side of exclusion (not that I agree this is best).

Revolution has occured on this land twice, yet you assume that a 50 year tradition of liberal reform is the forever guiding movement in world history.

You assert the Old Testaments seemly oppression on women, yet deny its context. The Biblical context is definitively on the side of equality in parteners, but supports differing roles. You deny the context of Paul's letters to the Corithians, because the submission of the wife is unfair when paired against a husband that's commanded by God to do everything in their family's best interest or 'so help them God.' You deny the context of Jesus where he cries out for the defense of the women and children. And you deny the context of the Old Testament in asserting that Love does not balance Obediance.

You show your ignorance of the text by claiming Leviticus and Paul are the only two instances of anti-homosexual scriptures. You show your ignorance when you do not note that the sin of Sodom was homosexuality (the men wanted to be with the two men who appeared in the town as disguised angels).

You set up a straw man argument for the homosexual basis in the Bible, then knock it down, then claim most all protestants think this way (your reporter claims only evangelicals are anti-homosexuality).

You cite only those that agree with your view, without mentioning strong critics and the opposition.

You finally show ommittance by eliminating the context surrounding the many that believe the Bible supports homosexuality by not given a relation to those that oppose.

I am disappointed with my Church and with cultural conservatives in general for focusing on gay marriage as the centerpiece of their 'defense of marriage'. Lenient cultural attitudes toward pre-marital sex, co-habitation, and divorce have done far worse damage to the sacrament of marriage than legalized gay marriage ever will. We clearly have our eye on the wrong ball.
I have a respect for the gay community for fighting for their right to live as they please. Their lifestyle does not infringe on the rights of others, and this is the type of personal freedom that defines the American system of government.
But what disappoints about the gay community's defense is the shallow claim that (to quote Jon Meacham) ???sexual orientation is not a choice???a matter of behavior???but is as intrinsic to a person's makeup as skin color???. To a certain extent, this is correct. Sexual orientation is not a choice, just as an orientation toward alcoholism or violence is stronger in some than others. We are all created with our temptations and tendencies; but it is our FREE WILL, our actions in the face of those temptations which determine the content of our character.
Can we truly define ourselves as heterosexual, homosexual, or even celibate until we have taken action toward those classifications? I am a heterosexual because, after experiencing desires toward women in my youth, I chose to actively indulge those desires. Now I am happily married; I still experience those same desires toward many women. But by free will, I choose to no longer indulge them. I have very young children now ??? I challenge you to define my 2 year-old as a heterosexual, homosexual, or a celibate. You cannot. He will define that for himself via his FREE WILL as he matures, takes stock of his desires, his sense of morality, etc, and then finally takes a hold of his own sexuality by either indulging or repressing those senses.
So to the gay community, I say that you do have a worthy cause to fight. But stop cowering behind some mask of genetics; stop claiming that you have no control over your homosexuality by comparing yourselves to disenfranchised women and people of color. Our American society has become worse-off because its members don???t take personal responsibility. Show the courage to defend your decisions and actions that ultimately made you homosexual. After all, how can one truly be proud of what they are, if they claim to have had no control of their destiny?

Wesley Crosby:

"The bible clearly states eating shellfish is an ABOMINATION yet I don't see any evangelicals picketing or trying to outlaw Red Lobster or Captain D's.....hypocrisy or ignorance, it's just too hard to tell."

Not so hard to tell. There is this whole section of books after Leviticus and all that called "The NEW Testament," and some of those Old Testament proscriptions (eating shellfish, for example) were lifted. As a devotee of Red Lobster, I can only say HURRAY!

Unfortunately, some of those Old Testament proscriptions (man/man sex for example) were not only left in place, their proscription was reiterated and reenforced.

You need to read the WHOLE Bible for it to make sense, not just the parts you choose to mock.