Blind faith helps people to believe that the earth is flat, and the world was formed almost...overnight. It is a companion to enjoy...the Dark Ages
Blind faith helps people to believe that the earth is flat, and the world was formed almost...overnight. It is a companion to enjoy...the Dark Ages
I'm gay catholic, or some what catholic on my own way. I can't even remember the last time I went to church, however I thank God every single day. I'm 21 and thanks God I have a great family that understand that I did not choose to be this way... I really believe that the Bible and the Laws should be compliantly separated... I for one thing don't care if its call 'marriage' or 'civil union' We can even come up with a new word... I do agree that in 10 years same sex couples will have all of the rights just as the rest of the world... After all we all are sons and daughters of the same Father.
They, the homosexuals, can read and so they understand the Bible very well. They are flawed,corrupted and UnGodly in their thinking. They look for and to ways to get around the truth that God says in the Bible regarding homosexuals. God can and will not have anything to do with unjust,UnGodly individuals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Homosexuals know that what they do is a sin. They choose to make that choice and color there actions as a civil rights issue. It is not a civil rights issue at all!!!!!!!! This political correct climate is a bunch of madness. They are human beings but are in deep in sin. They have drugs for them too change there sex or do whatever but the want to keep the practice of there sick desires. There lack of discipline and lack of making the choice God has ordained is a example of there weakness. They choose not too submit to the teaching of the creator and want man to follow there interpetation. That it is ok to be gay. Just remember that if all was ok in that thought process sodom would be here still. There would be no HELL if we thought like that.
Don't be fooled by this agenda !!!!! Stand up and speak out against this action but treat them as human beings ..
An anti-God philosophy, ie, the acting out of evil spirits, will say that the scripture; is unclear since God is incapable of creating a book and maintaining it in such a way that we can trust it, and by extension trust God. To attack God in this way is to take a position against God, to become an agent of satan. God maintains His word, for He says, "Thy word oh Lord is forever settled in heaven." -Psalms
Your wife looks great too me! The Bible in no way calls that a sin. I was born with feelings for your wife. She's beautiful to me. How can I be condemned for feeling this way all my life. A woman is a woman. Married or unmarried, what difference does that make to my natural attraction? What difference can that make to my actions? The Bible supports my feelings and actions. How could God be against the way he made me? Anyone who wishs to throw stones at me, just doesn't know me. I intend to settle down with your wife. Until such time as my desire leads me elsewhere: I will love your wife. Being better looking and richer than you are, taking your wife will be a breeze. The Bible tells me its alright.
An important lesson from the Gospels, always forgotten by christian fundamentalists: it was the literalism that made pharisees see in their holy book the justification to condemn Jesus to the cross. Think of that...
It is sad that at the 21st century we are still discussing about what the Good Book says about our today's topics as it wasn't a product (also) of the particular cultures in which its 40 different authors were raised. Yes, we can believe God spoke. But, in Bible terms, he did it THROUGH (about) 40 different "co-authors", respecting their language skills and specific/limited worldview, which include, among other things, their vision on sexuality. The challange for every religious person is to synthesize what is essencial in the Bible in order to avoid the common error of a doctrinal thought that generally supress a rational morality.
As a further note; this verse is certainly one where science and religion agree. Genetically we are males and females. It is from that pairing that families naturally spring. It is true that there are genetic mutations which produce gender mixed expressions, however a kind loving god does not discriminate his love based on our physical natures. He asks us to master our wills and control our actions. He asks for our complete fidelity to Him - which is also a pattern for the fidelity we should express towards our spouses. If God has an issue with homosexuality I would suspect it would be it's deceptive nature - essentially it is genetic identity denial. As humans we are flawed, even to the point of denying our most essential natures, however that is a matter of perception. In order for homosexuality to be acceptable to God it would have to be something we cannot change, or something God did to us. In either case, we'd be able to look at HIim and say; "I was just being true to myself - the way you made me. Unless or until science definitively says sexual preference is irrevocably hard wired and unchangeable it's at least a partly learned - and therefore changeable - behavior. That takes homosexuals out from under the umbrella of the equal protection clause as it is currently interpreted.
So you're saying that in the eyes of God, all homosexuals are guilty until science proves them innocent. Interesting but extraordinarily unfair.
So you're saying that in the eyes of God, all homosexuals are guilty until science proves them innocent. Interesting but extraordinarily unfair.
So do you pick who you are attracted to? So could you choose to be gay? Could you make yourself love someone of the same sex?? I don't choose who I am attracted to it just happens. Why would anyone choose to live as a 2nd class citizen that is constantly discriminated against by people like you?
The question of whether or not marriage is a man made or god given right and the definition of marriage is at the heart of this issue. A look at the bible and the legislative history clearly shows the legal development of the arguments. The Bible asserts that men and women were created as different and brought together into a relationship by God. Man says he is free to associate, including sexually, with anything he wants. Both can be true. What we have a right to is CHOICE. However what we can choose between is not unlimited. As agents, we can choose and I would submit that choice is a fundamental, protectable, and enforceable right. However, some things are not within our power to choose. Gender being one of them. Please stop referring to marriage as a right. If it were a right we could use the law to force someone to marry someone else they who they didn't want to marry. You have a right to enter into a contract society calls marriage. Contracts have terms and conditions Historically, one of the terms has been heterosexual pairing. That is why in order to have same sex marriage the definition of marriage would have to change. Ergo; Prop 8.
The commandment "Love thy neighbor as thyself" doesn't give ANY exceptions. It's not 'tolerate' thy neighbor as thyself. Anything less is less than equal to one's self. Duke speaks to adhering to the clear and distinct. Can this commandment be any more clear? This supersedes any and all other arguments, and requires a negative judgement and the creation of the '(unworthy of God's Love) other' for this exception to be made. How can anyone judge that love (especially love that is equal to their own) does not exist between two people? To judge that love cannot exist between two people of the same sex is tantamount to condemnation. If God is Love, isn't this condemning God?
I think this one is pretty easy. It is clear in scripture that homosexuality is wrong and if you don't see it that way, you are trying to forge scripture to fit your interpretation. This is also pretty easy...God made woman for man. A penis and vagina are made to go together. It's that easy.
why should the bible be the source that determines civil law? Those who believe the bible should be what determines how you should live your life should live in accordance to their own religious doctrine, I don't believe your bible is the literal word of G-d and have no intention of adhering to your religious doctrine. More importantly, everyone should have a choice what, if any religious code determines how they live their life. Religion should stay out of civil law just as the government should stay out of the church.
The commandment "Love thy neighbor as thyself" doesn't give ANY exceptions. It's not 'tolerate' thy neighbor as thyself. Anything less is less than equal to one's self. Duke speaks to adhering to the clear and distinct. Can this commandment be any more clear? This supersedes any and all other arguments, and requires a negative judgement and the creation of the '(unworthy of God's Love) other' for this exception to be made. How can anyone judge that love (especially love that is equal to their own) does not exist between two people? To judge that love cannot exist between two people of the same sex is tantamount to condemnation. If God is Love, isn't this condemning God?
The statement that we are all one in Christ regardless of our race or gender does not support the idea of same sex marriage or even marriage at all. It's point is that we should all be united in our faith in Christ regardless of our race or gneder. Jesus asked the Pharisees ???Have ye not read that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female???? Add to that the injunctions towards complete fidelity to God and your spouse and the message seems to be pretty clear.
This issue--same-sex marriage--deserves our thoughtful attention. As long as news sources like newsweek continue to publish sensationalized and poorly researched articles like this one, the conversation will continue to be confused and reactionary. As a Christian, I am seeking understanding. I, along with Newsweek's many other readers might be better served by reporting that enlightens and challenges.
The bible also says that male masturbation is punishable by death. It also says that if a woman is not a virgin on her wedding day she should be stoned to death. The bible also very clearly condems divorce. Being gay as just as natural as being straight. Since they say ignorance is bliss, you must be very happy!
I have a brother that is gay and a brother-in-law that is also gay. I love them both. None of them talk about marriage or any kind of union. We have no problem.
The problem that is created by some so-called gay right activists is that they do not accept themselves as they are. They need some kind of recognition. It's fine as long as they don't mingle with the term "marriage" which is reserved exclusively for a man and a woman. Some can debate the legality of the term "marriage" as long as they wish, it will not now or ever change the meaning that our Creator had in mind.
I have thought this for a long time. To me the answer is a federally-recognized civil union. Who knows where this will go? I have my suspicions that those fighting gay marriage may eventually take their case to the Supreme Court, which to me would a true crap shoot that they may very well regret. If the Supreme Court were to rule against the bans, such a ruling would simultaneously revoke all bans and laws across the US.
A poster below references the concept of the "tyranny of the majority". http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS291US305&q=Tyranny+of+the+majority&btnG=Search . A successful invocation of this concept could sway the court, as it has previously at the federal level.
Now whether or not that means suddenly Ken and George will be marching down the aisle at a Baptist church near you, I don't think that's at all likely, nor do I believe that is the goal.
Thank you for your comment.
-Joe
-Joe
It could become the next Roe v. Wade, and we have seen how easy it has been to remove the effects of that decision.
Joe - Churches will not be required to perform same sex marriages. Just as they are not forced to dispense contraception or perform abortions. The freedom to do something is not the same as the requirement that something be done.
Exactly. The state *cannot* make any requirement regarding the theological practices of a church other than where they may cross the most carefully written written laws. No church can be compelled to sanctify a gay marriage. I think some people may fear that if the government allows it the next week there will be pink bows down the aisles of their church, and groom and groom cakes in the reception hall.
That's where the separation of church and state protects the *church*.
Maybe if (some of) the churches were to stop trying to blend themselves with the state the boundary might be more clear. :)
Thank you for your comment.
-Joe
Umm The Creator wrote the bible, not ths Constitution
Bible is clear. There is no confusion no interpretation, its crystal clear on how it mentions homosexuality. Its a negative one. End of story
(this is within the context of bible and homosexuality)
As a pastor, I believe that this issue will be the most devisive issue in the church for several years to come. I also believe that this issue will bring about the downfall of America. This nation won't fall from without, but from within. Between the persecution of Christians by the homosexual community and the Muslim faith, America will no longer be recognizable as the country it is now within 10 years. Even so, Come Lord Jesus!
Because of course only homosexuals and Moslems can destroy America. God forbid "Christian" pharisees ignoring the Ten Commandments and Christ's Big Two would have anything to do with it.
-Joe
Romans 1:21-22,26-27: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. I think it's very important to mention in this scripture that Paul is talking about God's punishment to those who deny God and those who are idolaters. What Paul is saying, if you read the entire passage, and not just the inflammatory bits, is that because they denied him in the first place, he turned them into homoesxuals. What Paul is saying is in direct contradiction to what the fundamentalist advocate above says when he states freely and openly that he believes that homosexuals do not choose their same sex attractions, and in most cases actively deny and try to suppress them for years. He says that he believes that the Pauline passages are at the same level as Jesus's passages, which is a matter of faith, and thus I will not dispute it. However, it is obvious that he, and many people commenting here, are cut-and-pasting these 2 verses in Romans and not considering the entire passage. This is just like taking the word "Judge" out of "Judge not, lest ye be judged" and determining that you're supposed to judge everybody, or taking the word "kill" out of "Thou shalt not kill" and determining that you're supposed to kill everybody. Chapter and verse numbers are NOT inspired by God, everyone. You have to consider the whole passage. Twisting the words in Romans and applying them freely to every person who has same-sex attractions is SIN, and people who do so should repent.
Profaning the Holy Spirit, manipulating or twisting the Word to human causes is the one unforgivable sin. I agree with you, I'd think that if people were so concerned about the integrity of the message they would take utmost care before they put *any* spin, pro or con, to the Word.
And where the Word is ambiguous, perhaps the best action might be silence.
I don't think God in His perfect Will intended us to obsess on four hundred words at the expense of the other seven hundred seventy thousand?
-Joe
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
Discuss