Gay issue What say you to this.

[Delta4Embassy]

Christianity on the whole is completely anti-sex and misogynistic, while pro-violence and anti-woman. Claiming Jesus said this and that is all well and good, but so long as the majority of what is Christianity is defined by what Paul said (the actual creator of Christianity hence the term Pauline Christianity) trying to make Christianity into a warm fuzzy Carebear religion requires one to ignore the vast majority of it.

This is as much an incorrect assessment of Christianity as is claiming homosexuals are all assigned to hell. Gay-Lesbians have their militant fringe, and there is that militant fringe in Christianity as well.

The Catholic Church will not witness the marriage of the divorced, will not witness the marriage of homosexuals, and dislike, hatred, contempt isn't even in the equation. The focus is solely on the criteria for a sacramental marriage. 1) It takes place between a man and a woman; 2) It is for life until death parts the two.

Note, I used the word that the Church "witnesses" because it is Catholic teaching that the couple themselves perform the sacrament with the priest as a witness the sacramental union of a man and a woman.

Here is the real problem. I cannot control Christianity's militant fringe, I have no real voice. The news media chooses to amplify the voice of the unbalanced and ignore the reasonable. In the same way, I am relatively certain the balance of gay-lesbians cannot control their fringe, because like me, they have no voice. The news media chooses to amplify the voice of the fringe. Behind the media...I wonder if there is a very powerful, very wealthy sociopath who sees the world and its people as his puppets. He pulls our strings; he yanks our chains. He likes the excitement that imbalance brings. Besides, he hates the West.

BODY PLEASURE AND THE ORIGINS OF VIOLENCE By James W. Prescott

"Religious Roots
The origins of the fundamental reciprocal relationship between physical violence and physical pleasure can be traced to philosophical dualism and to the theology of body/soul relationships. In Western philosophical thought man was not a unitary being but was divided into two parts, body and soul. The Greek philosophical conception of the relationship between body and soul was quite different than the Judeo-Christian concept which posited a state of war between the body and soul. Within Judeo-Christian thought the purpose of human life was to save the soul, and the body was seen as an impediment to achieving this objective. Consequently, the body must be punished and deprived. In St. Paul's words: "Put to death the base pursuits of the bodyקfor if you live according to the flesh, you shall die: but if by the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live" (Romans 8:13). St. Paul clearly advocated somatosensory pleasure deprivation and enhancement of painful somatosensory stimulation as essential prerequisites for saving the soul.

"Now concerning the things whereof you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman" (1 Corinthians, 7:1).

Aristotle did not view a state of war between the body and soul, but rather envisioned a complimentary relationship in which the state of the soul or mind was dependent on the state of the body. In fact he stated that "the care of the body ought to precede that of the soul." (Politica)

It is evident that the Judeo-Christian concept of body pleasure is quite the opposite of that outlined by Aristotle, particularly, the relief of body pain and discomfort through somatosensory pleasure. This denial of somatosensory pleasure in Pauline Christian doctrine has led to alternative forms of 'relief' through such painful stimulations as hair-shirts, self-scourgings, self-mutilations, physical violence against others, and in the non-sensory pleasures of drugs.

Experimental animal studies have documented counterparts to these phenomena. For example, animals deprived of somatosensory stimulation will engage in mutilations of their own bodies. Animals deprived of touching early in life develop impaired pain perception and an aversion to being touched by others. They are thus blocked from experiencing the body-pleasure therapy that they need for rehabilitation. In this condition, they have few alternatives but physical violence, where pain-oriented touching and body contact is facilitated by their impaired ability to experience pain. Thus, physical violence and physical pain become therapies of choice for those deprived of physical pleasure.

The question arises as to how Christian philosophy and theology, which borrowed heavily from Aristotle, managed to avoid, if not outright reject, Aristotle's teachings regarding the morality of pleasure. The roots to this question can be found throughout the Old Testament, beginning with the account in Genesis of the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden. The first consequence of Eve's transgression was that nudity became shameful. This even may well be the beginning of man's hostility toward women and the equating of woman with evil, particularly the evils of the body. This is vividly portrayed in Zechariah (5:5-8) in an angel's description of the flying bushel:

"This is a bushel container coming. This is their guilt in all the land." Then a leaden cover was lifted and there was a woman sitting inside the bushel. "This is wickedness, he said, and he thrust her inside the bushel, pushing the leaden cover into the opening."

Violence against sexuality and the use of sexuality for violence, particularly against women, has very deep roots in Biblical tradition, and is spelled out very early. The nineteenth chapter of Genesis (19:1-11), the first book of the Old Testament, holds that the rape of woman is acceptable but the rape of man is "a wicked thing." This chapter about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah describes Lot's hospitality to two male travelers (actually two angels) who were housed with him. "

A bit to read, but the sooner you do, the sooner you'll stop trying to justify a decidely screwed up religion.

 

[Meriweather]

A bit to read, but the sooner you do, the sooner you'll stop trying to justify a decidely screwed up religion.

You do realize that Prescott found a couple of buttons and sewed a vest on them? A common result when people proof-text scriptures for their own agenda/audience rather than considering the original writer's agenda and audience.

Paul and his audience believed they were living in end times, and that their focus should be on life in the next rather than on things of this world.

Try reading Theology and the Body. A long read, but it will give you a better foundation and a different perspective from Prescott's.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

When I pick up the New Testament and start reading it from cover to cover, the impression I get is that the hatred of gay people is about the LAST thing Jesus was all about. He never once mentioned it.

When Jesus said "Believe in Me", I don't think he meant "believe the preacher man thumping his bible instead of Me", "Believe in Paul instead of Me" or "Cherry pick some stuff from Leviticus instead of Me". He meant "Believe in Me" -- period.

If the hatred of homosexuality were as central to Christianity as people here are making it, then why didn't Jesus mention it? This absolute obsession with it among the reactionary Pharisees has nothing to do with Jesus' actual teachings, and only indicates that there are way too many people willing to listen to anybody BUT Jesus.

 

[Gadawg73]

"Pro gay stance"
Says it all.
At least someone has the guts to admit this is and has never been about religious beliefs.
Some folk hate gay folk and demand they be treated like 2nd class citizens.

A lot of people hate them because of how the militant gay mafia treats everyone who doesn't bow down and worship the same sex gods. Or should I say su... never mind.

They don't seem to understand that people don't have to agree with their lifestyle anymore than they have to agree with ours. I blame Hollyweird.

I do not agree with the lifestyle of fat pig Americans but I do not work to deny them any rights I have.

 

[Gadawg73]

Grown men afraid of the gay googeyman is hilarious but also scary as if they are dumb enough to deny gay folks their rights just as soon as they get that their ignorance will have them seeking out another group they are scared of to take their rights away.

 

[Gadawg73]

Doesn't mean I can't call a spade a spade.

You are free to hold whatever interpretation of the Bible you choose, my brother, as do I. If one wishes to hold the view that the Bible encourages discriminating against or oppressing homosexuals, they are free to feel that way (and I am not saying you necessarily do). I simply choose to focus on the passages that suggest I leave judgment to God and treat everyone as a child of God....to the best of my ability at least. When I can walk on water, I too, will pass judgment.

Pointing out sinful behavior, and trying to get someone to repent is not judging them. On the other hand, those who delight in sin, and mock God's word, should be challenged in public and often. At least that's how I see it.

I see your point of view. But let's just suggest, for the sake of argument, that all those Bible passages are problematic. In fact, I would argue that they are. Let's not go into debating each verse because it's been done on these boards 1,000 times and no one ever changes anyone's mind so let's not go that path. But just for the point of the argument, we accept that those verses are problematic for whatever reason. Now we go to a homosexual and encourage him to "pray away the gay" so to speak. He finds a love for God and repents, but spends the rest of his life unhappy and unfulfilled because he denies his own feelings for other men. Then we die and go to God and say "hey did you see how I saved that man from the sin of homosexuality?" and God says "you know all those verses are problematic right?" Well now what we have done is made this guy's life miserable for no reason. This is why I try my best to leave things like this between God and the individual.

I completely understand what you are saying and if you believe the Bible is against homosexuality,then trying to save someone from that sin is an act of love. I get it. It's just not a jump I am willing to make

You know...maybe as Christians we should actually listen to what Jesus told us and worry about the log in our own eyes instead of worrying about the splinters in someone else's? As Christians we hold Jesus so high...I don't know...maybe we should listen to Him once in a while

There is nothing wrong with preaching the Gospel. The Bible says that queers are going to hell. It's up to us to try to set them on the straight and narrow, and you can't do that without letting them know that practicing gays can't go to Heaven.

"up to us to try to set them on the straight and narrow"
hahahaha
You know absolutely nothing about the teachings of Jesus and Christianity.
All you post is old JEWISH rules in Old Testament.
Play God all you want but how well that been working for you Moe?

 

[Marianne]

1) what was once celebrated will be condemned

2)what was once condemned will be celebrated

3)those who don't celebrate these things will be condemned

We will have to call you hissy hortysir.

Heterosexual marriage will not be condemned.

Marriage equality will be celebrated.

Both will be allowed to celebrate their beliefs.

None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs.

Really Jakey? None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs? WTF do you think is happening now? The gays are telling the three major religions in the USA that they have to accept them regardless of what their religion says. Basically they are making them choose between leftist agenda and their God. The religious right isn't asking for anything outrageous. All they are asking for is a right to respectfully bow out of having to serve specifically gay events without fear of lawsuit for discrimination. It's not like they are going to have the right to refuse you a birthday cake or a box of pastries.

I.E. A gay man walks into a Muslim bakery to get a wedding cake. The proprietor is asking to be able to say "we don't do gay weddings due to out religious beliefs however here is the name of a few very good businesses that do cater to gays."

That's it. It's not unreasonable. There will be plenty of establishments that will not only cater to gay events and will no doubt advertise that they proudly serve gays events. Any gay couple will be able to get the wedding of their dreams and still allow those whose religious beliefs are opposed to their lifestyle to also have their rights and freedom of religion. However the rainbow gestapo seems hell bent on doing exactly what they accuse straights of doing to them. Nice job LGBT hippocrates.

Don't take this the wrong way, but aren't you gay? If so, it's a pleasant surprise to see you defending religious rights from the militant gays. It's rather refreshing.

Uh, No I'm not gay. I'm married to a man with three kids. I am the religious right however I really don't have a problem with gays. What I have a problem with is them acting like hippocrates demanding their rights while stomping on other peoples rights.

 

[Gadawg73]

1) what was once celebrated will be condemned

2)what was once condemned will be celebrated

3)those who don't celebrate these things will be condemned

We will have to call you hissy hortysir.

Heterosexual marriage will not be condemned.

Marriage equality will be celebrated.

Both will be allowed to celebrate their beliefs.

None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs.

Really Jakey? None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs? WTF do you think is happening now? The gays are telling the three major religions in the USA that they have to accept them regardless of what their religion says. Basically they are making them choose between leftist agenda and their God. The religious right isn't asking for anything outrageous. All they are asking for is a right to respectfully bow out of having to serve specifically gay events without fear of lawsuit for discrimination. It's not like they are going to have the right to refuse you a birthday cake or a box of pastries.

I.E. A gay man walks into a Muslim bakery to get a wedding cake. The proprietor is asking to be able to say "we don't do gay weddings due to out religious beliefs however here is the name of a few very good businesses that do cater to gays."

That's it. It's not unreasonable. There will be plenty of establishments that will not only cater to gay events and will no doubt advertise that they proudly serve gays events. Any gay couple will be able to get the wedding of their dreams and still allow those whose religious beliefs are opposed to their lifestyle to also have their rights and freedom of religion. However the rainbow gestapo seems hell bent on doing exactly what they accuse straights of doing to them. Nice job LGBT hippocrates.

Don't take this the wrong way, but aren't you gay? If so, it's a pleasant surprise to see you defending religious rights from the militant gays. It's rather refreshing.

I am a strong defender of equal rights for everyone, gay or straight. Almost 61 years old, grew up in deep south, 6'5, 285 lbs, former athlete, own 3 corporations, vote Republican since 1972. Straight and married for almost 40 years, grown kids. Tobacco chewin, beer swillin, flannel shirt wearing, whiskey sippin, fishin, huntin, game skinnin, guitar playin, gun totin red blooded American. American by birth, Southern by the Grace of God. Played 4 quarters many a time years ago against some of the best. Was at church once again last Sunday and did not hear ONE WORD against gay folks. Your claims that folks that are fat, lazy, eat too much, eat pork and shellfish and the other 2 dozen sins in Leviticus are all going to hell are absurd. You single out gay folk ONLY as your example and all us that love hog BBQ sandwiches at Nicks in Athens, Ga. get a free pass. Ridiculous.

 

[Marianne]

The pastor understands Christianity, and you loons do not.

I'd debate that. While he is correct we are to treat everyone with love you can't just cherry pick one verse of scripture because it backs someones agenda and toss the rest of the book. Jesus never hesitated to love people but he also never hesitated to point out wrong doing. Even the woman caught in adultery he said he wouldn't condemn her but he also told her to "go and sin no more". This pastors totally ignoring his responsibility to uphold scripture. To me he's looking for the least controversial way out of a awkward situation.

Very good, Christians cannot cherry pick scripture to condemn their fellow humans.

In case you haven't read the bible, the bible says in the OT to take gays out to the edge of town and stone them. Now Jesus set a new precedence by preaching forgiveness but he never ever condoned sin and it's clear that homosexuality is a sin. How many times did Jesus say "go and sin no more". How about turning over the money changers tables? Just because Jesus preached love doesn't mean life is a free for all and we can do what we want, hence repentance being part of Jesus' teachings.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

1) what was once celebrated will be condemned

2)what was once condemned will be celebrated

3)those who don't celebrate these things will be condemned

We will have to call you hissy hortysir.

Heterosexual marriage will not be condemned.

Marriage equality will be celebrated.

Both will be allowed to celebrate their beliefs.

None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs.

Really Jakey? None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs? WTF do you think is happening now? The gays are telling the three major religions in the USA that they have to accept them regardless of what their religion says. Basically they are making them choose between leftist agenda and their God. The religious right isn't asking for anything outrageous. All they are asking for is a right to respectfully bow out of having to serve specifically gay events without fear of lawsuit for discrimination. It's not like they are going to have the right to refuse you a birthday cake or a box of pastries.

I.E. A gay man walks into a Muslim bakery to get a wedding cake. The proprietor is asking to be able to say "we don't do gay weddings due to out religious beliefs however here is the name of a few very good businesses that do cater to gays."

That's it. It's not unreasonable. There will be plenty of establishments that will not only cater to gay events and will no doubt advertise that they proudly serve gays events. Any gay couple will be able to get the wedding of their dreams and still allow those whose religious beliefs are opposed to their lifestyle to also have their rights and freedom of religion. However the rainbow gestapo seems hell bent on doing exactly what they accuse straights of doing to them. Nice job LGBT hippocrates.

Don't take this the wrong way, but aren't you gay? If so, it's a pleasant surprise to see you defending religious rights from the militant gays. It's rather refreshing.

I am a strong defender of equal rights for everyone, gay or straight. Almost 61 years old, grew up in deep south, 6'5, 285 lbs, former athlete, own 3 corporations, vote Republican since 1972. Straight and married for almost 40 years, grown kids. Tobacco chewin, beer swillin, flannel shirt wearing, whiskey sippin, fishin, huntin, game skinnin, guitar playin, gun totin red blooded American. American by birth, Southern by the Grace of God. Played 4 quarters many a time years ago against some of the best. Was at church once again last Sunday and did not hear ONE WORD against gay folks. Your claims that folks that are fat, lazy, eat too much, eat pork and shellfish and the other 2 dozen sins in Leviticus are all going to hell are absurd. You single out gay folk ONLY as your example and all us that love hog BBQ sandwiches at Nicks in Athens, Ga. get a free pass. Ridiculous.

While I applaud the spirit, in point of fact prohibitions against pork n such are only binding for Jews. Non-Jews are only held to 7 of the 613+ commandments binding Jews. Of which sexual immorality is one.

Seven Laws of Noah - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The seven Noahide laws as traditionally enumerated are:[6]

1. Do not deny God.
2. Do not blaspheme God.
3. Do not murder.
4. Do not engage in incestuous, adulterous or homosexual relationships.
5. Do not steal.
6. Do not eat of a live animal.
7. Establish courts/legal system to ensure law and obedience.

 

[Meriweather]

When I pick up the New Testament and start reading it from cover to cover, the impression I get is that the hatred of gay people is about the LAST thing Jesus was all about. He never once mentioned it.

When Jesus said "Believe in Me", I don't think he meant "believe the preacher man thumping his bible instead of Me", "Believe in Paul instead of Me" or "Cherry pick some stuff from Leviticus instead of Me". He meant "Believe in Me" -- period.

If the hatred of homosexuality were as central to Christianity as people here are making it, then why didn't Jesus mention it? This absolute obsession with it among the reactionary Pharisees has nothing to do with Jesus' actual teachings, and only indicates that there are way too many people willing to listen to anybody BUT Jesus.

Hatred of homosexuality, in fact, is not central to Christianity. As you note, it is barely mentioned, hardly heard. In fact, I heard nothing of homosexuality until I was in high school, and then it was not from the Church. At that point I merely thought, "How very odd," and that was it.

It is my opinion that the news media is playing up the fringe element of Christians who happen to hate homosexuality to broad-brush all off Christianity with it. In the real world: I know my Catholic grandmother had no issue with it; my Catholic parents never mentioned it. My daughters have no issues with it.

Therefore, this leads me to consider another likely truth: The balance of gay and lesbians have no trouble at all with people wanting to observe sacramental rites using given instructions and actions from Christ. Christ gave us instructions about marriage between a man and a woman for life, so there is a sacrament surrounding these teachings. Jesus also anointed twelve male Apostles, so the sacrament of Holy Orders applies to males.

Any changes the Church makes could not be traced back to Christ, so changes are not likely. This does not mean women and homosexuals are not respected or are treated badly by the Church. Quite the contrary. We have roles equally vital. Balance and union between all of us, not a form of apartheid as some try to make it out to be.

 

[Marianne]

1) what was once celebrated will be condemned

2)what was once condemned will be celebrated

3)those who don't celebrate these things will be condemned

We will have to call you hissy hortysir.

Heterosexual marriage will not be condemned.

Marriage equality will be celebrated.

Both will be allowed to celebrate their beliefs.

None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs.

Really Jakey? None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs? WTF do you think is happening now? The gays are telling the three major religions in the USA that they have to accept them regardless of what their religion says. Basically they are making them choose between leftist agenda and their God. The religious right isn't asking for anything outrageous. All they are asking for is a right to respectfully bow out of having to serve specifically gay events without fear of lawsuit for discrimination. It's not like they are going to have the right to refuse you a birthday cake or a box of pastries.

I.E. A gay man walks into a Muslim bakery to get a wedding cake. The proprietor is asking to be able to say "we don't do gay weddings due to out religious beliefs however here is the name of a few very good businesses that do cater to gays."

That's it. It's not unreasonable. There will be plenty of establishments that will not only cater to gay events and will no doubt advertise that they proudly serve gays events. Any gay couple will be able to get the wedding of their dreams and still allow those whose religious beliefs are opposed to their lifestyle to also have their rights and freedom of religion. However the rainbow gestapo seems hell bent on doing exactly what they accuse straights of doing to them. Nice job LGBT hippocrates.

Don't take this the wrong way, but aren't you gay? If so, it's a pleasant surprise to see you defending religious rights from the militant gays. It's rather refreshing.

I am a strong defender of equal rights for everyone, gay or straight. Almost 61 years old, grew up in deep south, 6'5, 285 lbs, former athlete, own 3 corporations, vote Republican since 1972. Straight and married for almost 40 years, grown kids. Tobacco chewin, beer swillin, flannel shirt wearing, whiskey sippin, fishin, huntin, game skinnin, guitar playin, gun totin red blooded American. American by birth, Southern by the Grace of God. Played 4 quarters many a time years ago against some of the best. Was at church once again last Sunday and did not hear ONE WORD against gay folks. Your claims that folks that are fat, lazy, eat too much, eat pork and shellfish and the other 2 dozen sins in Leviticus are all going to hell are absurd. You single out gay folk ONLY as your example and all us that love hog BBQ sandwiches at Nicks in Athens, Ga. get a free pass. Ridiculous.

The NT allows Christians to eat pork. Nobody said gays were going to hell for being gay. I'm not singling out gays I'm just saying that people should be given conscientious objector status when it comes to certain things that the government should spell out in a law. IE specifically gay events like weddings and LGBT events. Honestly I also think this should cover hate speech and derogatory comments. IE. A T shirt shop keeper should not be made to make a shirt that says " God Hates fags". He should be able to decline without fear of lawsuit. No black bakery should have to cater a klan rally and no Jewish Deli should have to cater a Neo Nazi convention. I would cover a much wider range of people other than the religious right. By being specific as to what can be declined the law would prevent abuse like someone not waiting on a gay in a restaurant or department store. We aren't talking about everyday service, we are talking about specific events.

Luke 10:
Jesus Sends Out the Seventy-Two
…7"Stay in that house, eating and drinking what they give you; for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not keep moving from house to house. 8"Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you; 9and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, 'The kingdom of God has come near to you.'…


1 Corinthians 10:27
If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience.

 

[Gadawg73]

Good post but Catholic Church has so many loopholes

Christianity on the whole is completely anti-sex and misogynistic, while pro-violence and anti-woman. Claiming Jesus said this and that is all well and good, but so long as the majority of what is Christianity is defined by what Paul said (the actual creator of Christianity hence the term Pauline Christianity) trying to make Christianity into a warm fuzzy Carebear religion requires one to ignore the vast majority of it.

This is as much an incorrect assessment of Christianity as is claiming homosexuals are all assigned to hell. Gay-Lesbians have their militant fringe, and there is that militant fringe in Christianity as well.

The Catholic Church will not witness the marriage of the divorced, will not witness the marriage of homosexuals, and dislike, hatred, contempt isn't even in the equation. The focus is solely on the criteria for a sacramental marriage. 1) It takes place between a man and a woman; 2) It is for life until death parts the two.

Note, I used the word that the Church "witnesses" because it is Catholic teaching that the couple themselves perform the sacrament with the priest as a witness the sacramental union of a man and a woman.

Here is the real problem. I cannot control Christianity's militant fringe, I have no real voice. The news media chooses to amplify the voice of the unbalanced and ignore the reasonable. In the same way, I am relatively certain the balance of gay-lesbians cannot control their fringe, because like me, they have no voice. The news media chooses to amplify the voice of the fringe. Behind the media...I wonder if there is a very powerful, very wealthy sociopath who sees the world and its people as his puppets. He pulls our strings; he yanks our chains. He likes the excitement that imbalance brings. Besides, he hates the West.

to

1) what was once celebrated will be condemned

2)what was once condemned will be celebrated

3)those who don't celebrate these things will be condemned

We will have to call you hissy hortysir.

Heterosexual marriage will not be condemned.

Marriage equality will be celebrated.

Both will be allowed to celebrate their beliefs.

None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs.

Really Jakey? None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs? WTF do you think is happening now? The gays are telling the three major religions in the USA that they have to accept them regardless of what their religion says. Basically they are making them choose between leftist agenda and their God. The religious right isn't asking for anything outrageous. All they are asking for is a right to respectfully bow out of having to serve specifically gay events without fear of lawsuit for discrimination. It's not like they are going to have the right to refuse you a birthday cake or a box of pastries.

I.E. A gay man walks into a Muslim bakery to get a wedding cake. The proprietor is asking to be able to say "we don't do gay weddings due to out religious beliefs however here is the name of a few very good businesses that do cater to gays."

That's it. It's not unreasonable. There will be plenty of establishments that will not only cater to gay events and will no doubt advertise that they proudly serve gays events. Any gay couple will be able to get the wedding of their dreams and still allow those whose religious beliefs are opposed to their lifestyle to also have their rights and freedom of religion. However the rainbow gestapo seems hell bent on doing exactly what they accuse straights of doing to them. Nice job LGBT hippocrates.

Don't take this the wrong way, but aren't you gay? If so, it's a pleasant surprise to see you defending religious rights from the militant gays. It's rather refreshing.

I am a strong defender of equal rights for everyone, gay or straight. Almost 61 years old, grew up in deep south, 6'5, 285 lbs, former athlete, own 3 corporations, vote Republican since 1972. Straight and married for almost 40 years, grown kids. Tobacco chewin, beer swillin, flannel shirt wearing, whiskey sippin, fishin, huntin, game skinnin, guitar playin, gun totin red blooded American. American by birth, Southern by the Grace of God. Played 4 quarters many a time years ago against some of the best. Was at church once again last Sunday and did not hear ONE WORD against gay folks. Your claims that folks that are fat, lazy, eat too much, eat pork and shellfish and the other 2 dozen sins in Leviticus are all going to hell are absurd. You single out gay folk ONLY as your example and all us that love hog BBQ sandwiches at Nicks in Athens, Ga. get a free pass. Ridiculous.

While I applaud the spirit, in point of fact prohibitions against pork n such are only binding for Jews. Non-Jews are only held to 7 of the 613+ commandments binding Jews. Of which sexual immorality is one.

Seven Laws of Noah - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The seven Noahide laws as traditionally enumerated are:[6]

1. Do not deny God.
2. Do not blaspheme God.
3. Do not murder.
4. Do not engage in incestuous, adulterous or homosexual relationships.
5. Do not steal.
6. Do not eat of a live animal.
7. Establish courts/legal system to ensure law and obedience.

All old JEWISH laws.

 

[Gadawg73]

1) what was once celebrated will be condemned

2)what was once condemned will be celebrated

3)those who don't celebrate these things will be condemned

We will have to call you hissy hortysir.

Heterosexual marriage will not be condemned.

Marriage equality will be celebrated.

Both will be allowed to celebrate their beliefs.

None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs.

Really Jakey? None will be allowed to persecute the other in commerce because of their religious beliefs? WTF do you think is happening now? The gays are telling the three major religions in the USA that they have to accept them regardless of what their religion says. Basically they are making them choose between leftist agenda and their God. The religious right isn't asking for anything outrageous. All they are asking for is a right to respectfully bow out of having to serve specifically gay events without fear of lawsuit for discrimination. It's not like they are going to have the right to refuse you a birthday cake or a box of pastries.

I.E. A gay man walks into a Muslim bakery to get a wedding cake. The proprietor is asking to be able to say "we don't do gay weddings due to out religious beliefs however here is the name of a few very good businesses that do cater to gays."

That's it. It's not unreasonable. There will be plenty of establishments that will not only cater to gay events and will no doubt advertise that they proudly serve gays events. Any gay couple will be able to get the wedding of their dreams and still allow those whose religious beliefs are opposed to their lifestyle to also have their rights and freedom of religion. However the rainbow gestapo seems hell bent on doing exactly what they accuse straights of doing to them. Nice job LGBT hippocrates.

Don't take this the wrong way, but aren't you gay? If so, it's a pleasant surprise to see you defending religious rights from the militant gays. It's rather refreshing.

I am a strong defender of equal rights for everyone, gay or straight. Almost 61 years old, grew up in deep south, 6'5, 285 lbs, former athlete, own 3 corporations, vote Republican since 1972. Straight and married for almost 40 years, grown kids. Tobacco chewin, beer swillin, flannel shirt wearing, whiskey sippin, fishin, huntin, game skinnin, guitar playin, gun totin red blooded American. American by birth, Southern by the Grace of God. Played 4 quarters many a time years ago against some of the best. Was at church once again last Sunday and did not hear ONE WORD against gay folks. Your claims that folks that are fat, lazy, eat too much, eat pork and shellfish and the other 2 dozen sins in Leviticus are all going to hell are absurd. You single out gay folk ONLY as your example and all us that love hog BBQ sandwiches at Nicks in Athens, Ga. get a free pass. Ridiculous.

The NT allows Christians to eat pork. Nobody said gays were going to hell for being gay. I'm not singling out gays I'm just saying that people should be given conscientious objector status when it comes to certain things that the government should spell out in a law. IE specifically gay events like weddings and LGBT events. Honestly I also think this should cover hate speech and derogatory comments. IE. A T shirt shop keeper should not be made to make a shirt that says " God Hates fags". He should be able to decline without fear of lawsuit. No black bakery should have to cater a klan rally and no Jewish Deli should have to cater a Neo Nazi convention. I would cover a much wider range of people other than the religious right. By being specific as to what can be declined the law would prevent abuse like someone not waiting on a gay in a restaurant or department store. We aren't talking about everyday service, we are talking about specific events.

Luke 10:
Jesus Sends Out the Seventy-Two
…7"Stay in that house, eating and drinking what they give you; for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not keep moving from house to house. 8"Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you; 9and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, 'The kingdom of God has come near to you.'…


1 Corinthians 10:27
If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience.

No shortage of folks here that state gay folks going to hell for being gay.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Uh, No I'm not gay. I'm married to a man with three kids. I am the religious right however I really don't have a problem with gays. What I have a problem with is them acting like hippocrates demanding their rights while stomping on other peoples rights.

Let all of us know when that happens.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The pastor understands Christianity, and you loons do not.

I'd debate that. While he is correct we are to treat everyone with love you can't just cherry pick one verse of scripture because it backs someones agenda and toss the rest of the book. Jesus never hesitated to love people but he also never hesitated to point out wrong doing. Even the woman caught in adultery he said he wouldn't condemn her but he also told her to "go and sin no more". This pastors totally ignoring his responsibility to uphold scripture. To me he's looking for the least controversial way out of a awkward situation.

Very good, Christians cannot cherry pick scripture to condemn their fellow humans.

In case you haven't read the bible, the bible says in the OT to take gays out to the edge of town and stone them. Now Jesus set a new precedence by preaching forgiveness but he never ever condoned sin and it's clear that homosexuality is a sin. How many times did Jesus say "go and sin no more". How about turning over the money changers tables? Just because Jesus preached love doesn't mean life is a free for all and we can do what we want, hence repentance being part of Jesus' teachings.

"it's clear that homosexuality is a sin" traditionally to you. "How many times did Jesus say" to judge not others?

 

[Meriweather]

Good post but Catholic Church has so many loopholes

I don't see it as loopholes so much as knowing where the parameters begin and end. For example, Christ's teachings began with marriage between a man and a woman that was intended to last a lifetime. The end. We cannot take this as Christ advocating government withholding benefits from homosexuals which they allow to heterosexuals.

Further, when government gave the nod to divorce, countless Christians turned their backs on Christ's teachings, followed the government instead, and supported/got divorces. Countless Christians, but countless more continue to follow Christ's teachings on this.

 

[Marianne]

The pastor understands Christianity, and you loons do not.

I'd debate that. While he is correct we are to treat everyone with love you can't just cherry pick one verse of scripture because it backs someones agenda and toss the rest of the book. Jesus never hesitated to love people but he also never hesitated to point out wrong doing. Even the woman caught in adultery he said he wouldn't condemn her but he also told her to "go and sin no more". This pastors totally ignoring his responsibility to uphold scripture. To me he's looking for the least controversial way out of a awkward situation.

Very good, Christians cannot cherry pick scripture to condemn their fellow humans.

In case you haven't read the bible, the bible says in the OT to take gays out to the edge of town and stone them. Now Jesus set a new precedence by preaching forgiveness but he never ever condoned sin and it's clear that homosexuality is a sin. How many times did Jesus say "go and sin no more". How about turning over the money changers tables? Just because Jesus preached love doesn't mean life is a free for all and we can do what we want, hence repentance being part of Jesus' teachings.

"it's clear that homosexuality is a sin" traditionally to you. "How many times did Jesus say" to judge not others?

Traditionally to me? The bible flat out says it's a sin it's not a tradition. It's not like I'm putting up a Christmas tree.

I'm not judging them? They are gay, they admit they are gay It's by their own admission I call them gay. All I'm saying is for my own soul salvation I don't want to participate in something the bible calls sin. That's my right. If they feel otherwise that's their right, they have to stand before God alone and God will judge whether they did right or wrong. What makes their rights more important than mine?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The pastor understands Christianity, and you loons do not.

I'd debate that. While he is correct we are to treat everyone with love you can't just cherry pick one verse of scripture because it backs someones agenda and toss the rest of the book. Jesus never hesitated to love people but he also never hesitated to point out wrong doing. Even the woman caught in adultery he said he wouldn't condemn her but he also told her to "go and sin no more". This pastors totally ignoring his responsibility to uphold scripture. To me he's looking for the least controversial way out of a awkward situation.

Very good, Christians cannot cherry pick scripture to condemn their fellow humans.

In case you haven't read the bible, the bible says in the OT to take gays out to the edge of town and stone them. Now Jesus set a new precedence by preaching forgiveness but he never ever condoned sin and it's clear that homosexuality is a sin. How many times did Jesus say "go and sin no more". How about turning over the money changers tables? Just because Jesus preached love doesn't mean life is a free for all and we can do what we want, hence repentance being part of Jesus' teachings.

"it's clear that homosexuality is a sin" traditionally to you. "How many times did Jesus say" to judge not others?

Traditionally to me? The bible flat out says it's a sin it's not a tradition. It's not like I'm putting up a Christmas tree.

I'm not judging them? They are gay, they admit they are gay It's by their own admission I call them gay. All I'm saying is for my own soul salvation I don't want to participate in something the bible calls sin. That's my right. If they feel otherwise that's their right, they have to stand before God alone and God will judge whether they did right or wrong. What makes their rights more important than mine?

The Bible may be inspirational but it is not literal. Those who insist on it are heretically and immorally stubborn, having on the outside a shine of respectability while corrupt on the inside. Worry about your soul, please.

Yes, we will let God, not you, judge this, nu?

Everyone's rights are the same, little buddy. And the Constitution is the law of the land, not the Bible. And the 14th Amendment, not Leviticus, is the authority on this in the US.

 

[Marianne]

I'd debate that. While he is correct we are to treat everyone with love you can't just cherry pick one verse of scripture because it backs someones agenda and toss the rest of the book. Jesus never hesitated to love people but he also never hesitated to point out wrong doing. Even the woman caught in adultery he said he wouldn't condemn her but he also told her to "go and sin no more". This pastors totally ignoring his responsibility to uphold scripture. To me he's looking for the least controversial way out of a awkward situation.

Very good, Christians cannot cherry pick scripture to condemn their fellow humans.

In case you haven't read the bible, the bible says in the OT to take gays out to the edge of town and stone them. Now Jesus set a new precedence by preaching forgiveness but he never ever condoned sin and it's clear that homosexuality is a sin. How many times did Jesus say "go and sin no more". How about turning over the money changers tables? Just because Jesus preached love doesn't mean life is a free for all and we can do what we want, hence repentance being part of Jesus' teachings.

"it's clear that homosexuality is a sin" traditionally to you. "How many times did Jesus say" to judge not others?

Traditionally to me? The bible flat out says it's a sin it's not a tradition. It's not like I'm putting up a Christmas tree.

I'm not judging them? They are gay, they admit they are gay It's by their own admission I call them gay. All I'm saying is for my own soul salvation I don't want to participate in something the bible calls sin. That's my right. If they feel otherwise that's their right, they have to stand before God alone and God will judge whether they did right or wrong. What makes their rights more important than mine?

The Bible may be inspirational but it is not literal. Those who insist on it are heretically and immorally stubborn, having on the outside a shine of respectability while corrupt on the inside. Worry about your soul, please.

Yes, we will let God, not you, judge this, nu?

Everyone's rights are the same, little buddy. And the Constitution is the law of the land, not the Bible. And the 14th Amendment, not Leviticus, is the authority on this in the US.

I agree it's God inspired but not everybody believes that it is just God inspired. Some believe it's the infallible word of God and there for to be taken literally. Who are you to decide whether they are right or wrong?

Really heretical? How the hell is following the bible to the letter heretical? If anything we are the heretical ones for not believing it's the perfect word of God.

heretical
[ həˈretikəl ]

ADJECTIVE

1. 
   believing in or practicing religious heresy:
   "heretical beliefs"

Wow dude! Getting a little judgmental there aren't you? Who the hell are you to say that these people are immorally stubborn and basically calling them white washed sepulcher's, you don't know them. Worry about yourself please.


Yes grasshopper the Constitution is the governing law of the land which is what is being argued here.

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment 14

jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Now under the Constitution I have the right to exercise my religious beliefs. I also shall not be deprived of life,liberty and property without due process and I deserve equal protection under the law.

1. Forcing me to go against my religious beliefs by serving gays is a violation of my free exercise of my religion because my religion says homosexuality is wrong. Support thereof specifically related to a gay event would also be considered wrong under my religious beliefs.

2. Forcing me to go against my religion is keeping me from life and liberty and I have not had due process which is a violation of the Constution. However,my unwillingness to serve gays will not prevent them any violation of life and liberty because there are plenty of people who will serve gay events. They can get anything they want from someone else, unhindered. The gay community has also kept some people from life liberty and property by running off all their business because they practiced their religious beliefs.

3. I am not getting equal protection of the law because the gay community would be forcing me to give up my equal protection to cater to the gays. Again they can get what they want from someone else so basically what the gay community is saying is they get protection and I get none.

Again why are their rights more important then mine?