News & Politics - Same Sex Marriage Continued - Page 16

migamoo · 04-28-2004, 06:17 PM

Nele if you ever want someone to talk to or have any questions, you can always PM me. I'll be glad to help in anyway.

Ashley

Brooklyn's babe · 04-28-2004, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fieryangel:
Brooklyn's babe : Bugs said there would be people who would question the validity of the bible. I asked where in the bible it says that. If you can help, thanks. I personally just don't have the time right now to search myself.

Ashley

So far I haven't found anything. I've looked in Galatians and it's mostly about rituals of the Old Testament, and whether or not they should still apply.
I do know it's in there somewhere, though, because I remember studying it in confermation.
Hey, no problem. Being homeschooled, gives me plenty of time during the day.

Quote:

Originally posted by Nele:


I understand you're not trying to be mean [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Well actually I don't know what it means to be a real Christian, I never had someone who showed it to me or thought me how the be a good one.
And yes I do have a copy of the bible but I wouldn't know where to begin because well the book is huge [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

The four gospels would be a good place to start. What translation of the bible do you have? New Living or the Message are some good translations. The New Living website is set up where you can look up certain words or phrases.
What Fieryangel said applies to me also. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

***Jerry D*** · 04-28-2004, 07:32 PM

1. Everyone has been talking about free will, but is everything in life caused by free will? Do you not think that God (or some higher being if you will) puts you in a situation to see how you will react?

I definitely feel that God puts us in certain situations at time to see how we'll react.

2. Have you ever been attracted to someone of the same sex? Or maybe you think someone is pretty or cute or whatever adjective you want to use?

I've never been attracted to someone of the same sex, but I have admired certain members of the same sex as being handsome, and I don't have a problem with saying "he's good looking" to my wife.

Lady_Amabel · 04-29-2004, 06:40 AM

Frankly i dont see the problem. I am a bisexual woman who sees in both comunities this anit/pro same sex mariages. Why cant people accept others? twenty odd years ago divorce was a dirty word now its a common practice. will this ever happen for same sex marriages

Lexi A. · 04-29-2004, 11:56 AM

Thank you for answering my question Brooklyn's babe. I agree that people twist things to get what they want out of the Bible. And I guess that's my point...how can we make law based on something that can be made to say anything we want it to?

Quote:

Originally posted by Fieryangel:


1. Everyone has been talking about free will, but is everything in life caused by free will? Do you not think that God (or some higher being if you will) puts you in a situation to see how you will react?

I think our lives have a general plan, but we ultimately make the choices. We are purposely put into certain situations, and then we are given a choice as to different paths we could take. (Just for the record, I do not feel sexual orientation falls into this.) In my own spiritual views, I feel that we're here to make our spirits stronger and wiser, and life on earth is the only way to do that.

Quote:

2. Have you ever been attracted to someone of the same sex? Or maybe you think someone is pretty or cute or whatever adjective you want to use?

I've never been sexually attracted to another woman, but I have no problem admitting that another female is pretty or whatever.

GrhmLz · 04-29-2004, 07:51 PM

Here is the bible passage from Galatians that Bugs8476 is talking about:

Galatians 1:6-10

NO OTHER GOSPEL

"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-which is really no gospel at all. Evidently, some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned! Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.

bugs8476 · 04-29-2004, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Katis:
[qb]

Wait. What? Ok, now you are saying that it is ok to brainwash kids? How about picking an opinion on this. In one sentence you say it's ok to brainwash them and try to force your beliefs and then in the next you are preaching about free will. Which is it? Do we have free will or should we force other people to think the way we do? If forcing an issue on a child to make them feel it is ok is wrong, how is forcing an issue on a child and making them feel it's wrong, ok? [qb]

My bad, I said it the wrong way, I went back and edited it, sorry about that. I was trying to say that Brainwashing our children is wrong, by teaching that homosexuality is right, when it's not. The Free Will issue, is that your born with it, which makes everyone have the choice to do what they want. Understand were Im coming from, if not then inform me.
Listen homosexuality is wrong. It goes against the bible and what god said, really, im not forcing an issue on a child to make them feel its wrong, because it is wrong. Our society will make it feel like it is OK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katis:

And I am sure you do sin everyday. I'm sure that you wear clothes that mix materials, or don't do everything your parents say, or do thigs they would disapprove of. I'm sure you have moments where you are covetous of things other people have, etc. So it might be a good idea to get off the high horse.

Im not saying that I don't sin. Im not saying that nobody sins. I was saying that i feel that you can live up to god and try not to sin. I would like to know were you got "sinning for were mix matirels. What?

Quote:

Orginally Posted by Katis:

Just because you believe it's wrong doesnt' mean you have the right to oppress other people because of it. Even if you don't allow them marriage that could just lead to denying them rights about other things, like the issue with the doctors being allowed to denying medical care. It's setting a precident of discrimination which is not acceptable.

Listen. Im not opressing anything. Your on the other side of the agrugment, so in this cause, you would feel like that. The act of homosexulity is wrong. Marriage is suppose to be for a man and a woman.
Doctors, are wrong for denying medical treatment. Thats not right.

JULIE..... [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Katis · 04-29-2004, 09:11 PM

So it's not ok to brainwash children into thinking being gay is all right, but it's ok to brainwash them into thinking it's wrong. Hm.

The mixing of materials was in reference to the bible passages others had posted stating that it was a sin to mix cotton and some other fabric, (can't remember which it was.)

And just as staunchy as you say that homosexuality is wrong, I say it isn't. You have your beliefs backing you up, and I have mine. It would seem more along the lines of what America stands for to go with the side that is supporting freedom than the side that is trying to deny freedom because you are oppressing. You are denying some couples rights that are automatically assumed belong to others. It's so obviously a case of unequal rights.

ashley5001 · 04-29-2004, 09:20 PM

Alrighty, I've been reading this thread for awhile and I had to step in and throw in my 2 cents.

One of my close friends is gay. Once when I was talking to him about his sexual orientation, I asked him if he thought it was based on choice or biology. He told me that he never would have CHOOSEN to be gay. Homosexuals face discrimination everyday, and not just in the marriage issue. I just find it ironic that people say that sexuality is a choice. I cannot fathom choosing to be gay. Why would people make a decision that is going to make their lives that much harder?

Occasionally when I see a pretty girl I'm attracted to her. Does this make me a lesbian? I don't think so.

I think it's sad that my friend cannot marry his boyfriend of 3 years. Honestly, my friend has a better relationship with his boyfriend than I have ever had with someone of the opposite sex. I think that right there says something about society.

Bugs

Quote:

But being my childs mother, i will be teaching him/her something in life that will be meaningful

I just wanted to point out that my parents tried to teach me to be a Republican and I'm....well, not. Just because you try to teach your children something does not mean that they will accept what you have to say. And honestly, if children blindly accepted what they were taught I would be worried about the future of our planet. Oh, wait. The way religious right already does that to them. And I have to agree with Katis that it's sad that you would disown your child for not agreeing with you

GrhmLz · 04-29-2004, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brooklyn's babe:
So Christians and other sinners have no choice to be who they are? Doesn't the bible say that we all are by nature sinful?

All human beings are sinful by nature because they are born with original sin. This dates back to the fall of Adam and Eve.

However, this does not mean that "sin" is acceptable before God and that human beings should just be sinful because they are "by nature." What this means is that human beings face temptation throughout their lives and their struggle is to overcome that temptation. The spiritual goal is not to submit to those temptations which lead to sinful acts.

Quote:

Originally posted by Brooklyn's babe:
But are't you judging homosexuals by saying, "Yeah, I sin, but at least I'm not as bad as them?"

It is not judgmental to preach that homosexuality is a sin. Why? Because this law is based on God's and not my own biased assertions. I have already covered this argument in one of my other posts but I will repeat it again. The bible states "Judge not, Lest ye be judged" but it also states "judge righteous judgment." God was not telling humans not to judge at all. He was according man the right way to judge and Jesus administered the proper way to judge when he passed on the messages of "beware of false prophets" and "beware of wolves in sheep's clothing." So, without using judgment, we would not be able to distinguish one from the other.

Secondly, the bible does distinguish between the righteous sinner and the unrighteous sinner. We all sin but there is a difference between the two.

Quote:

Originally post Brooklyn's babe:
It says, in the first amendment to the Constitution, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion." Wouldn't a law banning gay marriages be respecting the Christian religion? Thus my legal standpoint.

Yes. This is referred to as the "Establishment Clause." However, the "Free Exercise Clause" is the second clause to this amendment and it states "Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It is the forgotten clause.

The framers of the Constitution adopted these clauses for the purpose of promoting religion and not suppressing it. The framer's believed that religious freedom was of the strongest importance and it was the reason for emigration to America to escape religious oppression. The purpose of the "Establishment Clause" was to prevent the federal government from establishing a denominational religion that would serve to inhibit our religious freedeoms. It was never indended to keep "Christianity" or other faiths out of public life.

Also, the "Establishment Clause", was originally restricted to the federal government. It is a fact, that at the time the first amendment was ratified, many states had state-established religions. When the Constitution was written, Christian religious instruction was the primary purpose of education. Even George Washington expressed this sentiment when he said "True Religion affords government its surest support. The future of this nation depends on the Christian training of our youth. It is impossible to govern without the bible" This offers proof that the original intent of the "Establishment Clause" was never to prevent the states from forming their own established religions.

It wasn't until the Fourteenth Amendment that this clause became applicable to the states through the "due process clause." This decision and other court rulings that followed began to distort the original context of these clauses. And now we have those rulings as legal precedents. They are now used to suppress people's free exercise rights in school and public life.

Another fact is that the phrase "separation of church and state" came from a letter of Thomas Jefferson's and the letter came several years after the Constitution and Bill of Rights were already in effect. Thomas Jefferson's statement has been twisted and distorted by the "separationists" who support a strict separation of church and state.

So, I say, wouldn't allowing gay marriage suppress Christians and force them to live in a society that goes against their religion? Doesn't that endorse discrimination against Christians? This is my legal standpoint.

This isn't meant to imply that everyone should be force to lead a christian lifestyle. However, it is implying that this country was founded upon religious sentiments and forcing full-blown secularism on Christians is unconstituional and discriminatory and against what the founding fathers wanted.

[ 04-29-2004: Message edited GrhmLz ]

Coren · 04-29-2004, 10:31 PM

So if a religion thinks murder is ok, we'd CLEARLY be surpressing that religion, wouldn't we? So obviously we're imposing upon their religious freedom. But crap, if we take away murder, doesn't that screw with your religion? And isn't adultery in one of the commandments? I'd think that would be a bigger fish than homosexual marraige.

Religious freedom doesn't mean we'll cater to your beliefs. Don't want to grant gays marraige in your church? Don't. No one's making you.

Katis · 04-29-2004, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GrhmLz:

So, I say, wouldn't allowing gay marriage suppress Christians and force them to live in a society that goes against their religion? Doesn't that endorse discrimination against Christians? This is my legal standpoint.

This is just absolutely ridiculous. You would not be prevented from practicing your religion. If your religion said that you were not to engage in homosexuality, allowing gay marriage would not force you to be a homosexual. It would not force you to be accepting of homosexuals, it would not mean you had to attend weddings, or send cards, or anything of the sort. You would still be free to judge them and tell them all they are going to Hell. Acknowledging sin is not engaging in it. You would not be sinning so what is the problem? It is not your right or responsibility to stop other people from "sinning", you may tell them what you think but ultimately it's up to the individual. You are not allowing people freedom of choice by wanting to ban gay marriage, you are taking away this free will that people find so important.

And you know, kids don't always respect their parents. If you really wanted to follow the Bible you would propose a law that made it illegal for children to disobey. Your mom tells you to clean your room and you don't? Well, it's to juvie for you! You cheated on your husband? Get in the courtyard we're going a stonin'! And anyone who uses the Lord's name in vain, well you better watch out, a stake is going up. And I don't even want to talk about people who don't worship God, who belong to another religion, that is definitely not allowed.

Why follow some of the Bible in regard to passing laws on the rest of us, but not all of it?

[ 04-29-2004: Message edited Katis ]

Lexi A. · 04-30-2004, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GrhmLz:


So, I say, wouldn't allowing gay marriage suppress Christians and force them to live in a society that goes against their religion? Doesn't that endorse discrimination against Christians? This is my legal standpoint.

Katis already explained what my thoughts were when I read this, but I had to comment anyway. If you were forced to be in a same sex relationship/marriage, then of course you could argue that violates you as a Christian. To say that you're being discriminated against because of what other people are doing in their own lives is absurd.

The cost of having freedom of religion and speech is that you're going to have to deal with seeing or living around people that do not have the same religion or opinions as you.

[ 04-30-2004: Message edited Lexi A. ]

Coren · 04-30-2004, 08:46 AM

What if their religion says it's ok for same sex marraige? You truly ARE discriminating against them by not allowing it, opressing their religion. If it were allowed, your church could continue to not recognize it and call them sinners. Nothing in Christianity says "Thou shalt not live where the homosexuals get married"

GrhmLz · 04-30-2004, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lexi A.:
To say that you're being discriminated against because of what other people are doing in their own lives is absurd.

We live in this society as a whole. This means that everything is interconnected; therefore it is not as simple as "what other people are doing in their own lives."

Christians are being discriminated against in the public sector. This new wave of "secularism" is suppressing the rights of christians in public life and in public education. There are several cases that demonstrate extreme violations of supressing the "free exercise of religion" all due to the misinterpretation and misuse of "the establishment clause."

The issue dealing with homosexuality will be no different. Teachers may not literally conduct a classroom course called "homosexuality"; however, supression of christian beliefs regarding homosexuality is being manuevered by different means.

For example, hate crime legislation. This legislation has been in existence since 1968 and it covered attacks based on race, religion, or national origin. Homosexual activists have lobbied to list homosexuals on this piece of legislation. While this legislation would be well meaning to prevent violence, this legislation is abused. In Pennslyvannia, the Pittsburg-Post Gazette, acknowledged concern that the Governor's new signed bill, which provides legal protection from verbal harrasment as well as hate crimes, could be interpreted and stretched to suppress the speech of pastors and preachers who may quote biblical passages condemning homosexuality or may include the expression of opinions disapproving of homosexuality. This isn't far-fetched because the statute provides more severe criminal penalties through "harrassment by communication."

Gay and Lesbian activists have been successful in securing tolerance for themselves. But they are complete hypocrites when it comes to being tolerant regarding the Christian faith. This is especially prelevant in public schools. These "anti-harrassment" policies that have been put into place are deceptive because its focus is to "kill" disapproving speech regarding homosexuality which is politically incorrect. The focus is not to prevent harrassment because under these policies students who express their opposition to homosexuality are subject to punishment.

Homosexuality is being introduced into the public school system. This introduction is not being done in an objective way but in a sublte way to undermine the christian teachings. David Limbaugh's book provides an example of this in Persecution: How Liberals are Waging War against Christianity. In 2002, a school in Michigan celebrated "2002 Diversity Week." A part of the activities included panel discussions and speeches on topics regarding homsexuality and religion. One girl submitted her speech for review because she was required to. The school officials removed all remarks that criticized homosexuality. She was also not allowed to incorporate her Roman Catholic views during the panel discussion even though the topic was for homosexuality AND religion. Apparently, she was told that her negative message didn't send the positive religious message that they wanted because they are compatible and that homosexuality is not sinful or immoral. And here we have a public school instructing a Christian student about what her religion really means versus what her pastor or parents may tell her and what she thinks it means herself.

Other indoctrination in the school sector regarding homosexuality occured in Massachusettes in 2001. A teacher admitted that he subtly had introduced gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered" subjects into class. The novel he distibuted was called The Perks of Being a Wallflower. The subject matter dealt with beastiality (between a boy and dog), man-boy sex, anal sex between boys, male masturbation, and female masturbation using a hot dog. When a parent objected to this reading material, she was treated disdainfully.

In California, the ACLU and the Gay-Straight Alliance Network pressured a school district to adopt a pro-homosexuality policy that calls for punishment of any student or teacher who speaks out against homosexuality.

My point here is there are plenty of examples that constitute that what you are saying is inaccurate. These actions already are discriminating against Christians. And I only see it getting worse if homosexaul marriage is allowed. This is crossing a big line from tolerance to forced acceptance that homosexuality is moral. There is nothing "absurd at all" about my legitimate concerns.

Quote:

Originally posted by Lexi A.:
The cost of having freedom of religion and speech is that you're going to have to deal with seeing or living around people that do not have the same religion or opinions as you.

Yeah, it's just too bad that gay activists don't see it that way!

Obviously, I advocate both freedom of religion and free speech or I wouldn't even be on this thread discussing this with you right now. I hear and see things that I don't agree with all the time.

My argument here is that Christians are often subjected to scorn and ridicule and denied their religious freedoms at the risk of "offending others." There is nothing in the Consitution that protects you from language you may personally find offensive. But there is a problem when school systems are endorsing the free speech of homosexual activists at the expense of criminalizing/penalizing the free speech of christians opposed to homosexuality. Not only are you invading upon the their free speech but you are prohibiting them their right to exercise their beliefs.

It's amazing how when other groups claim to experience discrimination, society properly acknowledges it. But when it comes to Anti-Christian discrimination, the attitude tends to be "Yes, please shut them up. They are offending everyone." Please!