SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Sponsors of California's voter-approved gay marriage ban accused Attorney General Jerry Brown on Monday of advancing a far-fetched legal theory to justify overturning it.
In papers submitted to the state Supreme Court, lawyers for the Protect Marriage coalition argued that Brown had "invented an entirely new theory" by asking the justices to trump the electorate, which approved Proposition 8 to amend the state Constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman.
"We will not mince words. The attorney general is inviting this court to declare a constitutional revolution," reads the brief co-written by Kenneth Starr, dean of Pepperdine University's law school and former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.
The competing positions come in a series of legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought after the ballot initiative passed with 52 percent of the vote on Nov. 4. Brown initially said he would defend the measure in his role as attorney general.
But in a dramatic reversal, he changed course two weeks ago and joined same-sex marriage supporters in asking the court to void Proposition 8 and to uphold the estimated 18,000 same-sex unions sanctioned during the four months gay marriage was legal in the state.
Lawyers for the couples, gay rights groups and cities that brought the cases argue that the measure's backers used a flawed process for qualifying the amendment for the ballot.
Brown, however, argues that the amendment itself is unconstitutional because the Supreme Court established marriage as a fundamental right in its May decision striking down previous one man-one woman marriage statutes.
Starr and co-counsel Andrew Pugno maintained in their brief filed Monday that the attorney general is asking the court to assume powers not granted by the Constitution.
"The judiciary is entirely a creature of the Constitution, not an independent, freestanding guardian of minority rights or natural law," they wrote.
In an interview Monday, Brown responded that it was the sponsors of Proposition 8 who have misunderstood the role of the courts in a democratic society.
"Mr. Starr ignores the fundamental doctrine of judicial review and the historic duty of the Supreme Court to guard our fundamental liberties," he said.
Also Monday, lawyers for San Francisco and five other counties, as well as for gay couples who married during the four-month window, asked the court to let stand the existing marriages even if it upholds Proposition 8.
They argued that nothing in the language of Proposition 8 nor the ballot arguments submitted by Protect Marriage made it clear the gay marriage ban was designed to apply retroactively.
Proposition 8's sponsors have argued that the 14-word measure, which holds that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," effectively bars the state from acknowledging any same-sex marriages, regardless of when they were sanctioned.
No, its not, and you really can't speak to my personal beliefs, no matter how much you'd like to.
You know mike, I have no problem with people in the world being "gay", we expect them to live in sin. I have a big problem with people claiming Christianity and deying the Word in favor of their sin.
Of course, from Romans chapter 1, it is unbelief, not just sin or even idolatry, that causes one to be given over to the debasement of homosexuality. Read it yourself without the "idolatrous homosexuality" filter the Metro church and other homosexual churches teach to tickle your ears and keep the money coming in. All homosexual sin is unbelief.
Delight, I have not called God a liar, but I'm sure you want to believe I do because it makes it so much easier for your thought process: "All gays are bad, gays purposely separate themselves from God." Simply not true! Do we not all sin? Does that mean we're not Christian because we sin? Of course not! To sin you must know you are doing wrong, but I KNOW that I am not doing wrong by loving my partner. You are all too concerned with my goings on and need to be worrying about yourselves because it is very clear that you have some sinful issues that you're not ready or willing to examine.
I have NO evidence at all that you are a true Christian . I don't believe you currently CAN have a relationship with God when you walk in sin. You call God a liar.
Even the demons believe...they just don't follow.
well, I didn't read of the rich young man to be defending his riches to everyone, he was sorrowful.
This dialog seems to be tit for tat; we say God's word says thus, and he says no it does not...
back and forth. If he has a forum by which to defend to the death his homosexuality, does that not make him more entrenched in his own beliefs to the exclusion of even considering Scriptural truth after a while? I don't know for certain but he seems to become more dogmatic in his belief as we continue on.
btw...I hope the bible scholars are right, but if Joseph did turn away from his riches, it was not because Jesus followed him, Jesus just lets him go. If God is calling Mike, it may not matter what we say.
Delight, now you lie as well. I most certainly believe in God. Stop trying to pin me and talk as if I have declared that I don't believe in God when you know it perfectly well to be false. This most certainly is not what Jesus would do. Believer, I don't think its perfectly clear or there would be no room for debate.
delight, the neat thing about the incident with the rich young ruler is that some Bible scholars believe that he might possibly have been Joseph of Arimethea. So there is hope!
If mike doesn't believe God...what makes us think he will believe our words?
mike22685, God does not have to since His original and only design for marriage is perfectly clear and He offers no options to His one and only design for marriage.
Believer...
Consider how Jesus handled the rejection of the Gospel message in the story of the rich young man in the book of Mark 10:17-22.
After Jesus told him to sell his goods and give to the poor, pick up the cross and follow Him the young man was "sad at this word, and went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions."
The young man had great enthusiasm for Jesus and eternal life...he actually ran to Jesus. But Jesus found the ONE thing that would hold him back from eternal life. The young man would not give his riches away...riches were his achille's heel just as homosexuality is mike's; the one thing he will not give up for eternal life.
He went away and Jesus let him go...Jesus did not follow or run after him and say, 'reconsider my invitation'. Jesus let him go, perhaps we should consider doing the same for mike.
Delight, no reason to speak like a jerk. You interpret plenty for yourself.
Believer...mike's word is more important than God's Word. His has all the interpretations.
No, its not. God's word does not say anything about gay marriage, so it most certainly is up to interpretation.
mike22685, no that's God's Word versus your beliefs.
Believer, that's your belief verses mine.
that depends on how you interpret 'lost'. :)
mike22685, the only problem is God will never support same-sex marriage since that would woefully violate His original and only design for marriage. So no matter how you twist it, as long as you and your partner have sexual intimacy you will always be sinning in the sight of God.
I'm quite sure you are just as lost as anybody else on this page.
perhaps those who you know and hang with are lost...I'm told the gate is narrow but not impossible.
Not to sound like a post modern philosopher, but aren't we all lost to some degree? :)
mtg says-"so it's really up to you what you choose to believe..."
What you miss, mtg... unlike carnal Christians, I don't choose to believe anything. I have the MIND OF CHRIST! For "who has known the mind of the LORD that he may instruct Him?" But we have the mind of Christ." 1 Cor 2:16
You spend a lot of time patting Mike on the back...hmmm. I don't need YOU to interpret Mike for me...I don't even need Mike to interpret himself to me. God, through His word and the understanding that comes from being Filled with the Holy Spirit reveals what fruit comes by way of True Salvation. Mike is lost and what's worse...he really couldn't care less. So, mtg, follow Mike and fall in a ditch as well.
Luke 6:39 "Can the blind lead the blind? Will they not both fall into the ditch?"
All the more reason to support gay marriage :)
mike22685, are you having sex outside of marriage? Yes, my partner and I are having sex outside of marriage. Then according to the Word of God you are committing sin!
No, God never speaks to sex within a committed gay relationship. He certainly condemns any and all sexual relationships for the purpose of getting off.
mike22685, as I've said all along I don't question your love for your partner nor do I call your phileo love for your partner sin, but it is the sexual intimacy that you say you are having with your partner that God calls sin.
mtg, yes, I am proud that my son has the ability to love sinners while hating sin, but neither he nor I or even his Mom can take credit for that ability, but must give that credit to God who gave him and all Chrsitians that ability. And although it's difficult at times to do that, but by the grace and help of God we can and must if we are to be an effective witness to the lost.
I am happy that your son turned out well, believer. My wife and I were marvelling the other night at how wonderfully our 4 children "turned out." (The youngest was born in 1979.) It is such a delight to see these kind, mature - and, yes, Christian - people who are contributing to our world. Our oldest and are youngest are married. For what it is worth, the two in between are well adjusted and quite clearly heterosexual, like their two married siblings. I can tell you that I would have no fear for one of my children or for their mother and me, however, if any one of them wanted to marry a person of the same sex - as long as it was a truly loving relationship on which a good life could be built. I will overlook the inordinate "pride" you display in your son's loving the sinner but not the sin. You and I are just proud of our children, and we can't help it.
believer, when I came out to my parents they were initially devastated and thought it was something they had done. Eventually, they came to realize being a gay man was only a small part of my personality and they have since come a long way since 6 years ago. They embrace my partner as part of the family, as does my grandmother, and they are all fundamentalist Catholics. Love wins out Believer, and all of them have been able to see there is no sin in our deep love for one another.
mtg, unconditional love is not a license to sin and God's Word is clear if we are truly a child of His and we sin He will discipline us and if He does not then that is proof that we are not a child of His. So can I as a father do any less for my son when he sins. Your view of unconditional love may very well have led unsaved people to believe they were saved when in truth they were not. As for my son, he is very happily married and he and I still as we always did have a very good relationship with one another. Plus, there have been several times he has thanked his Mom and I for the way we raised him and the Christian morals and values we taught him. Plus he also sees the sexual practices of homosexuality as a sin yet while in college shared his townhouse with a homosexual who he still considers a friend. So you see mtg it is very possible to hate the sin without hating the sinner.
My point, believer, is that Mike seems to display more fruits of the spirit than most other "Christians" on this site. Perhaps more than you showed your sinner son? How is he doing these days - with the unconditional love you said you showed him?
mtg, and your point is? That somehow if my son or grandchild were to tell me he/she thinks their a homosexual I would change my mind with regards to God's original and only design for marriage and sexual intimacy? I don't think so because when my son had sex with a girl he was dating that did not change my mind with regards to pre-marital sex being a sin nor did any other sin he committed growing up lead me to change my mind with regards to what God called his behavior. He called it sin so therefore I called it sin. But before you jump off the deep end I do not consider the fact that a person considers themself to be a homosexual a sin, but when a person acts outside of God's original design for either marriage or sexual intimacy that is a sin and that's what God calls it so that is what I call it. Unlike you I do not patronize sinners with regards to their sinful behavior to include myself, because in patronizing them you are not helping them but only crippling them by making them think they are Christians when they are not or if indeed they are a Christian keeping them from enjoying the close intimate relationship God desires to have with them and keeping them from becoming the person God wants them to be, because they can't as long as they are living with unconfessed sin in their life and/or living in sin.
MTG, many thanks for the kind words, and the same goes for you.
Delight, you and I certainly read Mike differently. You wrote: "I read put downs from you of others who disagree with you...you get very nasty as from what I understand your service was terminated at least once for this reason. You spend an inordinate amount of time posting here which leads me to believe you are not a content or happy person. This is no theory but come from the words you have written."
Seems to me that Mike is among the kindest and LEAST judgemental people on this Web site (thougfh I know we all have occasional lapses and say nasty things which we may or may not deeply feel). I think Mike posts here so much because he is trying to help some of you. I don't know why he cares. I mean, I don't really know any of you folks, and I don't really care much what you believe. I assume that God gave you the same good mind that he gave most people - so it's really up to you what you choose to believe. It just seems to me that Mike does not want to be stereotyped - and I think he has a bit of aa burden for people who spend somuch time being upset by the way another person lives. I could be wrong (as I have been many times), but I think I can see Mike for who he is. It would do some of you good to meet a "Mike" that you could talk with. You might release some of the burdens you are holding up.
You know, when God wants to prune me, He put other people in my path. If I refuse to be pruned, He uses my relatives. If I still refuse to learn anything, He will use my own family! Even my wife! (How dare HE?!?) Perhaps God will need to give delight or prophet or believer a gay daughter or son (or grandchild) one day - just for pruning purposes.
Delight, again, you assume and twist so many words to try and paint me in a bad light. I most certainly have talked about my relationship with God before, and I don't think that relationship has anything to do with an ability to quote from the Bible verbatim. I am quite proud of my relationship with my partner, although I rarely talk about our sex life because that is something very private. I am a very happy person, but thoroughly enjoy a good debate, hence why I come here so often. Saying that I am selfless does not show a lack of humility, but it is a defense when someone calls me selfish without knowing anything about me other than the fact that I am in love with another man. Delight, don't tell me about attacking someone or opening my heart when it is sadly apparent how little you look at yourself. You jump down my throat for each thing I say, but I can't recall a time you talk about your faith or your issues; rather, you focus entirely on mine. Why is that?
Mike-I don't read anywhere you say anything about your relationship with God but I see a lot of references to your beau and sex life which you seem to be very proud of. I see no use of God's Word, other than to use against God and Christians; misquoted and ripped out of context.
I read put downs from you of others who disagree with you...you get very nasty as from what I understand your service was terminated at least once for this reason. You spend an inordinate amount of time posting here which leads me to believe you are not a content or happy person. This is no theory but come from the words you have written.
"I believe the Spirit talks through my heart".
We hear the "spirit" that talks through your words, the words that come from your heart. We do not recognize this spirit as tthe Holy Spirit we know, there is no "interpretation" of that, Mike. We cannot be ALL wrong and you the only one right.
"I am actually one of the most selfless people"; this is actually like saying I'm a very humble person, which in itself negates any humility. I hope you will consider that you may be in the process of being given over to your sinful desire and understand that God will not continually strive with you and that He must give you over as he will not force you to come to true Salvation against your will.
Before you punch out a nasty reply to me on your keyboard-STOP- and consider all of the words you have heard from Believer and others that have tried to point you in the right dirction and humble your heart before God. If you find that you are angry at my words to you-please realize...the spirit within you is not God's.
mike22685, not accusing just stating a fact!
You don't know that because your interpretation could be wrong for all you know.
mike22685, but if the "spirit" you're listening to is telling you anything that violates, contradicts, or supersedes God's Word it is not God's Holy Spirit.
Delight, there's a theory that when people have a stereotype, they actively seek things that confirm their stereotype and ignore things that might negate them. I most certainly have talked about my relationship with God plenty of times, which you strive to negate and claim I must be praying to some God different than yours. I am actually one of the most selfless people you'd ever meet, but you give the impression that you could care less to know about that.
Believer, I don't listen to men only, but I believe the Spirit talks through my heart as well as through other people.
mike22685, I was not speaking for you but for myself and I believe delight, but your choice is this, listen to men like mtg or listen to God through His Holy Spirit and His Word, it's your call all the way.
and of course, mike, no adversary, no roaring lion, right? I've yet to see you advocate God as much as you do your sexual preferrence...so no God, either?
It's all about mike.
Believer, don't speak for me, MTG is actually quite the amazing person. Delight was not attempting to make me a better person (he/she?) was attempting to make me look ungodly by saying I pray to man when in fact that was not what I said at all. Rather than read what I was saying (which i thought was simple, but perhaps I'll have to break it down next time) Delight took it out of context...for what reason? Because you want to show me how a real Christian acts? I don't think so!
mtg, no, we're trying to give Mike22685 the help he needs to have victory over sin in his life so that he can become the person God wants him to be in order to be able to join God in effectively reaching the lost for Christ. God's Word says nothing is impossible with God, we can do all things through Christ who strengthens us, and as a child of God He will give us whatever we ask as long as it's for our best and in accordance with His Will and Word. Sure sounds like a winning formula to me, in fact the only thing missing is a person who is not wholeheartedly surrendered to the Lordship of Christ and the control of God's Holy Spirit. Your patronizing of Mike is not helping him on bit it is only crippling him.
These people, Mike, love to "nail" something or to say "You lose" in one way or another. They are busy separating themselves from anyone who does not walk the lockstep walk. Who was the intelligent poster who used to be here? He was quite a literalist, a fundamentalist. I can't recall his name. he was a clear thinker, though too conservative for me, of course. Anyway, he wrote once, "After a while, I will stop speaking to these people." (meaning, I think, people like you and me, Mike) Do you ever wonder if you and I should say the same thing? It is dispiriting to fight such negativity every evening. Hoping all's well with you.....good night.
Delight, you blatantly ignored what I wrote in my post! It was "christians" like YOURSELF who told me to pray, not God. You nailed nothing, but you're completely content in spreading a lie to smear someone else. You are not a Christian, you disgust me.
So, why do you need God and Christanity? Why not be an atheist?
I didn't assume, mike, I nailed it.
"In fact, I didn't pray God's will, I prayed man's.."
You do not trust in God, you trust in man.
" so I did all I possibly could and nothing happened" Yeah, no doubt.
Man cannot save you and deliver you out of your sin.
I know you from what I read from your writings...Satan has devoured you.
Delight, homosexuality isn't a behavior. Having sex with someone of the same sex is behavior, but even if I didn't date or have sex with anyone, I would still be gay because of my intrinsic attraction to another person. How could you possibly assume what was prayed? In fact, I didn't pray God's will, I prayed man's, and man's will was that I change from being gay. i had many "christians" telling me I was sinful and going to hell if I didn't pray, so I did all I possibly could and nothing happened. Don't you dare assume you know something about my struggle as if its some cookie cutter story.
From another post: "I have tried before in the name of God, then I became suicidal. I don't believe that God loves me so much he'd rather see me die than be gay"
My point exactly...what was prayed? Certainly not God's Will. Who made you suicidal? God? No I think not...more like something Satan would do:
"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour". "1Peter 5:8.
Satan knows sin separates you from God. I daresay if he cannot cause you to die in your sin, he will be satisfied to see you blinded by sin and live a life not pleasing to God.
"is it possible that black man pray to become white and God will grant it?"
Apples and oranges; skin color is not a behavior. Homosexuality is a behavior, skin color is something one is born with. I don't see how these two can ever be compared, seriously; a person of color cannot change his color (unless he's Michael Jackson) but a behavior can be changed by a change of heart.
I've heard many say, 'I've prayed, but I cannot change' and I would ask what did you pray? Is that prayer anything like Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsame, "Not my will but Your will be done." Behavior cannot be changed unless one has a change of heart from self-willed to God-willed surrender.
mike22685, I never said that but rather it has been you who has declared that people can't change and if they do they truly were not homosexual in the first place. Plus, until we know with all certainty what causes a person to be or to become a homosexual we can't answer the meant to portion of your post.
Believer, you cannot talk to a few people who claim they have changed and use that as evidence that everyone can or is meant to.
mike22685, the reality is I have seen it, I have spoken to former homosexuals both male and female who are living healthy heterosexual lives, married to a person of the opposite sex and raising a family. It appears if any one has a hardened heart here it may very well be you. Plus it is not a sin to be black or white but it is a sin to violate God's original and only design for both marriage and sexual intimacy.
Tom, you have presented your opinion...that is not evidence! Believer, is it possible that black man pray to become white and God will grant it? Of course not, because God made them black for a reason. Same thing with being gay, but your heart is closed and wont allow you to see it solely because it would challenge your beliefs too much.
mike, the nuture issue may or may not hold water in your case, but it does in many other cases. Plus, once again I trust God and God's Word more than I do man and man's teachings. God's Word declares that with man some things are impossible, but with God all things are possible. Plus, whenever a person chooses to stop sinning in a certain area of their life, satan will do all he can to convince them that they can't and at times they may very well sin in that area of their life down the road, but that does not mean that it's impossible for them to have victory over that sin, but only that they are still human and still vulnerable, but if they will repent of that sin God will forgive them and by the Holy Spirit help them to have victory over that sin in the future. But first and foremost this person must be a truly born-again believer.
yes mike i guess you know more then those who spent a life time researching it. I could use the same argument why one would one child become a drunk as I was but other were not. or one becomes a killer but the other does not but I won't. The information contain at Narth and information from focus on the family as well as others confirms what Scripture says mike Homosexuality is a sin and one needs to leave it to be in the will of God. The research also present by these web site as well as other also confirms that one is not born gay, no gay gene that is. You may call it shoddy but you have not given any evidence for what you believe. Either thru Scripture or thru research you have just asked us to rely on your word. But not to rely on the thousands that have left the homosexual life style and the studies that have been done. Hmmmmm let me see who i woill believe. Again mike who is the one that has the blind eye? Jesus said the road is narrow that leads to life, you need to pick up your cross and carry it mike. The wide road your on leads no where. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Tom, do not belittle me by saying I am having a temper tantrum, that is a sad attempt by you to shut down conversation and I think you know that perfectly well. Tom, you actually haven't presented any evidence beyond saying "Well I researched it..." So have I, and even the founders of NARTH have shotty data with many holes in it. You look at that data with a blind eye because it confirms what you want to believe is true, even though it is not.
No, I do not remember everything from childhood, but explain how I have 3 straight siblings, or how some twins are gay, some are not, yet they also have straight siblings. The nurture theory doesn't hold water.
oh and mike when are you going to answer the question that are ask of you? Don't you think before you start having temper tanturms because someone hasn't answered your questions you might want to try answering some of the ones ask of you. Do you remember being feed when you were a baby? do you remember wearing a diaper? learning to walk? talk? crawl? do you remember any of these? and yet you do these things...hmmmmm are you born already walking? talking? crawling? feed yourself? potty trained? talking? Research says that this period of life is where the lion share of our persona is developed. Do we remember it? most of us do not I dare say 99% of us do not. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
mike mike actually I have talked to have and am helping someone get out of the sin of homosexuality. I have listen to several individuals who have come out of your lifestyle attest to the fact that it is a sin and one can change and I have researched a bit that the evidence points to one not being born gay. And mike if I may be so bold the evidence for the statements just made have been brought forth here in these forums for you over and over and over yet you still wish to justify your lifestyle by denying the evidence presented to you. That says a lot about you. My beliefs first off are rooted in the Scriptures of the Holy Bible from there it is backed up by the latest research and confirmed by countless people who have accept Jesus as Lord, surrendered their life to Him and found healing from homosexuality the lifestyle they chosed to follow till Jesus set them free. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Tom, you keep saying the same thing without answering my question. HAVE YOU SPOKEN to anyone who claims to be an ex-gay, personally. Have you evaluated the research with an open heart and prayed not to be biased, or do you enjoy your bias because it backs up your personal faith beliefs?
yes and not all drunks can or adulters or or or and I dont have answer to that cept not all will come and surender all to Christ. Are ou ready to? That also doesn't mean that thousands haven't changed the sexual orintation. They have. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Believer, why can't you accept that despite the fact research supports it and I have lived it, sexual orientation is not a choice?
Tom, I'm not arguing for the state of arguing, but you haven't presented any facts. It is a fact that even Dr. Spitzer says not all gays can change (you know, the doctor whose study Christians twist to their own means?)
the sad thing believer is he doesn't want to. I am not trying to be hard but if one reads what has been written by mike as well as other and then reads the answers that have been given by those who are followers of Christ one can see that he is not interested in changing his life style to align himself with this God his says he follows. He just appears to want to argue for the sake of arguing despite the facts presented. Sorry mike for being so cynical of your motives. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
mike22685, why can't you accept the fact that it is possible for someone to change from being homosexual to being heterosexual, the same way it is possible for someone to change from being heterosexual to being homosexual? Plus, God's Word says that with man some things are impossible, but with God all things are possible.
Believer, what is more believable is that people who are gay abstain from sex and those who were bi but maybe "felt more gay" (in quotes because it sounds awkward, not because I'm quoting someone) and have decided to try and pursue the opposite sex. Knowing myself, I know that even if I prayed for years and years, I would not become attracted to women, as I have tried before and we all know how that turned out :) Its very irritating when people who are straight tell me it was a choice to be gay and that without a doubt I can change, as if they somehow know my being or my relationship with God (that being said, I appreciate that you leave open the possibility of not actually "turning straight" but abstaining.)
mike22685, I have both spoken to and read the testimonies of former homosexuals who no longer take part in the sexual practices of homosexuality. Some have remained single and others are married with families. And while they are still tempted at times they are in support groups who are available to help them through those difficult times and most importantly they rely on God and God's Holy Spirit to help them through as well.
Tom, no face slapping, just the truth. You make an interesting point by comparing homosexuals to drug or alcohol addicts. Being gay is not an addiction, and we do know that for sure (when an alcoholic has alcohol, a certain area of the brain lights up on a cat scan...not so if a homosexual sees porn, for instance.) You still haven't answered my question: Do YOU know of any "ex-gays" that you have spoken to personally about their experience?
mike then take it as a slap in the face because you are doing a couple of things you denying Gods power to change lives which he done not with just Homosexuals but to drunks, drug addict adulters etc etc. You also slapping the face of countless former yes mike former Homosexuals who have surrender their lives to Jesus and sought His kingdom and righteousness and in the process were changed. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Yes, actually. They said they convinced themselves that they weren't gay and were so caught up in the moment that they said "Yep, I'm straight as an arrow!" which is what groups like Exodus report. What they don't follow up on is a few months/years down the road when the brainwashing wears off and the people realize they are miserable and now feel like they lot God and themselves down. Are there some people who call themselves gay but maybe are bi and can live a straight life? Absolutely! But to say that all gays can change is completely ignoring the majority of gays who have lived it, and its a slap in the face for you to tell me I can do something when you can't even fathom the roads I've been down trying. Being gay is not like being an alcoholic as its not a chemical dependency (I know some on here enjoy comparing it to such.)
mike have you?
Tom, the "evidence" you are speaking of is shotty at best, and a majority of the people who were "cured" of being a homosexual report that they are merely being celibate. Again, I ask, have you spoken to any of these "ex-gays" to hear their account?
Sorry mike wrong again you're denying the power of God to change. If you would bother to look at the evidence of people leaving yes leaving and changing their sexual perference you would know that you could as well. God didn't make you gay it was and is, in the finial analysis your decision to follow your desires not is. Remember mike the road is narrow and Jesus is waiting for you to get on it and start to be transformed by His Spirit into His righteousness. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Sorry mike wrong again you’re denying the power of God to change. If you would bother to look at the evidence of people leaving yes leaving and changing their sexual preference you would know that you could as well. Because God didn't make you gay it was in the finial analysis your decision to follow your desires not is. Remember mike the road is narrow and Jesus is waiting for you to get on it and start to be transformed by His Spirit into His Holiness. Gods Blessing In Christ
Tom...gaydom, huh? Unless you are God I can't fathom how you know he didn't make me gay, other than the fact that if he did, your beliefs would fall in on themselves, but that's not ample reasoning for me. Even if I chose to remain celibate, I couldn't suddenly become straight. Its clear you're lacking in honest conversations with gays if you think that is possible.
bryan, you make the assumption that God created autistic or deformed people when in reality although God allowed it He did not engineer it, but rather these problems are the result of living in a sin-soaked world. These problems are the consequences of the sin of Adam and Eve on all creation to include the genetic make-up of man.
opps forgot to add that that whole transformation would be a wonderful testament to God grace and power. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
one problem is that God didnt make anyone gay. evidence points to nurture vs nature so the end result is do you allow God to transform your mind thus freeing you from your sinfull life of gaydom. Thus allowing you to meet one of the opposite sex and have a child to grow up and cure cancer? hmmm Jesus is waiting Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Bryan,
Please read the Bible for literal meaning and gain some understanding for yourself; then you may not make such assumptions nor question God's purpose...He is very clear on purpose.
Bryan,
You miss the point...we live in a fallen world...God doesn't create people with deformities, they are environmental anomalies; autism, infertility, facial deformities, etc. etc. are caused by the fallen nature of this world.
After the judgment comes He will create a new Heaven and Earth that are no longer under the curse.
Delight,
I do question him a lot sometimes on the purpose of his creations. "Why do you create autistic people?" "Why are some born with facial disformity?"
The very blatant answer that came directly from my conscience was: "What's wrong with them? It is only the animalistic instincts in human that have caused society to persecute these people. See them in God's eyes, and you'd realize that they are no less of a human being than you." Same applies for all kinds of God's unique creation.
"We agree that God works with a purpose, what purpose would blurring gender lines do for society, other than to include homosexual and transgenders which works aginst His first command; "Go forth and multiply"?"
See how God's words are not supposed to be taken literally? Go forth and multiply? Then why did he create people who are infetile?
He told Adam and Eve to multiply and breed; it's part of his humanity project to expand the human species. In the 21st century, I am pretty sure we have enough expansion.
God works his miracles for all human beings in miraculous ways. Perhaps, he decided to make me gay and gave me the desire to adopt so that I would one day adopt this child from Palestine, whom He would want grow up here and not there. And today, I find that one of the most miraculous ways of his workings is that he has a way of making us "desire" to do the things that he wants us to do so that he doesn't need to force us to do his work.
Bryan,
I think the comparision between food and people is a little far-fetched. Most food today is engineered by man but the creation of male and female doesn't evolve, hasn't changed. We agree that God works with a purpose, what purpose would blurring gender lines do for society, other than to include homosexual and transgenders which works aginst His first command; "Go forth and multiply"?
Online,
That was just to show a counter argument for the following:
Premise 1 : "Marriage was a common thing during biblic times."
Premise 2: "Yet, the bible did not mention about same sex marriage."
Conclution: "Same sex marriage is not sanctioned by the bible."
Replace the word marriage with food and same sex marriage with fast food services, and you'd see how the above argument doesn't hold.
Bryan90,
(The bible had so many laws on food consumption, yet there are no statements about fast food services, do they?)
What does that have to do with this fact: the New Testament clearly does not sanction same sex relationships . . . ?
opps sorry for the last two post let me try again.
Delight I agree it would not be worth winning the debate and to lose the case, The ultimate goal is to bring one into the saving grace of Jesus Christ. I to have struggled with my sharp retorts and have tried to sterr away from character assassination. maybe not aways successful. But Scripture in Timothy says that all of Scripture is good for teaching,preaching and rebuking,correcting. That we must do. When individuals seek to make the Gospel into something it is not then it needs to be confronted. get thee behind me satan I believe Jesus rebuked Peter.. When you look at the writers of the NT and even Jesus' own words there are some pretty sharp retorts. Usually it seems when one was trying to change what scripture said or what Jesus was preaching.Having said that I wish to thank you for bringing up my sibtle change in my post it is an easy thing to do. Thank you again. Finially in my some 50 years I have watched this great country founded for the most part on Scripture fall away form Gods moral laws. We should as Christian be somewhat excited as the Bible does fore tell the falling away of the world before Jesus returns. So the time is short and we need to be bold in spreading the Gospel, to enter into the debate and not be shy about the truth of Gods word. When one reads of the early church fathers and what they preached and taught you can see that for those who hold to the truth of scripture we are pretty close. Especially in the area of human sexuality. So for those of whom wih to change the truth of the Gospel are without a foundation and will soon be swept away if we hold to the truth. Gods Blessing to you delight and to all who seek His kingdom and His righteousness. in Christ Tom
Delight,
Thank you for sharing the story of your sister. I remember I once said to you: "If only you knew someone close to you whom is gay, you might think differently."
This is another friendly reminder from God to Bryan: "Do not attempt to assume other people's life and judge them from those assumptions because you know nothing about what they've been through, and nothing about what they believe in."
I am truly sorry.
Online,
The bible had so many laws on food consumption, yet there are no statements about fast food services, do they?
Instead of using computers or Internets, I decided to use food consumption, since many say that technology is not relevant during biblical times, I chose something more relevant and even more universal than marriage.
If given a choice, who did not want to attain food quickly back in the biblical times, but it's just that there weren't any means of doing so! Same goes for same-sex marriage, there were no means of performing one in a society that still hold on so tightly to gender roles.
We evolved from animals which had clear gender roles and short sighted survival instinct. But God gave us humans something extra - rationality, empathy, and far-sightedness. Doesn't mean that Jesus didn't preach about gender equality, it was not intended by God! Imagine if he did 2000 years ago, people would think that he is insane!
God does his work not by storms of revolution but by drizzles of change. He gives us time to slowly slowly leave our animalistic instincts, and adopt more and more of the values he intended for us to learn.
He first spoke against murder, a VERY common animalistic behavior. Then greed, selfishness - all stemming from our animalistic instincts.
Perhaps now it seems that he thinks that we are ready to abandon our instincts on gender roles? I wonder when shall come the day when we could reconcile different religions. I am afraid my lifespan does not compare to God's patience and won't be able to witness such beauty.
feel,(The Bible has several definitions of marriage. . . )
Yet, there are no definitions that speak about marriage being between those of the same sex, do they?
Bryan, you responded to "Gosh, Bryan, what century DO you live in?"
with
"The century of love! HAHAHA. But no, I do indulge in sensual pleasure regrettably. Though I made a promise awhile ago not to engage in anal sex till I get married and I hope that I can keep that promise. :P"
I have looked back and tried to figure out WHAT I was talking about in that post. Maybe I had you, Bryan, confused with somebody else. I don't know. It was a non sequitur, at best. Sorry....
Please point it out next time when I have a small stroke like that!
Bryan,
Just a note about how I feel homosexuals reject God first because of unbelief, I'd like to clarify:
I understand it to be a tremendous struggle to find yourself same-sex attracted; I know it happened at about age 11 for my sister when she became painfully attracted to a gal I used to go horseback riding with. With anything, once we allow thoughts to take control of our minds we tend to believe that what we think is true and the feelings that follow are also true. Many homosexuals don't talk about these early feelings of attraction and without working out these strong feelings, the thoughts become obsessive; the mind cannot let go. With these thoughts and strong feelings taking hold so early in life, we begin to look at the world and form our worldview through that lense and wish to justify where we fit in and begin to order our world through the identity of same-sex attraction.
I believe the main reason homosexuals have a hard time wanting to believe in God is that they know what God has spoken about homosexuality being outside of His design and they don't like the choice. As my sister plaintively said to me, "are you saying I have to be celibate?"
Because the identity is so strong, the feelings so ingrained, the choice too difficult to consider, they turn away in unbelief. You can come to Christ as a homosexual, as we all have sin when we come to Him, but He loves us too much to leave us where we are; in slavery to sin. He will work in those who submit to His loving authority but they key is submission and most homosexuals are not willing from the get-go to give up their 'idenity' and so they are resistant to the Gospel. It is a mistake to tell someone they can be actively homosexual and walk with Christ as this cannot be done...sin separates us from God and one who tries to hold onto sin will only be frustrated in that pursuit.
Tom,
I absolutely know what you mean but I weigh the Scripture (for myself) and am constantly checking my motives for posting here. You see, I really should have been a lawyer because there is just something exhilerating about finding that one key point to argue and it's irrestistable to try and 'win' the argument. But as you may know, you can win the argument but lose the 'case'.
I've felt that sometimes here I have allowed my flesh to rise up as I can think of a thousand 'I could've saids' or 'I really want to say'. Before I became conformed to Christ (still a work in progress), I had a sharp toungue and wit and sometimes I think I'm way too funny; I could rip and tear with words. :D
So, what it comes down to for me is I will not address the abusers directly but I may use the words they say and refute their argument without to engaging that person. That is, if I think the point needs to be made, I try to see if someone else will make the point first.
I did not mean that to be a criticism of your posts at all, I think you do a good job of defending the Gospel, I just see a change in your tone (a bit). Posting here and reading the articles has sometimes made me feel cynical as I watch this society fall into such sad depths and the way in which some people express their frustration at us over God's words. Butnonetheless, keep on keeping on, I got your back, brother.
Bryan,
You are actually very polite, aimable and very honest; I was not thinking of you...I was speaking of the obvious offenders. I enjoyed our early conversations but I feel we communicate in very different dialects. As I mentioned, I've come to know God through Scripture as an Absolute and an Objective Person and your view of who God is nebulous; like a ghost or a mind image; unknowable.
I believe Scripture is written to be taken literally and when it doesn't speak in that way, it says so. Some of the Scripture is written in an Apocalyptic language and imagery especially in the book of Revelation where John saw visions, images and he had no words to discribe what he was seeing. Of course now, a lot of what he said is becoming clear as technology catches up.
I don't believe God rejects homosexuals, rather the other way around, as I read Romans chapter 1 it is because of unbelief that God gives them over. You may disagree but that's what I see both in Scripture, from my experience with a homosexual sister and her friends (whom I really like as people) and from comments by most of the homosexuals here on the CP.
Bryan, I believe you to have a soft heart and I pray you will come to know God, Jesus rose from the grave, He is alive today and He is knowable.
Forgiven Sin,
Notice Paul's first sentence: "It is good for a man not to marry, but since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband."
This in itself speaks of pragmatism. It's better to not X, but since Y is worse, and if X can prevent Y, do X.
And notice how Paul says that if through mutual consent, then it's best to remain abstinent. But if one sides lust for the other, then it's better for the other to abide since if not, one side might commit adultery. This fits perfectly into Paul's first sentence. It's better to not indulge in lustful sex, but since lustful sex within marriage has more emotional foundation then lustful sex outside marriage, it's better for one to happen then the other.
And it's also funny how the very wise Paul spoke of pragmatism, which some religious people ignore nowadays. For example abortion. If aborting a child can prevent you from ruining your life and your family's life and the child's life because you are a 14 year old, why not?
ifeelfine, plus I believe in the 67 War, Begin wanted to offer a sacrifice on the site where the mosque is on the Temple Mount and Mosha Dayan stopped him because he knew it would bring the whole Arab muslim world down on Israel, since most Jews believe the mosque is the actual site of the Temple.
ifeelfine, you know for certain that Levirate marriages are not practiced among some Jews today? Don't forget that many of the laws you cite to legitamize people's sinful behavior were between God and the nation of Israel only and my gut hunch is you've never even been to Israel so in essence you really have no way to know if these laws are still being practiced or not, but I have and I know the modern day Samaritans still practice many of the sacrificial laws whereas the Jews do not because many will not go on the Temple Mount for fear of walking over the Holy of Holies and being struck dead.
delighted Gods Blessing on you. I know what you mean and I agree with you to a degree. Part of the problems that the US is having regarding the moral decline and the upcoming judgment of our Father is because the church as a whole didn't unite to speak out on the unChristian un biblical sins that are promoted by those who have forsaken Jesus and the narrow road. Sins like Homosexuality, abortion, adultery, fornication yes feel even divorce so for us to not speak up now to those who are preaching another gospel one that will bring destruction upon them selves would be equally wrong. The mike,feelfine byrns of the world are not Christian according to scripture maybe they were at one time but by the fruit of what they write one can see that they are apostate. i don't think they are past the point of no return or a seared conscience Paul says in Timothy. So keep preaching the word delight your knowledge of the Truth is wonderful to see as believer and prophet and the others who are standing up to ones who wish to twist what scripture says and pervert the gospel. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
ifeelfine, if you can handle it why not try reading the Song of Solomon!
iff,
By the time Jesus came into the picture, the practice of multiple wives were no longer a wide practice simply because of the ramification/complications history bore to such pratices although, I'd love to suggest folks came back to a Godly perspective of God's original design for marriage.
The apostle Paul speaks directly to the sexual intimacy of married couples for non-procreational purposes. He states to not deprive one another of sexual intimacy lest one falls into temptation. 1 Cor. 7:5
Delight,
Actually I did question why I am so addicted to this site.
In a way, I am bored, and I love discussions and expressing my thoughts.
But in another way, I hope that perhaps one day, if a gay christian, his mom, or anyone who is suffering from the conflict of sexuality and faith, visits this posts, through some of our comments, we could help them reconcile their faith.
I feel absolutely sad when homosexuals reject God because they think that God rejects them. Well I for one believe that God does not reject us, and we shall not him. It's possible to reconcile faith and sexuality! Despair not!
delight: . . . so . . . when are you going to give scripture that is supportive of recreational sex rather than procreational - nothing you've cited so far indicates either procreational or recreational.
"They only use this site to promote their sin without shame, to blaspheme God and spew hate at bible believing Christians"
Spew hate? LOL.. Have I? If I have indeed, a thousand apologies, for I intend no hatred in my messages.
"Really, one only needs to have an equally yoked and God blessed marriage to know the depths of God's design for marriage...incredible sex!"
This really amuses me. You could interpret those as sex?! Hahaha.. It sounded more like poetry to me. And yet you choose not to interpret "homosexuals" as worded by the bible and take them for its literal meaning. Why not take "drops of the night" literally as well?
feel feel ya don't understand guess you never will. I am on a forum that is speaking about the sin of homosexuality. At this time I am not aware of any other argument on this site pertaining to divorce so why are you trying to change the subject as usual. Do you want to talk about divorce then lets go start another forum. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Tom,
Bless you, brother! I just want to tell you I'm turning over a new leaf as you may consider doing the same. I've seen a lot of muddy pearls here and I do know that the swine attack; so I am no longer engaging the scoffers here. Let them think what they will, as most are given over to their sin and are in unbelief...you can't change their destination.
They only use this site to promote their sin without shame, to blaspheme God and spew hate at bible believing Christians. For myself, I won't engage them but I will others who ARE seeking. So hang in, remember Jesus never defended Himself and as you know He was not tolerant of sin, He told the adulterous woman; "Go and sin no more." There was no argument from her (at least none recorded in Scripture) as there are endless arguments here. Let God judge, they will be surprised when they meet Him in His justice and not His mercy.
Feelfine "Is scripture supportive of non-procreational sex within marriage? If so, cite the verses."
God's View on sex that is for pleasure and not just for procreation, one only has to go to one book on that; Song of Songs...
[The Beloved] "I have come to my garden, my sister, my spouse; I have gathered my myrrh with my spice; I have eaten my honeycomb with my honey; I have drunk my wine with my milk. (To His Friends) Eat, O friends! Drink, yes, drink deeply, O beloved ones!"
[The Shulamite] I sleep, but my heart is awake; [It is] the voice of my beloved! He knocks, saying, "Open for me, my sister, my love, My dove, my perfect one; For my head is covered with dew, My locks with the drops of the night."
There's more.
Really, one only needs to have an equally yoked and God blessed marriage to know the depths of God's design for marriage...incredible sex!
tom, tom (see, I can make silly names too): there are lots of discussions about divorce on this site (granted not nearly as many as homosexuality which makes me wonder what's the obsession about) and I don't recall you ever popping into one. I wonder why - I guess it's just easier to pick on gay people when you're not gay than to pick on divorcees when they are all over the place and just so . . . in your face.
Online4him: The Bible has several definitions of marriage which are no longer in use or in some instances even legal. Leverite marriage was mandated by God - nobody is engaging in that nowadays. And the list could go on.
mike if you are following a gospel that is NOT in scripture and by your own words you are not. The you are most certainly not walking as a Biblical Christian. feel my my fine I haven't admonished anyone over divorce or other sins because these discussions are not about divorce or other sins. Theses arguments are about the SIN of homosexuality. byn are you that confused? Scripture says sex is only for married men and women who are married to each other period. Them's are Jesus' words. Again if your love for a man carries over to sexual acts it is contrary to Gods commandment and moral law so you are in sin and need to repent just like any other sin. If you continue in these sins Scripture says you will receive your judgment just like anybody else who continues a life style of sin. Gods Blessing In Christ oh by the way fine, hypocrite I maybe just as we all but the difference is I am forgiven and trying to walk the narrow road that leads to eternal life, not the wide road that leads to destruction by living a life style contrary to Scripture or compromising the word of God to fit ones own world view. In Christ Tom
Online4Him - Is scripture supportive of non-procreational sex within marriage? If so, cite the verses.
Mike,
As you have already mentioned; you have a social definition for marriage opposed to a biblical view of marriage . . . if you have a social/cultural view of marriage, why are you using the bible to defend a cultural practice?
mike22685, neither online or myself say we take the Bible literally on all points, what we say and believe is that in its original autographs the Bible is the God-breathed, inerrant, plenary Word of God, literally God's Word.
Online, it most certainly has been answered explicitly every single time you post it. There is no verse that speaks of same sex marriages, but my answer has always been that Jesus knew who his audience was. To them, same sex marriage would be as foreign as if he spoke about the internet. Jesus kept all male apostles because he knew female apostles wouldn't be taken seriously in that society, nor would gay marriage. Online, if you insist on taking the Bible literally, then do you keep your beard and never trim your sideburns? Do you ensure your clothing is made of only one material at a time? Do you prepare your food in accordance with the laws of Lev? Do you advocate that we stone adulterous women? That is Biblical literalism, you choose literalism a la carte.
Bryan90, (So what about the countless biblical figures who married more than one wife?)
Polygamy was a practice that became culturally acceptable but you will not find this practice being ordained by God . . . it is similar to the practice of fornication today; it is not Gods will that anyone should become sexually active until after they are married. . . but this is not how our culture sees it.
bryan, God's original and only design for marriage is one man and one woman united as one in the sight of God for life, He offers no other alternatives. This design was established with the creation of Adam and Eve and affirmed by Christ in the New Testament. His only design for sexual intimacy is as I shared earlier and anything outside that design He condemns as sin. There are no alternatives. As far as your anatomy lesson I can't answer that, nor can you, nor do we know if that was a result of God creating us that way or another result of living in a sin soaked world. But just because something feels good does not give one permission to do it and especially when God's Word is clear with regards to His original and only design for both marriage and sexual intimacy.
Mgt,
"Gosh, Bryan, what century DO you live in?"
The century of love! HAHAHA. But no, I do indulge in sensual pleasure regrettably. Though I made a promise awhile ago not to engage in anal sex till I get married and I hope that I can keep that promise. :P
Believer,
What God condemns is sexual lust that has no foundation of love. And back in the biblical times, this was occuring very often among "men rapers". Which is why in the bible, the condemnation for homosexual, put in context, is more likely to mean men who just have sex with men for lust and even shame (yeap they sodomized men to shame them). Which is why in Sodom and Gemorrah they depicted the men saying: "Send out those Angels, and let us rape them." That is not homosexuality in which we see today.
What happened throughout the years is that, men, who dominated the church, imbued their notion of "gender role" and "masculinity" in their interpretation and hence interpreted what the bible meant to be for "male rapers" to be "all kinds of homosexuals". The very same thing happened to females. They actually got it worse than we do. And hence the females instigated the feminist movement with the courage given by God, I suppose. And now, perhaps it's time for us to send out the message that we have faith that God has nothing against homosexuals too!
bryan, what God condemns as sin is sexual intimacy outside of His original design for sexual intimacy between one man and one woman united as one in the sight of God for life through marriage be it physical acts or mental acts of sexual intimacy. This would include the sexual practices of homosexuality between two people of the same sex.
bryan, God created sex for both the ability to procreate and to enhance the relationship of a husband and wife. Song of Solomon speaks much to the latter. Plus for a woman to get pregnant does not require her to have an orgasm and yet God created her with that capability. And it appears for the reason of sexual enjoyment and fulfillment only.
Gosh, Bryan, what century DO you live in?
believer, yes. When I got blocked for my "nigra" parody (I guess that's why), I signed up with another handle.
Believer,
So you're saying that if homosexuals all don't have sex, and kiss each other on the cheeks to express love, we are fine? So it's fine for men to love men then?
But Believer, did you not know that God spoke against all kinds of non-procreational sex? So do you admit that if homosexuals stop having sex with each other, heterosexual should stop having non-procreational sex as well?
Online,
So what about the countless biblical figures who married more than one wive?
Typo: should read (He) constantly used the phrase, (it is written): Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:18 pm
Premise 1: (no such thing existed during the biblical times) . . .
Again, the scriptures state that marriage is between a man and a woman; yes, some men had more than one wife but we never read of a marriage between a man and another man: do we?
Premise 2: Here is the actual verse: 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 (Romans 1:27). This passage speaks for itself . . . but if you would like another passage, what about: Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, (1Corinthians 6:9)?
Also, the idea that Jonathon and David were homosexual partners is nothing more than a fantasy composed by those desiring to justify their sinful behavior.
Argument 1: Determining which passages of scripture apply to present day Christians is not hard to understand when read in its proper context; especially when these biblical admonitions are repeated in the New Testament.
(But when one day, one of your best friends tells you that they are homosexuals, I hope that your conscience would tell you that there is nothing wrong with that. . .)
My conscience is not ultimate authority in matters of faith . . . it is the Word of God; but if one of my best friends did declare that he or she was a homosexual, I would admonish them to submit their will to the will of God and seek his grace. I would still be their friend but there would be no change in what Gods Words says . . . it would still be a sin.
mtg, by chance are you the former "hlerwin"?
mtg, it only becomes a problem when people assume what people did behind closed doors in order to justify sexual practices that God's Word declares to be sin.
Do we know that David's and Jonathan's relationship was not sexual? If it was, I still think David was a great and mighty king and ruler. I have no interest in what he and Jonathan did behind closed doors. (I wish more people on this site did not care so much about that, either. It's a distraction.)
bryan, in your response to online you mention the relationship of David and Jonathan, if you relationship with your partner is just that and involves no sexual feelings or interaction there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, since having that type of relationship does not determine if a person is either heterosexual or homosexual.
Online,
Premise 1: This premise answered your question on why the bible did not talk about same sex marriage - because no such thing existed during the biblical times. "The fact the scripture ONLY speaks of marriage being between one man and one woman refutes your argument." Actually scripture also talked about one man and many wives. But obviously most of you simply like to pick verses. But it's also because these relationships were the ones that are common during the biblical times. If the bible were written today, obviously we won't have marriage between a man and an alien, but that doesn't mean that it's wrong down the road.
Premise 2: "Romans 1 speaks of men with men as an ERROR" You read that phrase seeing it as men having relationships with men. I read the phrase and I see that it's talking about men having sex with men. In a way, the relationship I share with my bf is just like the relationship Jonathan had with David. It's just that David and Jonathan did not have sensual non-procreation sex - which again is spoken against for any kind of relationship.
Argument 1: I know you would disagree, many would. But are the premises that resulted in the conclusion wrong? Tell me which premise you disagree with. Do you not agree that we should not be the ones picking the phrases to adopt and to abandon? Do you not agree that if the bible were taken literally, one has to pick phrases?
Online,
The truth is not really that elusive, hard-to-reach, or anything, it's just hard to understand. The narrow road right? (The favourite saying of many of the posters here). It's hard to go our instinct of greed and our idea of gender roles for example. But when one day, one of your best friends tell you that they are homosexuals, I hoep that your conscience would tell you that there is nothing wrong with that. And that conscience, that voice of God, I hope, would trumph all of our instincts.
bryan, please share the specific passages for those other issues and I'll do my best to see if we are to adhere to them, but as for the Sabbath, Christ addressed that issue in the Gospels so I'll let you look that up for yourself.
bryan, Acts 10:9-16, Peter in a dream is told by God that it is permitted to eat things that were once considered unholy and unclean which would include pork. Your attempt to say the Word of God isn't God's Word is simply a feeble attempt on your part to justify practices that clearly violate the Word of God, biblically known as straining gnats.
Bryan90,
First, you did not answer my question, which leads to the conclusion that many of you refuse to admit that homosexuality is simply not a practice that is not supported by scripture.
Next, premise 1: The fact the scripture ONLY speaks of marriage being between one man and one woman refutes your argument.
Next, premise 2: Romans 1 speaks of men with men as an ERROR . . . why is that?
Finally, you said, (The bible should not be taken literally)
I disagree; we should take the Bible literally because the Lord Jesus Christ also took the Bible literally. Anytime the Lord Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, it was always clear that He was taking it literally. For instance, when Jesus was tempted by Satan in Luke 4, Jesus answered and quoted from the Old Testament; as a matter of fact you constantly used the phrase, (it is written), so it is clear from the context that He took the Bible literally.
Also the New Testament speaks the following with certain conviction: In Johns epistles, for example, we are told that we (know) the truth-(1John 2:211; 2 John 1; John 8:32), Paul speaks of coming to a (knowledge of the truth)-2 Timothy 2:25; 3:7-8; 4:4, the writer of Hebrews speaks of a (knowledge of the truth)-Hebrews 10:26, and Peter speaks of (obedience to the truth)-1 Peter 1:22). If truth is uncertain, elusive, out-of-reach, lost on us as we live in our own private worlds of (post) modern reality, then what on earth are the apostles talking about?
Online,
I think what Mike is trying to say is that this issue has been discussed over and over and over again.
I'd have to repeat it one last time:
Premise 1: "Doesn't mean that it is not stated in the bible, it is forbidened"
Justification: "The bible reflects the lives of those who write it. God inspired those people to write their lives so that we could learn from the value embedded within. During their times, there was no such thing as a same sex marriage, so obviously it is not discussed by the bible."
Premise 2: "The verses in the bible that talks about homosexuality do not directly speak against men loving other men."
Justification: "Most of the times, it refers to men lusting for men and having sex with them merely for lust. It is perhaps true that there would be an equal amount of verses that speak against men having sex with women for non-procreational purposes. When the bible spoke against homosexual sex, it is generally speaking against non-procretional sex."
Now let me try and make this argument clear
Argument 1: "The bible should not be taken literally."
Premise 1: "We do not get to choose what to follow in the bible and what to ignore."
Premise 2: "Since the bible is the word of God, everything written in it should be valid."
Premise 3: "If the bible is taken literally, MANY verses written in the bible is not valid, and many christians simply don't abide by them."
Premise 4: "Hence, if the bible were taken literally, we would have to exclude certain statments of the bible; this contradicts Premise 1."
Conclusion: "The bible should not be taken literally, and we should take the value that is embedded within. That way, the bible would make most sense."
Mike22685,
On the contrary . . . it has not been answered . . . which verse mentions same sex marriages . . . can you post it now so that we can finally end this discussion? Give us the book, chapter and verse please . . .
Online, really? How many times has that been answered for you, yet you still ask it as if its your smoking gun.
Bryan90,
Where do we find same sex marriages mentioned in the Bible?
Believer,
Really? Is there a line in the NT that says we are allowed to consume swine now? Or that it's okay to grow 2 kinds of crops on the same field? Or that it's okay for a woman to intervine in 2 men's argument? Or that it's okay to work in the Sabbath?
bryan, you're correct we just can't pick and choose, but at the same time there are laws in the Old Testament which are no longer relevant today such as food restrictions and sacrificial laws because God spoke to Peter with regard to the laws on food consumption and Christ's death on the Cross was the fulfillment of the sacrificial laws. So while we can't randomly pick and choose a study of the scriptures allows us to know for the most part which laws and teachings are still relevant to us today.
Tom said: "you can't be in continuoes sin and be a Christian."
And Tom, you are a hypocrite. I have yet to see you admonish anyone who got remarried after a divorce or married a divorcee. Many of the other posters on this site are complicit in your hypocrisy and you in theirs.
Delight: If these are truly the very last days, its only because you've screwed the planet up.
believer: "bailout issue to vote?" I'm not following you.
Believer,
You can't just decide which passage in the bible to adopt and which to throw away! You either take it all, or take none at all. And like I said before, for the bible to be timeless, it is not the "literal" words that are supposed to be conveyed, it's the value embedded within the stories. God tells his words in tales, and wish for us to understand the value behind it.
Is it not hypocritical that you value the bible so much and proclaim that "oh there are some rules that are not applicable!" So who decides? You? The Church?
mike22685, granted there are some Old Testament laws and teachings that are no longer applicable to our day and age, but there are many such as God's design for marriage and sexual intimacy that still are applicable along with the teachings given to us in the New Testament that you and others appear to be saying are no longer applicable to 2009, but in truth they are very applicable to 2009 and a number of problems we struggle with in our day and age are a result of people to include those of us who profess to being believers ignoring them.
Delight, no, I am standing up for my beliefs, as I most certainly am a Christian.
Tom, I am not wrong. Prophet, for one, clearly stated that he is judging, and the way you talk, yes you are. I don't think much in the Bible is clearly stated other than maybe the Golden Rule, but there is a backstory behind everything written in the Bible. Paul wasn't writing for us 2000 years later. He was writing letters to immediate groups of people, 2,000 years ago, because the mentality was that Jesus was returning within days, weeks, months.., certainly never in their wildest dreams having us still waiting 2,000 years later. That being said, they wrote for their times and their issues, and when the Bible is put into that historical context, the passages often said to regard homosexuality are clearly not talking about homosexuality as we know it today.
Prophet brought up the point before that Pride is a sin. Does that mean it is a sin for us to feel pride when we have done a good job and get recognized for it? Certainly not, but its what you can do with your pride. The Bible speaks against lusting after others and fornication, and I would even say it talks about men lusting after men, but the Bible never says men loving men in a relationship is perverting God's design. That is a human understanding and interpretation, and that is what I am here to fight. Much has been interpreted into the Bible, and because the majority of evangelicals feel it is truthful does not make it so.
I agree Delight The bible speaks that in the last days men will be lover of themselves, following a strange gospel. They will be surprise when life is over. mike the argument never changes the homosexual lifestyle is a sin it is clearly stated in the Scriptures. We can say it many different ways and times but the fact remains and I am sorry if you all think we are judging, (you are wrong there as well) but all Christians need to speak the truth of what Gods Word says. Granted it may be a bit hard at times and even harder for those of you who are apostate or fallen away from the truth but the fact remain if you dont change you ways then destruction is you rewards. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Now there's a bonafide delusion for you: "We are in the very last days and the delusion is here."
Delight,
"You interpret the bible into oblivion and God and His word don't have any value other than what you place on them"
His words don't have any value to me other than what he shows me through his creation. I use his words to help me understand the life that he has given me through the help of the wisdom he has bestowed me with.
I try to understand his other creations, by attempting to take. in other people's perspective - the christians, muslims, atheists, capitalists, communists, blacks, whites, women, men, homosexuals, etc. And I realize that the more I learn from other individuals, the more I see how his words for us make sense; the more I understand his values and his creation.
You take the scripture as an absolute, while I take the "living". Because God seldom contradicts himself, hence if we find that his creation contradicts his words, it's either we have yet to understand his words or his creation. I choose to believe in the former, you the latter.
I have faith in his creation, you have faith in his words. Perhaps in the end, we'd realize that none of us are wrong - it's all part of God's "twisted" way of working things out. (Twisted because I have yet to understand.)
"Jesus said the road is narrow that leads to eternal life and the road is wide that leads to destruction"
I have never really pointed this out before, but this is what I just realized? Most of you here think that you are taking the narrow road, and we are taking the wide? It's hilarious how bias we can get. Don't you think it's also true the other way around?
The wide road of using the bible to persecute, and the narrow road of reconciling the bible with the lives God has bestowed on human beings.
No one would know better than you, Mike about picking fights. Hello? You are on the Christian Post, don't be all but-hurt about being "persecuted", unless that floats your boat. You are persectuting our belief and picking fights, you don't hear us whimpering over it.
Believer, there is so much in the OT that no one follows anymore, so don't accuse me of something you also do.
Tom, I'd appreciate an original response. When you copy and paste the exact same thing in multiple forums, you're clearly looking for a fight.
Tom,
We are in the very last days and the delusion is here. My thought is that it comes in this form of worldly "love". Tolerance being the key virtue and anything that is not tolerant is hate. I saw a commercial today for the Oprah show, seems she trying her hand at religion once again. The Tolle series she did wasn't so successful in making converts, although thousands tuned in. Now she has this liberal "reverend" Bacon who will be doing "spirituality 101" webcasts. He will tickle their ears for sure. We were warned by God that it must be this way and I do feel badly for those who will be decieved. Keep up the good work, run the race well and you will have reward in Heaven.
I have seen people twist and turn and run try to convince people of a falsehoods but mike,andfeel,and mtg and brny take the cake. So once again The Bible says Gods is the same today as yesterday as tomorrow. He never changes neither does His word. He knew that this issue wouldbe a hot button issue back when He created the world, as the world turn further and further from the truth of His word so He made it simple and to the point several times in His word Homosexuality is a sin maybe a little worse then some maybe not as bad as others, but the end result is if your are living in this particular sin you have most likely shipwreck any salvation you may have had. In Other words you can't be in continuoes sin and be a Christian. Jesus said the road is narrow that leads to eternal life and the road is wide that leads to destruction. You who condone or live in the homosexual lifestyle are wrong and you are sinning. Jesus is waiting for you to repent and turn from you wicked ways. I'd like to argue longer but these tired bones need their rest.Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
How convenient for the 'comma' people...God can now say just about anything you want. Like a cosmic puppet, right?
mike22685, no, it is you who refuse to apply God's Word to the year 2009 by saying that God's teachings in the Old Testament and even some in the New Testament no longer apply to this generation.
mtg, why does it not surprise me that motto would be a UCC motto, especially considering how they have so much departed from the basic tenets of the Word of God and the Christian faith.
Apply God's word to the year 2009???. God's word was written for all men, for all time. Because the human race has let it's morals go down the toilet, we decide to change what the written word means? Where did this almighty revelation come from? The bible does not change - people and societies do.
Amen MTG! So many on here absolutely refuse to actually apply God's word to the year 2009. It was written at least 2,000 years ago, and if you notice, much of what they focus on is not Christ's message of love, but rather the OT condemnations.
God did not give you a brain to a slave to the printed word.
I like the United Church of Christ's motto: "Don't put a period where God put a comma. God is still speaking."
Not to listen to you people. ... God finished speaking in some quite old printed material, and - that's it for God. It's over for the big guy.
Memo: No more news, OK, God? It's too confusing. Thanks.
In all honesty Bryan, did someone put your head in a blender? You are just all over the place in your argument. You think in relative terms and I believe what we see in Scripture are absolutes from an outside and very objective God. You interpret the bible into oblivion and God and His word don't have any value other than what you place on them. We have no common ground for conversation. One day you will find your nebulous ideas won't cut it when the rubber meets the road but, ah...good luck to you.
"I take such comfort that one day you will be judged harshly for your actions to which so are so completely blind."
Now, Mike, don't let them get your goat. You're better that that -and more Christian than that, too.
DP wrote:
"One of the main diagnosed problems with gays from a psychological standpoint is the anti-social behavior. It is a need to be hated by those you disagree with in order to validate yourself. It is quite common among gays. This is why it is so important to sue and/or get fired anyone who disagrees with you being gay. For example, Mike...almost every other post from you contains a slam against someone. We have come to expect it.
&
"This is a Christian site. The Bible doesn't change for us and it is arrogant for you to act like it should change for you. It is insulting to us and completely arrogant. You have shown little to no respect for anyone who disagrees with you. Yet, we still post with you trying to show you that being a Christian means coming to Jesus on HIS terms and not yours."
DP, your remarks at the top come from a person with "problems," diagnosed or undiagnosed. Maybe you need to get out and meet more gay people - or buy a medical book that was published after 1950.
The second remark underscores the fact that we Christians do not have to take a test to post here. We do not have to view the Bible the same way you do. Your way is fine - for you. You may have a very large support group behind you. That does not mean that your interpretation of the Bible is correct. Give Mike - and others - a break on occasion.
John, you are twisting words out of context. I called Lev. garbage because we have literally thrown out every other law in it except for those of you who cling to the one verse about homosexuality.
"God doesn't have an opinion...God has a Word"
Actually I don't think God is as objective as you think. Remember how he debated with Abraham on the number of "good" people that has to be present in Sodom and Gomorrah for it to be saved? He loves us; and love by nature is subjective. And his love for us very often trumphs his other principles.
"you just cannot read His Word and come away with an truthful assessment that homosexuality is in anyway acceptable to God"
Then how come I can? And many more for that matter. Do remember that the exact same line was used for slavery, crusades, and persecution of females. Some even preached by the contemporary pope.
"this statement can also be true of psychopaths"
And I bet that is another group of individuals whom you readily judge and whom I readily wish to empathize with. Not all "psychopaths" are as bad as you deem them to be, some of them just cannot understand certain things in life and simply needs some time, and empathy.
"God's Word as a final arbitrator."
But God's Word is being interpreted by your own rationality don't you think? Didn't you interpret the meaning of "homosexual" in the bible?
ifeelfine, would you be willing to put the bailout issue to a vote?
Well, Bryan,
God doesn't have an opinion...God has a Word and you just cannot read His Word and come away with an truthful assessment that homosexuality is in anyway acceptable to God. He makes no concessions for marriage between same sexes and He speaks quite harshly about it several places in the Bible, both OT and NT.
As far as your statement "as long as you can live with your integrity and conscience" this statement can also be true of psychopaths as they don't let their conscience bother them and integrity is in the eye of the beholder with situational ethics and "being true to oneself".
The final arbitrator for the acceptability of a man's behavior cannot originate with man; we are creatures of rationalizations and justifications and we can spin anything we want. That's why we need God's Word as a final arbitrator...not 6 million opinions based on conscience or a sense of integrity. We are fallen creature with fallen ideas, we need God.
I'll be the first to admit (and have already) that I am not always as eloquent as I would like - I am certainly no Viking or Steveh20. And there have been times when I have been a little brash and my emotions get the better of me but I have not bailed on any conversations, there have been times when I have not responded as I would have essentially just repeated what I said earlier.
"I took you for one who believes there are no "wrong" answers."
You are right. I try not to condemn others and call what they do "wrong" because I believe that as long as you're happy, as long as you can live with your integrity and conscience, i'd just live and let live.
But what I felt that was wrong was that prophet so confidently contend that it is in God's opinion that we are a perversion. And in my humble opinion, I think that it is not true.
But you do attack the Bible. You called a part of it "garbage" in another thread because it called your lifestyle an abomination.
DP, I don't know where you get your information from, but all the gays I know throw the best parties (pretty social behavior, if you ask me.) You don't know anything about me (again) but you're trying to diagnose me as being anti-social? You, sir, are absurd! Many, many on here slam me quite consistently, then pretend they meant it with the best of intentions when any fool could see otherwise. I take such comfort that one day you will be judged harshly for your actions to which so are so completely blind. I am on here because I am a Christian, so I have just as much right as you do. I don't attack the Bible, I attack your ignorance.
Now Bryan,
I took you for one who believes there are no "wrong" answers.
There is Scriptural support for the man/woman model of marriage but none for any other type. So one would be Scripturally sound and one would be just an opinion...self serving opinion at that.
"God.....created.....romantic.....love......and......marriage.....to.......be.....between.....a.......man......and.....a......woman.
Anything......outside......of......that......is.......a......perversion. "
Do you not read our comments?
That is your humble opinion. And in my humble opinion, You.... Are.... Wrong....
"I've been forced to change my posting name because you all backed me into a corner and I cussed, then everyone cried foul."
Actually, the computer reports certain things to the webmaster. When I tried to post what Santa says I got a warning about inappropriate word usage....
Still, this is a sign of that anti-social thing I just posted where it is important to villanize those who believe your homosexuality is a sinful life-style.
"You hate me, go ahead and say it, you'll feel better."
One of the main diagnosed problems with gays from a psychological standpoint is the anti-social behavior. It is a need to be hated by those you disagree with in order to validate yourself. It is quite common among gays. This is why it is so important to sue and/or get fired anyone who disagrees with you being gay. For example, Mike...almost every other post from you contains a slam against someone. We have come to expect it.
"Prophet, I'm sorry, what did you say? You're so high up on that pedestal of yours I couldn't hear you!"
That is an arrogant statement from someone who has an anti-social need to attack anyone who disagrees with you. You even attack the Bible when you say that what is plainly worded and specifically written is just our opinion yet you say you don't believe the Bible so why is it our interpretation. Just say..."I don't believe that part of the Bible." Instead, you attack those who have been patient with you and restated over and over in new and creative ways what the Bible plainly says.
This is a Christian site. The Bible doesn't change for us and it is arrogant for you to act like it should change for you. It is insulting to us and completely arrogant. You have shown little to no respect for anyone who disagrees with you. Yet, we still post with you trying to show you that being a Christian means coming to Jesus on HIS terms and not yours.
Your attack on me is proof positive of an anti-social disorder you need to get some help for. Prophet is not high up on a pedestal. If anything he and the rest of us have tried to reach down to the muck you're stuck in to lift you out. This is what Jesus commands. The fact that you don't understand that is proof you do not understand the Gospel but believe what Paul called "another gospel" which suits your life-style.
I've been forced to change my posting name because you all backed me into a corner and I cussed, then everyone cried foul.
mtg, I've been posting for over a year now and I can tell you mike22685 dishes out as much as he takes in and the same is true with ifeelfine who has been known for taking cheap shots and then bailing out. I know very few of us who can plead not guilty to the charge of being rude and disrespectful at times. Plus, when you're dealing with some of the hot-button topics we deal with, we can sometimes become more emotional than rational. And if mike22685 were honest he would tell you he's been forced to change his posting name because of comments he's made.
mtg: Spot on.
Gee, guys, when did this board get so "Naah, naah, naah, naah, naah, naah?" Sounds like a kindergarten playground...
If it makes you that happy to separate yourselves from Mike and me, go ahead. I find myself in the same position as a poster who used to be here - called "str8notnarrow," or something like that. I realize I am biased a bit, but Mike seems to display more milk of human kindness than most of those who taunt him. (I think I'll go back and read all the postings and see if I still feel that way. But that's for another day. Good night, folks.....
DP, the personal attacks you make...so silly! You hate me, go ahead and say it, you'll feel better.
"Jesus is waiting for my answer to....your incoherent sentence?"
Incoherent understanding does not mean the question was incoherent. I understood it perfectly. That means the problem is with you since others understand it.
Jesus is waiting for my answer to....your incoherent sentence?
hmmm mike never called you a queer thems your words. However if one take words and twisted them to say something it doesn't is that not crooked? Jesus is waiting for your answer. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Ha, now I'm a queer and a crook, how silly! Prophet, funny, you have insulted people and many have called you out on it, yet you ignored completely. That is why I always challenge you to examine your conscience, which I'm sure would be difficult for you.
PS, me and mtg are not the same person, just like minded.
actually for once mike is right I did mean crooked level but reading the words of mike and mtg I would say crook about fits your world view as well. You both keep trying to steal the truth of what Scripture says and twisted it to justify your life styles and beliefs. Prophet you rock, it does seem when those who oppose the truth of Gods Word are confronted with the facts they do resort to put downs and hate speech. Keep standing on the word prophet in the long run if they dont repent and walk the narrow road that leads to life they will get their just rewards. Gods Blessing in Christ Tom
"You're so high up on that pedestal of yours I couldn't hear you!"
The problem is with altitude on Prophets part there dude. He's on the level. Perhaps it is a problem of your lack of altitude....
"Prophet, its clear you're on your high horse about this, so let's move on. "
No. Sin is sin and we won't move on.
Well, I suppose I'll just say what Jesus said. And if you have a problem with it, then we will know that you are not a Christian.
Mike...go and sin no more.
mtgburrell/mike,
I know you don't think you are. Just like you don't think sin is sin.
I don't think Mike is being that way, Prophet. You DO place yourself so high...so superior. Your CP handle says it all: prophet. How overweening.
Mike,
When you can't win an argument, you think insults will make a difference? It just shows your true color. "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks...."
I believe he meant to say crooked level ;) Prophet, Im sorry, what did you say? You're so high up on that pedestal of yours I couldn't hear you!
mike...or mtgburrell...whoever you are,
I wouldn't say high horse, because I hold myself to the same standards that I preach. I speak the Word of God.
Did I miss something? What is a "crook level?"
mtg, my thanks for the compliment :)
mtg you must be using a crook level Gods Blessing in Christ Tom
Or - put another way - by their fruits ye shall know them.
Mike, you seem to be the calmest, most level-headed or fair person here most of the time.
No one has ever answered my question about precedence (unless I missed the answer): Is there precedent for what Jerry Brown is trying to do? I can understnad his motivation, but his actions seem illegal to me (a non-lawyer).
Sorry....I first posted this question on the wrong column (Keeping Prop 8 Donors Anonymous). Any ideas on this?
Prophet, its clear you're on your high horse about this, so let's move on.
Mike: heterosexuals practicing oral and anal sex are committing sodomy - which is a sin. I never said this applied only to homosexuals. The difference is that heterosexuals have the correct 'parts' to engage in sex as God intended. Sodomy is certainly not a gay only sin.
Mike,
I know enough about your "love". God created romantic love and marriage for a man and a woman. Romantic love between same sex people is a perversion and a sin.
"Do we really need to go over the disgusting biological details about how certain parts of the body were made for exit only"
I've already posted the greek which is QUITE clear on the subject to anyone who's mind isn't clogged by perversion.
John, I know PLENTY of married couples who practice anal and oral sex. Does that make their entire love perverted? Prophet, you place that blanket statement and keep saying its perverted, but YOU DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING about my relationship or my love, so to say such a blanket statement that every single relationship between every single gay person is perverted is completely ridiculous.
Perverted: To cause to turn away from what is right, proper, or good; corrupt. To bring to a bad or worse condition; debase. To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse.
If you don't use it the way God designed it then you have perverted it. It doesn't matter how we want. It is a matter of deviation from HIS design and HE determines that. HE wrote in HIS word that homosexuality was disgusting. HE said it.
Oy! It's like talking to an ADHD kid. Do you not read my posts?
God.....created.....romantic.....love......and......marriage.....to.......be.....between.....a.......man......and.....a......woman.
Anything......outside......of......that......is.......a......perversion.
You really do not know what is perverted about it? Do we really need to go over the disgusting biological details about how certain parts of the body were made for exit only, and that the mouth was created so we could eat food, drink and communicate? And biology aside, the bible clearly says it is a perverted abomination. This is why God made a man and a woman. How much more basic and simple could it be to understand? I pray you break free from Satan's grip, repent, and find the truth.
Prophet, explain, EXACTLY what is perverted about it.
ifeelfine, the only times I was dismissive is when you try to say slavery was endorsed and promoted by God, both of which are totally false.
feel fine the answer to your question on slavery has been asked by you many times. It is nothing more then a tactic by you to distract from the topic at hand. Homosexuality is a sin just like any other sin and one needs to repent from this sin that God condemns contrary to what byn says, it is not sanctified by God it is condemned period. feelfine where have I picked and choose? We are talking about homosexuality and as has been shown over and over scripture by scripture that homosexuality is a devient lifestlye condemn by God, one not built on Gods love but on lust. It is you that by your fruits, which are your words that you have written just like mike and byn that are in error. Jesus said the road to life is narrow and the road to destruction is wide. You all call yourself Christians but your fruit says something different. Get off the wide road and surrender to Lord Jesus and the truth will be shown you. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
By the way. YOu have "blind faith". That's your problem right there. I have faith too, but mine isn't blind. It's backed by the Word of God.
Bryan,
God created you. Ok. God created the drug addict too, so it must be okay. (By the way before you go off saying you're different, it's all genetic disposition).
Second,
I only speak the Word of God. And it says that homosexuality is a sin. So, though "romantic love" is not a sin, "romantic love" between same sexes is.
"Romantic love between same sex people is a perversion and a sin."
How can you know that what we are experiencing isn't romantic love? Who are you to say such things? God created me, and God would definitely know that what I am feeling for my partner is equal, if not more than what most men are feeling for most women.
And I have faith, blind faith, that the relationship between my partner and I is sanctified.
Mike,
"Prophet, for about the 3rd or 4th time, you do not know my love for my partner, so you only make it perverted in your own mind."
For the 100th time....I know enough about your "love". God created romantic love and marriage for a man and a woman. Romantic love between same sex people is a perversion and a sin.
Believer: I've quoted the verses on how slaves are to be treated many times but you personally have been very dismissive of those passages.
Then He said to them ALL, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.
For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will save it."
Mike, this applies to you and all of us. If you will not do this you cannot follow Christ and if you hold tightly to your life (as your posts indicate), you will lose it. Far from hating you, we lovingly admonish you.
Sadly, some people are so blinded by Satan, they can not and will not see the sin they live in. The bible clearly says this:
Le 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Le 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.
2Pe 3:3 ¶ Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts.
2Ti 3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy.
Ro 1:27 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.
Scoffer, unholy, boaster. The bible, which some around here thumb their nose at knew exactly what was going to happen in this world (and this forum).
We are not self congratualatory over your failure to pick up your cross...rather from your tone and outrageous lies, we seek to defend God's truth.
Post all you want, truth is all you'll get, so either turn from your sin or quit crying. Who are you winning over in your argument against God? You cry that we are ganging up., but it shows we are all of ONE ACCORD. As far as AIDS goes, that is a secondary argument; God's admonishion being the first...so we must give you a secular argument as well. But you do what you do...denial, denial, denial and attack, attack, attack. I have no high horse and there are no "interpretations" in the Bible for someone who wishes to OBEY God...only for those who want their own way; splitting hairs and ignoring plain scripture is your deal; you are the one looking for validation for sin. I think it's arrogant of you to think you can possibly please God with the flesh and hold on to sin while claiming Christ.
Wilderness, give an example, what pollution are we talking about? Delight, I post on here because I will not let you all sit around and congratulate each other on your superior judgments of others. You need to be challenged and be told that you are wrong. AIDS was not discovered in gay men solely, it just spread the fastest in the community because unfortunately, many gay men thought "heck, we can't get pregnant, so why use a condom?" You almost speak as if AIDS developed itself in gay men, which could not be farther from the truth. I don't want lies, I want you to step off your high horse, realize you are far from perfect, stop judging others so much, and realize that yes, there most certainly can be multiple interpretations of the Bible and to pretend you have it correct is arrogant.
Love God...turn away from sin...that is the LOVE God speaks of.
Love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, then love your neighbor as yourselves.
Problem is you equate admonishment with hate...you want lies, that is "love" in your world. we cannot oblige you and we do not hate you rather in love, we are trying to get through to you, you just don't believe.
Mike...AIDS WASN'T FOUND IN GAY MEN IN AMERICA FIRST??
Homosexual acts are not responsible for the AIDS crisis?
How can you believe THAT? Stop kidding yourself.
Mike, it may be time to ask yourself...why you bother post here on CP, if you feel so victimized; it is a choice you make. You cannot change God's mind on the subject of homosexuality, nor our minds either as we simply believe God over your protestations.
You may have your cake and eat it too in THIS world as far as government giving you special rights...I think you may find God has another plan for you and it's not about molly-coddling your so-called rights and allowing you to be comfortable in this lifetime; carrying a cross is uncomfortable! He says, "Go and sin no more". If sin is what you want to do, then you are free to go and do.
Galatians 1:10 "For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ".
Homosexual activity is an abomination and it contributes to the pollution of the land. If you are engaged in it, repent, and flee the wrath of God.
"Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die" (Pr 15:10).
There is truly too much hatred to even respond to. You people are thrilled with your lies about homosexuality bringing AIDS into our society and believing that I have a black soul without even knowing me. Shame on every single one of you. It is clear you cannot see the forest through the trees when it comes to Christ's most important message: love.
ifeelfine, so you don't think Christ meant one man and one woman in Matthew 19:4-6 or Mark 10:6-9?
ktulu, many states do already, they are called domestic partnership laws and if they were strengthened could ensure that any two people living in the same house who provide primary support for each other would get the same legal rights and benefits of a heterosexual married couple.
Feelfine, you corrected Mike: "I need to correct you, Jesus never said ONE man and ONE woman"
And, then Slacker corrected you:
No since "the two" shall become one flesh, implys that the man is but 1 person and the woman that he "unites" with is but 1 person, implying again 1 man and 1 woman.... hmmm interesting isn't it....
How do you know you are saved, looks to me like it may be pure conjecture based upon your conduct here on CP. Isn't there an element of agreeing with God on what He has said in the Word or are you one of these interpreters?
Instead you take great joy in advocating homosexuality, using Scripture as a skeptic would and disagreeing with your brothers; accusing Tom of dishonesty and me of being narrow:
Matt 7:13,14 "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it.
Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it."
Do you think Jesus finds you amusing?
Rather than redefining the meaning of marriage to include gay couples, use a different term. In the UK there is a non religious civil union that is available to everyone straight or gay, so gay couples can have the same legal rights as straight couples (the giving of such rights being the main argument gay couples use on this issue). This allows a clear separation between the religious ceremony of marriage between a man and a woman and the legal union of a couple. Religions should be aloud to restrict their ceremonies as they see fit and state legal agreements should be open to all. This arrangement removes most peoples objections in the UK (as far as I am aware anyway).
ifeelfine, I don't know about Tom, but I do wholeheartedly agree with those verses, we are to be the best we can be for Christ in any circumstance we find ourselves. That is not to say one is in favor of slavery, but rather being the best Christ-like witness we can be. Plus, I find it interesting how you don't quote those verses where masters are instructed as how to treat their slaves or servants. And you also make the assumption that slave owners always mistreated their slaves and yet in the Bible instructions are given for how a slave at the end of their term could become a permanent possession of their owner. Doesn't it seem that if the practice of slavery was so bad that there would be no way a slave would want to remain a slave and we would not have these verses?
delight: Where have I misquoted scripture? Feel free to look up any scripture I quote - I always do. I am a Christian because I am saved. I may sometimes play "devil's advocate" but only in the colloquial sense - I'm definitely not an advocate of the devil. You seem to have a pretty narrow minded definition of Christian if you exclude everyone who thinks differently than you.
Feelfine...what is your definition of 'honest'?
Is it honest to claim Christianity as you have done in the past and then proceed to misquote and deride Scripture and oppose the Christians here?
To be completely honest...you are a devil's advocate.
Tom: Do you agree with this verse?
Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to talk back, not to pilfer, but to show complete and perfect fidelity, so that in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior. Titus 2:9-10
or how about this one?
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ; not only while being watched, and in order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. Eph. 6:5-6
I've got more if you want them. According to these verses, slaves should not fight back and should submit - do you feel that the current slaves in the sex trade should submit? What about child slaves? Should they just put up with it?
I wish Christ's blessing on you too Tom.
Tom: You do pick and choose like everyone else - I'm honest about it and apperently you're not.
"you do not know my love for my partner,"
As I have told many gay or straight people...your love for your partner doesn't matter if it is not love based on obedience to the Word. Fornication is fornication. Unless your partner is a female your "love" is of no consequence.
Mike and Jew: No one likes to be reminded of the HIV/AIDS epidemic that homosexual men have brought into our society; some would like to deny it and go to great lengths to deny it, but that doesn't make the argument erronous. The pro homosexual argument alluded to earlier was, homosexuality harms no one.
"homosexuality does not mean you have AIDS, so you are wrong!"
Just because you, yourself don't have AIDS doesn't mean homosexuality is harmless and you cannot promote the lifestyle to others as beneficial because as you point out there are sadly promiscous homosexuals who are spreading HIV/AIDs; since a lot of the sex is transient, these don't inform their partners if they are HIV positive, continuing to spread the disease.
Jew says, "your proffered argument regarding the harm to society from homosexuals is specious at best. By that reasoning we should hate monkeys too"
Got to love this line of reasoning...how do you suppose the AIDS virus jumped species???
SPECIOUS argument? I think not, Jew...it is factual but you are misinformed by the media by buying into the myth from the TV commercials that show females as the face of AIDS. Jew, you are a victim of politically correct dogma...the facts of AIDS is easily determined by a cursory internet search.
"I doubt you understand Greek anymore than I "
Actually, they teach greek as a course where I'm an alum and I have the greek and hebrew text to my right. (Nothing like all those little cards on a ring with the word on one side and the meaning on the other to keep you busy....) I got one of my Greek Bibles from my dad who was a Bible college professor so...I might have atleast a raw and undefined understanding.... Still, it's meat no matter how you eat it.
Tom...an arguement as old as time. In fact, Jesus got hung on the cross for His "interpretation" by people who didn't want the Bible to be as clear as it is. This is why Jesus seemed to say over and over "do you not know the scripture" to those who were looked up to for their knowledge of it.
I found an interesting word in Galatians 5. The gays keep saying you shall know them by their fruits. Just before Gal 5:22-23 (which is the list of the fruits of the Spirit) are the fruits of the flesh.
The word "fornication" is "porneia" which defines it as "sex outside of marriage" (as Biblically defined). Please note the word root which is the root of several words in this area of behavior).
Since the gay community is seeking "marriage" it recognizes it doesn't have it. Therefore, a gay physical relationship is fornication which is not a fruit of the Spirit and at odds with the fruit of the Spirit. So, Mike....unless you and Tom want to bring in some definition of sin from the rim of emergent theology...your fruit is that of sin and not of the Spirit.
Gal 6:7 "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."
If fornication is the "flesh" and not the Spirit, are you not sowing to the flesh? Dudes...come on...don't throw your eternity away because you want to be right. As I've said, if I'm wrong on this I still go to heaven. If you're wrong...you don't because you have turned away from God's clear Word.
MIke, whether you believe in the bible or not, your biology(Dna and Rna) is similiar to other young men and your biology is guided and instinctly different from that of the female, so it is illigical to be naturally attracted to someone of the same sex, biology, and nature.
feel I agree with slacker I wonder what Bible you are reading. Why are you changing the subject again If you want to talk about slavery open up a new topic. I wish I could just pick and choose what I choose to believe in His word. It would be so much easier to just float thru life believing what I want but alas I can't because I believe in a God that gave us clear instruction on how to get to heaven and how to live our lives and what can cause us to miss the boat so to speak. Sorry fine the road is narrow that leads to life and broad is the way that leads to destruction. What road you on looks to me it is pretty wide. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
ah but that is where you are wrong mike. we are supposed to look at the fruit and see if it is rotten and in danger of dying. We admonished to correct rebuke preach the gospel. Mike by your admission you are not following the Gospel as it is written in the word of God that puts you at risk. I do feel sorry for you because you seem to not know the ramifications of your actions or maybe just dont care because you have followed a different God. You love for your partner is good as I have said before I have loved and love lots of men, would give my life for them BUT the love is from God and it stops well before it changes to lust and we have any kind of physical sexual contact period. That is not of God. So again seek God and His righteousness, Surrender yourselve to Jesus and His narrow road and you will be set free. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
slacker: It appears as though you would like to have it both ways. By using your logic slavery today would be justified and righteous. I believe you've said that it is not justified nor righteous so why does the exact same logic apply here? Me, I'll be consistent and say that taking this text literally no better than taking the text on slavery literally.
Tom, no need to feel sorry for me, that's not what Jesus requires, and you are not one to judge my relationship with Christ. Prophet, for about the 3rd or 4th time, you do not know my love for my partner, so you only make it perverted in your own mind.
to Ifeel:
"mike: I need to correct you, Jesus never said ONE man and ONE woman - that is something those that would condemn you add."
What bible do you read because mine says in Matt 19:5 " for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh"
No since "the two" shall become one flesh, implys that the man is but 1 person and the woman that he "unites" with is but 1 person, implying again 1 man and 1 woman.... hmmm interesting isn't it....
ifeelfine,
Sixteen ounces to a pound.
It still all comes down to that homosexuality is a sin. And the "love" they share is a perverted love. It's not a love created by God.
well said DP and you used good grammar as well. feel I see you are still trying to shoe horn your own misguided thoughts into what the Bible actualy says. Won't work fine me thinks you need to ask God for forgiveness and repent of your sins God will provide you with the truth. mike I feel sorry for you but I can't really add to what DP said cept Jesus loves you so much He died for you a long time ago. Im thinking He knew you would be on this forum arguing your misguided world view just like fine does and at the same time you are being told the truth of His Gospel and road to salvation. Please listen to the words of learned men and followers of Jesus Christ. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
DP, I doubt you understand Greek anymore than I (its all Greek to me, ba-dum-psh, thank you ladies and gentlemen...) but there are many, many who disagree with your interpretation, and play it off as only having 1 interpretation (AKA the one you agree with) is simply stupid.
"You use the Bible as a weapon, not as a tool of love. "
You have an odd definition of love. You haven't listened to anything we've said with the intention of determining if you are right with God. You've rewritten the Bible to fit your life-style. You've shown us that you have no ability to understand plain greek and you're arguements spew hate at us because we dare to tell you you're wrong.
It is you who use the Bible, this site and any other means as a weapon. Still, we love you enough to try to help you to the logical end of your own arguements. The greek is absolutely clear. It is you who are wrong.
This is not an interpretation of the greek. Those words can only be used in one way. Greek is specific. It is not English where you can make a word fit different situations and twist them to mean what you want. You never question the greek and when it is posted you just ignore it. The truth will not change for you and you are arguing with the wrong people. None of us are God. We just take him at his word.
ifeelfine, interesting to know, thanks!
Tom, prophet: how much do each of you weigh?
mike: I need to correct you, Jesus never said ONE man and ONE woman - that is something those that would condemn you add.
If you think you're going to bring me to Jesus by throwing your Biblical interpretation at me you have another thing coming. You use the Bible as a weapon, not as a tool of love.
no mike my job is to preach the gospel all of it. The condemnation you are fighting comes from His words mike not mine. but there is hope mike and you can avoid being condemned but it has to be your choice, cause in just about everything we do we have a choice. Good vs evil right vs wrong I pray mike you will choose Good which only comes thru Jesus Christ. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Tom, you want to condemn, not love, There is a huge difference, maybe someday you'll see that.
Prophet, you do not know ANYTHING of my love other than what you make up in your mind. It is just as real and pure as that of my parents or any other straight couple.
Mike,
Yes, it's rather simple to diagnose your relationship with your partner. God created romantic love and marriage to be between a man and a woman, the Bible condemns homosexuality, you and your partner are involved in a homosexual relationship...your love is not the love that God created, it is a perverted love.
so proper grammar is your answer to my comments about your silly arguments. While I admit grammar and spelling aint my strong suit, dont you think your being a bit elitist mike. I think you get the meaning tho. I have love many a man and would have given my life for more then a few. However mike to say that I love them enough to engage in sexual acts that God condemns would mean I have stepped from Gods love to the lust of the world and in doing so am in danger of judgment. But the good news mike is there is hope in the Lord Jesus Christ. To surrender to Him with all you soul,mind,heart and strength can set you free from your sins that so easily ensnare you. Gods Blessing in Christ Tom
Believer, you know perfectly well I have defended this point time and time again. The Bible says nothing in favor of homosexuality, but Jesus saying one man and one woman hardly condemns homosexuality. You are stretching the truth for your own means (interesting you condemn me for the same thing!)
mike22685, God declares and Christ affirms that God's original and only design for marriage is one man and one woman united as one in the sight of God for life and that sexual intimacy is reserved for one man and one woman united as one in the sight of God for life through marriage. Now please provide any Scripture that provides for any alternative to either one of those designs.
Tom, the more sillier we get? I might just stop there...I think you shot yourself in the foot. Also, its you're, not your. Learn proper grammar before you condemn, please. Prophet, you know nothing of the love between my partner and I, so the only perversion is made up in your head, as you could not possibly diagnose it through this website.
Ah jew it must be sad to not know the moral laws of God. Despite what Scripture says. It must be hard to not be able to understand what His will is in regards to sex between man and women, or men and men, or women and women, or even between adults and children or humans and animals I feel sorry for you then. The Bible from the beginning to the end is clear that we can not only know the will of the Lord but to understand what He means. Does this mean I understand Gods mind naaaaa He is God but He has revealed Himself in so many ways and times that unless you are walking with your eyes closed you can't miss it. I will grant you that not all things are cystal clear in His word but the issue of who is able to have sex and when is clear, very clear. It is between a man and a women in the marriage covenant. Gods Blessing I hope and pray that your eyes will be open and Gods Spirit enters in and begins to make you new and to teach you all things of God. Yes it is hard for some to understand and accept what Scripture says. In Christ Tom
Jew,
True. I believe that homosexuality is a sin, because God thinks it's a sin, and His Scriptures call it a sin.
Tom,
The thing about scripture is that it is not simple at all. Do you understand why the bible was written like that? Do you understand why God says what he said in the bible?
"Prescribing morality means that it's meaningless to do good because you have no other choice. "
What does it mean to God if we just follow blindly what he says and not understand the virtue of value?
Since my arguments are not cogent enough i'd lay them down in premises:
Premise 1: God does not encourage sexual intimacy that is not for procreation purposes
Conclusion 1(a): God does not encourage sex between 2 men and also sex between a man and a woman if not done for procreation purposes.
Based on the "few" verses in the Bible, the above is what it says.
But many confuse the discouragement God has for non procreational sex for love between two men.
I understand that not many people like to understand the scripture, and understand God's way. It's true that most of the times, it's hard for us to understand His way with our limited wisdom and knowledge. But I am sad to see that by not understanding his ways, we are inflicting so much pain on one another. The very scripture that you hold so true has been interpreted in so many ways, and many interpretations backed horrible events - Crusades, Persecution of Women, Blacks and many more.
Prophet, insomuch as my life revolves around writing clearly and unambiguously, I think your statement is best put as this:
But one thing is for certain. CHRISTIANS BELIEVE Homosexuality is a sin. And CHRISTIANS BELIEVE THAT those who choose to continue in it will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
When you're dealing with religious BELIEFS it's not a mater of facts. BELIEFS are just that. You have to account for the fact that people out there believe differently from you and that someone else believing other than you do does not affect your ability to hold onto and abide by your beliefs.
But one thing is for certain. Homosexuality is a sin. And those who choose to continue in it will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
Bryan,
Again, it is about sloughing off responsibility. The man who kills himself because someone doesn't like him has only himself to blame. I have loved ones who aren't saved who don't want anything to do with me. Why haven't I killed myself. Because whether I live or die isn't in the hands of someone else. It's in God's hands. The person who kills himself is a coward. Simple.
Mike,
And I don't condemn love. I condemn the perversion of love that is shared between homosexuals.
Mike
"Prophet, too much pride most certainly hurts you, and pride and being gay are not even comparable things."
You have yet to say how pride hurts you. And pride and homosexuality are comparible. They're both sins.
Tom, I don't know why you're grouping me in with anyone who's using or referring to the bible. I don't think it's useful for much of anything beyond a paperweight. My entire point was one about law and society. I could really care less what you believe so long as you keep it to yourself and out of my and everyone else's affairs. Your particular notion of sin should not inform the laws of society, many of whom do not follow your belief system, but rather inform your own personal conduct. If the "sinners" want to "sin" let them do so. Prescribing morality means that it's meaningless to do good because you have no other choice.
ah mike jew and bryn the more you argue the more sillier you get. You jump from dont use the bible to using the bible but you never give any, any references that support you're twisting of scriptures. If you would bother to read the scriptures you would see that it condemns Homosexuality just like it condemns any other sin, period. So once again if you choose to follow the way of sin you will receive your just rewards. If you choose to follow Jesus as Savior and the narrow way then you receive life. It is quite simple actually not really subject to much interpretation unless one choose to ah twisted it around then strange beliefs come along, such as yours. bryn have you research the Narth web site? you probably wouldnt like it but it gives good info about this whole area. But even if one is "born gay" which your not but if what would it matter it is still a sin one which can lead you to the wrong side of heaven in the end. So it is still your choice to follow your desire or Gods. Jesus will set you free will you let Him. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Not to depart from the riveting continuing debate on nature vs. nurture, but the premise of this article, from a legal standpoint, is rather interesting and simple at the same time. Here we have a question regarding vested rights held by individual citizens which may or may not be revoked because of a popular vote to amend the state constitution. It's one thing to interpret prop 8 as prohibiting future gay marriages. That's an entirely fair reading and regardless of how much I disagree and find it an ignorant reaction to a pursuit of equality and familial security, until overturned it should stand. On the other hand, it is a much harder sell to say that without due process protections validly issued marriage licenses should be revoked. There was no form of administrative hearing or legislative scrutiny involved in this constitutional amendment. They merely released it into society and garnered enough votes. That hardly demonstrates sufficient due process protections.
As for DelightntheLord, your proffered argument regarding the harm to society from homosexuals is specious at best. By that reasoning we should hate monkeys too. Moreover, AIDS is not confined to homosexuals. Should we hate all asians because of bird flu? The bible tells you hate homosexuals. Just stick with that because your other arguments are even flimsier.
believer, I have, countless times before, explained differences in interpretation for the exact Bible quotes you use against me. Why don't you go look them up yourself?
"we do know this, same-sex marriage violates God's original and only design for marriage"
I don't think God had an original design for marriage. When population was scarce, I am pretty sure God had nothing against procreation between siblings. And I dare not say, that God is against polygamy during certain times as well. (Saying otherwise would have been very disrespectul to the mormon church.)
In my opinion, the sanctity of marriage lies not within that paper, or that church-recognized union called marriage. It lies within the bond two people have for each other.
Which is why, as a homosexual, I don't really care much if you would want to call the union between my future partner and I "marriage", "civil union", or whatever, because no "physical term" can dilute the bond we would have for each other. And again, I think God is not that superficial to care about the physical terms as well.
A marriage done without a spiritual bond between a man and a woman is no more encouraged by him than a marriage of two men.
"And at this time there is no valid scientific evidence to prove a person is born homosexual."
Neither is there evidence that a person is brought up to be a homosexual..
In a way, it's all in God's will to make things "debatable" and "arguable" just like religion and many other things. There is just no way to prove it.
I am going to convey this opinion one last time; it's been ignored throughout discussions for the last few months.
"We also know that when same-sex couples have sexual intimacy they violate God's original and only design for sexual intimacy"
In a way, you're right. God's original design for sexual intimacy is only for procreation purposes. Any non-procreation sexual intimacy, even in marriages violates God's design. Though again, mankind has proven to God that the sexual intimacy that we have nowadays is not pureply animalistic and it's done with Love, and I am quite sure God has nothing against those.
So please do not use the fact that the "God's original design of sexual intimacy" argument again plese!
mike22685, show me where the Word of God says otherwise?
believer, you do NOT know that. You interpret the Bible that way. BIG difference!
mike22685 and bryan, while we don't know with 100% certainty what causes a person to be or to become a homosexual, we do know this, same-sex marriage violates God's original and only design for marriage. We also know that when same-sex couples have sexual intimacy they violate God's original and only design for sexual intimacy. And at this time there is no valid scientific evidence to prove a person is born homosexual.
Tom,
It's astounding how you can assert so confidently that homosexuality is by nurture and not nature. What is backing your assertions? Do not point to scripture again because there is no phrase in the scripture that talks about the science of homosexuality.
In God's diverse world, it's apparent that any attempts to generalize would prove to be faulty. Which is why I am so confidant that most of the things I say about other people but myself is wrong.
Tom, where do you get your research, because the majority I have seen talks about the probability of prenatal factors...not choice.
"Tell that to cannibals. Hitler. Mao. And a number of other powerful atheists who murder for the soul purpose of shutting up religions."
Same to Pope Urban or any other Pope who called for the crusade.
" The problem with people today is they don't want to take responsibility for their own action. It's always someone else's fault"
It's not about blaming other people. It's about how sinners condemn sins. The assassin who killed a man is no more a sinner than the hirer who ordered the man killed. A mother who rejects her son, and drives her son to eternal misery, is no less a sinner than the son who committed suicide.
There is no one clearly defined LAW. Everything is subjective and so is God. Follow the heart!
So mike I dont need know you on a personal level. I just need to look at write and what you say you believe in and I know that you are on the wrong side of the fence when it comes to faith and salvation. If YOU would bother to look at all the evidence with your "open mind" you would see that it homosexuality points to one being the way you grew up. Case in point can you tell me your earliest memory? do you remember wearing diapers? being fed by someone? how about your first steps? first words? my guess is since you are like most of us you don't. Well it just so happen that time in our lives are when the lion share of our persona is developed. So mike your not born gay it is a hard desire to put down perhaps but it is ultimately you decision on who you will follow Jesus or your self. One sets you free the other just binds you up more and more. holy holy I am not just a sinner saved by grace and trying by His strength to follow the straight and narrow that leads to eternal life. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
Sorry, DP, it seems we were on the same page.
Prophet, too much pride most certainly hurts you, and pride and being gay are not even comparable things. FYI, me coming out to my family has brought us closer together because for the first time we actually started having honest, difficult conversations and worked through a lot of skeletons in our closets.
DP, you think homosexuality is wrong because you think that is what will get you into Heaven the fastest. I don't understand how you can condemn love, quite a different act from murder, and think you are following in Jesus' footsteps.
Tom, when did you choose to be straight. You don't know me from a hole in the wall yet you're going to get all holy-holy on me and tell me I chose to be gay? I don't think so buddy! You're not qualified to make that diagnosis, and you're completely and totally wrong. Plus, you assume the kinds of sex that I have and vaguely say "Well your homosexuality hurts many people." Tell me, who does it hurt? My family loves me and my partner and are not embarrassed in the least. My friends are supportive, wonderful people who see how much my partner and I love each other. I am a fantastic teacher, and my sexual orientation isn't even something I need to bring up, and so my students have no idea, nor do they need to.
Delight, homosexuality does not mean you have AIDS, so you are wrong! Homosexuality does not kill unless you decide to be promiscuous (which is not some inherent trait of being gay, sadly, it is a choice a lot of gay men make.) Nice attempt at an argument, but my partner and I have both been tested and are completely monogamous, as are every single gay couple we are friends with. We do not hurt anyone by being gay, you are grasping at straws.
"we know, inherently, that killing someone is wrong."
Tell that to cannibals. Hitler. Mao. And a number of other powerful atheists who murder for the soul purpose of shutting up religions.
How soon we are brainwashed in this country by the media and special interest such as the gay lobby..."Homosexuality is not so. Who does it hurt?"
Did we forget about AIDS?? Or, are we so politically correct these days and have fallen for the revisionist history ( as late as 1982!) forgeting AIDS began as a homosexual disease and then was passed onto women through men who are bi-sexual.
I find it ironic to say the least that a gay man could say seriously that Homosexual sex "hurts" no one. Have you no peers who are dead and dying...you must know a few as AIDS shortens the life expectancy of homosexual men. I understand why you wouldn't want to bring that up, but the truth is homosexuality does more than hurt people...it kills.
mike are you that lost that you can't see that just the physical sexual act inherent to gay sex can and does hurt people? How can you say that it is natural? man so steeped in your world view you cant see the trees for the forest.or is the other way around. Mike your wrong homosexuality hurts many people and there is a way out of this choice you have made. The way out is thru Jesus Christ. He and He alone can set you free from the sin you walk in, actually we all walk in. believe in Him and seek His forgiveness mike, He will open your eyes to His truth, His right way of doing things and you will be saved! Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
"Who does it hurt? What evil does it bring?"
All sin hurts Jesus. It brings the evil of a depraved mind as written in Romans 1.
"we know, inherently, that killing someone is wrong."
Actually, there are many who feel it is perfectly OK to kill someone. They have their own rational justification for it. YOU may "inherently" know that it is wrong but they don't just like you don't "inherently" know that homosexuality is wrong but I do.
"two Hebrew words and translated them to greek and compound them."
Thus he created or "made up" the word in greek. I actually got the info from two different websites.
Pride can't hurt you. Unless it separates you from family (like homosexuality does).
Pride is a state of mind that most certainly can hurt you (haven't you ever read a Greek tragedy?) My argument stands, and you didn't answer my question.
Bryan wrote: "Ironically, (as far as i know, my knowledge is filled with flaws), male-male relationships only started to get seriously persecuted during the peak of the christendom when the pope and all came about."
I'm not so sure that same-sex relations weren't punishable by death in the earlier years before and during and after Christ. Even, in spite of certain dominance practices. Just no sure.
Mike,
"Homosexuality is not so. Who does it hurt? What evil does it bring? There is no moral decay, other than it goes against your views."
Pride is a sin too. But it doesn't hurt anyone. Try another argument.
Bryan,
Homosexuality was an accepted norm in ancient Rome.
The gay man who killed himself because his mom kicked him out of the house. He's the murderer. He made the choice. He killed himself. The problem with people today is they don't want to take responsibility for their own action. It's always someone else's fault. This generation has produced more sissies and pansies than any other. No wonder the homosexual agenda is running rampant.
Prophet, regardless of whether you ever read the Bible, we know, inherently, that killing someone is wrong. Homosexuality is not so. Who does it hurt? What evil does it bring? There is no moral decay, other than it goes against your views.
Wilderness, Sodom and Gemorrah was about inhospitality and rape, quite different from my partner and I who love, respect, and cherish each other.
Come out your Sodom and Gomorrah and do not look back. Remember Lot's wife!
"I simply do not know if actual relationships occurred in biblical times, but I'd be willing to gander actual relationships were not let known for fear of death."
Ironically, (as far as i know, my knowledge is filled with flaws), male-male relationships only started to get seriously persecuted during the peak of the christendom when the pope and all came about.
Before then, most evidence eludes to the idea that there was really not much love involved in a "marriage". It aws mostly seen as a family unit for procreation purposes. Passion, love and lust for another women, or boys for that matter, could be sustained before marriage, or in some cultures, after marriage.
Alexander the great was one such example. So were the hundreds of Emperors in China..
"thou shall not commit murder"
And how shall your interpret murder here prophet? Soldiers who kill invaders? Father who ended up killing a rapist when stopping him from raping his daughter? The assassin who got paid to kill?
And who is the murderer? the guy who paid the assassin to kill, or the assassin himself? or both?
Who is the murderer? The homosexual who committed suicide or the parents who kicked him out because he is gay, and made him feel that he is nothing but an abomination, who deserve to have no happiness and is meant to rot?
Mike wrote: "Forgiven, funny, many on here have argued that of course there were gay relationships back then."
Opps, didn't mean to give that impression; I should have said acknowledged reality.
Rewritten: "Until the english word entered the language, the biblical reference were to the acts of same-sex sexual relations simply because the act was still considered an abomination from the old levitical law therefore any word for a relationship or orientation of same sex relations was nonexistent simply because an actual relationship/orientation was not an acknowledged reality.
I simply do not know if actual relationships occurred in biblical times, but I'd be willing to gander actual relationships were not let known for fear of death.
"Where we can all study the pure texts that you seem to have access to."
You have access to it too. Any bible would do. But read it by opening up your heart and mind, and read to understand, not to abide.
Wow.. that was fairly conceited of me.
And I remember one parable in the bible where Jesus lauded a young boy who could preach God's words better than a pastor who spent his life studying and preaching.
To me, it's always the innocence of hearts that resound God's words most resonantly. I see that more and more now, when more and more bible parables make more and more sense as I live through life and witness the pure-of-heart actions of others.
Daniel,
Correction, Paul took two Hebrew words and translated them to greek and compound them. Sorry. I'm pretty sure that is how it went.
Daniel wrote: "Actually, the greek had no specific word for it"
That's because Paul's reference to the words used in the OT were Hebrew. Malakos is greek.
Is it a sin to murder someone because you hate them? How about if you love them so much that you don't want them with anyone else but you? Why isn't anyone arguing that point? Probably because the phrase "thou shall not commit murder" encompasses ALL murders, regardless of the reason.
Same with homosexuality. "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."
That encompasses all homosexuality, regardless of the reason.
Paul was specific. Any homosexuality, whether in an orgy or in a "relationship" is a sin. Now, Paul could have said "Homosexual orgies are a sin" and then the homosexuals would say "well that doesn't include 'relationships'".
Paul could have said "Homosexual relationships are a sin" and the homosexuals would say "Well, that doesn't include homosexual orgies."
So instead, Paul just said men having sex with men is a sin. I think that covers the orgy/relationship problem extremely well.
Forgiven, funny, many on here have argued that of course there were gay relationships back then. Prophet, why wasn't it just stated directly? That leaves a lot of room for interpretation, and again, historically, Paul was experiencing Pagan orgies in which priests would have sex with men (married men) as a way to serve the temple (basically temple prostitution.) Paul was warning against idolatry, not homosexuality (but that's my interpretation.)
Actually, the greek had no specific word for it. When you use ask.com and search "greek word for homosexual" you find many different articles. Many said it is possible that Paul actually made up the word he used for homosexual in 1 Cor 6:9 as there was no current word at the time for such behavior.
Much of what was written on the subject discribes the behavior such as in Romans 1. Women with women and men with men. The greek is very specific in those frames of reference. In fact, the greek in Romans 1:27 "And likewise, the males also forsaking the natural use of the female burned in their lust toward one another, males with males working out shamefulness, and receiving back in themselves the reward which was fitting for their error." The word shamefulness is Greek dictionary number 808 which means "shame, that which is unseemly."
A key phrase is "back in themselves". The word themselves is also "himself" in the singular. Another key phrase is "natural use" which would be the designed use difference between male and female. The word for lust there (I hate English) is 3715 "excitement of the mind i.e. a longing after" and is based on 3713 "reaching out after, desire". This behavior and desire is easily seen in Mike's posts.
Another key issue is that Paul wasn't a rated X kind of guy. This was a very nasty subject in the day. He was a Christian who had been raised in the Hebrew religious schools. This subject simply wasn't discussed. For him to discuss it as he did was way out on a limb.
So, why did he do it? Much homosexual Roman literature has survived. Therefore, it was an issue in Rome where it was not in Isreal. You would have to be completely ignorant of Greek to come to any other conclusion. Male with male burning lust towards one another really is quite clear. You would have to change some words to come to any other conclusion.
Paul is talking about a male being excited by another male and having that excitement acted out physically. It covers all areas which involve this behavior whether it be in a group or in an exclusve relationship. It is the ACTION of the "excitement of the mind" which is acted out which is the problem and not the context underwhich it is acted out.
The word homosexual (homosexuality) was created in the early 20th century largely due to the increased influence that one's sexual orientation determined whether they would be same sex attracted or opposite sex attracted.
Until the english word entered the language, the biblical reference were to the acts of same-sex sexual relations simply because the act was still considered an abomination from the old levitical law therefore any word for a relationship or orientation of same sex relations was nonexistent simply because an actual relationship/orientation was not reality.
The word(s) for the act were indeed in Scripture; Old and New. the first refernce is of course Lev 18:22 and Lev 20:13, which use arsenos (male) and koiten (intercourse) translated whoever lies with a male, having intercourse as with a female.
Paul then takes the very same words and compounds them; arsenokoitai meaning the same; whoever lies with a male, having intercourse as with a female.
Also, we find in 1 Cor, the word malakoi used translated to effeminate. Althoug, we find this word translated as soft, we also find it translated as a male prostitute, a boy kept for sexual intercourse, and a male of submits his body to unnatural lewdness.
The same-sex sexual acts were indeed a part of biblical history, but the influence of same-sex acts being of orientation or an acknowledged relationship was not accepted until the 20th century.
The word of God is definitely not fuzzy when it comes to showing us that homosexual activity is an abomination and contributes to the defilement of the land.
Mike,
Actually, I shot BOTH our arguments in the foot. But we see it written
"27And 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."
So whether it's an orgy, or a "relationship", we see by Paul's description, that it is a sin.
Prophet, you shot your own argument in the foot! If Greeks (the original language of the Bible) had a word for homosexual, why did they never ONCE use it? Why is there no direct translation? In every single instance, there has been a fuzzy translation that people like you, DP, believer and Tom jump on and say "Oh, yup, its talking about gays alright!"
But I'm no lawyer (obviously).
Is there any lawful precedent to what Jerry Brown is trying to do? This seems patently illegal to me.
And by the way, folks, you might as well get used to polygamy. It is definitely coming back (to places where it does not exist already). After all, polygamy has been the norm for most of mankind's history. The norm has NOT been one-man-one-woman marriage.
"mtg, no, my original statement is exactly the way I meant to say it. Whether people choose to believe it or not absolute truth does exist and many of those truths can be found in the Word of God."
To this quote from believer, I would only add "in his opinion."
So, as I was saying. If Paul meant "orgies" in Romans 1, then he would have said so. I'm sure that there was a word back then for orgies. It's not like the Romans would say "Hey Bill! You want to come over to my place and we can have one of those little get togethers where there are lots of people and we do all sorts of weird and kinky sexual things with each other and maybe even involve some children?"
Yeah, I'm sure that's what they said. That would be like saying "He Bill! You want do come over to my place and do that thing where we kill an animal and then chop it up and cook it, and then sit around a table and eat it along with maybe some vegetables and something to drink?"
Or do you think they said "Hey Bill! Want to come over for dinner?"
"because there are multiple versions of it "
There are many translations but I've only found one version in the Greek and Hebrew which is what I study from. I find it to be quite exacting. I do agree that those who study from translations do have some issues with interpretation. Still, those who have some concept of hermeneutics do much better.
The problem is people don't want the Bible to say what it really says. Things like you are suppose to take care of those in need. You are suppose to speak the truth when someone is wrong. Every aspect of your life belongs to God to be used His way and in stewardship no matter what you want. The greek is quite clear on the subject. Don't go with a translation. I was told at Bible college that the KJV was translated because he wanted to divorce his wife and be gay. This is why the KJV uses less condemning words when it comes to homosexuality.
Bryan
I'm so glad your Biblical knowledge is so much more pure then those of the thousands of pastors world wide and the leagues of scholars who dedicate their lives to accurate interpretation and teaching of God written word.
Please enlighten us all as to your source of information regarding a great cover-up and conspiracy regarding bastardization of the Bible. Where we can all study the pure texts that you seem to have access to.
"Do you know that the word "homosexuality" wasn't even invented in the 16th century?!"
Really? And do you know that the Greeks and Hebrews probably had a word for homosexuals during their time? Sure it wasn't "homosexual' (as that is an English word), but I'm sure they had one.
"The argument that many homosexuals have is that Romans is talking about orgies. No it's not. Otherwise Paul would have said "orgies". It's really not that hard to understand."
Yeah, and we would assume that back in the days they had a seperate word for "homosexuality" and "orgies".
Do you know that the word "homosexuality" wasn't even invented in the 16th century?!
This is why the bible cannot be taken literally! Words change and get invented! The word "bronze" in 300BC Greek in today can mean BLUE!!
So, if in the bible someone said "the sky is bronze," which perfectly makes sense in his/her mind frame; it doesn't mean that we are living in a counterfeit world!
Ah the same ole arguments mike and feelfine and people such as them that believe in a strange god and gospel and those who stand up for the truth of Gods word and commandments. I truly respect delight and believer and prophet as well as wilderness and all you that spend time on these forums trying to defend Christianity. For feel fine if your church wish to grant gay marriage so be it, however it would not then be a Christian church but a counterfeit. apostate that is. I know i know these are harsh words but the gospel is harsh to those who dont know it. Gods Blessing In Christ Tom
"the word effeminate means homosexuality, despite the fact that it would exclude lesbians"
Most times the word "men" in the Bible includes women as well; such as ALL men means women, too. I don't think that verse absolves lesbianism as a definition of that is found in Romans 1:20-28 where it is equally condemned.
It's sadly amazing to me that some will read a verse that condemns "effinate" men and come away with an idea that the verse is of no effect because it doesn't include the sin on the flip side of the coin. This is grasping at straws in much the same way as saying Lev 18 is the old "law" and of no effect because old law isn't in practice today; Sodom was destroyed because of "rape" or "inhospitality" rather than homosexuality as the sin and that Romans chapter 1 only condemns homosexual acts done in idolatry.
Mike please consider this: What is the Nature of your god to have given his word that anyone can mis-interpret or a god who fails to give an example of homosexual 'marriage' so that 'believing' homosexuals wouldn't have to fornicate outside of a recognized marriage. I assume that since you claim a form of christanity that fornication is a sin, right?
The argument that many homosexuals have is that Romans is talking about orgies. No it's not. Otherwise Paul would have said "orgies". It's really not that hard to understand.
mike,
Agreed. I don't answer to you either. And true Christians will continue to fight homosexual marriages. We stand up for what is righteous and pure.
DP: The speed limit may be 55 but you can still get a ticket for going 35mph in a 55 but most likely wouldn't get a ticket at 45mph.
DP and Prophet...55 is 55, that is an absolute. The Bible has been interpreted and reinterpreted time and time again, and so yes, I do not believe all that is in the current version because there are multiple versions of it (for instance, saying the word effeminate means homosexuality, despite the fact that it would exclude lesbians or any butch gay men, of whom I know plenty.) You can think what you want, I do not answer to you and feel completely confident with my belief and relationship with God.
"My belief is that God does sanction my marriage, and your interpretations of the Bible will certainly crucify me for saying such. "
Not really. My belief is that God is the judge. The rules are the rules. You can believe what you want but God will judge by the rules He has made. My problem is with the logic you use to come to your conclusions.
For example, the 55 means 55 thing. You've never bothered to respond to that. You simply say things are our interpretation. 55 means 55 and it just won't work to do 80 and tell the nice patrolman 55 is just his interpretation.
The truth is that you hold to emergent theology which says that the Bible is written by man and interpreted by man. Everyone can interpret the Bible any way they want and that's OK as if there is no price to pay for being wrong. We will each stand before God for our "interpretation". If I'm wrong on this issue I still go to heaven. If you're wrong on this issue you don't. I'm not the one with all my chips on the line.
Well, the truth is, that homosexuality is a sin. You may gain the approval of a secular government, but not God's.
DP, I have been saying for MONTHS that I want equal protection under the law, but that marriage also signifies a bond between 2 people for life. My belief is that God does sanction my marriage, and your interpretations of the Bible will certainly crucify me for saying such.
Wilderness, don't blame gays for moral decay. I think straight people have done the lion's share for that, thank you very much.
Delight, domestic partnership laws are a joke and a way to shut up the queers. That will not happen here, so sorry to disappoint.
Mike22685 , "1400 rights."
1400 rights will never take away the abomination of homosexual activity and how it defiles land. Moral downslides and attempts to redefine biblical truth will never change the truth. "For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven" (Ps 119:89).
"and a civil marriage is in no way a God sanctioned marriage"
Mike, are you looking for God's sanction for same-sex marriage by stating this? Is this your objection to domestic partnerships that could offer all the same rights? You want....God's blessing?
"Marriage is a black and white, understood term. Domestic partnership is not."
Yes, Mike you are correct; marriage is a black and white term as in one male and one female and is rightly understood in THAT context by a vast majority of people all over the world since the beginning of time. If you feel so strongly about the rights issue, then lobby for stronger Domestic Parntership Laws and leave 'black and white marriage' alone; there is no need in this society to redefine marriage into a gray area for all the rest of us to just gain the legal rights you seek.
You cannot expect God to sanction same-sex marriage and having a government approved form of "marriage" will not make it right in God's Eyes.
Mike,
"My answer is I deserve equal protection under the law, and a civil marriage is in no way a God sanctioned marriage."
Do you want to be recognized by the government, or by God as having a legitimate marriage?
PhatDajuan - Spot on. Churchs should be able to marry whomever they want & discriminate on that basis with whomever they want. If my church wants to perform a same-sex marriage then it should be able to. If your church doesn't want to, fine. The gov't shouldn't be in the business of legally sanctioning churches but in licesing civil unions (whether performed at a church or not).
"tell me exactly where I said that! "
Dude, you've been saying that in one form or another for months!
Believer, tell me exactly where I said that!
phat, and stronger domestic partnership laws will do just that.
mike22685, so then your goal is not the same legal rights and benefits, but the approval of an alternative form of marriage which is a clear violation of the Word of God and the present day definition of civil marriage?
Marriage is a black and white, understood term. Domestic partnership is not. There is absolutely no reason to reinvent the wheel because it makes you uncomfortable or conflicts with your beliefs. Marriage gives everything: health care, hospital visitation, inheritance, and the list goes on for 1400 rights that a domestic partnership simply will not cover and would take YEARS to get to that place, if ever. Civil marriage is not a religious issue.
mike22685, so how does same-sex marriage get you equal protection and if it does so would stronger domestic partnership laws?
No, your answer is "hey, here's a domestic partnership, now sit down and shut up." My answer is I deserve equal protection under the law, and a civil marriage is in no way a God sanctioned marriage.
mike22685, who said I wanted domestic partnerships to be equal with marriage, I don't. But if the goal is to get the same legal right and benefits as heterosexual married couples then stronger domestic partnership laws is your answer. Unless however that's not the goal at all but a smokescreen to to legitamize a alternative form of marriage that clearly violates God's original and only design for marriage?
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but aren't polygamists already getting married in Utah and the Latter Day Saint communities? The slippery slope argument doesn't really hold anything but speculation, and I still can't figure out how me loving my partner so much that I want to spend the rest of my life with him in a committed relationship is evil.
No gay marriage, no civil or domestic partnerships! We must "Stand Firm" against this evil.
Polygamy is next if we don't stand strong against gay marriage in all its relative forms.
The Bible and the Church have spoken clearly on this.
Believer, could it possibly be that you're doing both? *gasp* Domestic partnerships will not be equal to a marriage, ever. If we do get to a point where gays have the exact same rights, it would be foolish to not call it marriage, since that would essentially be what it is. Legal marriage is not about creating children, it is about a legal partnership between two people. I stand by what I said: you advocate separate but equal (PS, you still haven't answered my question.)
mtg, there's a statement used among Christians that says, God said it, I believe it, that settles it, but in truth the statement should say, God said it, that settles it! Now if a person has even a lick of common sense they'll believe it.
mtg, no, my original statement is exactly the way I meant to say it. Whether people choose to believe it or not absolute truth does exist and many of those truths can be found in the Word of God.
mike22685, first you say I'm demonizing now you say I'm advocating separate but equal and all I'm saying is if the real goal is to get the same benefits and rights as those of married heterosexual couples then just move to strengthen domestic partnership laws to make sure that happens.
Believer, you seem content with separate but equal, so answer my question. Would it have been fair if all black schools had just worked harder to make their schools equal to white schools rather than integrating? Certainly, white folks cried foul when it happened and said blacks were out to redefine the public school system.
Slacker, my point exactly! Majority rule doesn't mean that we can all get together and enact a law. The supreme court has a duty to protect the minority from tyranny, and the CA supreme court already ruled that a gay marriage ban was unconstitutional in their state. We decided as a country that segregation was unconstitutional, but with the passing of Prop 8, then theoretically we could get a majority together to pass a law that blacks and whites should go to separate schools. Prop 8, not the gay civil rights movement, are creating a dangerous and slippery slope.
tamma, thanks for playing, but no our government is not a democracy, but a republic.
The redefining of "democracy" is one of the most disastrous and potentially fatal blows America has ever suffered, and the most frustrating thing about it is that it is such a blatant lie. The simple truth is that America is not now, never was, and was never intended to be a "democracy."
Subsequent to declaring their independence from Britain, the colonies established their own, individual governments and, apparently in the enthusiasm of independence, most of them incorporated "democratic" standards for qualifying voters in their systems. According to some of the framers of the Constitution and to many 20th Century historians, this act very nearly caused the political death of the infant nation.
Thomas Jefferson, March 11, 1790: "The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind."
Regardless of the issue at hand, the key is that 52% of the population of the State of California voted for this proposition which added an ammendment to the constituition of the state of california. if the judiciary in California reverses this, then they will effectively nullify all the constitutional amendments in the constitution both at the state level and at the federal level. Whats next a few people getting together and saying that women shouldn't have the right to vote or that blacks shouldn't or that the bill of rights should be in the constitution. Come on people where does it stop....
I hate to say "I told you so" but I did. Months ago I predicted on the CP board that this is exactly what would happen if Prop 8 passed.
Maybe one day people will begin to understand the great lies that are fed to Americans every day. Among them are that the U.S. is a democracy. It isn't and hasn't been for a long time. Majority rule is myth fed to us to make us think we really have a say in how things are done. Actually, who can scream and shout the loudest and put on the mantle of "victimhood" the quickest outweighs the will of the majority almost every time. "Majority rule?" The "Voice of the People?" "Every vote counts?" "Unbiased media?" "Christian nation" Please, spare me. These phrases lost their meaning the first time some mentally challenged judge decided to legislate from the bench.
Another lie is the "separation of church and state." There is none. As long as the government can regulate what a pastor can or cannot say from the pulpit by the threat of withholding tax exemptions, there is no separation. For better or worse, every church that is an IRS Code 501c(3) beneficiary is a defacto state controlled church.
Sorry to sound like a radical. I'm not. I think spending almost a decade looking at my country from overseas has turned me into a realist.
"The competing positions come in a series of legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought after the ballot initiative passed with 52 percent of the vote on Nov. 4."
What is Jerry Brown doing going against the 'will of the people'? I'm sure everyone here would agree with the 'will of the people' if 52% decided that 'Christians' couldn't get married. Oh but that's God's will isn't it? Why don't I get to legislate my religious views, and 'force them down your throat'? LEAVE US ALONE and worry about your own miserable life.
"The competing positions come in a series of legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought after the ballot initiative passed with 52 percent of the vote on Nov. 4."
What is Jerry Brown doing going against the 'will of the people'? I’m sure everyone here would agree with the 'will of the people' if 52% decided that 'Christians' couldn’t get married. Oh but that's God’s will isn't it? Why don't I get to legislate my religious views, and 'force them down your throat'? LEAVE US ALONE and worry about your own miserable life.
'The competing positions come in a series of legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought after the ballot initiative passed with 52 percent of the vote on Nov. 4.'
What is Jerry Brown doing going against the ‘will of the people’? I’m sure everyone here would agree with the ‘will of the people’ if 52% decided that ‘Christians’ couldn’t get married. Oh but that’s God’s will isn’t it? Why don’t I get to legislate my religious views, and ‘force them down your throat’? LEAVE US ALONE and worry about your own miserable life.
“The competing positions come in a series of legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought after the ballot initiative passed with 52 percent of the vote on Nov. 4.â€Â
What is Jerry Brown doing going against the ‘will of the people’? I’m sure everyone here would agree with the ‘will of the people’ if 52% decided that ‘Christians’ couldn’t get married. Oh but that’s God’s will isn’t it? Why don’t I get to legislate my religious views, and ‘force them down your throat’? LEAVE US ALONE and worry about your own miserable life.
Delight, English is not plain when it is illogical.
And, believer, your statement should read:
mtg, you're right with regard to changing the other person's mind, but if what a person believes is assumed by him to be absolute truth, then someone else choosing not to believe it does not change the fact that the first person stills believes it is absolute truth.
Sounds like a run-around, but the awkward sentence above actually does makes sense....
mtg, your right with regard to changing the other person's mind, but if what a person believes is absolute truth, then someone else choosing not to believe it does not change the fact that it is absolute truth.
mike22865, you're the only one demonizing this issue, plus if the domestic partenrship laws aren't strong enough then work on making them stronger so same-sex marriage acts will not be necessary if the goal is to get the same rights and benefits as heterosexual married couples.
Ergo, Mike, it annoys you when someone speaks against homosexuality, that's why you all en