A Political and Moral dilemma solved: Homosexuality

[NYcarbineer]

Neither does yours.

I never implied it did... I merely pointed out God's position, as God stated it in the scriptures. THAT being God's word is God, telling you what reality IS.

The scriptures are hearsay. We have no idea who really wrote the scriptures, nor do we even know that the God of the Bible is the one and only true God.

So you're saying you have no idea who wrote such, but you're positive God did not inspire such?

Fascinatin'... thanks for sharing. If that had ANY relevance to the discussion, that would be ... relevant.

How do you know the Muslims aren't right?

The list is endless... but I'll go with 1400 years of irrational brutality... which is in totally alignment with evil.
OKA: UN-God. If it helps, that is also how I KNOW that Islam is the Religious arm of the Ideological Left.

Good and evil are Human constructs. By assuming that God is of a certain nature is simply Humans assigning qualities to God.

If a true God exists, he cannot be fabricated by humans. Only a mythical God can be fabricated by humans.

Maybe God isn't a 'nice guy'. You have no authority to declare otherwise.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And I submit that you do not know God, and the truth is not in you.

Judge not, lest you be judged.

A classic no true Scotsman argument.

I'm not judging anyone. Just making an observation.

Your observation is flawed.

Interesting, those who perpetuate adherence to the law, and profess to be Christians also advocate for selective application of the law. Is that Christlike?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The list is endless... but I'll go with 1400 years of irrational brutality... which is in totally alignment with evil.
OKA: UN-God. If it helps, that is also how I KNOW that Islam is the Religious arm of the Ideological Left.

This is getting ridiculous. I said nothing of Islam, or of 1400 years of irrational brutality or of the Ideological Left. I am speaking strictly based on the law of this land, the United States of America. Spare me your history lessons.

It's my argument with Keys. Don't let it distract you. He's manufacturing God in his own image, which of course is preposterous.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I submit the 230 years of precedent

Of which the 14th Amendment consists. It was ratified on July 9, 1868. I cite constitutional precedent, which trumps your contention of traditional precedent.

And I submit that you do not know God, and the truth is not in you.

The discussion is not about a God whom you do not know and Whose Truth you do not comprehend.

 

[Mr.Right]

And I submit that you do not know God, and the truth is not in you.

Judge not, lest you be judged.

A classic no true Scotsman argument.

I'm not judging anyone. Just making an observation.

Your observation is flawed.

My observation is Scriptural. You support gay marriage, therefore, you cannot be a Christian.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"OKA: UN-God. If it helps, that is also how I KNOW that Islam is the Religious arm of the Ideological Left." Factually unsound and morally insane.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And I submit that you do not know God, and the truth is not in you.

Judge not, lest you be judged.

A classic no true Scotsman argument.

I'm not judging anyone. Just making an observation.

Yes, you are as your "submission" is a judgement. Be very careful.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And I submit that you do not know God, and the truth is not in you.

Judge not, lest you be judged.

A classic no true Scotsman argument.

I'm not judging anyone. Just making an observation.

Your observation is flawed.

My observation is Scriptural. You support gay marriage, therefore, you cannot be a Christian.

If you are a literalist, then your observation is flawed.

 

[Mr.Right]

And I submit that you do not know God, and the truth is not in you.

Judge not, lest you be judged.

A classic no true Scotsman argument.

I'm not judging anyone. Just making an observation.

Your observation is flawed.

My observation is Scriptural. You support gay marriage, therefore, you cannot be a Christian.

If you are a literalist, then your judgement is flawed.

Excuse me? What do you mean by literalist? Are you saying that I should not take Gods word as the literal truth?

 

[TemplarKormac]

My observation is Scriptural. You support gay marriage, therefore, you cannot be a Christian.

So is mine, and based on legal precedent also.

What people on this thread seem not to understand is that from a religious standpoint, I cannot, nor will I ever condone gay marriage or homosexuality, I still think it is unnatural. But from a legal standpoint, I cannot expect the unequal application of our laws. It's that simple. I support equal protection under the law, not gay marriage itself.

And you are in no place to judge my relationship with God. Don't even presume to know what its like.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

In a democratic society, sexual behavior cannot be legally treated as unacceptable...

Guess again. I submit the 230 years of precedent which says otherwise in JUST THE US ALONE... and the 99.99999~% of human history, where sexual deviancy has been 'unacceptable'.

What you're desperately wanting to establish is that deviancy is only considered such because of antiquated societal constructs... and that if a majority of 'das peoples' 'BELIEVE' that deviancy is normal... then deviancy MAGICALLY becomes normal.

Sadly... Majority opinion does not determine normality. And there's no such thing as MAGIC... What you're wishful of, is what is known as ILLUSION... which where such becomes BELIEVED DESPITE THE EVIDENCE BORN IN REALITY: Such turns to DELUSION.

And again, quite sadly, is what you and your cult are saddled with.

There were thousands of year of 'precedent' to support the acceptability of slavery.

Depends on where you're standing. If you're standing in North Africa, it still does... .

Of course that's where Islam is running the show... and Islam, like the Ideological Left, is evil. So like those who claim that behavior which deviates 180 degrees from the Human Physiological norm... is NORMAL... they claim that evil shit is NOT evil.

Slavery is based upon deceit, which is held up as truth.

The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is based in deceit, which is held up as truth.

See how that works?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Judge not, lest you be judged.

A classic no true Scotsman argument.

I'm not judging anyone. Just making an observation.

Your observation is flawed.

My observation is Scriptural. You support gay marriage, therefore, you cannot be a Christian.

If you are a literalist, then your judgement is flawed.

Excuse me? What do you mean by literalist? Are you saying that I should not take Gods word as the literal truth?

You may not as a scriptural literalist apply it as law in a secular nation. If you wish to do that, move to Iran.

 

[JakeStarkey]

In a democratic society, sexual behavior cannot be legally treated as unacceptable...

Guess again. I submit the 230 years of precedent which says otherwise in JUST THE US ALONE... and the 99.99999~% of human history, where sexual deviancy has been 'unacceptable'.

What you're desperately wanting to establish is that deviancy is only considered such because of antiquated societal constructs... and that if a majority of 'das peoples' 'BELIEVE' that deviancy is normal... then deviancy MAGICALLY becomes normal.

Sadly... Majority opinion does not determine normality. And there's no such thing as MAGIC... What you're wishful of, is what is known as ILLUSION... which where such becomes BELIEVED DESPITE THE EVIDENCE BORN IN REALITY: Such turns to DELUSION.

And again, quite sadly, is what you and your cult are saddled with.

There were thousands of year of 'precedent' to support the acceptability of slavery.

Depends on where you're standing. If you're standing in North Africa, it still does... .

Of course that's where Islam is running the show... and Islam, like the Ideological Left, is evil. So like those who claim that behavior which deviates 180 degrees from the Human Physiological norm... is NORMAL... they claim that evil shit is NOT evil.

Slavery is based upon deceit, which is held up as truth.

The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is based in deceit, which is held up as truth.

See how that works?

In your irreligious mind?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Argh!

The conservatives on this thread are just as bad as their liberal counterparts at arguing from a solid position!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Gay Americans aren't being 'denied rights,' they in fact possess the same rights as all persons in the United States...

True... Welcome back.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Mr.Right]

My observation is Scriptural. You support gay marriage, therefore, you cannot be a Christian.

So is mine, and based on legal precedent also.

What people on this thread seem not to understand is that from a religious standpoint, I cannot, nor will I ever condone gay marriage or homosexuality, I still think it is unnatural. But from a legal standpoint, I cannot expect the unequal application of our laws. Its that simple. I support equal protection under the law, not gay marriage itself.

And you are in no place to judge my relationship with God. Don't even presume to know what its like.

And yet you are defending mans law over Gods law. What if there was a law forbidding Christians to worship? Should we support it, since it's the law? According to your argument, we should.

 

[MACAULAY]

We should obey God rather than man.

But do we? All of us are in some way guilty of not obeying God and succumbing to the whims and edicts of man. You shouldn't throw stones in a glass house.

So because we all fall short of the glory of God, we should therefore not recognize sin?

Interesting...

So if I get an extra quarter in my change and fail to alert the clerk, then I've no right to expect that someone should not break into my house?

LOL! TK... Have you suffered a stroke?

Have you a mirror? Ya might check that smile buddy. Odds are its gone crooked on ya. I'd suggest an aspirin, STAT!

What if a human being simply rejects the theory that God exists? What if that same human being via his own ability to reason decides upon a perfectly acceptable set of moral values, based on reason, without any interference from any thoughts of a supernatural being,

and as a result supports the advancement of a civilized society, with law and order, with morality little different than that of the religion based societies. With liberty and justice for all...

How do you condemn him?

_________________________________________

I certainly don't condemn him. Lots and lots of people who reject the tales in the Bible still arrive at the conclusion that "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is the proper way to live....philosophers too....and reaching the conclusion through reasoning seems to have a richer quality to it than just being scared to go to Hell.

Mr. Jefferson comes to mind.

But, to each his own. Through fits and starts Christians have done a pretty good job at getting us along with our journey to...whatever...I think its Perfection...that has to be the goal, even if it is impossible to reach.

I don't think the Christians would have me, but I respect them...I wish the damn Muslims were as far along in social evolution as they are, but it looks like they are 500 to 1000 years behind.

Good thread. Rare thing.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is based in deceit, which is held up as truth.

Nobody is asking to normalize anything. What is being requested is that the law treat people fairly. Is that too much to ask?

See how that works?

Do you?

 

[TemplarKormac]

And yet you are defending mans law over Gods law.

And just like the Pharisees, you insist on unfair application of the law, or complete ignorance of it. You hypocrite. Do "real" Christians insist on uneven application of the law and selective justice?

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Hold on there.

God is impartial in his judgement, why aren't you?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

What if a human being simply rejects the theory that God exists?

Then that human being is an imbecile. In that as a being which exists as a function of the creation, they demand that their exist no Creator... thus demanding that that which they cannot deny exists, does not exist.

(Don't try to take that all at once... that's a lot to consider for a person of your limited intellectual means.)