Updated 08:10 pm.EST, Mon November 23, 2009

Church|Sat, Aug. 22 2009 10:22 AM EDT

ELCA Opens Ordination to Noncelibate Homosexuals

By Lillian Kwon|Christian Post Reporter

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America on Friday approved a resolution to allow gays and lesbians in same-sex relationships to be ordained.

  • elca
    (Photo: ELCA)
    Voting members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America take a moment to pray before voting on Friday, Aug. 21, 2009.

ELCA's highest legislative body voted 559-451 during the biennial Churchwide Assembly in Minneapolis.

It was a moment of celebration for supporters of the resolution, which overturned the denomination's ban on noncelibate gay and lesbian clergy. But opponents warn the action will likely lead to an exodus of churches.

"This will cause an ever greater loss in members and finances. I can't believe the church I loved and served for 40 years can condone what God condemns," said the Rev. Richard Mahan, pastor at St. Timothy Lutheran Church in Charleston, W.Va., according to The Associated Press. "Nowhere in Scripture does it say homosexuality and same-sex marriage is acceptable to God. Instead, it says it is immoral and perverted."

After the vote, the conservative Lutheran CORE (Coalition for Reform), which had been officially recognized by the ELCA, severed ties with the 4.6 million-member denomination and declared itself an independent Lutheran organization.

"We can no longer in good conscience participate in this relationship with the offices in Chicago," said the Rev. Paull Spring of State College, Pa., chair of Lutheran CORE.

The conservative group announced that it will host a gathering next month in Indianapolis to discuss what the future for "faithful Lutherans" who uphold the authority of Scripture might look like and how they can work together.

The denomination's head, Presiding Bishop Mark S. Hanson, expressed concern that Friday's decision would push individuals and congregations to leave.

But he encouraged them to stay in "the conversation."

"Are you willing to stay engaged with us in the conversation about how you can, with integrity, stay in this church body so that we might respect your bound conscience?" Hanson posed during a news conference.

He also noted that he was pleased with the respect that has been shown from both sides of the gay clergy debate over the past eight years.

The resolution to change ELCA's ministry policies was put forward by the ELCA Task Force on Human Sexuality which had been assigned to develop a social statement on human sexuality as well as make recommendations to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly on changes to policies regarding practicing homosexual persons.

The panel's social statement, “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust,” was narrowly adopted on Wednesday. The document acknowledges that there is neither a consensus nor an emerging one in the denomination on homosexuality and also recommends that the ELCA commit itself to finding ways to recognize lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships.

The Rev. Mark Chavez of Landisville, Pa., director of Lutheran CORE, renounced this week's decisions and believes they will damage the denomination's relationships with partner churches and its ecumenical relationships (with Roman Catholics, Orthodox, and most Protestant Churches) around the world.

"The Anglican Communion is in the process of splitting apart because of the actions of The Episcopal Church. The ELCA seems unconcerned about a similar effect on the LWF (Lutheran World Federation)," Chavez said.

Lutheran CORE has invited like-minded Lutherans to direct funding away from the ELCA.

"We cannot support this departure from God’s Word,” said Chavez.

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 | 3 | 4
  • Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:37 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show One quick note concerning the above article and I'm gone, as I have no desire 2 subject myself 2 the kind of distasteful comments I've had 2 endure at this web site. While the article indicates a "narrow" passing of the afore mentioned "statement" the fact is in all other circumstances, the passing of this statement would have required only a simple majority. Conservative ELCA members, in an attempt 2 control the outcome of the vote, put forth a request that this particular vote require a 2/3's majority. They believed that by doing so, the vote would fail, thinking there would not/could not be enough votes to pass on a 2/3's requirement. But the Holy Spirit and the Lord God moved many there and in fact, it passed by exactly 2/3's. I personaly think this requiremet was fortunate, as it let gay laypersons such as myself see, that indeed, 2/3's of my church and the churches of others supported the resolution, & therefore supported me. How do I know all this happened? I was there & voted 4 the resolution. The folks who opposed failed in their sad attempt to manipulate the votes outcome & justice prevailed. Praise B 2 God!! hide

  • Fri Sep 11, 2009 4:10 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    Romans 1:26For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, 1men with 1men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

    28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, F3 wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, F4 unmerciful; 32who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

  • Fri Sep 11, 2009 4:07 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

    24Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

  • Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:37 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    How the APA removed homosexuality from its Manual of Mental Disorders in 1973
    http://www.blowthetrumpet.org/IsHomosexualityaMentalDisorder.htm

    Report Shows Gay Activist Influence on Mental Health Organizations
    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/feb/06020902.html

    How the Mental Health Associations Misrepresent Science
    http://www.narth.com/docs/TheTrojanCouchSatinover.pdf

    Facts About HOmosexuality
    http://www.ucmpage.org/articles/facts_about_homosexuality.html

    APA 'ignoring the science' on homosexual reparative therapy
    http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=634346

    APA Sexual Orientation and Therapy Task Force Report: An Analysis
    http://www.christianpost.com/article/20090806/apa-sexual-orientation-and-therapy-task-force-report-an-analysis/index.html

    It's the ENDGAME, and as the Radical Feminist/Homosexual Alliance sees the majority unexpectedly beginning to wake up, they're panicking to get all their secret agenda's ultimate goals set into law.
    Since the 1970's they've kept themselves disguised as ordinary womens groups and family groups, while increasing their numbers and infiltrating society's most important institutions - from the bottom (all our schools) to the top (EU, UN and the WH).
    Their power, despite being less than 1% of the population, is a testament to their deviousness and their patient planning.
    It's the Endgame and they've almost won everything they always wanted. But suddenly some of the majority are waking up and are not afraid of all the shouting name-calling tactics that the RFHA has used on the public since the 1970's.
    It's time we all stand up against the RFHA and all the atheists ruining our country - and not back down as I'm sure they'll urge us to.

    TGF
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The most loving thing you can do for your family is to pull them out of the public school system and keep them far away from apostate churches.

  • Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:40 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    The subject is the ECLA undeniably falling into Satan's hands. Can we please stop talking about the love lives of naked men cavorting and covered in disgusting thoughts they can't control? It makes me want to throw up.

    TGF
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One of the most loving things you can do is help a homosexual repent and become a normal person again.

  • Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:35 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Excellent lesson on Proverbs, Dreamer.

    Big Mark, I also enjoy weekenderman's comments and have said so before.

    We have a number of wonderful Christian posters here. And it's often an encouragement to read their comments.

    TGF
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The most loving thing you can do for your family is to pull them out of the public school system and keep them far away from apostate churches.

  • Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:07 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

    Daniel Paul said ""I am capable of falling in love (with men)." I am capable of theft, murder, adultery and the list goes on. Just because one is capable of something doesn't mean it's OK with God. We are all capable of sin."

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

    Amen.

  • Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    "I am gay." True. "God made me as I am." Lie "God doesn't make mistakes." Amen. "I am capable of falling in love (with men)." No doubt a perverted love.

  • Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:47 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "I am capable of falling in love (with men)." I am capable of theft, murder, adultery and the list goes on. Just because one is capable of something doesn't mean it's OK with God. We are all capable of sin. hide

  • Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:45 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "I am capable of falling in love (with men)." We have one word for love in English. Greek has 4 (3 common). So, yes, you are capable of "falling in love" with men. However, this is not the level of love God created for marriage. It's a different word.... hide

  • Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:57 am Agree: 5   Disagree: 4

    Flagged as inappropriate. show The subject is the ECLA undeniably falling into Satan's hands. Can we please stop talking about the love lives of naked men cavorting and covered in disgusting thoughts they can't control? It makes me want to throw up. TGF --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The most loving thing you can do is help a homosexual become normal again. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:25 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show gguy, the reality is there is a God and He indeed is the God of the Bible. And at this point there is no valid scientific evidence that people are born homosexual or that God created them homosexual. But at the same time since we don't get to choose our temptations it means that people don't choose to be tempted by same-sex attractions. But God's Word also says He will not tempt a Christian more than he can handle and in fact with every temptation He allows to come into our life He will provide a means of escape so we don't have to give into the temptation and sin against God. Now there may come a time when science discovers that some people are born with a bent toward homosexuality which means even though they have that bent they still have the ability to choose not to move in that direction, the same that some believe a person may be born with a bent toward alcoholism but then none the less still have the ability to choose to or not to consume alcohol. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:23 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show believer, at the risk of repeating myself it would have to make some kind of sense to me. Here's how I see it, assuming there is a god: I am gay. God made me as I am. God doesn't make mistakes. I am capable of falling in love (with men). So how, then, can it possibly be that I'm only attracted romantically to men, I can (and do) fall in love, but yet I'm supposed to either deny it or turn away from that love? That not only doesn't make sense to me, it would be a mean, horrible thing of a creator to do. It would be contrary to every shred of common sense I have. Imagine how you might feel if, being exactly who you are, you were told that you can not ever pursue a romantic relationship. Ever. If you fall in love, too bad you must walk away from it. When you ask why, there is no reason other than certain people telling you, "Because." Can't you imagine the horrible injustice and lunacy of that? Yes, I suppose I could take the route some have and adopt a celibate life. But I think if I did I would be a shell of myself. I would spend so much energy forcing myself away from all romantic impulses that I'd miss out on the opportunities to help people, and grow, and CONTRIBUTE to the world. How can that possibly be the right thing? Honestly, if there is a god I think this whole business about his having a problem with anything to do with homosexuality is a mistake. A big, unfortunate mistake. None of it makes sense. I know you disagree, but that's how I feel. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show gguy, reality is on the issue of homosexuality you've very much made up your mind with regards to the sin aspect of it. So my question would be, what would it take to convince you that God sees not so much homosexuality but the sexual practices of homosexuality be it physical acts or sexual desires as sin in His sight? hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:24 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show believer, I understand about having faith when it comes to certain things we may not be able to make sense of. I could subscribe to that and simply trust, but only to a point. We all have a breaking point. For example, people who are told that killing doctors who perform abortions is ok have reached a point I would call crazy. But to them they are doing the right thing, and can justify it, and probably believe it's the greatest of all tests, to see how strong their faith really is. It's an interesting question: How far would you go for your faith? My personal breaking point is waaaaay before any kind of violence. As I've said (and of course I'm predisposed to feel this being being I am gay) I could never abide by calling homosexuality a sin. It makes no sense to me. I know you feel differently, and I respect your belief. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show gguy, needless to say "Mew" should be "New", oh well! hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:26 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show gguy, excellent point with regards to the why question and indeed I share your same concern. And for most of God's commands there is indeed a logical and/or beneficial reason why God makes those commands. And yet there are times where by our own human understanding we are indeed unable to grasp God's wisdom for certain prohibitions as well as instructions to do something. And it is at that point that we must simply trust God to know what He is doing and realize He indeed is in control and indeed has a purpose for His command to us. Plus, we need to keep in mind that many of the instructions and prohibitions found in the Old Testament are no longer applicable to us today because they were given with reagrds to the Old or Law Covenant and we are now under the Mew or Grace Covenant. And that there are some commands that are found in both covenants that are indeed still applicable to us as His Church today. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:52 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "...and if God declares something to be wrong it is always in our best interest to avoid it at all costs." believer, that's one thing I don't quite understand. If a religion held that it was a sin to, for example, color your hair, I would ask why. If the answer boiled down to, "No reason. It just is. You must believe and live by this or else" then I would walk away. It has to make sense. I don't understand putting faith in something that doesn't make sense or that is actually contrary to what does make sense. To me it makes no sense that a religion would make a big deal out of some people being gay. I just don't understand what the problem is. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:43 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "That's the problem with being your own god. You determine what is right and wrong. Then everyone else has to live with it or you don't get along. When it comes to God determining right and wrong there is a common denominator that makes it all work. Only when people want to go out on their own do we get into trouble...." First of all, I am not my own god. I don't subscribe to the notion that there needs to be a god, an almighty supreme leader, or anything like that. I think society collectively decides, based on principles and ethics. Second, I think you're kidding yourself if you think your god is the sole rule maker. Christians can't even decide amongst themselves what the rules are, let alone all the non-christian denominations. It's a free for all, but instead of individuals fighting it's gangs of churches fighting. To you it may appear there is only one source for rules, but it appears that same way to many others too who, like you, also think theirs is the one and only source. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:04 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show gguy, God's Word tells us that most if not all temptation is pleasing to the eye and chances are if it wasn't we'd sin a whole lot less. Situational ethics does not get it when it comes to doing what is right in the sight of God and if God declares something to be wrong it is always in our best interest to avoid it at all costs. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:43 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "But not for religious reasons, and not for things I don't believe are wrong. " That's the problem with being your own god. You determine what is right and wrong. Then everyone else has to live with it or you don't get along. When it comes to God determining right and wrong there is a common denominator that makes it all work. Only when people want to go out on their own do we get into trouble.... hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:28 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show believer, I generally agree with your last post. I agree that romantic love will usually lead to sexual closeness, but my point was more that whether it does or not the true beauty of that bond, the utterly priceless wonder of it, is the love. Personally, I have never known or seen any friendship, no matter how extraordinary, that I couldn't distinguish from a romantic bond. I guess I believe when a relationship happens with that kind of love, that romantic bond so amazing people live and die and beg, steal and borrow just to taste it, when that happens we should celebrate it. If it's two men or two women, so what? hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:16 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Chas, I understand your point, but I just don't believe that. I don't believe in any of it. I believe in repenting for the things one has done wrong. I believe in the cleansing and healing power of it. But not for religious reasons, and not for things I don't believe are wrong. hide

  • Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:56 am Agree: 8   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show The catholic church is the modern-day version of the pharisees. Lots of pomp and show, but little spirituality. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:33 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show chas, no, not because I said so but because God in His Word said so, God said it and that settles it and we do not need sacred traditions and the only sacred writing we need is the inerrant Word of God. And in fact the Jewish leaders were rebuked by Christ for making many of these sacred traditions a stumbling block to drawing near to God instead of a way for people to draw closer to God. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:26 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show gguy, I believe it is totally possible to show affection to another person without it being romantic and/or sexual, but simply a form of strong brotherly love, a form of phileo love. But to be honest when I see two people sucking face or groping all over each other I don't see a friendship I see a romance that is moving toward if not already in the sexual realm. And while my wife and I can be romantic without being sexual I can guarantee if it doesn't sometimes lead to a sexual encounter for us that romance isn't going to last very long unless there would be extinuating circumstances to keep it from moving to sexual. I would find it hard to believe that two people who are romantically involved are not contemplating a sexual encounter with that person sooner or later and for most men sooner than later. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:07 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "When you are in love with someone, really truly deeply in love, sex becomes pretty unimportant." Tell that to my wife! :) hide

  • Chas »
    Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:46 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 11

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Believer, That is interesting since the Jews understood God's Word by Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Jews had sacred tradition as well and sacred tradtion always affirms the correct interpretation of scripture and the Prophets being the teaching authority confirmed it. The Catholic Church, because of being the True Church, has a similar formula. We have sacred scripture, and the correct intepretation of it by sacred tradition with the hierarchy being the final authority affirming both. The best you can ever do believe is say," because I said so". Gguy, All people including Homosexuals are built in the image and likeness of God but you may not act on your orientation. Your orientation is a product of a fallen world. If you do not repent from your activity, you will not be saved. Period. Also, any heterosexual who fornicates or is an adulterer who does not repent will not be saved. Period. So, it isn't just homosexuals who should clean up their lives. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:29 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show believer, I understand your position. I really do. Just to let you know, what strikes me about their relationship as its described is how tender and loving it is. Just beautiful! To me, beautiful the way romantic love is between two people. (Same as the one between David and Jonathan.) So I don't understand this need to make it about sex. Gay people don't revolve around sex any more than straight people do. That's why the REAL difference between gay and straight is best described with the word 'orientation.' It's not just love or just sex, but the nature of having the whole of your capacity for romantic feelings to be for your own gender. This gets to the heart of one reason anti-gay arguments sound so shrill sometimes: why would anyone work so hard to fight against the beauty of love? Anyway, I just wanted to make that point, that it's not about sex. When you are in love with someone, really truly deeply in love, sex becomes pretty unimportant. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:23 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show gguy, for the sake of argument let's say they did have a sexual interlude during their relationship with each other. The Bible makes no bones about recording the sins of some of the great people in the Bible, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Samson, David, Peter, Paul and so on. But just because they sin does by no means say that God is okay with their sin. So to cite the sins of people in the Bible by no means makes that sin permissible in the sight of God. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:54 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show In your opinion, Chas, in your opinion. Duly noted. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:51 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show chas, so if Scripture teaches that Ruth married a man and sacred tradition did not teach that would that mean that Scripture was wrong? In other words who really cares what sacred tradition says about things God's Word has already spoken to, you act as if we need the roman catholic church's approval before we believe teachings and truths taught in God's Word. hide

  • Chas »
    Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:32 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

    gguy,

    Scripture said Ruth married a man, and Sacred Tradition says she married a man and never had any type of immoral relationship with her mother in law.

    Sacred Scripture, 1 strike, Sacred Tradition, 2nd Strike, Official teaching of the Catholic Church affirming Ruth was heterosexual, 3rd Strike and you are OUT!!!!

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:14 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "Larry Craig married a woman." Christians repent when they sin, GGuy. When do you plan to repent? hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:02 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "Ruth married a man. She was heterosexual." Larry Craig married a woman. What's your point? hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 2:51 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    gguy, considering Ruth was married to Naomi's son and she sent her to Boaz's fields and she marries Boaz, it sure doesn't sound like Ruth and her mother-in-law had any type of romantic involvement whatsoever.

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:46 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    "Some say it's a close friendship, others say it was a romantic bond. No one can say with certainty."

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

    Actually, yes we can. Ruth married a man. She was heterosexual.

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:21 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show "that was REALLY sad of Homo Man. He takes biblical verses that tell of a close friendship and twists it into a homosexual relationship." Some say it's a close friendship, others say it was a romantic bond. No one can say with certainty. It serves no purpose for either to insist their belief trumps someone else's. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:25 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 1

    "LOL, that was REALLY sad of Homo Man. He takes biblical verses that tell of a close friendship and twists it into a homosexual relationship."

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

    The number one way for a homosexual "christian" to justify their sin, is to twist scriptures to fit their view.
    The second way is to claim God made them that way....which, of course, is a lie.

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:14 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    hman, so are you saying you're a homosexual sexual addict or what? Your pop psychology lessons make no sense at all.

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:12 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 0

    hman, not only were Naomi and Ruth close, she was her mother-in-law and she had no other family it appears but Naomi and the same was true for Naomi. This is a story of a wonderful relationship and no where do we have any indication whatsoever that sex was involved.

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:05 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    "It may be psychologically more healthy for the ex-addict not to hang around with people who have *never* been addicts, if there is a danger that the non-addict can accidentally trigger a relapse for the addict.

    At the same time, the addict should not be making laws that are actively harmful to other people. "

    So I guess you are relating this two the same sex marriage debate is that it. So does that mean by your logic that if I was a sex addict that I shouldn't create laws to stop sexual addiction, hmmm by your logic, I guess rape shouldn't be outlawed, cool does that mean that pedophilia and beastiality should be lawful. When one aborant sexual practice is lawful, all aborant sexual practices should be as well...

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:04 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 5

    Flagged as inappropriate. show For example, it is *not* appropriate for a heterosexual sex addict to spend his energies trying to make heterosexual marriage illegal. Maybe *he* should altogether abstain from sex with other people, if he feels that any sex at all could be a trigger for his addiction. But he needs to let other people live their lives. If he starts spending his life efforts on controlling other people, he has merely created another addiction for himself. But this new addiction he has created for himself is worse, in the sense that it is harmful not only to himself but to other people and to society at large. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:02 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    "Probably the most frequently quoted of all scriptures at weddings is a same-sex commitment:

    Ruth 1: 16-17

    Intreat me not to leave thee,
    or to return from following after thee,
    for whither thou goest, I will go,
    and where thou lodgest, I will lodge.
    Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God.

    Where thou diest, will I die,
    and there will I be buried.

    The LORD do so to me, and more also,
    if ought but death part thee and me. "

    You think this is a "same sex committment", talk about reading into it... Hey I could have said the same thing about a dear friend that moved to Rochester a few years ago, does that make me Gay... Since you seem to know who is gay by how you "look" at each other, you tell me...

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:01 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    Flagged as inappropriate. show It may be psychologically more healthy for the ex-addict not to hang around with people who have *never* been addicts, if there is a danger that the non-addict can accidentally trigger a relapse for the addict. At the same time, the addict should not be making laws that are actively harmful to other people. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:00 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    "GGuy wrote: "children have good natural drives too. A desire to see mommy and daddy happy, a desire to help others, etc. Those are not given proper credit when we call everyone sinners right off the bat."

    Many people posting at this site have described grossly pathological childhoods.

    They also describe themselves as being "depraved" as young adults.

    They then say that if you were not depraved as a young adult, then you cannot be saved.

    With empathy, I would like to suggest that their family and personal pathology makes them un-empathetic toward other human beings whose experiences have not been so pathological.

    It's like being an ex-smoker, ex-drinker, or an ex-heroin addict.

    I don't know ... is it best to let them be?

    If they gave up their antipathy, might they fall back into pathology? "

    Thats all you got from what has been posted, i only have two words.

    "Pay Attention"...

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:37 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 4

    Flagged as inappropriate. show GGuy wrote: "children have good natural drives too. A desire to see mommy and daddy happy, a desire to help others, etc. Those are not given proper credit when we call everyone sinners right off the bat." Many people posting at this site have described grossly pathological childhoods. They also describe themselves as being "depraved" as young adults. They then say that if you were not depraved as a young adult, then you cannot be saved. With empathy, I would like to suggest that their family and personal pathology makes them un-empathetic toward other human beings whose experiences have not been so pathological. It's like being an ex-smoker, ex-drinker, or an ex-heroin addict. I don't know ... is it best to let them be? If they gave up their antipathy, might they fall back into pathology? hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:32 am Agree: 5   Disagree: 1

    LOL, that was REALLY sad of Homo Man. He takes biblical verses that tell of a close friendship and twists it into a homosexual relationship.

    I assure you, there are no verses that tell of homosexuality being anything but an abomination and a perversion of God's original intent for marriage/sex: one man and one woman.

    Animals, children and homosexuals need not apply.

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:26 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 6

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Donnakay wrote: "I challenge those who believe [homosexuality] is okay to show me the scripture that says so!!!" OK! :) Probably the most frequently quoted of all scriptures at weddings is a same-sex commitment: Ruth 1: 16-17 Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee, for whither thou goest, I will go, and where thou lodgest, I will lodge. Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God. Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried. The LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me. hide

  • Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:04 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show Hey garageguy, I think someone needs to get a life! You don't think much before you speak,do you? Otherwise you wouldn't be making such stupid statements, would you? hide

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
  • Church
  • Gifts
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Bethany House Publishers

It was a balmy California evening. I had gone for a jog before I was to speak at a leadership conference. I still can't recall how I got there, but I found myself sitting on a curb