Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[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.

LOL......that just will be a big winning argument for you- "Women you need to shut up in church and let the men folk do your thinkin for you"

Women are allowed to think, but not to lead the Church. If you don't like it, you can go to one of the several heretical choices that ignore scripture here, or not go to Church at all.

LOL....indeed I can.....still upset that Martin Luther opened the door that resulted in women leading churches? So do you think that Jesus will send those women to hell? Or do you think that Jesus will send everyone to hell who doesn't agree with your particular band of Jesus believers?

 

[Steinlight]

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

ROFLMNAO! Have you READ the title of this thread? Wherein the OP is questioning the intent of The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality's intent to force others to accept PROFOUND ABNORMALITY as NORMAL and to abuse public accommodation laws to do so?

They are DEMANDING THAT ABNORMAL REASONING BE RECOGNIZED AS NORMAL! The potential consequences of such being NOTHING BUT: DELETERIOUS.

The actual medical community does not share your view that homosexuality is abnormal.

So no specific harmful effects? Not one prediction?

Could it be that the medical community is fudging on the numbers just like the climate scientist have done also these days & times maybe? Hmm.

It is actually interesting, the reasoning to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder was entirely political and based on the lobbying. Rather than being based on evidence and scientific investigation.

 

[Syriusly]

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.

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Reminds us of climate gate...I mean who can believe anything much these days right?

Indeed... 'trust' is a very difficult these days. But that's because of the rise of evil, which uses a perversion of human reasoning OKA: Relativism, to advance deceit, through fraudulence, as a means to influence the willful ignorant..

Such is the foundational species of reasoning of that which is known as Left-Think... or the addled intellectual soup on which "Liberalism, Progressivism (fascism), socialism, communism and Islam... rests.

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 essential to truth.

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.

So now that we understand the addled processes, we can see why suddenly, we're hearing idiots proclaim that THAT WHICH IS ABNORMAL... is perfectly normal.

That you and many others on the right have an unwarranted fear and hatred of gay Americans illustrates why we need the Constitution and its case law as much today as during any time in America's history; case law that protects gay Americans from your unwarranted, irrational fear and hate.

 

[Syriusly]

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

ROFLMNAO! Have you READ the title of this thread? Wherein the OP is questioning the intent of The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality's intent to force others to accept PROFOUND ABNORMALITY as NORMAL and to abuse public accommodation laws to do so?

They are DEMANDING THAT ABNORMAL REASONING BE RECOGNIZED AS NORMAL! The potential consequences of such being NOTHING BUT: DELETERIOUS.

The actual medical community does not share your view that homosexuality is abnormal.

So no specific harmful effects? Not one prediction?

Could it be that the medical community is fudging on the numbers just like the climate scientist have done also these days & times maybe? Hmm.

It is actually interesting, the reasoning to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder was entirely political and based on the lobbying. Rather than being based on evidence and scientific investigation.

Oh Youtube?
LOL

If you read the history of 'homosexuality as a mental disorder'- it was listed for 20 years- and that listing was never based upon evidence and scientific investigation.

What you complain about as being a flawed process for changing the designation was the very same flawed process that labeled homosexuality as a mental illness in the 1950's.

Meanwhile the consensus of the medical community is that homosexuality is not a mental illness. You disagree with them- but then again you think women should be second class citizens too.

 

[Steinlight]

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.

LOL......that just will be a big winning argument for you- "Women you need to shut up in church and let the men folk do your thinkin for you"

Women are allowed to think, but not to lead the Church. If you don't like it, you can go to one of the several heretical choices that ignore scripture here, or not go to Church at all.

LOL....indeed I can.....still upset that Martin Luther opened the door that resulted in women leading churches? So do you think that Jesus will send those women to hell? Or do you think that Jesus will send everyone to hell who doesn't agree with your particular band of Jesus believers?

Jesus doesn't send people to hell, people put themselves there. Since you don't understand basic Christian doctrine, perhaps you should stop commenting on these things?

 

[Steinlight]

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.

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

Thrive in what sense? Materially? Perhaps, but even that is coming to an end, particularly in Europe as the EU becomes less tenable. Demographically thriving? Certainly not, birthrates are on the decline and social systems contingent on population growth are becoming financially unsustainable, at this point, you are dependent on immigrants from illiberal societies for your future population. Morally and spiritually? Doesn't look like it, marriage rates are down, divorce rates up, children born out of wedlock up, drug/drink abuse up, depression/anxiety and mental disorders up. The secular and liberal west is a historical anomaly and as the United States becomes less the dominate global force and we move towards a multipolar world, this culture will continue to wane.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

That you and many others on the right have an unwarranted fear...

Site anything I've said which you feel represents fear.

Now, because NOTHING I have said can reasonably, or even possibly be inferred as 'fear'... I hereby accept your inevitable failure to produce such evidence, as your concession to me, that you must change the subject from scientific FACT, wherein such which deviates from the human physiological standard, thus DEVIATES from that standard is ABNORMAL... . And what is ABNORMAL is NOT NORMAL, because you have no means to sustain your no wholly refuted 'point of view, perspective, opinion and feelings... .

Such is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Steinlight]

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

ROFLMNAO! Have you READ the title of this thread? Wherein the OP is questioning the intent of The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality's intent to force others to accept PROFOUND ABNORMALITY as NORMAL and to abuse public accommodation laws to do so?

They are DEMANDING THAT ABNORMAL REASONING BE RECOGNIZED AS NORMAL! The potential consequences of such being NOTHING BUT: DELETERIOUS.

The actual medical community does not share your view that homosexuality is abnormal.

So no specific harmful effects? Not one prediction?

Could it be that the medical community is fudging on the numbers just like the climate scientist have done also these days & times maybe? Hmm.

It is actually interesting, the reasoning to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder was entirely political and based on the lobbying. Rather than being based on evidence and scientific investigation.

Oh Youtube?
LOL

If you read the history of 'homosexuality as a mental disorder'- it was listed for 20 years- and that listing was never based upon evidence and scientific investigation.

What you complain about as being a flawed process for changing the designation was the very same flawed process that labeled homosexuality as a mental illness in the 1950's.

Meanwhile the consensus of the medical community is that homosexuality is not a mental illness. You disagree with them- but then again you think women should be second class citizens too.

This is the former President of the APA, and he knows more on the subject than you. I know you don't care what he has to say, because you are a dogmatic believer in egalitarianism and nothing would sway you.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

This is the former President of the APA, and he knows more on the subject than you. I know you don't care what he has to say, because you are a dogmatic believer in egalitarianism and nothing would sway you.

It's Relativism... addled subjectivism which rejects reality and substitutes limitless falsity more in keeping with its own relative, personal 'needs'.

 

[beagle9]

Could it be that the medical community is fudging on the numbers just like the climate scientist have done also these days & times maybe? Hmm.

No, see you go introducing strawmen like that and you allow a loophole for middle voters to leave this platform. What is wrong with you? There is no comparison between the fact of the 1st Amendment and your tinfoil allegations that "climate change experts ....all 700 accredited experts...are lying to the public about climate change".

Why do you self-dilute your arguments that way?

Well seeing that you and me disagree on the issue of climate gate, where as I read that the numbers were being manipulated by so called educated people in which case it was admitted as such, then it is you that is therefore injecting your bias in this post and not me. You are therefore diluting my point based upon your bias in another thread, where as I was just using it as an illustration that people shouldn't always look to the educated as if they are clean and UN-corruptible in life, when in fact the evidence is to the contrary to those who are open minded about such things.

It could be that you may be causing your own problems here, by being UN-movable and biased on some issues in which are still highly debatable and unsolved as of yet.

Wait a minute, didn't you say that the APA is infiltrated by those who have silenced or now controls something that you were talking about ? It's all just illustrations of groups, organizations, politics and etc. that can become corrupted and infiltrated, and then the educated who are bad in a smart way are then the ones who protect the corruption at all cost. We being supposedly the lowly ignorant ones, are supposed to always respect education right, and even if it is going against the grain we are still to do this, but isn't this what creates sheeple, and then comes the end next ?

 

[Silhouette]

It's Relativism... addled subjectivism which rejects reality and substitutes limitless falsity more in keeping with its own relative, personal 'needs'.

And while ignoring/subjegating the extinction of the rights of people to the exercise (daily practice in and outside of a church building) of their faith and its core values at the very least.

Oh, and also while ignoring the needs of children to a mother and father, insisting this voteless class be mere subjects/lab rats in an untested social experiment poised to replace the standard of thousands of years in human society.

 

[beagle9]

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.

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

So you are of the attitude that Freedom should be more and not less of an anything goes type of thing in which you want to see more of today (or) that we should try and get as close to that sort of thinking as possible now right ? Then we will have become a modern society in your way of thinking right ? Should we break down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.), and to do this in order to become the most decadent & immoral society in the western world now ?

 

[Silhouette]

So you are of the attitude that Freedom should be more and not less of an anything goes type of thing in which you want to see more of today (or) that we should try and get as close to that sort of thinking as possible now right ? Then we will have become a modern society in your way of thinking right ? Should we break down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.), and to do this in order to become the most decadent & immoral society in the western world now ?

I'll bet you that Syriusly would want people to have a modicum of morality when they deal with her. She'd be the first to shriek bloody murder if someone cut her off in traffic, say.

Yet that person cutting her off has a different "driving orientation" than she does. What a bigot she would be for becoming angry at being cut off by someone just enjoying their "right" to do so?

Rules are for losers! (unless them being broken steps on your toes)... friggin' hypocrites..

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

So you are of the attitude that Freedom should be more and not less of an anything goes type of thing in which you want to see more of today (or) that we should try and get as close to that sort of thinking as possible now right ? Then we will have become a modern society in your way of thinking right ? Should we break down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.), and to do this in order to become the most decadent & immoral society in the western world now ?

This doesn't make any sense.

No one is advocating 'breaking down' anything.

That you and others on the right have an unwarranted fear and hatred of gay Americans doesn't justify discriminating against them.

 

[beagle9]

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.

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

So you are of the attitude that Freedom should be more and not less of an anything goes type of thing in which you want to see more of today (or) that we should try and get as close to that sort of thinking as possible now right ? Then we will have become a modern society in your way of thinking right ? Should we break down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.), and to do this in order to become the most decadent & immoral society in the western world now ?

This doesn't make any sense.

No one is advocating 'breaking down' anything.

That you and others on the right have an unwarranted fear and hatred of gay Americans doesn't justify discriminating against them.

Putting words in someones mouth are you ? No one hates anyone, but you want to try and play it that way don't you ? Now why is that I wonder ? No one fears anyone either. The only thing people want is to be respected as to what they believe in, and to be respected in what they have been taught in life about sin. Your ilk wants to sue them, harass them, use big words on them (or) to use the twisting of the laws on them in hopes that they would think that you are legit in order to do to them what you are doing to them. People hopefully are waking up to the game that has been going on in these ways, just like the way you tried to assign your words of hate and fear to me, and this in order to suggest to others that this is what I do, or what I think or in who I am, but you are wrong.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

So you are of the attitude that Freedom should be more and not less of an anything goes type of thing in which you want to see more of today (or) that we should try and get as close to that sort of thinking as possible now right ? Then we will have become a modern society in your way of thinking right ? Should we break down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.), and to do this in order to become the most decadent & immoral society in the western world now ?

This doesn't make any sense.

No one is advocating 'breaking down' anything.

That you and others on the right have an unwarranted fear and hatred of gay Americans doesn't justify discriminating against them.

Putting words in someones mouth are you ? No one hates anyone, but you want to try and play it that way don't you ? Now why is that I wonder ? No one fears anyone either. The only thing people want is to be respected as to what they believe in, and to be respected in what they have been taught in life about sin. Your ilk wants to sue them, harass them, use big words on them (or) to use the twisting of the laws on them in hopes that they would think that you are legit in order to do to them what you are doing to them. People hopefully are waking up to the game that has been going on in these ways, just like the way you tried to assign your words of hate and fear to me, and this in order to suggest to others that this is what I do, or what I think or in who I am, but you are wrong.

Of course you have an unwarranted fear and hatred of gay Americans – hence this nonsense about “break[ing] down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.),” where to recognize the comprehensive civil rights of gay Americans will 'imperil' our free society, as well as being an 'affront' to decency, morals, and standards.

Acknowledging the right of gay Americans to access marriage law is not 'indecent,' nor is it 'immoral,' and it comports with our most fundamental American standards of equal protection of the law and the rule of law.

Indeed, your hatred of gay Americans is in fact indecent and immoral.

 

[beagle9]

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

So you are of the attitude that Freedom should be more and not less of an anything goes type of thing in which you want to see more of today (or) that we should try and get as close to that sort of thinking as possible now right ? Then we will have become a modern society in your way of thinking right ? Should we break down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.), and to do this in order to become the most decadent & immoral society in the western world now ?

This doesn't make any sense.

No one is advocating 'breaking down' anything.

That you and others on the right have an unwarranted fear and hatred of gay Americans doesn't justify discriminating against them.

Putting words in someones mouth are you ? No one hates anyone, but you want to try and play it that way don't you ? Now why is that I wonder ? No one fears anyone either. The only thing people want is to be respected as to what they believe in, and to be respected in what they have been taught in life about sin. Your ilk wants to sue them, harass them, use big words on them (or) to use the twisting of the laws on them in hopes that they would think that you are legit in order to do to them what you are doing to them. People hopefully are waking up to the game that has been going on in these ways, just like the way you tried to assign your words of hate and fear to me, and this in order to suggest to others that this is what I do, or what I think or in who I am, but you are wrong.

Of course you have an unwarranted fear and hatred of gay Americans – hence this nonsense about “break[ing] down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.),” where to recognize the comprehensive civil rights of gay Americans will 'imperil' our free society, as well as being an 'affront' to decency, morals, and standards.

Acknowledging the right of gay Americans to access marriage law is not 'indecent,' nor is it 'immoral,' and it comports with our most fundamental American standards of equal protection of the law and the rule of law.

Indeed, your hatred of gay Americans is in fact indecent and immoral.

Your projecting again ClayTON.... No in your world suing people, threatening people if they don't go along, in which is to shut their businesses down or to shut their free speech / freedom to practice their religion as individuals down, (HA) well of course that is no threat to this nation in your mind ClayTON.. No it's not at all a problem in the world in which you live, but for the rest of us it is a new direct and indirect assault on the freedoms we all have protected and enjoyed in this nation over time. Fear ? You all are the ones who FEAR democracy, because you don't trust the results or the outcomes if Democracy is allowed to take place on the issues.

 

[Syriusly]

So you are of the attitude that Freedom should be more and not less of an anything goes type of thing in which you want to see more of today (or) that we should try and get as close to that sort of thinking as possible now right ? Then we will have become a modern society in your way of thinking right ? Should we break down all the gates that have made us the most free society in the world now (i.e. decency, morals, standards, guidelines, religion the constitution and etc.), and to do this in order to become the most decadent & immoral society in the western world now ?

I'll bet you that Syriusly

You are delusional.

 

[Syriusly]

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.

They have changed to an extreme pendulum that has been destructive for western society, but it will not always remain this way. History moves in cycles, and the secular liberal cycle is entering it's dying days across the test because it simply isn't sustainable in the long run.

Yet Western Society continues to thrive.....and societies that represent your backward type of thinking are represented by the most backward, repressive and least free societies on Earth.

So you are of the attitude that Freedom

I am of an opinion that our societies are improving and that Freedom of expression and freedom from oppression are good things.