who will christians discriminate against once gays have equal rights?

[FactFinder]

Just cause Christians point out that homosexuality is sin does not mean they are discriminating against you. They are trying to save your F'in soul! If you cannot see that , you are F'in dense. They also try to save murderers, rapists, harlots, thieves and self serving bastards.

Okay. That's the lamest post I've seen, possibly ever.

Do you know the verse about getting the log out of your own eye before you try to remove the splinter from another?

If they want to do good for this country, then can shut their 'effing' mouths on the GLBT front, and start praying. They can help feed the hungry, clothe the naked, minister to the hurting. There is a veritable SHIT TON of works they can do that don't involve judging and preaching.

I do and I work on it. Sin is sin is sin. and I help feed the hungry, I help clothe the naked though i am unsure where the hell they are and I attempt to minister to the hurting. Those in sin are hurting and are separated from The Father. Sin separates, egomania separates. Some of the most egostistical maniacs on the planet are homosexuals. God bless you and may you receive light.

 

[Sky Dancer]

By the way; surely you realize there are gay christians?

The Gay Christian Network

Well good for them.

I disagree. I can't think of anything worse for a gay person.

 

[FactFinder]

Oh, and we will not 'shut our effing mouths' on the subject because it would be a disservice to God and the individuals involved.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Oh, and we will not 'shut our effing mouths' on the subject because it would be a disservice to God and the individuals involved.

Huh?

 

[FactFinder]

By the way; surely you realize there are gay christians?

The Gay Christian Network

Well good for them.

Hopefully they will read their Bible. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
There is none perfect. Not one.

 

[Immanuel]

Oh, and we will not 'shut our effing mouths' on the subject because it would be a disservice to God and the individuals involved.

You lose more souls by screaming in their faces that they are going to hell than you do when you open your heart up in Christian love.

Immie

 

[FactFinder]

Oh, and we will not 'shut our effing mouths' on the subject because it would be a disservice to God and the individuals involved.

Huh?

Seek God and he will answer your 'Huh'.

 

[NGSamson]

By the way; surely you realize there are gay christians?

The Gay Christian Network

Well good for them.

I disagree. I can't think of anything worse for a gay person.

They seem happy.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Oh, and we will not 'shut our effing mouths' on the subject because it would be a disservice to God and the individuals involved.

Huh?

Seek God and he will answer your 'Huh'.

No, thanks!

 

[Immanuel]

By the way; surely you realize there are gay christians?

The Gay Christian Network

Well good for them.

Hopefully they will read their Bible. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
There is none perfect. Not one.

Would you read it if you constantly had some one that claimed to be a Christian (say a co-worker) in your face all day long telling you that you are going to hell?

Immie

 

[Sky Dancer]

Well good for them.

I disagree. I can't think of anything worse for a gay person.

They seem happy.

Who does? Gay celibate Christians? I don't think so.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Well good for them.

Hopefully they will read their Bible. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
There is none perfect. Not one.

Would you read it if you constantly had some one that claimed to be a Christian (say a co-worker) in your face all day long telling you that you are going to hell?

Immie

Who? Is that what you do?

 

[Wicked Jester]

I don't know whether Gadawg73 was asking me a question or making a statement.

The truth is that I don't support bans on gay marriage. A ban on gay marriage is nothing more than government intrusion into our lives; more nanny state politics.

If homosexuals are allowed to marry it will not affect me one way or another as long as they do not force my church to begin marrying them. At that point, I would start raising a stink. If my church chose to do so willingly that would not bother me, but they should not be allowed to force any church to bow to their will and so far, I do not believe that has happened.

Immie

It's a states issue Immie. If a states VOTERS elect not to recognize gay marriage, then so be it......It's the VOTERS who decided, not the government......It comes down to being a question of morals. And these gays who run around around claiming they are on par with the black experience in this country, are friggin' lunatics to the core. Being born black is not immoral. Choosing to engage in sex with your own gender is.

And I'll say it again, if gays don't want to respect what the VOTERS decided, then they can move to a state who recognizes it, get married, and quit their damn bitching about it, and go on living in their twisted Ozzie and Ozzie, or Harriet and Harriet perverted lives.

I will say it again, I don't support the bans. Whether it is a state's issue or not, the government should not be choosing to support one class of people over another. And if it is a voter's issue, they (especially the ones that complain about big government) should not be supporting this either. Do you want a nanny state or do you want smaller/less intrusive governments?

And in this case, much like abortion, the Federal Government has usurped marriage law making this for the time being a government issue not a voter's issue.

Immie

When it's a states voters who decide the issue, it's not a government issue. It should only become a government issue when a states voters elect to recognize gay marriage, and government must then honor it as far as marital rights are concerned.

Here in California. voters decided it was a moral issue. They do not want it recognized, and that's the beauty of our voting system. The voters decided, not government. And these gays, being americans, need to respect what the voters decided, or simply move.....The gays and their supporters had every opportunity to make their case to the voters before the vote. They lost, fair and square, and that's the way it is.

Hell, this state just passed it's own dream act legislation. I'm not happy about it....But i'll live with it, until such time our kids are off to college. We just bought 75 acres at the base of Glacier National Park in Montana. In two years construction will begin on our future home up there. In a lil' over 6 years we'll flee the insanity of this once great state. And the gays face the same choices. If they elect to stay in a state whose voters decided they won't recognize their perversions, then that is their choice, and their problem. Nobody is holding a gun to their head and forcing them to stay.

 

[Immanuel]

Hopefully they will read their Bible. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
There is none perfect. Not one.

Would you read it if you constantly had some one that claimed to be a Christian (say a co-worker) in your face all day long telling you that you are going to hell?

Immie

Who? Is that what you do?

Have I ever told you that you were going to hell? No, but I don't expect you to answer that question honestly.

Immie

 

[FactFinder]

Huh?

Seek God and he will answer your 'Huh'.

No, thanks!

Then it is your porblem. You may want to search the answers to the 'Hell' thread.

You got the answers? Not very likely. Does the wisdom of the ages prevail or the current lame failing society prevail? Tell me, oh wise one!

 

[bill5]

Of course we have heard the same kind of things from those against equal rights for women, for blacks, for hispanics, for native americans, for the handicapped, for other religions. There is nothing new under the sun when it comes to the excuses of those on the losing side of civil rights history.

Continuing to compare apples to oranges to bananas to boston ferns doesn't make it any more valid FYI. This boo-hoo we're oppressed bit has gotten very old.

The way I see it is that the federal government has no business favoring one class of citizen over another. I am a Christian and homosexuality is a sin in my point of view. That being said, it is not up to politicians to favor my point of view over that of someone who sees things differently.

For a long time, I have said that the federal government should simply issue civil union contracts to all couples who want to live as a family whether straight or gay. Marriage is a rite of the church and should remain as such like baptism. Many churches will marry homosexual couples and they have every right to do so.

A marriage should offer no legal rights. A couple should only receive legal rights through the federal contract of civil unions. Spiritual rites or would that be rights, would be remain the realm of the church, synagogue, mosque, haven or what have you.

I disagree w/your post in various ways but props for stating your case well.

 

[NGSamson]

It's a states issue Immie. If a states VOTERS elect not to recognize gay marriage, then so be it......It's the VOTERS who decided, not the government......It comes down to being a question of morals. And these gays who run around around claiming they are on par with the black experience in this country, are friggin' lunatics to the core. Being born black is not immoral. Choosing to engage in sex with your own gender is.

And I'll say it again, if gays don't want to respect what the VOTERS decided, then they can move to a state who recognizes it, get married, and quit their damn bitching about it, and go on living in their twisted Ozzie and Ozzie, or Harriet and Harriet perverted lives.

I will say it again, I don't support the bans. Whether it is a state's issue or not, the government should not be choosing to support one class of people over another. And if it is a voter's issue, they (especially the ones that complain about big government) should not be supporting this either. Do you want a nanny state or do you want smaller/less intrusive governments?

And in this case, much like abortion, the Federal Government has usurped marriage law making this for the time being a government issue not a voter's issue.

Immie

When it's a states voters who decide the issue, it's not a government issue. It should only become a government issue when a states voters elect to recognize gay marriage, and government must then honor it as far as marital rights are concerned.

Here in California. voters decided it was a moral issue. They do not want it recognized, and that's the beauty of our voting system. The voters decided, not government. And these gays, being americans, need to respect what the voters decided, or simply move.....The gays and their supporters had every opportunity to make their case to the voters before the vote. They lost, fair and square, and that's the way it is.

Hell, this state just passed it's own dream act legislation. I'm not happy about it....But i'll live with it, until such time our kids are off to college. We just bought 75 acres at the base of Glacier National Park in Montana. In two years construction will begin on our future home up there. In a lil' over 6 years we'll flee the insanity of this once great state. And the gays face the same choices. If they elect to stay in a state whose voters decided they won't recognize their perversions, then that is their choice, and their problem. Nobody is holding a gun to their head and forcing them to stay.

Texas has a dream act to.

 

[NGSamson]

I disagree. I can't think of anything worse for a gay person.

They seem happy.

Who does? Gay celibate Christians? I don't think so.

If they weren't happy, they would not go. Its not for you to decide whats good or bad for anyone else.

 

[Wicked Jester]

I will say it again, I don't support the bans. Whether it is a state's issue or not, the government should not be choosing to support one class of people over another. And if it is a voter's issue, they (especially the ones that complain about big government) should not be supporting this either. Do you want a nanny state or do you want smaller/less intrusive governments?

And in this case, much like abortion, the Federal Government has usurped marriage law making this for the time being a government issue not a voter's issue.

Immie

When it's a states voters who decide the issue, it's not a government issue. It should only become a government issue when a states voters elect to recognize gay marriage, and government must then honor it as far as marital rights are concerned.

Here in California. voters decided it was a moral issue. They do not want it recognized, and that's the beauty of our voting system. The voters decided, not government. And these gays, being americans, need to respect what the voters decided, or simply move.....The gays and their supporters had every opportunity to make their case to the voters before the vote. They lost, fair and square, and that's the way it is.

Hell, this state just passed it's own dream act legislation. I'm not happy about it....But i'll live with it, until such time our kids are off to college. We just bought 75 acres at the base of Glacier National Park in Montana. In two years construction will begin on our future home up there. In a lil' over 6 years we'll flee the insanity of this once great state. And the gays face the same choices. If they elect to stay in a state whose voters decided they won't recognize their perversions, then that is their choice, and their problem. Nobody is holding a gun to their head and forcing them to stay.

Texas has a dream act to.

Yeah, I was hoping Cali wouldn't go in that direction.....The damn liberals have taken this once great state and completely wrecked it. It's sad.

 

[Sky Dancer]

They seem happy.

Who does? Gay celibate Christians? I don't think so.

If they weren't happy, they would not go. Its not for you to decide whats good or bad for anyone else.

Of course. I have no control on anyone else. I don't see any good reason for a self-respecting gay person to attend a church that says they must be celibate or leave the person they love. Just my opinion.