Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Paperman299]

I post more scripture because you claimed we as Christians are hypocrites when this simply isn't the case, that is why I posted it. If you don't like me posting the scripture, than don't make the argument where you call us hypocrites for not following the kosher laws of the Old Testament.

Leviticus contains more than just dietary restrictions. Bible Buffeters that use Leviticus to bash gays, but ignore everything else contained in it ARE hypocrites.

I need to provide you a peer reviewed study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality? So if I provided you the peer reviewed study you would change your view on gay marriage?

Just an "FYI", nothing from NARTH or FRC is peer reviewed.

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Better throw away your cell phone, then, since the system which discovered the basic principles it's founded on is apparently worthless.

 

[MaryL]

NOPE.

 

[Steinlight]

I post more scripture because you claimed we as Christians are hypocrites when this simply isn't the case, that is why I posted it. If you don't like me posting the scripture, than don't make the argument where you call us hypocrites for not following the kosher laws of the Old Testament.

Leviticus contains more than just dietary restrictions. Bible Buffeters that use Leviticus to bash gays, but ignore everything else contained in it ARE hypocrites.

I need to provide you a peer reviewed study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality? So if I provided you the peer reviewed study you would change your view on gay marriage?

Just an "FYI", nothing from NARTH or FRC is peer reviewed.

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Do you really need a peer reviewed study to figure out that if everyone was homosexual the human race would cease to exist in a generation? But yea, heterosexuality and homosexuality are the same, they are equal, homosexuality isn't destructive at all.

If everyone was male, then the human race would cease to exist in a generation but does that mean males are inherently destructive?

Unless you really believe that you are in danger of suddenly becoming gay if we treat homosexuals equally, there is no reason for you to believe that everyone will become homosexual- just a strawman you raise to support your bigotry.

Treating homosexual couples exactly equally with my wife and I, doesn't harm you- doesn't harm anyone- it is just the right thing to do.

If there was a surplus of men in society that had no women, it would absolutely be socially destructive, just as homosexuality would be if it were practiced on a mass scale, as opposed to heterosexuality. You asked for a difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality and how they are inherently unequal, so I gave it. And you can't dispute that. That's without going into all the other anti-social and destructive elements of the homosexual lifestyle.

I never said that gay marriage would result in making everyone a homosexual. So you are just creating an strawman.

I don't believe in equality, and don't believe it the right thing to do. I don't accept the premise of equality as the unquestioned dogma. I also reject the premise of so called "harm based morality", I think it narrow minded and autistic. One of my primary objections with homosexual marriage is that the normalization and promotion of homosexual relations through gay marriage feeds the persisting condition of Anomie that plagues Western society. That is that moral relativism and secularism begets moral nihilism and atomization, which has social costs, that the narrow sighted "harm based morality" doesn't capture.

 

[Steinlight]

I post more scripture because you claimed we as Christians are hypocrites when this simply isn't the case, that is why I posted it. If you don't like me posting the scripture, than don't make the argument where you call us hypocrites for not following the kosher laws of the Old Testament.

Leviticus contains more than just dietary restrictions. Bible Buffeters that use Leviticus to bash gays, but ignore everything else contained in it ARE hypocrites.

I need to provide you a peer reviewed study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality? So if I provided you the peer reviewed study you would change your view on gay marriage?

Just an "FYI", nothing from NARTH or FRC is peer reviewed.

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Do you really need a peer reviewed study to figure out that if everyone was homosexual the human race would cease to exist in a generation? But yea, heterosexuality and homosexuality are the same, they are equal, homosexuality isn't destructive at all.

There's many genes that are beneficial which need not be immediately expressed. Carrying the genetics for homosexuality and expressing it selectively can have benefits for a population as a whole, ie caretaking.

Now where's this current, reputable, peer-reviewed scientific evidence of homosexuality's destructive effects you've been teasing us with? Come on now!

So if I provided a peer reviewed study on how homosexuality is more destructive than heterosexuality, you would reverse your view on gay marriage? So your view is based on empiricism, not the premise of egalitarianism?

That's a rather odd position. I don't think I have ever heard of anyone basing their position on gay marriage on a peer reviewed study. That is very odd.

 

[Steinlight]

I post more scripture because you claimed we as Christians are hypocrites when this simply isn't the case, that is why I posted it. If you don't like me posting the scripture, than don't make the argument where you call us hypocrites for not following the kosher laws of the Old Testament.

Leviticus contains more than just dietary restrictions. Bible Buffeters that use Leviticus to bash gays, but ignore everything else contained in it ARE hypocrites.

I need to provide you a peer reviewed study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality? So if I provided you the peer reviewed study you would change your view on gay marriage?

Just an "FYI", nothing from NARTH or FRC is peer reviewed.

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Do you really need a peer reviewed study to figure out that if everyone was homosexual the human race would cease to exist in a generation? But yea, heterosexuality and homosexuality are the same, they are equal, homosexuality isn't destructive at all.

There's many genes that are beneficial which need not be immediately expressed. Carrying the genetics for homosexuality and expressing it selectively can have benefits for a population as a whole, ie caretaking.

Now where's this current, reputable, peer-reviewed scientific evidence of homosexuality's destructive effects you've been teasing us with? Come on now!

Homosexuals, a care taking gene? Where is our peer reviewed study that there is a relation between homosexuals and a care taking gene?

 

[Seawytch]

I'll take my chances with the Jesus I read about...not the guy the haters write fanfic about.

Your problem is you only read part about Jesus...that's what cherry picking gets you and homosexuals are notorious for doing it in regards to the Bible

I love that you see it as a problem to stick with what Jesus himself said, not his crazy fans.

Mathew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Oh goody

I love Bible quotes!

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

16Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’c and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

You keep avoiding the ones that call what you do an abomination, why is that?

You keep avoiding the ones that says a woman must remain silent. (NT) Why is that?

 

[Steinlight]

Your problem is you only read part about Jesus...that's what cherry picking gets you and homosexuals are notorious for doing it in regards to the Bible

I love that you see it as a problem to stick with what Jesus himself said, not his crazy fans.

Mathew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Oh goody

I love Bible quotes!

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

16Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’c and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

You keep avoiding the ones that call what you do an abomination, why is that?

You keep avoiding the ones that says a woman must remain silent. (NT) Why is that?

Because they should remain silent in churches. scripture is very clear women cannot be priests.

 

[Seawytch]

Leviticus contains more than just dietary restrictions. Bible Buffeters that use Leviticus to bash gays, but ignore everything else contained in it ARE hypocrites.

Just an "FYI", nothing from NARTH or FRC is peer reviewed.

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Do you really need a peer reviewed study to figure out that if everyone was homosexual the human race would cease to exist in a generation? But yea, heterosexuality and homosexuality are the same, they are equal, homosexuality isn't destructive at all.

There's many genes that are beneficial which need not be immediately expressed. Carrying the genetics for homosexuality and expressing it selectively can have benefits for a population as a whole, ie caretaking.

Now where's this current, reputable, peer-reviewed scientific evidence of homosexuality's destructive effects you've been teasing us with? Come on now!

Homosexuals, a care taking gene? Where is our peer reviewed study that there is a relation between homosexuals and a care taking gene?

The evolutionary puzzle of homosexuality - BBC News

 

[Steinlight]

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Do you really need a peer reviewed study to figure out that if everyone was homosexual the human race would cease to exist in a generation? But yea, heterosexuality and homosexuality are the same, they are equal, homosexuality isn't destructive at all.

There's many genes that are beneficial which need not be immediately expressed. Carrying the genetics for homosexuality and expressing it selectively can have benefits for a population as a whole, ie caretaking.

Now where's this current, reputable, peer-reviewed scientific evidence of homosexuality's destructive effects you've been teasing us with? Come on now!

Homosexuals, a care taking gene? Where is our peer reviewed study that there is a relation between homosexuals and a care taking gene?

The evolutionary puzzle of homosexuality - BBC News

What is your point?

 

[Seawytch]

I love that you see it as a problem to stick with what Jesus himself said, not his crazy fans.

Mathew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Oh goody

I love Bible quotes!

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

16Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’c and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

You keep avoiding the ones that call what you do an abomination, why is that?

You keep avoiding the ones that says a woman must remain silent. (NT) Why is that?

Because they should remain silent in churches. scripture is very clear women cannot be priests.

Tsk, tsk...try 1 Timothy 2:12

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Leviticus contains more than just dietary restrictions. Bible Buffeters that use Leviticus to bash gays, but ignore everything else contained in it ARE hypocrites.

Just an "FYI", nothing from NARTH or FRC is peer reviewed.

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Do you really need a peer reviewed study to figure out that if everyone was homosexual the human race would cease to exist in a generation? But yea, heterosexuality and homosexuality are the same, they are equal, homosexuality isn't destructive at all.

If everyone was male, then the human race would cease to exist in a generation but does that mean males are inherently destructive?

Unless you really believe that you are in danger of suddenly becoming gay if we treat homosexuals equally, there is no reason for you to believe that everyone will become homosexual- just a strawman you raise to support your bigotry.

Treating homosexual couples exactly equally with my wife and I, doesn't harm you- doesn't harm anyone- it is just the right thing to do.

If there was a surplus of men in society that had no women, it would absolutely be socially destructive, just as homosexuality would be if it were practiced on a mass scale, as opposed to heterosexuality. You asked for a difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality and how they are inherently unequal, so I gave it. And you can't dispute that. That's without going into all the other anti-social and destructive elements of the homosexual lifestyle.

I never said that gay marriage would result in making everyone a homosexual. So you are just creating an strawman.

I don't believe in equality, and don't believe it the right thing to do. I don't accept the premise of equality as the unquestioned dogma. I also reject the premise of so called "harm based morality", I think it narrow minded and autistic. One of my primary objections with homosexual marriage is that the normalization and promotion of homosexual relations through gay marriage feeds the persisting condition of Anomie that plagues Western society. That is that moral relativism and secularism begets moral nihilism and atomization, which has social costs, that the narrow sighted "harm based morality" doesn't capture.

You've just perfectly described the idiocy OKA: Relativism.

Relativism is the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's cultural, societal, historical and personal context, and, as such can never be the result of soundly reasoned absolutes.

It is through this perversion of reason wherein relativism axiomatically rejects the objectivity that is otherwise essential to truth.

Therefore, only the lowly Relativist could demand that that which is otherwise irrefutably deviant, is perfectly normal.

And with truth being essential to trust and, both of those being critical to the establishment of a soundly reasoned morality, and because a soundly reasoned morality is essential to Justice... it becomes clear to reasonable people, that Relativism can never serve justice.

And given that the Ideological Left rests ENTIRELY upon Relativism, that is why since the Left came to power only 8 years ago... all sense of truth, trust, morality and justice have been rinsed from US Governance.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I love that you see it as a problem to stick with what Jesus himself said, not his crazy fans.

Mathew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Oh goody

I love Bible quotes!

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

16Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’c and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

You keep avoiding the ones that call what you do an abomination, why is that?

You keep avoiding the ones that says a woman must remain silent. (NT) Why is that?

Because they should remain silent in churches. scripture is very clear women cannot be priests.

Which illustrates why errant, subjective religious dogma is legally irrelevant.

And thankfully so.

 

[Steinlight]

Mathew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Oh goody

I love Bible quotes!

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

16Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’c and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

You keep avoiding the ones that call what you do an abomination, why is that?

You keep avoiding the ones that says a woman must remain silent. (NT) Why is that?

Because they should remain silent in churches. scripture is very clear women cannot be priests.

Tsk, tsk...try 1 Timothy 2:12

What about Timothy 2:12?

 

[Steinlight]

Mathew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Oh goody

I love Bible quotes!

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

16Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’c and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

You keep avoiding the ones that call what you do an abomination, why is that?

You keep avoiding the ones that says a woman must remain silent. (NT) Why is that?

Because they should remain silent in churches. scripture is very clear women cannot be priests.

Which illustrates why errant, subjective religious dogma is legally irrelevant.

And thankfully so.

Gender roles aren't subjective, but rather emerge from the inherent biological and sociological differences between the sexes, and societies that pursue "social equality" aka androgyny do so at their own peril.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Which illustrates why errant, subjective religious dogma is legally irrelevant.

First: Religion rests ENTIRELY in objectivism...

Second: 'Congress shall make no law .. prohibiting the free exercise of religion'.

In terms of 'law', it doesn't get MORE Relevant.

 

[MaryL]

PERSONALY? Gays don't need marriage any more than a fish needs a bicycle.

 

[Paperman299]

Leviticus contains more than just dietary restrictions. Bible Buffeters that use Leviticus to bash gays, but ignore everything else contained in it ARE hypocrites.

Just an "FYI", nothing from NARTH or FRC is peer reviewed.

No they aren't, because the New Testament reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality in Paul's Letters to the Corinthians for example. Whereas we explicitly aren't bound by the Old Law as Christ has fulfilled, our salvation comes not through the Old Law, but through him. The problem is, you don't understand that which you criticize.

So if I provided a peer review study that homosexuality is more destructive as a lifestyle than heterosexuality, than you would change your view on gay marriage? I thought your view on gay marriage was based in egalitarianism, not empiricism.

Homosexuals love "peer reviewed", even if it is worthless.

Peer review a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Do you really need a peer reviewed study to figure out that if everyone was homosexual the human race would cease to exist in a generation? But yea, heterosexuality and homosexuality are the same, they are equal, homosexuality isn't destructive at all.

There's many genes that are beneficial which need not be immediately expressed. Carrying the genetics for homosexuality and expressing it selectively can have benefits for a population as a whole, ie caretaking.

Now where's this current, reputable, peer-reviewed scientific evidence of homosexuality's destructive effects you've been teasing us with? Come on now!

So if I provided a peer reviewed study on how homosexuality is more destructive than heterosexuality, you would reverse your view on gay marriage? So your view is based on empiricism, not the premise of egalitarianism?

That's a rather odd position. I don't think I have ever heard of anyone basing their position on gay marriage on a peer reviewed study. That is very odd.

So what you're saying is, you don't have evidence of homosexuality's deleterious effects on society, that it's something you imagined?

 

[Syriusly]

Oh goody

I love Bible quotes!

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

16Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’c and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’d ”

20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

You keep avoiding the ones that call what you do an abomination, why is that?

You keep avoiding the ones that says a woman must remain silent. (NT) Why is that?

Because they should remain silent in churches. scripture is very clear women cannot be priests.

Which illustrates why errant, subjective religious dogma is legally irrelevant.

And thankfully so.

Gender roles aren't subjective, but rather emerge from the inherent biological and sociological differences between the sexes, and societies that pursue "social equality" aka androgyny do so at their own peril.

Gender roles have changed- 100 years ago in the United States women were virtual property of men- luckily that has changed- no matter how much you object to the changes.

 

[Syriusly]

PERSONALY? Gays don't need marriage any more than a fish needs a bicycle.

Personally- I really don't care what a bigot like yourself thinks.

Same gender couples can marry legally now just like my wife and I are married in over 30 states- and that is a great thing.

 

[Paperman299]

PERSONALY? Gays don't need marriage any more than a fish needs a bicycle.

Funny. Subverting a classic feminist line into something that beings down homosexuals instead of empowering women. Of course, women have hardly taken the line to heart, at least in an absolute sense. (Straight) women continue to seek out and form relationships with men. How appropriate that you've maintained the line's outlandishly hyperbolic nature.