Are you an atheist? (1 Viewer)

[Bladerunner]

How does gay marriage impact the rights of Christians who are not gay? (Notice how I feel the need to separate the two, there are gay Christians, of course, who are happy with this ruling and interpret those verses differently since there was no word for homosexual in those times.)

Ah,,,one at a time.

"How does gay marriage impact the rights of Christians who are not gay?"
First by the Bible versus, it is a sin. These actions will be judged by God himself. This will be the time for these people to present their cases.!!!!!!
As long they do not want a church wedding, there is no problem. As long as they do not call me a bigot because I do not believe they are right, there is no problem. As long as they do not try to destroy those who believe in Jesus and the actual word of the Bible all will be fine. However, it is only a matter of time before 2 gays and a lawyer are at the church steps threatening a lawsuit if they are not wed within the church halls. There will be several churches, that will marry them but most will not. This is where the problem begins.

In my eyes, Gay Christians is an Oxi-moron. How can you believe in Christ and keep on sinning. Oh, that is why the Catholic church lets you confess your sins. I have been with couples that actually went out with me on Friday night to a Honky Tonk and on Saturday night went to confession.This in my opinion is wrong as well but I will not go up against the POPE and his rules. That is Gods job.

"interpret those verses differently since there was no word for homosexual in those times." How do you do that? Does not a man lie (sleep) with Mankind (another man) as he would a Woman in a Gay relationship?????????????????.. Where is the discrepancy here. NONE there are!


Leviticus 20:13 - If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.

 

[Bladerunner]

Christians always interpret the bible to suit their own needs and likes.

For example "thou shalt not kill" is interpreted as try to avoid killing humans but its ok to kill animals by blowing their brains out. Oh, it's also ok to kill an intruder.

Marriage vows before god are sacred - unless you can't stand each other so get a divorce - till death us do part goes out the window.

There are hundreds of hypocritical examples where the bible is suited to ones circumstances, then the so called Christian is happy. They call it god guiding them or some such bollocks.

Col

Hi Colin, You must be feeling better today, have not heard you talk so much during the last six months. lol:

God has no problem with killings from a defensive standpoint. Luke 22:35-39

Animals were put here for us to consume. Genesis 9:2-3

Yes they are sacred. Romans, 7: 2-6

Colin, have these hypocritical Christians so hardened your heart as to keep you from everlasting life after death? The Bible (word of God) has not changed since its beginning, Man has.

 

[spikepl]

@Vassago: They cherry-pick. So some things forbidden in the bible are abominations, some other things forbidden in the bible aren't. Is this logical? No. Is this "faith"? It is whatever they want to make it into. Can you argue about this? You cannot - faith cannot be countered by logic.

Time for a reprint of Letter to Dr. Laura, obviously:

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp#TCc1WkhTZwEGdTKZ.99

 

[Galaxiom]

Time for a reprint of Letter to Dr. Laura, obviously:

Most of these passages come from Leviticus who was probably the stupidest, most prejudiced and bigoted person ever to have become famous on the back of religion.

 

[Galaxiom]

What are the norms for this in the UK, Europe and Australia?????????Do they allow weddings in the Catholic Churches in these areas?

In Australia, the vast majority of marriages (over 70%) don't involve churches at all. This figure continues to increase every year.

Our divorce rate is the lowest it has been since "no fault" divorce was introduced in 1976.

The bride and groom are typically aged about thirty and their children attend the wedding.

 

[Bladerunner]

Hello Spikepl, hope this finds you well this day.

Did Dr. Laura answer all of your questions? Hope so?


Oh, by the way what is the point you are trying to make,,,, One specific point please.

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Most of these passages come from Leviticus who was probably the stupidest, most prejudiced and bigoted person ever to have become famous on the back of religion.

Leviticus is a book of Laws for Israeli people.

 

[ConnorGiles]

I haven't been here for a while but it appears it has turned into a homophobic discussion.

Oh, more freaks then.

All that changes is that LGBT's can get married and be linked together (On paper). Who are you to deny someone else's happiness?

It being legalised doesn't affect you in any way shape or form. Stop acting like it does.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Welcome back Connor we have missed your contributions, however your quote is from the wrong post as Col who made it has not complained of these people being married, at least not on this thread.

Brian

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Doc: Hope this finds you well and thriving:

Just trying to go one day at a time. Setting your sights too high tends to blind you or give you dizzy spells. But thanks for the kind intentions.

Who hates Whom?,,,,,,,,it will be the LGBT community and other activists that (will remove) the Christian Churches from society and persecute the Christians in them for not ACCEPTING their social values.

Hate begets hate just as love begets love and forgiveness begets forgiveness. When the various Christian churches stop vicious public condemnation of the LGBT community then perhaps we can get on track with the idea of loving one's neighbor? Just a wild thought. (See next portion for follow-up.)

Haters, Bigots, Racist, etc. are some of the words spewed forth from the Liberal agenda to destroy anyone who disagrees with them.

Whereas the folks who don't have a choice in their sexual orientation get called Sinners, Perverts, Blasphemers, and other similar names used by the Church doesn't reveal the Religious Right's agenda to deny rights to an afflicted group? (see previous posts on the 1990s PET scan studies, which I take seriously)

You can condemn the Westboro Baptist Church, but in a recent synod (sorry, should that be capitalized?) the Souther Baptists again vowed to always condemn the LGBT folks. It was an AP wire story from about two weeks ago. The Westboro folks are more vocal and more demonstrative, perhaps, but the rest of the Baptists quietly support them by voting the same way. Then you wonder why the LGBT folks get upset when a bunch of virulent yammerheads picket the funerals of soldiers who gave the ultimate sacrifice for the people of their country? Hatred begets hatred and that sounds like a LOT of hatred to me. You should come to New Orleans (or at least read the news releases) during the Gay Pride celebration known as Decadence Fest. That name was chosen precisely because the gays know how much it will tick off the churches.

NOW that the US government is on their side, a rapid transition here is expected. YES, Who hates Whom is the question???????????

Since the old phrase "what goes around comes around" appears to be true, it would appear that many on both sides of that particular aisle hate each other. As to the "rapid transition" - I believe that many civil rights cases have returned to that simple yet very true judicial quote: Justice delayed is justice denied.

I'll condense your obviously dense segment about the difference between homosexuality and spinal birth defects. I was contrasting the two situations to point out that they are NOT comparable - because homosexuality is NOT a genetic condition, but rather is a gestational condition.

My guess is that it will be on a scale corresponding to the odds that man sprang from the ocean and after millions of years walked upright

We do not claim that MAN sprang from the ocean. That would be an amphibian of some sort that started the occupation of land. Man came later. However, with that detail corrected, the probability is 1 - because it happened. (That's the nice thing about computing probabilities of this type.) If it didn't happen, the odds are difficult to compute - but if it DID happen, the odds are 1.00 i.e. 100% - a sure bet.

One last thought: The late Will Rogers define the American brand of freedom thusly: Your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. Well, you get bent out of shape over losing the SCOTUS decision on marriage - but your religious interference denied them their rights to live honestly and without persecution. YOUR fist was in THEIR face on the marriage issue. Don't you SEE that? If you CAN'T see that, then SpikePL's earlier comment is right - logic apparently has no place in a religious discussion.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

What SCOTUS did was change marriage (God's Law) into something that would benefit 3.7% of society, . The descending judge (Justice Roberts) ask: "Just who do we think we are?" that is easy.......a GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Marriage pre-dated Biblical times unless you are a blind believer in the mathematical legerdemain of Bishop Ussher. And, as usual, you inverted the question. What SCOTUS did was GET RID OF improper restrictions in which the tyranny of the majority inflicted certain groups with restrictions on their civil rights. That is why courts are needed.

I will ask the hypothetical question, which you will probably get wrong anyway, but here goes: If all the right-handed people in the USA voted that all left-handed people should be put to death, would it be lawful? (The correct answer is NO, in case you had to guess.) This would be a more clear-cut case of the tyranny of the majority impinging its will on someone by denying them rights.

Let's ask that question now in a more practical situation: If the Caucasions of the USA voted to reinstate slavery, would it be lawful? (The correct answer is again NO. I'm hoping that by this time you didn't have to guess and that you are beginning to see the point.)

Denying someone the rights they should have because a large group of not-so-free thinkers has been exhorted to raise a great clamor to their congressmen does not make it right. The country was founded on the ideal that ALL are created equal before the law. It has taken this long for that simple idea to trickle down to a group that is 3.7% of the USA population.

even though they did not establish idea of marriage in the first place

Neither did the Jewish, Catholic, or Protestant churches. Those groups just arrogantly claimed it for themselves as a power grab to control the masses by controlling yet another part of their lives. But other cultures have also identified marriages that pre-date the 6000 year timeline and anthropologists have found evidence in earlier cultures regarding marriage's existence.

Get off your high horse, Blade. You are crying because someone finally caught you with your hand in the cookie jar and took it back from you. Now your side is crying like the petulant child who, having been caught, seeks moral high ground to excuse bad behavior.

 

[Vassago]

I'll break this up...

Ah,,,one at a time.

"How does gay marriage impact the rights of Christians who are not gay?"
First by the Bible versus, it is a sin. These actions will be judged by God himself. This will be the time for these people to present their cases.!!!!!!
As long they do not want a church wedding, there is no problem. As long as they do not call me a bigot because I do not believe they are right, there is no problem. As long as they do not try to destroy those who believe in Jesus and the actual word of the Bible all will be fine. However, it is only a matter of time before 2 gays and a lawyer are at the church steps threatening a lawsuit if they are not wed within the church halls. There will be several churches, that will marry them but most will not. This is where the problem begins.

Almost none of this has to do with your rights. Your beliefs aren't tarnished because others are getting married. Are your rights somehow impacted by out of wedlock relations of others? No, same with any other sin others commit.

I'm sure that most gay Christians would be willing to not have their wedding in a church that won't allow them. We aren't talking about cakes here.

In my eyes, Gay Christians is an Oxi-moron. How can you believe in Christ and keep on sinning. Oh, that is why the Catholic church lets you confess your sins. I have been with couples that actually went out with me on Friday night to a Honky Tonk and on Saturday night went to confession.This in my opinion is wrong as well but I will not go up against the POPE and his rules. That is Gods job.

But aren't we all sinners? What makes any other sin worse or better than others? Don't we all keep on sinning?

"interpret those verses differently since there was no word for homosexual in those times." How do you do that? Does not a man lie (sleep) with Mankind (another man) as he would a Woman in a Gay relationship?????????????????.. Where is the discrepancy here. NONE there are!


Leviticus 20:13 - If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.

I thought the old testament was trumped by the New Testament according to Christian beliefs. Leviticus has a LOT of ridiculous laws that we don't follow today. Most of the Old Testament does. Why are you singling this one out to believe in?

Was your wife a virgin when you were married? If not, you better stone her to death. Don't forget to invite your friends.

Deuteronomy 22:13-21

 

[ColinEssex]

Hi Colin, You must be feeling better today, have not heard you talk so much during the last six months. lol:.

I wasn't aware that you took such deep notice of my movements on these forums. Combine that with your ad hoc PM's and their strange wording about god, my wife etc. it is getting a bit chilling.

Col

 

[ColinEssex]

Welcome back Connor we have missed your contributions, however your quote is from the wrong post as Col who made it has not complained of these people being married, at least not on this thread.

Brian

Nor any other Brian. People can marry cats and dogs for all I care, it's not my problem what they do as long as it doesn't infringe on me.

Plus, I call lots of people freaks, like religious people, clowns, woofters, some magicians etc etc. it's just a saying I use.

Col

 

[Bladerunner]

Just trying to go one day at a time. Setting your sights too high tends to blind you or give you dizzy spells. But thanks for the kind intentions..

My Bad--will not happen again to anyone..including Colin...

Hate begets hate just as love begets love and forgiveness begets forgiveness. When the various Christian churches stop vicious public condemnation of the LGBT community then perhaps we can get on track with the idea of loving one's neighbor? Just a wild thought. (See next portion for follow-up.)

Whereas the folks who don't have a choice in their sexual orientation get called Sinners, Perverts, Blasphemers, and other similar names used by the Church doesn't reveal the Religious Right's agenda to deny rights to an afflicted group? (see previous posts on the 1990s PET scan studies, which I take seriously)

You can condemn the Westboro Baptist Church, but in a recent synod (sorry, should that be capitalized?) the Souther Baptists again vowed to always condemn the LGBT folks. It was an AP wire story from about two weeks ago. The Westboro folks are more vocal and more demonstrative, perhaps, but the rest of the Baptists quietly support them by voting the same way. Then you wonder why the LGBT folks get upset when a bunch of virulent yammerheads picket the funerals of soldiers who gave the ultimate sacrifice for the people of their country? Hatred begets hatred and that sounds like a LOT of hatred to me. You should come to New Orleans (or at least read the news releases) during the Gay Pride celebration known as Decadence Fest. That name was chosen precisely because the gays know how much it will tick off the churches...

I hate no one, please get that through your head........ok


The agenda of the LGBT community (most of them) is not to live in harmony, but rather to remove Christianity as we know it and you are buying into it. oh, well....what will be ...will be...... It has already begun---see various online blogs throughout various cities.

As I said, these people of this church are nothing but haters and do not represent any Christians that I know of, especially not me. The Southern Baptist might not be as you have described. I know, I know it is from the ultra liberal huffington post but here it is... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharon-groves/is-the-southern-baptist-c_b_6078108.html

As far as the Gay Pride celebration in NO, their name for it causes no one in the Christian world pause. Sorry for the disappointment.........

Since the old phrase "what goes around comes around" appears to be true, it would appear that many on both sides of that particular aisle hate each other. As to the "rapid transition" - I believe that many civil rights cases have returned to that simple yet very true judicial quote: Justice delayed is justice denied.

I'll condense your obviously dense segment about the difference between homosexuality and spinal birth defects. I was contrasting the two situations to point out that they are NOT comparable - because homosexuality is NOT a genetic condition, but rather is a gestational condition...

The Spina Bifida was brought up by another poster, not me. I just expanded on it. Ain't it funny that we have the same gestational condition all over the world. Hum............must be in the water.???????????????????????????????????/

We do not claim that MAN sprang from the ocean. That would be an amphibian of some sort that started the occupation of land. Man came later. However, with that detail corrected, the probability is 1 - because it happened. (That's the nice thing about computing probabilities of this type.) If it didn't happen, the odds are difficult to compute - but if it DID happen, the odds are 1.00 i.e. 100% - a sure bet.

One last thought: The late Will Rogers define the American brand of freedom thusly: Your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. Well, you get bent out of shape over losing the SCOTUS decision on marriage - but your religious interference denied them their rights to live honestly and without persecution. YOUR fist was in THEIR face on the marriage issue. Don't you SEE that? If you CAN'T see that, then SpikePL's earlier comment is right - logic apparently has no place in a religious discussion.

I think they have already made hash out of Darwinism and the rise of man some years ago but nice try. You say nature made man and I say God made Man and Woman. stalemate no proof on either side: think oneself is God vs faith in a creator. We don't have a lot in common.

You still don't get it. My main concern is that Scotus did this.... Legislate through the bench and not through congress.... They could have simply upheld the constitutional right of each state to decide its own fate..(but lets just throw out the 10th amendment.)..which in actuality, the minds of people in those states were changing slowly but surely....Now.... hearts/minds will be hardened.....To what degree I do not know but they will be hardened.... Now, what is next.......Maybe to save some money we need to get rid of congress and just let the democratic party rule. We don't need elections anymore unless you liberals want to switch leaders??????? Carl Marx would be pleased. This is one of the things I was talking about "be careful what they ask for" p.s. unless I miss my guess, after the 2016 election we will effectively have a perpetual one party system. Is that socialism or communism?

How did religious persecution stop them from getting married in other states that wanted them?
You say I have my fist in their face. If I do it is because they changed the law by being semi-dictators.
Is that what you really want or is this old saying what is really going on.? "It does not matter how you get there and how many people are affected, just so long as you get there". a lot of dictators in the past have had these thoughts.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Blade, you are hopeless. You cannot see that the reason your nose gets punched is because by interfering with marriage rights, your nose is in someone else's business. How much clearer can I make it before you understand the terrible truth of religiously-based hatred in the name of the (purportedly) greatest forgiver who ever lived. (Whether He lived or not, the idea of harping on forgiveness as important wasn't wrong, whoever came up with the idea.)

You say I have my fist in their face. If I do it is because they changed the law by being semi-dictators.

Yes? A law that does not affect you because you happen to be heterosexual and would not have taken advantage of the change anyway. TELL ME NOW how that change is a fist in your face. To my way of thinking, it is at most a finger, not the whole fist. I'll let you decide which finger.

 

[Bladerunner]

Blade, you are hopeless. You cannot see that the reason your nose gets punched is because by interfering with marriage rights, your nose is in someone else's business. How much clearer can I make it before you understand the terrible truth of religiously-based hatred in the name of the (purportedly) greatest forgiver who ever lived. (Whether He lived or not, the idea of harping on forgiveness as important wasn't wrong, whoever came up with the idea.)



Yes? A law that does not affect you because you happen to be heterosexual and would not have taken advantage of the change anyway. TELL ME NOW how that change is a fist in your face. To my way of thinking, it is at most a finger, not the whole fist. I'll let you decide which finger.

Doc.......it is not the marriage that is the problem. It is the law has been changed by judicial legislation, tearing the very fabric of the constitution. Once you tear that away, you will bring about a religious persecution not seen since the 1700s. we are already seeing it.

Had the states that did not allow marriage been allowed to progress normally, Marriage would have eventually been accepted by the majority of the people within these states. The workings of the constitution in action here. However, 6 judges actually tore up the laws made by the states and threw out the 10th amendment. I am sorry you think it is really about Gay marriage. It is about the lawlessness of the judges.

Regardless of what I think or feel about marriages between the LGBT community, The two people are still human beings and deserve the right to be happy. When Jesus returns they like all of us will have to make our case for salvation. Including me...........

.

 

[Bladerunner]

I'll break this up...

Almost none of this has to do with your rights. Your beliefs aren't tarnished because others are getting married. Are your rights somehow impacted by out of wedlock relations of others? No, same with any other sin others commit.

I'm sure that most gay Christians would be willing to not have their wedding in a church that won't allow them. We aren't talking about cakes here.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]

I hope we are not getting out of line here trying to keep it civil.

I have no problem with these people getting married. It is in the agenda of the movement that bothers me. The normal couple will get married at the clerks office (by the way,,,this is what my wife and I did as well), and be happy. THen there are some that want a church wedding. This is fine if the Churches decide to marry them. now, the problem will be when they tap a church that says NO,,,then the case of the CAKE becomes apparent. Under the FED Law now, the gov. will remove the churches tax exemption and protections from lawsuits if they still refuse to marry the couple. Lawsuits will then follow for those churches that still resist, the legal cost will bankrupt the church with the government idly watching.

What we have here is because 6 judges by pasted the constitution and threw away the 10th amendment, opened up the door for religious persecution not seen since the late 1700s. If you think not then why is there already a lawsuit filed to do away with all churches tax exemption and lawsuit protections.

If this thing had been handled through the normal channels and allowed to progress naturally, there would have come a time when all states would have permitted gay marriage by way of the people voice. These 6 Judges threw 320 million people voices out the door and now we cannot get it back.

But aren't we all sinners? What makes any other sin worse or better than others? Don't we all keep on sinning?[/QUOE]

This was where I said something about the Gay Christian being an oxi-moron. A gay person knowing that it is against all the teachings of the Bible (Gods Word) yet, believes in Jesus and redemption. I'll leave it at that without debate.

I thought the old testament was trumped by the New Testament according to Christian beliefs. Leviticus has a LOT of ridiculous laws that we don't follow today. Most of the Old Testament does. Why are you singling this one out to believe in?

Was your wife a virgin when you were married? If not, you better stone her to death. Don't forget to invite your friends.

Deuteronomy 22:13-21

Leviticus is full of laws for the Hebrew people as well as is Deuternomy. There are several scriptures in the New Testament dealing with the same subject.
. Matthew 19:1-8.....Romans 1:18-32 .......several more. Romans scripture deal with the female

 

[Bladerunner]

Blade, you are hopeless. You cannot see that the reason your nose gets punched is because by interfering with marriage rights, your nose is in someone else's business. How much clearer can I make it before you understand the terrible truth of religiously-based hatred in the name of the (purportedly) greatest forgiver who ever lived. (Whether He lived or not, the idea of harping on forgiveness as important wasn't wrong, whoever came up with the idea.)



Yes? A law that does not affect you because you happen to be heterosexual and would not have taken advantage of the change anyway. TELL ME NOW how that change is a fist in your face. To my way of thinking, it is at most a finger, not the whole fist. I'll let you decide which finger.

ok,I will bite, what would you have me do??????????????????

 

[ConnorGiles]

Thanks for the warm welcoming Brian

Don't count me back yet though. BusyBusyBusy!

Just thought I'd check up on the gang.