Updated 07:54 am.EST, Mon November 23, 2009

Society|Wed, May. 27 2009 01:52 PM EDT

Most Americans Still Against Legalizing Gay Marriage

By Audrey Barrick|Christian Post Reporter

On the heels of Tuesday's Proposition 8 ruling, the Gallup Poll released a new survey revealing most Americans are still opposed to same-sex marriage.

  • gay marriage
    (Photo: AP Images / Marcio Jose Sanchez)
    Supporters and opponents of gay marriage argue outside of the State Supreme Court in San Francisco, Tuesday, May 26, 2009. The California Supreme Court upheld a voter approved ban on same-sex marriage Tuesday.

Fifty-seven percent of Americans say marriages between same-sex couples should not be recognized by the law as valid. While a significant drop from 1996 when 68 percent said so, opposition to same-sex marriage has remained stable between 53 and 59 percent since 2004.

Support for legal same-sex marriage is currently at 40 percent. Although a jump from 27 percent in 1996, support has stalled in recent years, peaking at 46 percent in 2007.

The survey results come as same-sex marriage remains banned in California. On Tuesday, the state Supreme Court ruled 6-1 to uphold Proposition 8 – a voter-approved measure defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

While the court decision prompted celebrations among various Christians and family groups, some didn't see the ruling as a complete victory and foresee continuous battles over marriage.

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said the high court's decision to keep intact the estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages that were performed before California voters passed the amendment "seeds the ground for a possible legal battle before the U.S. Supreme Court."

Randy Thomas, executive vice president of Exodus International, didn't join the ranks of thousands of Christians in "hollering" over a win.

"I understand my Christian siblings’ excitement. I am glad Prop 8 has been upheld," Thomas wrote on his blog. "Yet my personal pervading sense is sadness that a lot of gay identified people are going to be very angry and not understand our perspective."

"It, the battle over marriage, is hardly over," he stated.

Liberal columnist Mark Morford wrote in the San Francisco Chronicle that traditional marriage supporters have already lost the marriage battle, citing the views of the younger generation.

"Gay marriage is a foregone conclusion. It's a done deal. It's just a matter of time," Morford wrote. "For the next generation in particular, equal rights for gays is not even a question or a serious issue, much less a sinful hysterical conundrum that can only be answered by terrified Mormons and confused old people and inane referendums funded by same."

According to the Gallup Poll, younger Americans are most likely to support the legalization of same-sex marriage. Over half (59 percent) of 18- to 29-year-olds say marriage for gay and lesbian couples should be recognized by the law as valid. For all other older age groups, the majority say same-sex marriage should not be legal.

Traditional family groups, however, believe the Proposition 8 ruling points America in the right direction especially when considering the next generation.

"Marriage is worth protecting because it is the way we teach the next generation: children need mothers and fathers," said Maggie Gallagher, president of National Organization for Marriage. "This victory for Prop 8 is a victory for children, for civil rights, and for the common good."

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2
  • Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Here are some quotes from James Madison, that clearly illustrate his position on religion:

    "The appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, is contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that ‘Congress shall make no law protecting a religious establishment."

    "The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries"

    Madison's summary of the First Amendment:

    "Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730 - 731).

    Against establishment of religion

    * The experience of the United States is a happy disproof of the error so long rooted in the unenlightened minds of well-meaning Christians, as well as in the corrupt hearts of persecuting usurpers, that without a legal incorporation of religious and civil polity, neither could be supported. A mutual independence is found most friendly to practical Religion, to social harmony, and to political prosperity (Letter to F.L. Schaeffer, Dec 3, 1821).

    Pretty much covers Madison and his ideology on the full separation of Church and State. He clearly intended that religion not control or be in any position of power in which it could dictate to the population or force it in any manner to follow its mandates of religious beliefs.
    TFR

  • Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:01 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Like it or not same sex marriage is legal. It will be legal across the entire US shortly and with that another f&e agenda point will be permanently removed along the road to a complete restoration of the Constitution where equality will be enjoyed by all.

    Once the Fairness Doctrine is reinstated then the f&e crowd will have to allow the truth to be heard by everyone!

    TFR

  • Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:55 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    drat55 »
    Sat Jun 20, 2009 9:53 am : 3 : 0 Flag

    Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
    __________________________________________________
    In Response: No it isn't. Your reliance upon your ideology which is not the law of the land, it is governed by SECULAR LAW, NOT RELIGIOUS Law, ends the debate.

    Got it, Reality is such a beautiful thing especially when an f&e fanatic is made to recognize it.

    TFR

  • Wed Jul 08, 2009 12:23 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Maggie Gallagher's comment that "children need mothers and fathers" is so completely irrelevant to the debate over marriage equality for these reasons:

    1: A couple does not legally require a marriage license to make babies.

    2: The ability to desire to make babies is not a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license.

    3: Single persons are not prohibited from adopting children.

    4: Many Gay couples have children through adoption, artificial insemination, surrogacy, etc.

    But really, who cares what Maggie Gallagher thinks? With every passing year Americans have become more accepting and supportive of their Gay friends, family members, and co-workers ... and even if their continues to be discomfort with the idea of marriage equality, that discomfort is fading with each new generation. Mark Morford is right.

  • Sat Jun 20, 2009 9:53 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

    To Wit:

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

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

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

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

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

    I know you have studied these things extensively.
    Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

    OK, admittedly, not original to me. But it says it so well !!!

  • Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:00 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    drat55
    You have commented...
    "Jesus never once condemned homosexuality. Not once."

    Now consider the writings of the Apostles after Christ. There are other New Testament references to Homosexuality.

    Of course that might mean that you do not believe that the writings after Christ were inspired by the same Spirit which was in Christ.

    The Bible is Genesis to Revelations, and Christ is in all of it.

  • Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "And as for the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality, to earlier points, they were based on laws of man. Jesus never once condemned homosexuality."

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    True, but He did make it clear that God created marriage and sex for a man and a woman. So anything outside of that is a sin.

  • Fri Jun 05, 2009 7:36 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    What has the Holy Spirit said to me? The Holy Spirit has given me the strength and conviction to love, to overcome those who would divide and define love in selective terms that are not based on anything other than their own bias and prejudice, to look beyond human laws and interpretations to the core of what Jesus preached - love and acceptance. And as for the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality, to earlier points, they were based on laws of man. Jesus never once condemned homosexuality. Not once.

  • Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:53 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    drat55
    You have said...
    "There's hope yet that one day you'll admit to the falacies of your own interpretations and confusion of laws, customs and mandates issued in the name of God's word throughout the ages."

    Remember that it is the Holy Spirit which reveals the truth in the Word of God.

    For him who has ears to hear, let him hear what the Spirit it saying to the Church.

    What have you heard from the Holy Spirit?

  • Thu Jun 04, 2009 6:10 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    drat,

    Unfortunately, the Bible does come right out and condemn homosexuality. Whereas, interracial marriages was a severely twisted and pervert interpretation (like the homosexuals do to prove their viewpoints).

  • Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:46 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    believer, wrhalver and others - I'm heartened that you've taken to distinguishing laws and grace, acknowledging interpretations and adding your own interpretations. There's hope yet that one day you'll admit to the falacies of your own interpretations and confusion of laws, customs and mandates issued in the name of God's word throughout the ages.
    Oh, and believer, thank you for your recognition that there are no scriptures that forbid interracial marriage. You are absolutely right and it makes my point for me - even though there are no scriptures on that point, the Bible was nonetheless used to defend single race marriage as God-ordained and to scorn interracial marriages. No scripture but "interpreted" by those who wished to use in support of their position. Thanks for bringing it up.

  • Wed Jun 03, 2009 1:05 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    "A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger"

  • Wed Jun 03, 2009 9:12 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 5

    "How do you know it is not God's plan that gay couples cannot have children, but we can adopt children in need?"

    That depends on the state/country. Keep in mind that if you drink and drive and kill someone it isn't murder but if someone steps out in front of a sober person there can be quite the court case. Just because our broken legal system views something a certain way doesn't make it right.

  • Wed Jun 03, 2009 6:24 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Well that seems to be quite the interpretation there. How do you know it is not God's plan that gay couples cannot have children, but we can adopt children in need? You don't really, all you have to go on are interpretations (as do I.)

  • Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:22 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 5

    drat55
    You mentioned the following relationships...
    couples who are unable to have children
    couples who are too old to have children
    couples who choose not to have children
    people who are single

    It is to God's authority whether a womb will be opened or closed regardless of age.

    And if a couple chooses not to have children, then hopefully their decision is in accordance with God's will.

    And Jesus himself said that marriage is not meant for everyone, and we are clearly warned about fornication and adultery.

    But we know that a sexual relationship between two of the same sex cannot in itself produce children. This is the abomination.

  • Tue Jun 02, 2009 9:58 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 8

    "Are these relationships (or lack of relationships) "unnatural"? "

    Natural refers to the method vs. the outcome. God created natural with Adam and Eve. Man goes into woman.


    "In fact, the Bible accepts sexual practices that we condemn and condemns sexual practices that we accept. Lots of them! Here are a few examples."

    Well...that's nothing new! Keep in mind the concept of law and grace. This concept is even difficult for believers. The purpose of the law was to show us that we are sinners. After all, that's a concept that people have trouble with too! The purpose was to show us that we, in ourselves, are not good enough to be considered holy. That was the purpose of the law.

    Mar 10:4-8 They said, "Moses permitted {a man} TO WRITE A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND {her} AWAY." But Jesus said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. "But from the beginning of creation, {God} MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. "FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh.

    Please note that it was because of our wickedness that Moses wrote it. Was it a permission from God to divorce? I don't think so. The Bible says that God hates divorce. Still, mankind 'divorced' God in the garden. There in is the problem.

    Also, please note that when discussing marriage and divorce the foundational point was that "from the beginning of creation, {God} MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE". This was where the arguement for marriage and against divorce starts from Jesus. One male...one female....

    Now, under grace we have accepted the purpose of the law that we are sinners in need of a savior and that savior to save us from ourselves! Jesus died to save us from our own sin and the Holy Spirit lives within us to help us live the way God wants us too. Paul wrote:

    Rom 6:1-2 "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"

    Therefore, for a person to say "I'm saved therefore I can get drunk, steal, be gay, commit adultry (and the list goes on) and God has forgiven me" is quite an insult to the sacrifice Jesus made on the cross let alone a statement of their true heart condition.

  • Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:30 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 4

    drat, plus there are absolutely no scriptures that say interracial marriages are prohibited!

  • Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:28 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 7

    drat, plus God clearly states His original and only design for marriage several times in His Word and each time He states it is one man and one woman united as one for life in His sight, needless to say same-sex marriage violates that design and is therefore sin in the sight of God!

  • Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:25 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 4

    drat,for one in Numbers 35:31 we read that the only violation of God's law where the death penalty was mandatory is in the case of murder, all other violations could be and were resolved in other ways. Plus, please don't cheapen the Word of God with your faulty interpretations, there is a huge difference between a woman marrying her deceased husband's brother and a woman having to have intercourse with his brothers until she had a male child, plus this was a hypothetical example the Saduccees were using to trap Christ and if you read His response you'll see He addresses their hypocrisy by saying "Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God?

  • Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:51 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 1

    Daniel Paul, you seem like one of the more rational people in this blog. But to your points:

    Because the Bible says it is "natural" that a man and a woman come together to create a new life, some people think this means gay or lesbian couples are "unnatural." They read this interpretation into the text, even though the text is silent about all kinds of relationships that don't lead to having children:

    couples who are unable to have children
    couples who are too old to have children
    couples who choose not to have children
    people who are single

    Are these relationships (or lack of relationships) "unnatural"?

    In fact, the Bible accepts sexual practices that we condemn and condemns sexual practices that we accept. Lots of them! Here are a few examples.

    DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
    If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
    DEUTERONOMY 22:22
    If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
    MARK 10:1-12
    Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
    LEVITICUS 18:19
    The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
    MARK 12:18-27
    If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
    DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
    If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.
    I'm certain you don't agree with these teachings from the Bible about sex. And you shouldn't. The list goes on: The Bible says clearly that sex with a prostitute is acceptable for the husband but not for the wife. Polygamy (more than one wife) is acceptable, as is a king's having many concubines. (Solomon, the wisest king of all, had 1,000 concubines.) Slavery and sex with slaves, marriage of girls aged 11-13, and treatment of women as property are all accepted practices in the Scriptures. On the other hand, there are strict prohibitions against interracial marriage, birth control, discussing or even naming a sexual organ, and seeing one's parents nude.

    Using scripture in a distorted sense, or ignoring some scripture and embracing others, speaks not to the Word of God, but to the word of man.

  • DRJ »
    Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:19 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    The title of this article is "Most Americans Still Against Legalizing Gay Marriage" Here is the Biblically correct amended title: "Most Americans AND ALL CHRISTIANS Still Against Legalizing Gay Marriage." This goes for two homosexuals getting married and also for a homosexual and a heterosexual getting married (unequally yoked). Amen anybody?

  • Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:45 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 5

    drat55
    You have commented...
    "And, by the way, I am Christian, I believe in God and believe in salvation through Jesus. I just can't find anything in the Bible that supports your unreasoned opinions. But I'm sure this comment will never see the light of day. I'm sure it too will be deemed "inappropriate"."

    As DP has mentioned, of late we have some individuals who have chosen to interrupt the flow of these blogs by flagging and/or randomly giving inappropriate thumb votes.

    I'm sure CP is working on a way to help curb this abuse. In the meantime all comments are truly welcome.

    The Bible has to be taken in its entirety from Genesis to Revelations. God clearly shows us His purpose in marriage for mankind (man and woman).

    There are two primary reasons and they are both intended to bring Glory and Honor to God, which is the reason why mankind exists in the first place.

    Again, welcome and happy blogging.

  • Sun May 31, 2009 9:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    Mat 19:5 "And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?"

    Man: anthropos (masculin noun)
    g) with reference to sex, a male

    wife: gyne (feminine noun)
    1) a woman of any age, whether a virgin, or married, or a widow
    2) a wife
    a) of a betrothed woman

    Jesus said one man and one woman. Greek has masculine and feminine versions of words. It is a very exacting language.

  • Sun May 31, 2009 9:04 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Drat... first...welcome to our little corner of the internet. If you are someone's alter-ego...welcome anyway.

    You asked for scripture....

    Rom 1:26 Because of this did God give them up to dishonourable affections, for even their females did change the natural use into that against nature;
    Rom 1:27 and in like manner also the males having left the natural use of the female, did burn in their longing toward one another; males with males working shame, and the recompense of their error that was fit, in themselves receiving.

    "also the males having left the natural use of the female,"

    "natural" (5446) means "physical"
    "use" (5540) means "employment i.e. spec sexual intercourse"

    "affections" = desire for sexual intimacy.

    (Please note these are translated Greek words. We use their definitions and not ours for their words.)

    God isn't about bigotry or hate. It is those who hate God's rules that do all kinds of things outside of what pleases Him.

    Please show me ANY Bible verses that say you can be right with God and homosexual at the same time.

  • Sun May 31, 2009 9:00 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    "The fact that my original post has been deleted as "inappropriate" tells me all I need to know."

    Welcome to the "I've been flagged" club. There are people who seem to flag for any or no reason here on all sides of issues. I wouldn't read too much into it....

  • Sun May 31, 2009 7:34 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 4

    drat, you say man instituted marriage and not God and yet we read in Genesis 2:22-24, "The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man and brought her to man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh." This was God's institution of marriage from the very beginning of creation and verse 24 is cited by Christ in both Matthew and Mark and by Paul in Ephesians and once again it is God's original and only design for marriage.

  • Sun May 31, 2009 6:24 pm Agree: 7   Disagree: 2

    The fact that my original post has been deleted as "inappropriate" tells me all I need to know. You don't want an honest discussion - you want absolutes that fit your conviction. Marriage is not a creation of God - it is a creation of mankind. Celibacy of priests is not a creation of God, it's a creation of mankind. Marriage limited to your definition of 1 man / 1 woman is your creation, not God's. Jesus, the radical of his day, would likely equate you with the Sanhedrin. And, by the way, I am Christian, I believe in God and believe in salvation through Jesus. I just can't find anything in the Bible that supports your unreasoned opinions. But I'm sure this comment will never see the light of day. I'm sure it too will be deemed "inappropriate". As have all other "inappropriate" positions taken thoughout the ages - sort of like Galileo's assertion that the universe didn't revolve around Earth resulting in his excommunication or the Spanish Inquisition's toll on innocents. But I'm sorry - I speak in truths and facts. My God is a good God. Not one immersed in hate and bigotry.

  • Sun May 31, 2009 5:47 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "I read this diatribe with utter amazement. But I don't know why I'm amazed. What I read are thoughtless, narrow condeming absolutes that are being selectively used to support individual prejudices, hate and fears."

    Our pastor preached the most amazing message on marriage today. I figured it would be good when he warned people LAST WEEK they may want to put their younger children and even teenagers in the various programs for them outside of the service today!

    In short, God is a triune being. There is Father, Son and Holy Ghost which make up one being. God made marriage after that model with God, man and woman. He had quite a bit to say about how sex outside of marriage is just physical and denies the people of the intimacy they need and want in a relationship. This is why people who have sex outside of marriage or marriages that are based on "great sex" don't last long because there is no long term intimacy. Bottom line...sex outside of a marriage just isn't good for us.

    He said the main problem with homosexual relationships is that you have the two people representing one side. It's either 2 men or 2 women which leaves one side empty. It is not how God designed relationships to work. In short, homosexuality is like having all your wheels on one side of the car.

    People form their "relationship" and then want God to fit in to what they have made. This goes for gay or straight people. The Biblical model is for a man and woman to have an inimate spiritual relationship as individuals which God joins together with a physical relationship between them. This is what Adam and Eve had.

    He made a great point that the essence of sin was that WE decide what is right and wrong for us. This is what Adam and Eve did. It doesn't matter what our society says or our courts say. God designed marriage to be a relationship between one man, one woman and himself.

    It is hatred toward God that is "selectively used to support individual prejudices, hate and fears" to keep God from being in control of their lives.

    Just FYI, the pastor said he knows we have homosexuals in the church and he's glad they are there. He did say that the church isn't going to endorse any behavior that is sin though.

  • Sun May 31, 2009 1:58 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    drat, the reason many are opposed to same-sex marriage is because God's original and only design for marriage is one man and one woman united as one for life in the sight of God, there are no other forms of marriage that are ordained by God, so in the sight of God same-sex marriage is a sin because it willfully violates God's original and only design for marriage.

  • Sun May 31, 2009 12:23 pm Agree: 11   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show I read this diatribe with utter amazement. But I don't know why I'm amazed. What I read are thoughtless, narrow condeming absolutes that are being selectively used to support individual prejudices, hate and fears. Why do you choose a passage in the Bible to support your homosexual hate and ignore other passages relative to the stoning of "unclean" women or the eating of "unclean" food. Biblicalbots have used the Bible to rationalize slavery, condemn interracial marriage, support unprovoked wars and subjogate women to men for centuries. What are you afraid of? How does the right for two people who love and care for each other to marry threaten your marriage? And why are you afraid for children in these marriages to witness love and support between two loving parents? It's sad and depressing to see how many of you would deny that to others simply because, at this moment, you can. hide

  • Sun May 31, 2009 2:05 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    A.S.Mathew
    You commented....
    "I don't have the right to judge anybody, whether
    homosexual tendencies are a biological problem, or
    a chosen lifestyle."

    Yes, you do. Judge according to the things of God, not the things of man.

  • Sat May 30, 2009 9:24 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    believer,

    "...studies have been done to show that the problem is not overpopulation but the misuse of the resources God has given us."

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Amen. If we used our natural resources and energy options the way God wants us to, we wouldn't have to worry about overpopulation.

  • Sat May 30, 2009 5:39 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "If God does not make mistakes, and we follow the work of Jesus and his word to love thy neighbor. How can anyone be sure that God did not put homosexuals here to slow the population down or to stop cretin people from passing on bad genes?"

    Man makes mistakes. Man sins...not God. God is quite vocal about homosexuality being sin in many places in the Bible. In Romans, the Bible said "God gave them over" or in plain English...God took His hand of control off of them and left them to their own path (never a good thing). God did not "put homosexuals" here. God gave people up to their own insistance of doing what does not please Him.

  • Sat May 30, 2009 2:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    peterpaul, God does not need to control the population, sin and specifically sins of greed are doing an excellent job already, add to that wars, famine, disease and natural disasters and population growth is well in hand. Plus, as prophet said you assume that God is for population control when in fact studies have been done to show that the problem is not overpopulation but the misuse of the resources God has given us.

  • Sat May 30, 2009 12:30 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    peterpaul,

    Who says God wants to slow the population?

  • Sat May 30, 2009 10:52 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    If God does not make mistakes, and we follow the work of Jesus and his word to love thy neighbor. How can anyone be sure that God did not put homosexuals here to slow the population down or to stop cretin people from passing on bad genes?
    I just find it hard to believe that God would not have a way to slow the population growth without a major plague. If God needed to eliminate a harmful gene out of the population that He may see affecting not one generation but the next. Then why would he not make sure that that person did not have children?
    Jesus would not want someone to be without love in their heart, so why not make sure that person could love but make sure they could not have children.

  • Fri May 29, 2009 5:26 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    mike85, before you accuse others of doing something you might do your homework and especially since I have no clue how to cut and paste articles and before I cite an article or study I read it over to do my best to determine if it presents valid information as I did when you cited several studies to me and found them to be shaky at best with regards to the points they were trying to make.

  • DRJ »
    Fri May 29, 2009 5:12 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 5

    Children, we must come to an immediate understanding. The issue of homosexuality is NOT an issue of the flesh. No doubt that there is a BATTLE raging in the current American culture that centers on homosexuality, but Paul says that we (Christians) battle not against the flesh, but principalities and powers (evil spirits, Satan). Brothers in Christ, you waste valuable time attempting to battle the fleshly perversions of fallen humanity. You cannot win. Likewise, you cannot win the battles against Satan and his evil spirits. Only Jesus can (and has) defeat the evil spirits now. The perverted people will defeat themselves by rejecting the truth of God's love and His offer of salvation in Jesus. Your time would much better be useful in sharing the love of God with those who are perishing and don't know it. Homosexuals KNOW that they are living contrary to God's design. They KNOW first by the order of nature and finally by the Word of God that He created them MALE and FEMALE for the purpose of procreation. They burn with un-natural desires because they deny the power of God that promises to set them free from their sin. They LOVE to sin against God. Stop feeding their egos by arguing with them. Tell them to repent and turn to God for salvation...then move on to the next sinner. The time is short and Jesus is coming very soon.

  • DRJ »
    Fri May 29, 2009 5:07 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 4

    So many "flagged as inappropriate" responses!!! Children, we must come to an immediate understanding. The issue of homosexuality is NOT an issue of the flesh. No doubt that there is a BATTLE raging in the current American culture that centers on homosexuality, but Paul says that we (Christians) battle not against the flesh, but principalities and powers (evil spirits, Satan). Brothers in Christ, you waste valuable time attempting to battle the fleshly perversions of fallen humanity. You cannot win. Likewise, you cannot win the battles against Satan and his evil spirits. Only Jesus can (and has) defeat the evil spirits now. The perverted people will defeat themselves by rejecting the truth of God's love and His offer of salvation in Jesus. Your time would much better be useful in sharing the love of God with those who are perishing and don't know it. Homosexuals KNOW that they are living contraty to God's design. They KNOW first by the order of nature and finally by the Word of God that He created them MALE and FEMALE for the purpose of procreation. They burn with un-natural desires because they deny the power of God that promises to set them free from their sin. They LOVE to sn against God. Stop feeding their egos by arguing with them. Tell them to repent and turn to God for salvation...then move on to the next sinner. The time is short and Jesus is coming very soon.

  • Fri May 29, 2009 4:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Mike...so you aren't doing any of the ESL? We're still trying to get schools to do special ed right during the school year here. I'm working on a complaint now concerning on-going treatment of a child. The parents sued and the judge agreed with the parents that making a middle school girl march around with a backpack full of rocks and then beating it with a stick when she wasn't marching fast enough was not "best practice" for a public school.... The then super this happened under retired but was brought back as interm for 6 months. Within the 1st month the girl was expelled from school.... I think our schools are in different worlds....

  • Fri May 29, 2009 4:55 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    "It just seems a little too convenient for your argument, "

    I heard a psycologist once say that 95% of Americans were co-dependent and the other 5% were in denial.... Co-dependency is far more pervasive in our society then people think.

    One of the main examples I grew up with was other Bible College families. Many people thought their children needed to act a certain way and the children co-dependently complied. After all, we have to keep the image clean, right? I was fortunate that my parents didn't buy into that sort of thing. Now, my dad did once tell me that I had to be cautious for "weaker brethren" as some of them have that whole "I'm of Paul" thing. He didn't want me to cause them to stumble as they grew which is a fair concern. Still, he never had this strict code of conduct for us.

    Trust me when I say that growing up in the ministry and having most of my friends within the families of people in the ministry gives me somewhat of a good understanding of co-dependency. I saw it for what it was before the term was coined.

  • Fri May 29, 2009 4:27 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Paul was talking about homosexuality in sex and marriages. As homosexuals were allowed to marry under Nero, and he even performed homosexual marriages.

    "The fact that marriage occurred between two men among the Romans is proved by a law in the Theodosian Code from the Christian emperors Constantius and Constans which was passed on December 16, 342. Martial attests to same-sex marriages between men during the early Roman Empire. The first recorded marriage between two men occurred during the reign of the Emperor Nero, who is reported to have married two other men on different occasions.'

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions

  • Fri May 29, 2009 12:22 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

    No, DP, it is not. You do realize that lying is an example of satanic behavior, right? I do not believe that a gay person told you every gay person they knew was codependent. It just seems a little too convenient for your argument, when in fact I have known many, many gay and lesbian people, and not one has ever said that.

    I don't know who is singing school's out more, my students, or me! Only 1 week left (then an additional week to pack up our stuff and finish up reports and whatnot.)

  • Fri May 29, 2009 11:39 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    "that is an observation that you're trying to impose on everyone, and that, sir, is a lie. "

    You do realize that making the statement like this based on what I posted is an example of co-dependent behavior....

  • Fri May 29, 2009 11:34 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Zowie.... Thanks wowie... :D

  • Fri May 29, 2009 11:20 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    "It isn't a characteristic of the gay community that we're codependent or insecure, that is an observation that you're trying to impose on everyone, and that, sir, is a lie."

    I said every gay person that I know. I didn't say the entire gay community. Also, it was the gay person who said every gay person she knew was co-dependent...not me. So, if you want to blame someone for the statement you will have to blame the gay gal! She's the one who said it!!!

    Switching gears here...are your students singing "schools out for summer" yet?

  • Fri May 29, 2009 11:17 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    "I have many, many friends who are gay of all age levels,"

    ...ummm.... I hold to the concept that a person can only maintain 4-5 friends. I think your definition of friendship is a bit different from mine. Friendship by my definition carries with it a very high level of accountability and involvement. Friends are those who are even closer than a brother so to speak. There are many people I could call friends by a lesser defintion including those gay folks. I knew one of them well enough that I would let her babysit the kids. Still, I didn't know her well enough or had the level of accountability I require to call myself someones friend.

  • Fri May 29, 2009 11:07 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    OK, so you have a few acquaitences. I have many, many friends who are gay of all age levels, and I wouldn't say a single one of them is codependent. Are some insecure? Sure, but so are many straight people! It isn't a characteristic of the gay community that we're codependent or insecure, that is an observation that you're trying to impose on everyone, and that, sir, is a lie.

  • Fri May 29, 2009 10:16 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    "DP, I don't believe you. It is proven that when we form stereotypes, we focus only on people who fall into our stereotypes."

    Actually, these are people I've just come across in regular life. Some I've worked with...some I've known from stores I've frequented. I am a person who believes people should talk with each other. People should get to know other people. I start up conversations in lines at grocery stores (after all, if you're going to be there for a half hour you might as well be friendly). It is my belief much of our societies ills are caused by people just not taking everyday opportunities to show (even strangers) that they are worth talking to.

    I form general friendships (aquaintance) very easily. The HS I went to had 2300 students grades 10-12. I could recognize 90% of them out in public and knew about 800-1000 by first name. So, yes...I do get to know the gay people around me just like I get to know the straight people around me.

    With that said...every last one of the gay people I know deal with a higher level of insecurity then "normal". Every last one of them is self admitted co-dependent. One told me during a conversation (someone I worked with) that every gay person she knows is co-dependent. Now, to be fair, co-dependency comes in quite a few shapes and sizes. Still, co-dependancy is a result which manifests itself in behavior. It can be anything from being a control freak to over-submissiveness, substance abuse and abuse of sex (including homosexuality).

    Man needs the Biblical standard to live by or sin happens in any number of ways. I don't view homosexuals as some "super sinners". I do view the behavior as sin just like adultry or fornication.

    So, Mike...I really do know these people! You may not agree but I'm just way more objective because I don't have anything to gain or lose. I believe the Bible. Nothing I learn about gays is going to change what is written there. This frees me to care about the person inspite of the behavior. After all, since Jesus saved me I don't see why He wouldn't save anyone else!!! You, on the other hand, have every reason to be bias as it is your existance in the balance.

  • Fri May 29, 2009 8:14 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Like I said, stereotypes are powerful things. I'm not accusing him with any authority, but its my opinion that DP is lying.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Music
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links