Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[GreenBean]

So you make a statement like that - so cock sure in your opinion being fact - that you can't present any facts to prove your opinion - you're a truly opinionated little fella aren't you ? do you have any basis for those opinions other a "gut feeling" ?

Come on "Bombs away" - put your money where your mouth is - instead of putting some one elses cock sure attitude in it . Put up or shut up

I am from the deep south. 95 out of 100 churches OPPOSED interracial marriage.
Hell, they opposed opening their doors to accept black folks for a long time.
Interracial marriage was against the law in Alabama until 2000.
95% of the churches there would not marry an interracial couple before that. They wouldn't be prosecuted but it gave them the excuse they needed.
As of last year 21% of Alabama Republican voters still opposed interracial marriage Pew Research Center.
Loving overturned those laws in 1967 but that was for criminal charges only but the states still kept the laws and most all churches stuck by it.
But the subject is the churches down here opposing it and not what the law is after Loving.
Bob Jones University opposed it until 2000.
Real world I have lived in.
How are things in Lah Lah land today?

No, I agree with all of that.

And there certainly are many churches that change their views to fit the societal norms. I completely agree with that statement.

There are thousands of churches that are that way.

However... there are a minority of actual Christian, Bible believing churches, such as mine, that honestly do not care at all what society thinks.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it. Even from Genesis 1, we know that all mankind was created from just Adam and Eve..... well doesn't that sort of shatter the idea of Racism, given we obviously are all the same race?

Doesn't Acts 10:34 when it says "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons" shatter the idea of Racism?

Does not Acts 8:26-40 say that G-d sent Philip to the Ethiopian court official?

Does that not shatter the idea of Racism?

So why did those churches promote racism? I have no idea. Ask them. But it didn't come from Christianity or the Bible (which is what Christianity is based on).

And if you look at where the push to end slavery and racism came from, it was from Christianity.

Now Homosexuality, is completely different. Unlike Racism which the Bible is explicitly against, Homosexuality is clearly defined as a sin. It's wrong, and an abomination.

The only way a church can accept homosexuality, is if they abandon the Bible. Given that the Bible is the fundamental basis for Christianity, that means they have to Abandon Christianity.

Yes, I am absolutely saying that any Church which accepts Homosexuality, is in fact NOT a Christian church. Those two concepts are mutually exclusive. You can't be both. Not an option.

And for those of us who are real Christians, we will never accept homosexuality, and we don't care what the rest of you think.

Game over. Have a nice day.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it.

Very True - in fact there's a strong case for the theory that Jesus may have been Black himself.

 

[GreenBean]

I am from the deep south. 95 out of 100 churches OPPOSED interracial marriage.
Hell, they opposed opening their doors to accept black folks for a long time.
Interracial marriage was against the law in Alabama until 2000.
95% of the churches there would not marry an interracial couple before that. They wouldn't be prosecuted but it gave them the excuse they needed.
As of last year 21% of Alabama Republican voters still opposed interracial marriage Pew Research Center.
Loving overturned those laws in 1967 but that was for criminal charges only but the states still kept the laws and most all churches stuck by it.
But the subject is the churches down here opposing it and not what the law is after Loving.
Bob Jones University opposed it until 2000.
Real world I have lived in.
How are things in Lah Lah land today?

No, I agree with all of that.

And there certainly are many churches that change their views to fit the societal norms. I completely agree with that statement.

There are thousands of churches that are that way.

However... there are a minority of actual Christian, Bible believing churches, such as mine, that honestly do not care at all what society thinks.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it. Even from Genesis 1, we know that all mankind was created from just Adam and Eve..... well doesn't that sort of shatter the idea of Racism, given we obviously are all the same race?

Doesn't Acts 10:34 when it says "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons" shatter the idea of Racism?

Does not Acts 8:26-40 say that G-d sent Philip to the Ethiopian court official?

Does that not shatter the idea of Racism?

So why did those churches promote racism? I have no idea. Ask them. But it didn't come from Christianity or the Bible (which is what Christianity is based on).

And if you look at where the push to end slavery and racism came from, it was from Christianity.

Now Homosexuality, is completely different. Unlike Racism which the Bible is explicitly against, Homosexuality is clearly defined as a sin. It's wrong, and an abomination.

The only way a church can accept homosexuality, is if they abandon the Bible. Given that the Bible is the fundamental basis for Christianity, that means they have to Abandon Christianity.

Yes, I am absolutely saying that any Church which accepts Homosexuality, is in fact NOT a Christian church. Those two concepts are mutually exclusive. You can't be both. Not an option.

And for those of us who are real Christians, we will never accept homosexuality, and we don't care what the rest of you think.

Game over. Have a nice day.

Old Testament Laws do speak against homosexuality.
And eating pork is a sin under Old Testament.
If you eat bacon you are a sinner, same as homosexuality.
Exactly the same as sin is sin.
Jesus never condemned homosexuality and he WAS A JEW HIMSELF.
A rabbi Jesus was.
And the Jews that did condemn homosexuality in that time viewed Jesus as a radical for his day for his acceptance of everyone.
That is what Christianity is.
If you are a Christian you never have to go around with a Big C on your game jersey.
They will know it by your actions.

Most folks here talk like Tarzan but post like Jane.
Next time put your cleats and helmet on before you cross the lines.
You need them.

Going by the Gospels he never spoke of it , either in a negative or positive light. The rest of your post is simply insane twisted fuzzy logic - OY VAY !

 

[Cecilie1200]

That your Bible says gay people are sinners doesn't mean that this cannot change over time.

The point he was making is that the Old Testament said eating pork was a sin. This could also be changed in the New Testament.

You're going to write your very own Testament and convert people to following it? Knock yourself out, and good luck with that.



As long as you leave the rest of us alone to think you're a heretical lunatic, we don't care. It's the rewriting of OUR Testaments, and attempting to force us to follow your revisions, that we have a problem with.

No, the point is that the religious stance will change over time, just like it has changed on the pork issue

Um, no the "pork issue" didn't "change over time", dumbass. Either read the book, or stop commenting on it. I'm not getting paid to give your worthless, ignorant ass Sunday School lessons. If you don't even know why Christians don't observe the same dietary rules that observant Jews do, then you have exactly two things to say on the subject of Christianity: Jack and shit . . . Jack just left town, and the latter is what you just posted.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's not the least bit adorable to me that you're ignorant enough to not know the history of the Church, and to think your piddling little disapproval will make any more difference than anyone else's has throughout time.

Christianity came to life during the time of the Roman Empire. History records ten specific Roman persecutions of Christians:

4) Trajan - In 112 AD, Roman governor Pliny the Younger was sent by the emperor Trajan (r. 98-117) to the province of Bithynia on official business. During his visit, Pliny encountered Christians, and he wrote to the emperor about them. The governor indicated that he had ordered the execution of several Christians, "for I held no question that whatever it was they admitted, in any case obstinancy and unbending perversity deserve to be punished." However, he was unsure what to do about those who said they were no longer Christians, and asked Trajan his advice. The emperor responded that Christians should not be sought out, anonymous tips should be rejected as "unworthy of our times," and if they recanted and "worshipped our gods," they were to be freed. Those who persisted, however, should be punished.

Hmm...any that converted were freed? Well, that is considerably LESS than what the Church did for centuries! Those who converted were often still killed (or died from the forced "conversion"), just not quite so horribly.

Oh, really? And you're now going to cite the proof for that, knowing that no one's word is worth shit on a message board, PARTICULARLY yours, right?

And don't think I didn't notice that you completely skipped the entire post except for one sentence that let you spew a little more "Christians are BAD! Nothing is bad except Christians! I hate Christians, and . . . and I hate Christians, and I can't think of anything but how I hate Christians!" Topic? What topic? You don't need to know nothing 'bout no stinking topic except how much you hate Christians, and they are therefore the only bad thing that has ever existed in the world.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, the point is that the religious stance will change over time, just like it has changed on the pork issue

No, actually you would be wrong on that pork issue.

There have been other aspects of Church belief, not outlined in the Bible that have changed over time. But the key is that they are not outlined in the Bible.

This, IS.

It's not going to change. Period. Not going to happen. Only those churches which either do not, or stop believing the Bible is the fundamental authority of our faith, will change their views.

The rest of us, are not going to. I'm not going to. My church isn't going to.

Sorry. Have a nice day.

Then in thirty years...maybe I'll order a pizza or buy motorcycle boots from what was once your church!

See, this would relate to that whole topic you missed on that earlier post that you saw as nothing but a chance to say, "Christians BAD!!!" Had you managed to reign in your rampant bigotry for two seconds, you might have noticed that the actual topic of the post was that Christians have been persecuted by the best for centuries, and are still hanging on. You aren't going to wipe them out of existence with your pallid excuse for hatred, however much it overwhelms your consciousness. And certainly not in thirty years.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am from the deep south. 95 out of 100 churches OPPOSED interracial marriage.
Hell, they opposed opening their doors to accept black folks for a long time.
Interracial marriage was against the law in Alabama until 2000.
95% of the churches there would not marry an interracial couple before that. They wouldn't be prosecuted but it gave them the excuse they needed.
As of last year 21% of Alabama Republican voters still opposed interracial marriage Pew Research Center.
Loving overturned those laws in 1967 but that was for criminal charges only but the states still kept the laws and most all churches stuck by it.
But the subject is the churches down here opposing it and not what the law is after Loving.
Bob Jones University opposed it until 2000.
Real world I have lived in.
How are things in Lah Lah land today?

No, I agree with all of that.

And there certainly are many churches that change their views to fit the societal norms. I completely agree with that statement.

There are thousands of churches that are that way.

However... there are a minority of actual Christian, Bible believing churches, such as mine, that honestly do not care at all what society thinks.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it. Even from Genesis 1, we know that all mankind was created from just Adam and Eve..... well doesn't that sort of shatter the idea of Racism, given we obviously are all the same race?

Doesn't Acts 10:34 when it says "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons" shatter the idea of Racism?

Does not Acts 8:26-40 say that G-d sent Philip to the Ethiopian court official?

Does that not shatter the idea of Racism?

So why did those churches promote racism? I have no idea. Ask them. But it didn't come from Christianity or the Bible (which is what Christianity is based on).

And if you look at where the push to end slavery and racism came from, it was from Christianity.

Now Homosexuality, is completely different. Unlike Racism which the Bible is explicitly against, Homosexuality is clearly defined as a sin. It's wrong, and an abomination.

The only way a church can accept homosexuality, is if they abandon the Bible. Given that the Bible is the fundamental basis for Christianity, that means they have to Abandon Christianity.

Yes, I am absolutely saying that any Church which accepts Homosexuality, is in fact NOT a Christian church. Those two concepts are mutually exclusive. You can't be both. Not an option.

And for those of us who are real Christians, we will never accept homosexuality, and we don't care what the rest of you think.

Game over. Have a nice day.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it.

Very True - in fact there's a strong case for the theory that Jesus may have been Black himself.

And that case would be . . . ?

 

[koshergrl]

There were so many black Jewish families in Nazareth at the time, dontcha know, lol.

 

[I.P.Freely]

I am from the deep south. 95 out of 100 churches OPPOSED interracial marriage.
Hell, they opposed opening their doors to accept black folks for a long time.
Interracial marriage was against the law in Alabama until 2000.
95% of the churches there would not marry an interracial couple before that. They wouldn't be prosecuted but it gave them the excuse they needed.
As of last year 21% of Alabama Republican voters still opposed interracial marriage Pew Research Center.
Loving overturned those laws in 1967 but that was for criminal charges only but the states still kept the laws and most all churches stuck by it.
But the subject is the churches down here opposing it and not what the law is after Loving.
Bob Jones University opposed it until 2000.
Real world I have lived in.
How are things in Lah Lah land today?

No, I agree with all of that.

And there certainly are many churches that change their views to fit the societal norms. I completely agree with that statement.

There are thousands of churches that are that way.

However... there are a minority of actual Christian, Bible believing churches, such as mine, that honestly do not care at all what society thinks.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it. Even from Genesis 1, we know that all mankind was created from just Adam and Eve..... well doesn't that sort of shatter the idea of Racism, given we obviously are all the same race?

Doesn't Acts 10:34 when it says "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons" shatter the idea of Racism?

Does not Acts 8:26-40 say that G-d sent Philip to the Ethiopian court official?

Does that not shatter the idea of Racism?

So why did those churches promote racism? I have no idea. Ask them. But it didn't come from Christianity or the Bible (which is what Christianity is based on).

And if you look at where the push to end slavery and racism came from, it was from Christianity.

Now Homosexuality, is completely different. Unlike Racism which the Bible is explicitly against, Homosexuality is clearly defined as a sin. It's wrong, and an abomination.

The only way a church can accept homosexuality, is if they abandon the Bible. Given that the Bible is the fundamental basis for Christianity, that means they have to Abandon Christianity.

Yes, I am absolutely saying that any Church which accepts Homosexuality, is in fact NOT a Christian church. Those two concepts are mutually exclusive. You can't be both. Not an option.

And for those of us who are real Christians, we will never accept homosexuality, and we don't care what the rest of you think.

Game over. Have a nice day.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it.

Very True - in fact there's a strong case for the theory that Jesus may have been Black himself.

does that mean god is black?

 

[I.P.Freely]

There were so many black Jewish families in Nazareth at the time, dontcha know, lol.

jebus was a falsha? this fairy tale gets better.

 

[Jarlaxle]

It's not the least bit adorable to me that you're ignorant enough to not know the history of the Church, and to think your piddling little disapproval will make any more difference than anyone else's has throughout time.

Christianity came to life during the time of the Roman Empire. History records ten specific Roman persecutions of Christians:

4) Trajan - In 112 AD, Roman governor Pliny the Younger was sent by the emperor Trajan (r. 98-117) to the province of Bithynia on official business. During his visit, Pliny encountered Christians, and he wrote to the emperor about them. The governor indicated that he had ordered the execution of several Christians, "for I held no question that whatever it was they admitted, in any case obstinancy and unbending perversity deserve to be punished." However, he was unsure what to do about those who said they were no longer Christians, and asked Trajan his advice. The emperor responded that Christians should not be sought out, anonymous tips should be rejected as "unworthy of our times," and if they recanted and "worshipped our gods," they were to be freed. Those who persisted, however, should be punished.

Hmm...any that converted were freed? Well, that is considerably LESS than what the Church did for centuries! Those who converted were often still killed (or died from the forced "conversion"), just not quite so horribly.

Oh, really? And you're now going to cite the proof for that, knowing that no one's word is worth shit on a message board, PARTICULARLY yours, right?

And don't think I didn't notice that you completely skipped the entire post except for one sentence that let you spew a little more "Christians are BAD! Nothing is bad except Christians! I hate Christians, and . . . and I hate Christians, and I can't think of anything but how I hate Christians!" Topic? What topic? You don't need to know nothing 'bout no stinking topic except how much you hate Christians, and they are therefore the only bad thing that has ever existed in the world.

I do not hate Christians...but like Jesus, I hate hypocrisy!

 

[Gadawg73]

You're going to write your very own Testament and convert people to following it? Knock yourself out, and good luck with that.



As long as you leave the rest of us alone to think you're a heretical lunatic, we don't care. It's the rewriting of OUR Testaments, and attempting to force us to follow your revisions, that we have a problem with.

No, the point is that the religious stance will change over time, just like it has changed on the pork issue

Um, no the "pork issue" didn't "change over time", dumbass. Either read the book, or stop commenting on it. I'm not getting paid to give your worthless, ignorant ass Sunday School lessons. If you don't even know why Christians don't observe the same dietary rules that observant Jews do, then you have exactly two things to say on the subject of Christianity: Jack and shit . . . Jack just left town, and the latter is what you just posted.

Old Testament statements condemning homosexuality would also be old Jewish law.
Where is it Christian law condemning homosexuals?
Speaking of dumbasses.

 

[Andylusion]

No, the point is that the religious stance will change over time, just like it has changed on the pork issue

Um, no the "pork issue" didn't "change over time", dumbass. Either read the book, or stop commenting on it. I'm not getting paid to give your worthless, ignorant ass Sunday School lessons. If you don't even know why Christians don't observe the same dietary rules that observant Jews do, then you have exactly two things to say on the subject of Christianity: Jack and shit . . . Jack just left town, and the latter is what you just posted.

Old Testament statements condemning homosexuality would also be old Jewish law.
Where is it Christian law condemning homosexuals?
Speaking of dumbasses.

If you had read the Bible, you wouldn't be asking that question.

And yes, I am telling you to go look it up yourself. We're not talking about a research paper on CO2 greenhouse effects. We're talking about the Bible, which is the top selling book world wide, and has dozens of extremely easy to find web sites with the complete text of the Bible.

Go read it yourself. Figure it out.

 

[Gadawg73]

Doesn't matter anyway sports fans.
Same as now that Navy Seal can serve openly as a gay man in the military and the lies about how that would cause "unit cohesion to break down" that Navy Seal will be able to marry his partner now legally.
And it will have ZERO effect on everyone's heterosexual marriage and on society.
Get over it, no matter how many lies and bull shit claims you make it is going to happen.
Move to Iran, they do it your way over there. They hold up a Book and claim it teaches them to condemn gay folks.

 

[Gadawg73]

Um, no the "pork issue" didn't "change over time", dumbass. Either read the book, or stop commenting on it. I'm not getting paid to give your worthless, ignorant ass Sunday School lessons. If you don't even know why Christians don't observe the same dietary rules that observant Jews do, then you have exactly two things to say on the subject of Christianity: Jack and shit . . . Jack just left town, and the latter is what you just posted.

Old Testament statements condemning homosexuality would also be old Jewish law.
Where is it Christian law condemning homosexuals?
Speaking of dumbasses.

If you had read the Bible, you wouldn't be asking that question.

LOL, I went to a private military school from 1966-1968 and religion class was mandatory.
There is NO Christian LAW condemning homosexuality.
The Bible's authors condemned homosexuality and that came from ancient cultures and Jewish law.
Jesus was A JEW. He did not follow Old Jewish Law concerning homosexuality as he accepted everyone.

 

[GreenBean]

No, I agree with all of that.

And there certainly are many churches that change their views to fit the societal norms. I completely agree with that statement.

There are thousands of churches that are that way.

However... there are a minority of actual Christian, Bible believing churches, such as mine, that honestly do not care at all what society thinks.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it. Even from Genesis 1, we know that all mankind was created from just Adam and Eve..... well doesn't that sort of shatter the idea of Racism, given we obviously are all the same race?

Doesn't Acts 10:34 when it says "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons" shatter the idea of Racism?

Does not Acts 8:26-40 say that G-d sent Philip to the Ethiopian court official?

Does that not shatter the idea of Racism?

So why did those churches promote racism? I have no idea. Ask them. But it didn't come from Christianity or the Bible (which is what Christianity is based on).

And if you look at where the push to end slavery and racism came from, it was from Christianity.

Now Homosexuality, is completely different. Unlike Racism which the Bible is explicitly against, Homosexuality is clearly defined as a sin. It's wrong, and an abomination.

The only way a church can accept homosexuality, is if they abandon the Bible. Given that the Bible is the fundamental basis for Christianity, that means they have to Abandon Christianity.

Yes, I am absolutely saying that any Church which accepts Homosexuality, is in fact NOT a Christian church. Those two concepts are mutually exclusive. You can't be both. Not an option.

And for those of us who are real Christians, we will never accept homosexuality, and we don't care what the rest of you think.

Game over. Have a nice day.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it.

Very True - in fact there's a strong case for the theory that Jesus may have been Black himself.

And that case would be . . . ?

I didn't say I agreed with it - I justsaid there was a case for it . IMO Jesus was a Nyth.

While many people have a fixed mental image of Jesus, drawn from his artistic depictions, these images often conform to stereotypes which are not grounded in any serious research on the historical Jesus, but are based on second or third hand interpretations of spurious sources

In explaining the development of racial theories in the context of scripture, Colin Kidd, in his book The forging of races, argues that the assignment of race to biblical individuals has been a mostly subjective practice based on cultural stereotypes and societal trends rather than on scientific methods. Kidd reviews a number of theories about the race of Jesus, ranging from a white Aryan Jesus to a black African Jesus, illustrating that there is no general agreement among scholars on the race of Jesus
Race and appearance of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[GreenBean]

No, I agree with all of that.

And there certainly are many churches that change their views to fit the societal norms. I completely agree with that statement.

There are thousands of churches that are that way.

However... there are a minority of actual Christian, Bible believing churches, such as mine, that honestly do not care at all what society thinks.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it. Even from Genesis 1, we know that all mankind was created from just Adam and Eve..... well doesn't that sort of shatter the idea of Racism, given we obviously are all the same race?

Doesn't Acts 10:34 when it says "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons" shatter the idea of Racism?

Does not Acts 8:26-40 say that G-d sent Philip to the Ethiopian court official?

Does that not shatter the idea of Racism?

So why did those churches promote racism? I have no idea. Ask them. But it didn't come from Christianity or the Bible (which is what Christianity is based on).

And if you look at where the push to end slavery and racism came from, it was from Christianity.

Now Homosexuality, is completely different. Unlike Racism which the Bible is explicitly against, Homosexuality is clearly defined as a sin. It's wrong, and an abomination.

The only way a church can accept homosexuality, is if they abandon the Bible. Given that the Bible is the fundamental basis for Christianity, that means they have to Abandon Christianity.

Yes, I am absolutely saying that any Church which accepts Homosexuality, is in fact NOT a Christian church. Those two concepts are mutually exclusive. You can't be both. Not an option.

And for those of us who are real Christians, we will never accept homosexuality, and we don't care what the rest of you think.

Game over. Have a nice day.

The whole race crap, is just that. There was nothing in the Bible that supports racism, and plenty that denies it.

Very True - in fact there's a strong case for the theory that Jesus may have been Black himself.

does that mean god is black?

No - but Adam and Eve were probably were .

 

[Andylusion]

Doesn't matter anyway sports fans.
Same as now that Navy Seal can serve openly as a gay man in the military and the lies about how that would cause "unit cohesion to break down" that Navy Seal will be able to marry his partner now legally.
And it will have ZERO effect on everyone's heterosexual marriage and on society.
Get over it, no matter how many lies and bull shit claims you make it is going to happen.
Move to Iran, they do it your way over there. They hold up a Book and claim it teaches them to condemn gay folks.

What part of "I don't care" did you not get?

First, the military has an extremely high control over public relations, as any government agency does. Whatever problems homosexuality in the military has, will be buried for as long as they can cover it.

But let's even say you are right.

"I do not care"

Not trying to be insulting.... I don't care.

Whether homosexuality causes millions of problems, or zero problems.... I don't care.

Whether you think I should get over it or not... I don't care.

Whether you think I should move to Iran or not.... I don't care.

Your opinion on my view of Homosexuality has ZERO value to me. Again, not trying to be insulting.... just trying to be transparent. I will DIE over this issue. You can march me to the electric chair, and I will still hold the same view up to the moment you throw the switch.

I won't change. Not for you. Not for society. Not for the government. Not for the constitution. Not for any Earthly reason you can come up with.

Don't care what you think. Too bad. Thanks for stopping by.

 

[guno]

Churches and religious institutions should be taxed as any other business unless they can prove what money they used to help in charity . Then we can say there is separation of church and state.

When people donate to religious groups, it's tax-deductible. Churches don't pay property taxes on their land or buildings. When they buy stuff, they don't pay sales taxes. When they sell stuff at a profit, they don't pay capital gains tax. If they spend less than they take in, they don't pay corporate income taxes. Priests, ministers, rabbis and Imams get "parsonage exemptions" that let them deduct mortgage payments, rent and other living expenses when they're doing their income taxes. They also are the only group allowed to opt out of Social Security taxes . The estimate is a total subsidy at $71 billion year.

 

[Andylusion]

Old Testament statements condemning homosexuality would also be old Jewish law.
Where is it Christian law condemning homosexuals?
Speaking of dumbasses.

If you had read the Bible, you wouldn't be asking that question.

LOL, I went to a private military school from 1966-1968 and religion class was mandatory.
There is NO Christian LAW condemning homosexuality.
The Bible's authors condemned homosexuality and that came from ancient cultures and Jewish law.
Jesus was A JEW. He did not follow Old Jewish Law concerning homosexuality as he accepted everyone.

Thanks, that's all I needed to know. You opinion has been filed away in the oval bin of my mind.

So back to me and my church.... Homosexuality is a sin. We won't have homosexual weddings, and no homosexual will be on our staff. Period.

Have a nice day.

 

[Andylusion]

Churches and religious institutions should be taxed as any other business unless they can prove what money they used to help in charity . Then we can say there is separation of church and state.

When people donate to religious groups, it's tax-deductible. Churches don't pay property taxes on their land or buildings. When they buy stuff, they don't pay sales taxes. When they sell stuff at a profit, they don't pay capital gains tax. If they spend less than they take in, they don't pay corporate income taxes. Priests, ministers, rabbis and Imams get "parsonage exemptions" that let them deduct mortgage payments, rent and other living expenses when they're doing their income taxes. They also are the only group allowed to opt out of Social Security taxes . The estimate is a total subsidy at $71 billion year.

Tell me you did not just suggest that allowing people to pay less tax, is us "subsidizing" them?