The Red State War On Gay Marriage

[Newby]

They believed it did. I don't think the scripture about gays has anything to do with consenting adult couples, but you believe it. See how that works?

I don't care what 'they' believed, it doesn't change the fact that the scripture 'they' quoted had nothing to do with inter racial marriage, and you can't even acknowledge that fact. Why not? Why do you have to hold onto a lie? Does it make you feel more 'right'?



So who do you think scriptures concerning lust, or the scriptures concerning marriage were talking too then? The children? Non consenting people?



Look, I get that you don't agree with the Bible, or you don't even believe in it, and that's fine. But, it doesn't give you the right to change what the words in it mean. You talk about people using it and twisting it to rationalize what they want it to mean, and you're really no different, you're just on the other side of the issue. The Bible never speaks of marriage between two people of the same sex, it only speaks of marriage between a man and a woman, and it says that any sex outside of that union, a union blessed by God, is sin, it's as simple as that. That means people cheating on their spouses, that means couples living together prior to marriage, that means swingers, that means any act associated with lust.



I have nothing against gays forming a legal partnership, or even 'marrying' in a church if they can find a church that will do so. I just don't believe that it is a union that is blessed or sanctioned by God since marriage in the eyes of God is clearly defined in the Bible. And if a church 'blesses' such a union in the eyes of God, then they're not following the Bible. If two gay people truly love each other and their physical relationship is born of love and not lust, does that make a difference since the Bible speaks of lust? I really don't know the answer to that question, I only know that the Bible clearly states what marriage is, and that it clearly states that physical realationships outside of that union are sin. So if you truly believe the Bible and base your faith on that, then you can never sanction a marriage of two people of the same sex as a marriage in the eyes of God. A secular/legal/state marriage is a completely different ballgame, and I have no issue with that.

See, you interpret passages to be against gays. Others interpret passages to be against interracial marriage or desegregation. You both think you're right and others think one or both of you is wrong.

Both are using the bible to justify their own bigotry.

The Bible isn't 'against gays', it warns against sin, sex outside of marriage is a sin, marriage is only described as between male and female. It's really very simple.


There is also no 'interpretation', it's very plainly stated, read the Bible for yourself, in context. The people using passages to say inter racial marriage is against the Bible are lying. I don't have to justify anything, that's what you don't get. The Bible says what it says, either agree with it or disagree with it, you're no different than those that supposedly 'interpret' it to say what they want it to say. You're using it for your own jusitifications, pot meet kettle. I would have more respect for your point of view if you simply said that you don't agree with the Bible, at least that's being honest. Trying to tell people that the Bible says other than what it says is just lying and manipulation. so you're no different the people using it to say that inter racial marriage is wrong. It's just as bad to use it to say that something is wrong as it is to use it to say that something is right.

 

[GISMYS]

God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
ROMANS 1:26-32

 

[deltex1]

I am fed up with the fag issue. The nation is in chaos...not to mention the world....and they are concerned about their right to eat a Twinkie at Joes deli...and our acceptance of their right to shove their Twinkie in their husbands donut hole. Do what your needs tell you to and shut up about it...I don't want to hear it.

 

[Seawytch]

I don't care what 'they' believed, it doesn't change the fact that the scripture 'they' quoted had nothing to do with inter racial marriage, and you can't even acknowledge that fact. Why not? Why do you have to hold onto a lie? Does it make you feel more 'right'?







So who do you think scriptures concerning lust, or the scriptures concerning marriage were talking too then? The children? Non consenting people?







Look, I get that you don't agree with the Bible, or you don't even believe in it, and that's fine. But, it doesn't give you the right to change what the words in it mean. You talk about people using it and twisting it to rationalize what they want it to mean, and you're really no different, you're just on the other side of the issue. The Bible never speaks of marriage between two people of the same sex, it only speaks of marriage between a man and a woman, and it says that any sex outside of that union, a union blessed by God, is sin, it's as simple as that. That means people cheating on their spouses, that means couples living together prior to marriage, that means swingers, that means any act associated with lust.







I have nothing against gays forming a legal partnership, or even 'marrying' in a church if they can find a church that will do so. I just don't believe that it is a union that is blessed or sanctioned by God since marriage in the eyes of God is clearly defined in the Bible. And if a church 'blesses' such a union in the eyes of God, then they're not following the Bible. If two gay people truly love each other and their physical relationship is born of love and not lust, does that make a difference since the Bible speaks of lust? I really don't know the answer to that question, I only know that the Bible clearly states what marriage is, and that it clearly states that physical realationships outside of that union are sin. So if you truly believe the Bible and base your faith on that, then you can never sanction a marriage of two people of the same sex as a marriage in the eyes of God. A secular/legal/state marriage is a completely different ballgame, and I have no issue with that.

See, you interpret passages to be against gays. Others interpret passages to be against interracial marriage or desegregation. You both think you're right and others think one or both of you is wrong.



Both are using the bible to justify their own bigotry.

The Bible isn't 'against gays', it warns against sin, sex outside of marriage is a sin, marriage is only described as between male and female. It's really very simple.





There is also no 'interpretation', it's very plainly stated, read the Bible for yourself, in context. The people using passages to say inter racial marriage is against the Bible are lying. I don't have to justify anything, that's what you don't get. The Bible says what it says, either agree with it or disagree with it, you're no different than those that supposedly 'interpret' it to say what they want it to say. You're using it for your own jusitifications, pot meet kettle. I would have more respect for your point of view if you simply said that you don't agree with the Bible, at least that's being honest. Trying to tell people that the Bible says other than what it says is just lying and manipulation. so you're no different the people using it to say that inter racial marriage is wrong. It's just as bad to use it to say that something is wrong as it is to use it to say that something is right.

Boy, you just don't get it do you? The whole bible is "subject to interpretation".

Did bigots use bible passages to justify segregation and anti miscegenation? Yes.

Do bigots use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry? Yes.

They believe they were right and righteous just as those today do. No difference.

 

[Flopper]

If it doesn't I owe you a dollar. that is how 10,000 to one odds work. Well we have a case in Britain going on, you neglected to to quantify location.

LifeSiteNews Mobile | ?I am still not getting what I want?: Gay couple suing church for refusing ?wedding?

Suing doesn't equal wining. No church will ever have to perform a ceremony (in the US) against the tenants of their faith. I'll let you know where to send the buck...adjusted for inflation I presume.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

churches are currently being forced to provide free birth control against the tenets of their faith. You will lose that bet.

• Insurance companies must provide prescription contraceptives, not churches.
  
• 90% of all group health insurance offered to employers included contraceptive coverage prior to Obamacare. Most Catholic hospitals, universities, and other church run businesses included contraceptive coverage in their health insurance coverage before Obamacare.
  
• A number of studies has show the cost of including contraceptive coverage does not increase premiums.
  
• 77% to 98%, depending on the study, of Catholic women use contraception.

Much ado about nothing.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

They believed it did. I don't think the scripture about gays has anything to do with consenting adult couples, but you believe it. See how that works?

I don't care what 'they' believed, it doesn't change the fact that the scripture 'they' quoted had nothing to do with inter racial marriage, and you can't even acknowledge that fact. Why not? Why do you have to hold onto a lie? Does it make you feel more 'right'?



So who do you think scriptures concerning lust, or the scriptures concerning marriage were talking too then? The children? Non consenting people?



Look, I get that you don't agree with the Bible, or you don't even believe in it, and that's fine. But, it doesn't give you the right to change what the words in it mean. You talk about people using it and twisting it to rationalize what they want it to mean, and you're really no different, you're just on the other side of the issue. The Bible never speaks of marriage between two people of the same sex, it only speaks of marriage between a man and a woman, and it says that any sex outside of that union, a union blessed by God, is sin, it's as simple as that. That means people cheating on their spouses, that means couples living together prior to marriage, that means swingers, that means any act associated with lust.



I have nothing against gays forming a legal partnership, or even 'marrying' in a church if they can find a church that will do so. I just don't believe that it is a union that is blessed or sanctioned by God since marriage in the eyes of God is clearly defined in the Bible. And if a church 'blesses' such a union in the eyes of God, then they're not following the Bible. If two gay people truly love each other and their physical relationship is born of love and not lust, does that make a difference since the Bible speaks of lust? I really don't know the answer to that question, I only know that the Bible clearly states what marriage is, and that it clearly states that physical realationships outside of that union are sin. So if you truly believe the Bible and base your faith on that, then you can never sanction a marriage of two people of the same sex as a marriage in the eyes of God. A secular/legal/state marriage is a completely different ballgame, and I have no issue with that.

See, you interpret passages to be against gays. Others interpret passages to be against interracial marriage or desegregation. You both think you're right and others think one or both of you is wrong.

Both are using the bible to justify their own bigotry.

True.

Which is why – thankfully – subjective religious dogma is legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

 

[hazlnut]

Oh and its liberals war on marriage and religious rights so...if its good for you its good for them...I am not religious at all but I support them 100%.

And they will lose that war big time….

 

[Newby]

See, you interpret passages to be against gays. Others interpret passages to be against interracial marriage or desegregation. You both think you're right and others think one or both of you is wrong.



Both are using the bible to justify their own bigotry.

The Bible isn't 'against gays', it warns against sin, sex outside of marriage is a sin, marriage is only described as between male and female. It's really very simple.





There is also no 'interpretation', it's very plainly stated, read the Bible for yourself, in context. The people using passages to say inter racial marriage is against the Bible are lying. I don't have to justify anything, that's what you don't get. The Bible says what it says, either agree with it or disagree with it, you're no different than those that supposedly 'interpret' it to say what they want it to say. You're using it for your own jusitifications, pot meet kettle. I would have more respect for your point of view if you simply said that you don't agree with the Bible, at least that's being honest. Trying to tell people that the Bible says other than what it says is just lying and manipulation. so you're no different the people using it to say that inter racial marriage is wrong. It's just as bad to use it to say that something is wrong as it is to use it to say that something is right.

Boy, you just don't get it do you? The whole bible is "subject to interpretation".

Did bigots use bible passages to justify segregation and anti miscegenation? Yes.

Do bigots use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry? Yes.

They believe they were right and righteous just as those today do. No difference.

No, it isn't, there are stories and parables that are used within it, but it says what it says, you either agree or disagree with it. Apparently you've never read it in context, or you'd realize that what you're claiming is ridiculous.

You're stuck on what 'bigots' used it for in the past and you're apparently unable to move off of that point, I guess because it's the only thing you have to cling too in order to continue to justify your feelings on it. I don't know, and I don't care honestly, I think we've talked it about as dead as it can get. The FACT that the scripture you posted above IS NOT talking about inter racial marriage stands.

 

[Seawytch]

The Bible isn't 'against gays', it warns against sin, sex outside of marriage is a sin, marriage is only described as between male and female. It's really very simple.





There is also no 'interpretation', it's very plainly stated, read the Bible for yourself, in context. The people using passages to say inter racial marriage is against the Bible are lying. I don't have to justify anything, that's what you don't get. The Bible says what it says, either agree with it or disagree with it, you're no different than those that supposedly 'interpret' it to say what they want it to say. You're using it for your own jusitifications, pot meet kettle. I would have more respect for your point of view if you simply said that you don't agree with the Bible, at least that's being honest. Trying to tell people that the Bible says other than what it says is just lying and manipulation. so you're no different the people using it to say that inter racial marriage is wrong. It's just as bad to use it to say that something is wrong as it is to use it to say that something is right.

Boy, you just don't get it do you? The whole bible is "subject to interpretation".

Did bigots use bible passages to justify segregation and anti miscegenation? Yes.

Do bigots use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry? Yes.

They believe they were right and righteous just as those today do. No difference.

No, it isn't, there are stories and parables that are used within it, but it says what it says, you either agree or disagree with it. Apparently you've never read it in context, or you'd realize that what you're claiming is ridiculous.

You're stuck on what 'bigots' used it for in the past and you're apparently unable to move off of that point, I guess because it's the only thing you have to cling too in order to continue to justify your feelings on it. I don't know, and I don't care honestly, I think we've talked it about as dead as it can get. The FACT that the scripture you posted above IS NOT talking about inter racial marriage stands.

It doesn't matter what YOU think the scripture says, those bigots were sure that it meant that interracial marriage went against god. This church still does. Kentucky Church Bans Interracial Couples

Yes, I call a bigot a bigot. People that used the bible to justify anti miscegenation and segregation were bigots. People that use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry are bigots. Both misinterpret the bible in my opinion. You think they only did it in one instance.

When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia

Same bigots, different day.

 

[Newby]

Boy, you just don't get it do you? The whole bible is "subject to interpretation".

Did bigots use bible passages to justify segregation and anti miscegenation? Yes.

Do bigots use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry? Yes.

They believe they were right and righteous just as those today do. No difference.

No, it isn't, there are stories and parables that are used within it, but it says what it says, you either agree or disagree with it. Apparently you've never read it in context, or you'd realize that what you're claiming is ridiculous.

You're stuck on what 'bigots' used it for in the past and you're apparently unable to move off of that point, I guess because it's the only thing you have to cling too in order to continue to justify your feelings on it. I don't know, and I don't care honestly, I think we've talked it about as dead as it can get. The FACT that the scripture you posted above IS NOT talking about inter racial marriage stands.

It doesn't matter what YOU think the scripture says, those bigots were sure that it meant that interracial marriage went against god. This church still does. Kentucky Church Bans Interracial Couples

Yes, I call a bigot a bigot. People that used the bible to justify anti miscegenation and segregation were bigots. People that use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry are bigots. Both misinterpret the bible in my opinion. You think they only did it in one instance.

When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia

Same bigots, different day.

What specifically do they misinterpret regarding the gay issue? And what did I misinterpret?

 

[Bombur]

No, it isn't, there are stories and parables that are used within it, but it says what it says, you either agree or disagree with it. Apparently you've never read it in context, or you'd realize that what you're claiming is ridiculous.

You're stuck on what 'bigots' used it for in the past and you're apparently unable to move off of that point, I guess because it's the only thing you have to cling too in order to continue to justify your feelings on it. I don't know, and I don't care honestly, I think we've talked it about as dead as it can get. The FACT that the scripture you posted above IS NOT talking about inter racial marriage stands.

It doesn't matter what YOU think the scripture says, those bigots were sure that it meant that interracial marriage went against god. This church still does. Kentucky Church Bans Interracial Couples

Yes, I call a bigot a bigot. People that used the bible to justify anti miscegenation and segregation were bigots. People that use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry are bigots. Both misinterpret the bible in my opinion. You think they only did it in one instance.

When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia

Same bigots, different day.

What specifically do they misinterpret regarding the gay issue? And what did I misinterpret?

You are failing to love your neighbor as yourself.

 

[kidrocks]

Good to see Texas (the great Red State) shot down for now.

 

[kidrocks]

Arizona goes down!!!

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/arizona-governor-vetoes-anti-gay-bill

 

[Silhouette]

Well I am a registered democrat and I'm on board with rolling back the idea of "gay marriage".

So I don't see how this is limited to a "red states" issue? Many many of the people in the chic fil a crowds and the boycott A&E/Duck Dynasty thing are also middle dem voters. You may have heard of Southern democrats?

Here are the passages from the Bible that spell out the mortal sin of enabling homosexual cultures taking over your society in very clear and very dire terms. The punishment for enabling a homosexual cult like LGBT is death and an eternity in the pit of fire. You cannot ask a christian to commit such a clearly delineated mortal sin and condemn him or herself to hell for an eternity. It's the same as asking them to wholesale abandon their religion:

JUDE 1

3. Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

4. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

5. I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not...

..7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire...

...14. And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

15. To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

16. These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

17. But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;

18. How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

19. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

20. But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,

21. Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

22. And of some have compassion, making a difference:

23. And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

24. Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy..

ROMANS 1

22. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29. Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30. Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31. Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32. Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Romans 1: 32 and Jude 1: 15 spell out that anyone who aids and abets the spread of a homosexual culture is going down with the ship.

It's very simple. If you are a christian and you fail to "earnestly contend" for the faith, you are as guilty as those practicing homosexuals of defiling the Big Plan. Christians cannot question the Big Plan. They have only to follow the mandate that sexuality is between men and women and not between women and women or men and men.

Ist Verboten, punishable by the worst damnation.

 

[007]

All this back and forth about homos wanting to be married, when after it's all said and done, the facts still remain....

In the eyes of God homosexuality is an abomination, and no two men nor two women married by some charlatan preacher in a sinners church will ever be married in the sense of marriage in the eyes of GOD. Marriage to God is the holy union between a man and a woman, period, end of story.

The only marriage that can ever be had here on earth between two homosexuals is a blasphemous marriage, an abomination in the eyes of God. Those engaging in it will surely burn in hell.

If God thinks homosexuality is an abomination why did he create homosexuals then? I've always maintained that of the 12 apostles at Christs last supper... you can bet that one of them was a closeted homo.

GOD didn't create homos, the devil did.

And if you approve of the deviant sexual perversion known as homosexuality, then you are condoning the work of the devil.

 

[kidrocks]

All this back and forth about homos wanting to be married, when after it's all said and done, the facts still remain....

In the eyes of God homosexuality is an abomination, and no two men nor two women married by some charlatan preacher in a sinners church will ever be married in the sense of marriage in the eyes of GOD. Marriage to God is the holy union between a man and a woman, period, end of story.

The only marriage that can ever be had here on earth between two homosexuals is a blasphemous marriage, an abomination in the eyes of God. Those engaging in it will surely burn in hell.

If God thinks homosexuality is an abomination why did he create homosexuals then? I've always maintained that of the 12 apostles at Christs last supper... you can bet that one of them was a closeted homo.

GOD didn't create homos, the devil did.

And if you approve of the deviant sexual perversion known as homosexuality, then you are condoning the work of the devil.

Did you forget that God created the 'devil'?

 

[Silhouette]

Did you forget that God created the 'devil'?

According to texts, God created everything including that spirit that eventually rose as a powerful angel and then who defied his own creator and started a cold war. Some say the Devil is in cahoots with God to test men's loyalty one way or the other. Since God's bid is to surround Itself with souls that are independent but also good and trustworthy, it makes sense to have someone in charge of the endless lull to temptation. The Devil, Lucifer, whatever name you want to call this entity by is the price God was willing to pay to not being alone in the universe without real companionship. Whatever God's arrangement with Lucifer, it doesn't affect the end game in that if you side with Lucifer, passively or actively, you are going to pay a very horrible price. Whereas if you stand true to your virtues and resist the endless lure to self-indulgences of the flesh, you will get to go to, IMHO, a place that has a far better real estate value.. Oddly, the best situation to vet souls in this way is one where they are nearly ignorant of what's going on as to the test. So forgive me for writing this at all. The situation is dire enough to call for it though. So I did. I would think the finest, strongest and best souls were those that instinctively gravitated towards restraint, wisdom, and temperence. But this is kindergarten so...I guess a manual is needed.

Homosexuals are not born that way. They are 'tampered with" [check your local gay vernacular]. "Tampered with" is when a normal sexual urge is conditioned to be attached to some other stimulant than the pheremones from the opposite sex. We trained many a farm stud by tricking him with pheremones from females onto a dummy mount. From then on he was "dummy mount oriented" and wouldn't look at the girls. The conditioning works the best when the animal is trained up [tampered with] just on or at the verge of puberty. Some animals self-train to mount same gendered pen mates via smelling estrus females but being frustrated in being able to access them. We've encountered this behavior in many different species. It is not a natural state. It is learned.

So, the devil, knowing the mechanics of conditioning as he must surely know every single subtlety of human behavior given his job description, works the conditioning and even convinces the affected in their own minds that they were "born that way". He might, for example, put some of his hosts up to taking over the American Psychological Association in the 1970s & 80s. You know, to remove their ruling scientific principle like they did [google "Leona Tyler principle"]. Science would be the #1 enemy of the devil, besides pure faith. After all, if the science shows what he's up to is bogus and his mouthpiece-puppets are wrong or lying, then how can his agenda move forward? So naturally, science behind human behavior had to go. It had to. And so it did: Former president of APA says organization (now) controlled by ‘gay rights’ movement

And of course the AMA, child psychologists and pretty much every mainstream entity takes its walking orders from the APA. This might be the dark one's most important and far-reaching achievement ever. Look how rapidly everything spiralled out of control afterwards? Once you control information, you control everything. I suppose it's a small little detail that that information springs from an non self-examining cult [LGBT]'s political feelings instead of hard data..

The only thing left at this point is for christians to take Jude 1 and Romans 1 seriously. For if they don't, the consequences for failing to 'earnestly contend' for the faith are one and the same as holding the flashlight for the devil as he breaks and enters right into the palace of the Kingdom of God.

Remember, I'm not a praciticing christian. I'm advocating for their contract with God so they will not be in breach. I think where we are today is exactly why Jude 1 and Romans 1 hold so much weight. They didn't want to see history repeat itself a la Sodom.

 

[boilermaker55]

How is it a war on marriage?
Have any of them proposed a law to ban marriage?

Oh and its liberals war on marriage and religious rights so...if its good for you its good for them...I am not religious at all but I support them 100%.

 

[Newby]

It doesn't matter what YOU think the scripture says, those bigots were sure that it meant that interracial marriage went against god. This church still does. Kentucky Church Bans Interracial Couples

Yes, I call a bigot a bigot. People that used the bible to justify anti miscegenation and segregation were bigots. People that use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry are bigots. Both misinterpret the bible in my opinion. You think they only did it in one instance.

When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia

Same bigots, different day.

What specifically do they misinterpret regarding the gay issue? And what did I misinterpret?

You are failing to love your neighbor as yourself.

That's not what I asked, I'll wait for the person I asked to give an answer.

And fwiw, christians trying to turn someone away from what they believe is sin IS loving their neighbors as themselves.

 

[Seawytch]

No, it isn't, there are stories and parables that are used within it, but it says what it says, you either agree or disagree with it. Apparently you've never read it in context, or you'd realize that what you're claiming is ridiculous.



You're stuck on what 'bigots' used it for in the past and you're apparently unable to move off of that point, I guess because it's the only thing you have to cling too in order to continue to justify your feelings on it. I don't know, and I don't care honestly, I think we've talked it about as dead as it can get. The FACT that the scripture you posted above IS NOT talking about inter racial marriage stands.

It doesn't matter what YOU think the scripture says, those bigots were sure that it meant that interracial marriage went against god. This church still does. Kentucky Church Bans Interracial Couples



Yes, I call a bigot a bigot. People that used the bible to justify anti miscegenation and segregation were bigots. People that use the bible to justify anti gay bigotry are bigots. Both misinterpret the bible in my opinion. You think they only did it in one instance.



When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia



Same bigots, different day.

What specifically do they misinterpret regarding the gay issue? And what did I misinterpret?

I don't believe the bible contains any condemnations of loving consenting adult same sex relationships. I believe that those that use it to justify anti gay bigotry misinterpret it, just as you believe that those that used the bible to justify racism do. Understand?