If physical proof is there, then physical proof is there. I reconcile it with Christianity by accepting that I don't have all of the answers. In fact, it's kind of arrogant to assume otherwise one way or the other.
Students suspended for wearing Confederate flags to protest gay rainbow flag
- Thread starter Old Fart
- Start Date
- Status
Two or three pages ago you supported denying them legal marriage and instead implied that they only deserve a civil union. I'm not sure if you're aware, but they are not the same. Marriages are recognized state-to-state and even at the federal level, where civil unions are not. Marriages provide many more benefits and protections than civil unions.
You didn't say it, so I'm only assuming and, if I'm wrong, please accept my apologies, but I take away that you might be against same-sex matrimony, but perhaps open to same-sex marriage, where:
Matrimony = Religious unity of two consenting adults recognized by a church and their god(s).
Marriage = Legal unity of two consenting adults recognized by the government.
Yes/no?
So some people sued a pastor... That doesn't represent the will of an entire group. By that liberal logic, we all would be stewed into the mass shooter pot.
Titles and names do matter. Settling for "civil union" is no different than having marriage, black marriage, jewish marriage, latin marriage.
Your bible does speak of homosexuality. It also speaks of punishable divorce, oppression of women, endorsement of genocide, literal witch hunting, pro-male god complex (it's tricky to know whether a wife looking upon the husband as she would god is in fact their gods word or a little embellishment of the author), and pro-slavery (though it's more of a soft letter of encouragement for slaves to love their masters)
I said why not start with civil unions and let people get used to it then move to marriage. The only problem I have with the whole thing is that they are trying to force it into the church. I really don't give a crap who is married to who, just don't trample my beliefs to make yourself fell better.
I just suggested that they take baby steps. Homosexuality has been a taboo in most civilizations since the ancient Romans. A little time for adjustment may be needed.
I actually think they should create civil unions form heterosexuals. Sometimes people just wind up together platonically.
My take on the educational system is this: all sides of a position should be discussed. Obviously, neither evolution or creation is a fact, as it cannot be proven. Similarly, homosexuality as a choice or genetics is not proven either, and cannot be fact. The educational system in this country is based on programming for certain skill sets, and to ensure that the preferred conventional wisdom as determined by the Authoritah is maintained. Facts have not been a component of the state schools for many years where social engineering is concerned.
As I am not a religious guy, I will not speak to the wrongness of any doctrine. As I am not a atheist, I do know and acknowledge that the Bible stated that it is immoral and therefore Biblically wrong. You may discount the Bible, but others will not, much like many discount the Constitution.
From there, the discussion moves to Old v New and so on. As it is either opinion and/or faith based, you will not win,or lose, based on facts.
ALL adults should be free to make their own choices, be it sexual orientation, gun ownership, or any other lifestyle, within reason, without Authoritah intervention. This also means the Authoritah minds their rules, as set by the People, to the letter. What defines reason? I think we lost that here YEARS ago, or we would not have conversations on this kind of subject matter.
Racial characteristics are genetic and can be, in most cases, readily observed. You cannot say that about homosexuality.
My recommendation: If homosexuals are given Preferred Citizen status by the Authoritah, every man, woman, and child should claim to be homosexual. Maybe this will slow the class-warefare integral to this issue. This, simply, is about power, and not about either genetic or lifestyle issues.
If everyone is special, then no one is special.
Heyaaaaaa! TedKennedy you lady boy, right? I think this OSA a gun web on line site. Heyaaaaa! Lady boy! Beaucoup lady boy here!
I can't mention suing pastors as I agree that's kinda silly. I think those were members of the church suing their own churches, but I don't recall for sure. I think that was more about the churches' culpability and discrimination than the states' laws, but I could be wrong.
I agree in that I don't care what it's called, but it should be the same for everyone. Call them all a civil union for all I care, but the fact of the matter is they are different. I think that's the rub.
Also the bible has all kinds of weird things aside from homosexuality that just don't make sense. I don't bathe and consider myself unclean for 7 days after every time I ejaculate, but Leviticus says I should. My wife doesn't lock herself in quarantine for 7+ days when she menstruates either. I consider those passages about as ridiculous as the ones on homosexuality, and apparently most people do too as they're are current laws addressing these in Western culture. This doesn't address atheism necessarily, but the fact of the matter is the rule book sure has a lot of **** thrown in it that doesn't make sense to apply to all people as enforceable laws.
I'd agree with this, but given that some couples are able to enter a legal contract (the marriage) and some aren't, all religious parts aside, I can see the rub here. Even it they remove the term marriage completely and just call it a civil contract, at least that would be equitable. At present, it's not.
I think the approach you have to use with the Bible is to account for 'adjustments' based on the translator(s) or the commissioning authority. It stands to reason that King James may have directed the exclusion, deletion , or revision to his sanctioned translation. Imagine a Biblical translation accomplished in the last 20 years in this country. Would a Clinton, Bush, or Obama translation have been slanted to reflect the position of the ruling class?
I 'magine so.
Filters are a good thing, and wholesale drinking of any doctrine should be discouraged in favor of thought and logic. Who can say that Moses did not adapt passages to reflect his personal opinions?
I await the flamers.....
I 'magine so.
Filters are a good thing, and wholesale drinking of any doctrine should be discouraged in favor of thought and logic. Who can say that Moses did not adapt passages to reflect his personal opinions?
I await the flamers.....
Honestly, given all the hatred directed towards gays, it's hard for me to believe someone would "choose" to be gay. I know there are extremely sexual people who have sex with both men and women, but that's just a high sex drive and apathy towards society's definitions of acceptable conduct. Those people aren't really "gay," (ie. sexual and romantic attraction to their same sex).
Also, equating gays with pedophiles and beastiality is a pretty facile argument. Most pedophiles are hetrosexual, and the fact is they are nothing more than rapists. What two consenting adults do should be their own business.
So, I do believe Gays are born Gay. If they want to marry, they should be able to do so. However, they should not be able to force a church to marry them.
Also, equating gays with pedophiles and beastiality is a pretty facile argument. Most pedophiles are hetrosexual, and the fact is they are nothing more than rapists. What two consenting adults do should be their own business.
So, I do believe Gays are born Gay. If they want to marry, they should be able to do so. However, they should not be able to force a church to marry them.
- Status
Similar threads
