God Gave Us The Definition Of Marriage
- Thread starter LuteHawk
- Start date
Sooo.....when do we let Muslims have 'equal time' on the religious legislation gig and put some Sharia Laws into the Constitution?...
STFU with this god crap
Leave it out of legislation.
Who gives a crap? It's just a word. "Marriage" vs Civil Union makes no difference to me
I don't want to hear about it anymore. I'm a conservative but we've got politicians who can't focus on true conservative issues and have to focus on the bibletards No wonder the Iowa Caucus and Straw Poll has become increasing irrelevant.
Leave it out of legislation.
Who gives a crap? It's just a word. "Marriage" vs Civil Union makes no difference to me
I don't want to hear about it anymore. I'm a conservative but we've got politicians who can't focus on true conservative issues and have to focus on the bibletards No wonder the Iowa Caucus and Straw Poll has become increasing irrelevant.
Last edited:
it's because it never was about ghey marriage, they are coming after religion, that's what luke talks about here
they will not be happy with a marriage or a union at the county office, next step is they force the church to marry or else the doors on the church, that's where this is headed
they will not be happy with a marriage or a union at the county office, next step is they force the church to marry or else the doors on the church, that's where this is headed
I hope it doesn't head that way either.
Churches shouldn't be forced to perform acts that are against their beliefs but a lot of these issues were brought upon themselves. I'll defend a church's right to deny ceremonial acts to gays as well as the gay's right to marry in the eyes of the federal government.
Churches shouldn't be forced to perform acts that are against their beliefs but a lot of these issues were brought upon themselves. I'll defend a church's right to deny ceremonial acts to gays as well as the gay's right to marry in the eyes of the federal government.
cool. but methinks they are gunning for churches. I just got that feeling. I wish some ghey activists would tell me for sure that they are not
Last edited:
So you're saying the OT doesn't count? If so, you are in disagreement with nearly every Christian who has spoken about this on HROT.
Or are you just picking and choosing which hateful parts of the OT you want to ram down people's throats?
Our founding fathers were deists. They weren't christians.
The bible say women shouldn't speak in church, they also shouldn't defend their husbands from physical violence. Also men who have vasectomies shouldn't go into a church nor ahoukd they trim their beards. Its also an abomination to eat shellfish.
I am a Christian but I understand that the bible cant be taken literally. I live my life by loving and respecting others. To many of you use the bible to justify feeling morally superior to others.
Well I don't know what anyone has said here before but it all changed when God sent his son to die on the cross. There is only one way to get to heaven and that is clearly stated in John 3:16. This is also why we as sinners are forgiven and no longer need to offer sacrifice to the Lord. Since you know the bible inside and out I'll assume you know what it says. An educated guess would probably lead a semi intelligent person to believe that's why they call it the New Testiment. Keep trying though
And like a good Christian, you don't let facts get in the way of your personal beliefs.
Our country was founded on Enlightenment principles.
Sure, lots of folks back then were Christians. Probably most. And many involved in the crafting of the constitution were, too. Many, but maybe not most. But when it came down to the actual design of our form of society, and the actual wording of the supreme law of the land, GOD WAS ENTIRELY ABSENT.
Bill O'Reilly, and Glen Beck and some other conservatives may think God is mentioned in the constitution, but they're total effing idiots. It simply isn't the case.
It isn't me you need to smack in line. It's the so-called Christians who keep wielding parts of the OT to object to gay marriage and women's rights, and and to fight in the Middle East, and so on that you should be spanking.
I'm guessing you have very little idea of what the Bible says. I hope you don't think good deeds get you to heaven. We all pick and choose things in the bible to live our lives by or ignore. It's what makes Christians such easy targets. It's also why it's not your job or mine to judge others. Unfortunately it's human nature to judge.
The vocal minority always have the biggest voice. Kind of like the squeaky wheel always gets the grease. In the end they aren't wrong. Being gay is a sin. Where they go wrong is that they condemn and judge which is not their job, it's God's. Standing up for your beliefs doesn't make you bigot. That's one thing gay people can't seam to understand even though they scream for people to accept their beliefs.
Why you think it's ok for one and not the other is beyond me.
I have read the bible extensively. Its was written and translated by humans. You have to interpret what its saying in many instances. In no way shape or form does it say anything regarding gay marriage. Out of the 37k versus in the bible only 7 make a reference to homosexuality. In many cases this was translated from a Greek word that described men as soft. Why didnt Paul use the most common term for homosexuality?
I am a Christian and the bible I follow doesnt exclude anyone nor is used to justify hate, war etc. It certainly doesn't justify acting morally superior to others which is how you come across.
Personally I believe, like many Americans, that our country was founded on liberty and I'm glad that those principals are being championed. That means people should be free to choose most any sin that doesn't violate another's rights. That's the system God started with free will, we honor him by following his example.
Because were not screaming for you to accept our beliefs. We are screaming for you to accept our rights. Why can't you see that distinction? I accept that you think I'm a sinner. I don't accept that you get to make laws about my sin.
If you extend the logic that judging is a sin, then making laws against gays is judgment and a sin in itself. Which makes it ok to pass laws against those who judge. Be careful.
This is really the bottom line, and it's amazing that so many religious zealots are whipped up into a frenzy over this issue, when it has nothing to do with them, their church, their beliefs or their version of 'god'.
I'm still waiting to hear the answer from the god-squad here who assert that 'gays are going to sue to be able to hold services in a church'....a church that they don't hold membership in, which is completely free to hold whatever religious beliefs it wants and expect its members to abide by those beliefs or go find another church.
I'm curious if ANYONE can find a SINGLE legal precedent of someone suing a church over being denied membership, or being 'excommunicated' for violating the 'rules' and tenets of said church. Pretty certain you won't find one. BUT, because it's such a GREAT talking point, to whip up the fervor of religious conservatives over a non-issue, it's just too easy to fool gullible people into thinking it's a real argument.
The people of this country should be able to decide what laws they are governed by. I personally think it should be voted on and then accepted either way. Obviously that's why we vote in our elected officials but somehow when a certain side controls the government they are never right.
You can live your life how you like, I just don't agree with it and that's my right. It does not make me a bigot. Unfortunately for gay people and those who are ok with it, the over use of that word will make people callous to it just like many are callous to the racist cries of blacks. Eventually nobody will listen to you. I don't say that in a mean way either.
I hope you aren't put off by religion for the sole reason of its stance on gays. The important thing to remember is we are all sinners and the only way to heaven is to believe in Christ and repent for those sins daily. It is not our job to judge and condemn others but it is our job to help each other live a life in Christ. It's a tough line to toe.
Yaaaay!!! Let's bring back slavery!!!**
**only THIS time, let's not enslave blacks, let's enslave the Hispanics that pick our fruit and vegetables. Maybe just a FEW blacks, too. We'll have to settle out which group to enslave by how we 'vote' that in....
I was asking myself this question, and I settled on and answer... So I'll offer it for thought: Bad language and lusting are just as much sin as homosexuality. If you deny bad language is a sin, embrace it and continue doing it forever declaring it not sinful, then it's every bit as sinful as anything else. It's my belief that the reason the church spends so much time on this is that it's actually a lifestyle homosexuals embrace, declaring it not sinful (oh, and it's not love that upsets them, it's the buts ex). Most Christians will acknowledge most sins for sin, and ask and receive forgiveness (adultery, gluttony, bad language). It's the ongoing nature of sin gone unacknowledged by those who commit it that bothers the church so much. I think that's what makes homosexuality and it's acceptance different.
I know, you think people actually have the right to marry, which they don't. straights don't, gheys don't. however, the church actually has the god given right to not do the ceremonies. And the constitution protects this right. God issues rights, the constitution protects folks from rogue governments.
I think the answer is a lot more practical. If you go after lusting or bad language you will make 90% of your congregation uncomfortable. Uncomfortable people will find a new church. If you focus on the sins of 2% of the congregation, the rest of the flock can feel better and pay the preacher to tell them how much better they are than others. Ironically, I think that means the church is complicit in a sin.
I've never said churches must perform same-sex marriages. In fact, I've been adamant about their rights to refuse.
The problem with your claim is that you claim there is only one God and that God is the one in whom you believe. In order for that to be true you must first disprove all other claims about god, gods, or lack thereof.
Respectfully, I disagree, and will stick to my original answer. I believe the overwhelming majority of churches, and Christians, are sincere in their beliefs.
Humanity has the free will to obey God or disobey God.
Humanity has the free will to sin or not to sin.
Those sinners who accept Christ and his redemption on
the cross by faith in Him.....They can be forgiven.
Those sinners who reject Christ and his redemption on
the cross by their unbelief.....They do not want forgiveness.
Bottom Line: There are 2 types of people in the world:
Those sinful people who believe in Christ .
Those sinful people who do not believe in Christ.
Humanity has the free will to sin or not to sin.
Those sinners who accept Christ and his redemption on
the cross by faith in Him.....They can be forgiven.
Those sinners who reject Christ and his redemption on
the cross by their unbelief.....They do not want forgiveness.
Bottom Line: There are 2 types of people in the world:
Those sinful people who believe in Christ .
Those sinful people who do not believe in Christ.
Again, I ask for proof. All of this is simply your opinion with no basis in fact.
And Islam affirms the Quran as the basis for Islamic beliefs.
And Buddhism affirms the Tripitaka as the basis for Buddhist beliefs.
And Hinduism affirms the Vedas as the basis for Hinduism beliefs.
And Confucianity affirms the Analects of Confucious as the basis for Confucianistic beliefs.
See your problem yet Lute? Not everyone believes in the same religion as you. Why should your religion be more important than anyone else's?
And Buddhism affirms the Tripitaka as the basis for Buddhist beliefs.
And Hinduism affirms the Vedas as the basis for Hinduism beliefs.
And Confucianity affirms the Analects of Confucious as the basis for Confucianistic beliefs.
See your problem yet Lute? Not everyone believes in the same religion as you. Why should your religion be more important than anyone else's?
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
-
-
Brauns, Mulvey Taking Advantage of Added Minutes Down the Stretch
- Latest: Eliot Clough
