Senate tackles gay marriage ban

[gingercat]

Rod,

Everying you are comdemning about me is so secular, typical and superficial. I hope you start look at things from Bible's perspective. I forgive you for your wrongful condemnation. :

Do you know that Christian society is becoming worse and worse. Do you know the reasons why? Because too many Christians accuse other faithful Christians just like you are doing. You are one of very trendy Christians. I can see it very clealy and I will speak up for the Lord. Your comdemnation will not faze me. Sorry.

BTW, noone in your thread are comdemning you or homosecuals nor do they hate them. We are just telling you what the Bible says about the homosexuality.

 

[thessalonian]

Rod,

Ah, the old "our side is being tolerant, your not" arguement. Let me let you in on something. Are you sure you are tolerant of us? Are you trying to unite with us. Or is it only unity with the Homosexuals that you desire?

By the way you keep speaking of your preist. Do you attend a Catholic Church?

 

[RichardE40K]

Well maybe, I still say it needed deeper thought. If we followed the bible word for word, we would be at conflict withourselfs. I just disagree with some parts due to the fact it was written by man listening to gods words. It's like the creation, I belive god made the univerce but allowed evolution because he knew what would happen.

I am prodastant, not catholic, although all christians are my brothers.

And I love you too brother, there is no one I dont love, I just disagree on points.

I dont know if this was at me but I look for a unity which is so rare. I dream of the one christian faith without all the devisions, the catholics, the prodastans est. I see just one faith one day, united in good for jesus. At the moment I just see the faith torn into parts. I want everyone to get along.

 

[Vic C.]

Rod,

Ah, the old "our side is being tolerant, your not" arguement. Let me let you in on something. Are you sure you are tolerant of us? Are you trying to unite with us. Or is it only unity with the Homosexuals that you desire?

By the way you keep speaking of your preist. Do you attend a Catholic Church?

Thank you Thess. I touched on this a couple of pages back. I don't think many actually spent the time to read it though. Seems they are too busy trying to further their agenda, so I will repeat part of what I posted:

This nation, for the most part, was comprised of Christians and other God-fearing people. (I use the word fear in it's Biblical sense) We were tolerant of other beliefs from the start, which is why our founding fathers split from the Brits in the first place. In time, we not only tolerated, we embraced those of a different skin color, nationality, religion, sex, etc. Noiw that the boat is getting full, the first group you all want to throw overboard are the Christians??? Now, who are the intolerant ones?

Sputnik, we are beginning to resent the "tone" of your posts. I think it would be in your best interest to take a short break and prayerfully consider your views and beliefs about the Bible, God, Christians and Christianity in general.

We should not be here pointing fingers at each other and determining who is and isn't a true follower of Jesus. I ask that we all refrain from that for the time being.

Everyone, lets put this verse in proper perspective before we "determine" who is and isn't the enemy here:

2 Cor 6: 14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership does righteousness have with lawlessness? And what fellowship does light have with darkness? (LITV)

 

[destiny]

Sputty,

Your not very loving or tolerant of our views it seems. You demonize us. :

'Us'? You mean 'the mob'? 'Us'? You mean the 'real' Christians on this forum? 'Us'? You mean those who throw stones at others? 'Us'? You mean those who are demonizing Richard? 'Us'? You mean those who are on the same wave-length as Lewis? Oh my.

You have it backward, my friend.

Again ...I don't CARE to tell others who they should and who they should not be attracted to or who or which gender they should love. It's none of my - nor your - business, thess. I just don't care, period ...savvy? This particular topic is not usually an issue to me except when I see fellow human beings being hounded by Christians.

You don't have to participate in anything you don't want to participate in so why get yourself worked up over this? Poor gingercat is all but having kittens (pardon the pun) over this issue. And, PLEASE, don't insult my intelligence by telling me that it's JESUS - and not homophobia - that is dictating your feelings on this topic. I'm sure you have all kinds of your own problems to deal with - I know I do - without losing sleep on who your neighbor is attracted to. Why not concentrate on sorting them out?

Incidentally, I wonder how many homosexual converts have resulted (have become 'straight') from the hissing and the spitting of the saints on this thread? If the hissing and the spitting method works then, by all means, continue to do it. If it doesn't then try another tack such as acceptance. Or, if acceptance goes against one's homophobic grain, try to grit one's teeth and 'tolerate' the gender orientation of others. Let God do His job and let Him be the judge of us all. It's pretty simple.

You seem to be awfully worried about telling us what we should and shouldn't do. You are even telling me things that I am not doing. As for the hissing and spitting method, it seems to be one that you like to employ in convincing us.

You noticed that too Thess? I wonder if it's some sort of reverse psychology or if he's convinced himself it's true??
Maybe he went to a christian school and was picked on as a child, I don't know.

Vic, I think we were posting at the same time!

 

[thessalonian]

I do find it interesting that the pro-homosexual side claims love and unity as their goals. Yet I think if you look at this whole thread you will see that the inflamitory language has been stronger on the pro-homosexual side. Further, those on that side do not reprimand their brothers (Sputnik) for being inflamitory.

 

[Rick W]

Potluck:
Are you saying that couples that are sterile should not be allowed sex?

No.
Are you saying you have a reading disability since it's quite obvious I mentioned nothing about sterility or are you saying I'm saying what I'm not saying? Or are you saying that two can't marry as husband and wife simply because they can't have kids? Or are you saying there is no value in father/mother to offspring relationships anyway? I'm sorry. Maybe I'm the one with a disability since I don't understand why what you're saying doesn't reflect nor address anything I said.

But what about sterility? Is there sterility in the bible? And what happened when Abraham chose not to believe God taking matters into his own hands to have a son?

Anyway,
I think it's quite obvious which preference God would have for us in view of all the scripture related to husband and wife. Or does that mean God is also a bigot because He chose to focus on a one man one woman relationship in His Word instead of giving same sex relationships the same or at least a little amount of attention? Since His sole focus is on husband and wife under a liberal view this appears to be quite intolerant and discriminatory with little regard for the feelings of same-sex couples. Surely He should have known to give both preferences equal time since equality in all things is the focus of modern day man who knows that support for one view without showing support for the other is endorsement only for the one. And that's unconstitutional.

Does scripture tell us how man and wife should treat each other? Yes. Is there a difference? Absolutely.
But today the priority of mother/father holds much less value. Will gay couples seek to adopt? That's happening today. It wasn't long ago that even secular science supported the need for both mom and dad in the life of a growing child. But again as time goes on man's science is proven to be less than accurate, the studies and conclusions of the roles of gender within the family made obsolete. Social science concerning the family cannot remain bigoted, discriminatory or intolerant therefore the old ideas of value of mother/father within the home must change or be tossed altogether. How can a professor or teacher teach the roles of gender as was once perceived without repercussion from a tolerant society? Can the conflict remain or should social science and psychology trash all evidence that there is an advantage for families with a father and mother?

 

[peace4all]

Sex yes, but within the confines of a commitment in marriage which naturally leads to the rearing of children within a family unit where the child gets input from both genders to prepare him/her for their adulthood and relationship to one of the opposite sex so they too may have a family blessed by God.

I was referring to this statement of yours. I may have interpreted it wrong, but what I got from it was that sex is only allowed in then commitment of marriage that leads to naturally rearring children.

So sterile marriage should be out of the question right?

and Potluck. Science evolves as time goes on. As we find out that thigns wern't as accurate, or 100% correct, We fix them.
Christianity OBVIOUSLY has done this too. look at the OT compared to the NT. So much was changed in it, and it was updated and made "better" (or atleast less morbid)
are you saying that we should deny the NT too, because it isn't what was originally said by the OT? or should we not pay much mind, because it may eventualyl be imrpoved upon with a New New testament or something?

I think the last time I sarcasticaly asked someone if they were disabled (or maybe i just asked if they were stupid) I got a warning....

There is always this HUGE debate, over wether gay adults can adopt. People say NO, because they are living with out the mother father relationship.
so, If you think at all, you would haev to take away EVERY kid, in a single familly household (either through divorce or death) and put them in straight foster homes.

There is huge debate on what is hte best number of children to have, for the childrens sake. Should we ban havign too many or too few children?
Wow, sounds like communist China. OHH NO!

 

[ArtGuy]

It wasn't long ago that even secular science supported the need for both mom and dad in the life of a growing child. But again as time goes on man's science is proven to be less than accurate, the studies and conclusions of the roles of gender within the family made obsolete. Social science concerning the family cannot remain bigoted, discriminatory or intolerant therefore the old ideas of value of mother/father within the home must change or be tossed altogether. How can a professor or teacher teach the roles of gender as was once perceived without repercussion from a tolerant society? Can the conflict remain or should social science and psychology trash all evidence that there is an advantage for families with a father and mother?

It's true that, all things equal, a normal hetero couple probably provide a better overall environment for a child, due to the collective advantages each sex brings to the relationship. Men are better at some things, women are better at others, and together they make for a more effective parenting unit.

But.

Not every couple raising a family consists of ideal parents. While the perfect gay couple may be worse than the perfect straight couple, is it that much worse? Is it worse than a medicore or bad straight couple? No. Which is better for a child? To be shunted back and forth between foster homes, or trapped in an orphanage until he's 18? Or to be raised by gay parents? Almost certainly the latter. Consider also that, while straight couples are often going to have children on accident, which dramatically increases the likelihood of an unloving environment, gay couples can't accidentally have kids. They not only have to want kids, they have to want kids so badly that they're willing to go through a lot of trouble and shell out a whole lot of money to either use in vitro or try to adopt. That right there possibly boosts the quality of the average gay family over that of the average straight family, regardless of what the ideal set of parents may look like.

 

[Rick W]

and Potluck. Science evolves as time goes on. As we find out that thigns wern't as accurate, or 100% correct, We fix them.

lol

Ok.
All studies/research/findings into the matter on a scientific and psychological basic are tossed.
So when do you think the idea of evolution will become obsolete or fixed? After all, we honestly thought science was correct about this subject of mother/father value. Oh well, live and learn I suppose.

 

[ArtGuy]

So when do you think the idea of evolution will become obsolete or fixed?

Right after the law of gravity gets axed, I'd imagine.

 

[Vic C.]

So when do you think the idea of evolution will become obsolete or fixed?

Right after the law of gravity gets axed, I'd imagine.

Cool, since some still believe gravity is a theory, not a law. :wink:

 

[ArtGuy]

So when do you think the idea of evolution will become obsolete or fixed?

Right after the law of gravity gets axed, I'd imagine.

Cool, since some still believe gravity is a theory, not a law. :wink:

Well, to be fair, Einstein's formulation of it is just a theory, even though it's far more accurate than the "Law". Newton's Laws of Motion are also incorrect, serving as low-speed approximations for the more accurate Theory of Special Relativity. The designation of "law" or "theory" has nothing to do with how well established something is, but rather the type of phenomenon it describes.

All of which is completely irrelevant to this discussion, I just really like physics. :-D

 

[soma]

Gay marriage has no effect on my marriage or the respect, sanctity and love in my relationship with my wife or children. I have only been married once and it is has been very strong.

Gay marriage is a political trick to solidify the Republican base because they have nothing to vote for.

The red states which vote Republican have the largest divorce rate.

Theses Republicans are not conservative because they are for big government controlling our bedrooms, our language, and our telephone concersations. They are for big spending for Corporations which make the energy bills, the medical decisions and what wars we are to fight. The money doesn't go for protection or recuperation of the soldeirs and vets, but to corporations to make bombs that are dropped on neighborhoods. Why are we fighting in Iraq for Haliburden.

We can trash the Constitution when it comes to manipulating the vote, illegal wars, torture, spying on U.S. citizens, but we need to change it to stop giving gays equal rights. We don't need an amendment to stop flag burning either that is another issue to manipulate people to vote for a do nothing for America platform. Just make the flags non-flamable, but that would cost the corporations money and we can't have that because they fund the Republican corruption.

We don't need to hate single parents, gays, immigrants to vote Republican. We need something done for the American people.

Gas prices have more affect on my family than gay marriage. I can't afford to take my kids to school, church or other functions that are important.

 

[thessalonian]

Folish words soma. Society will not stand if gay marriage is allowed. God will not be mocked and will judge this nation accordingly if we allow his laws to be undermined.

 

[Lewis]

Folish words soma. Society will not stand if gay marriage is allowed. God will not be mocked and will judge this nation accordingly if we allow his laws to be undermined.

That is so true Thess.

 

[DivineNames]

What I am opposed to, is these kinds of decisions being made by either politicians or an elite of the judiciary, who may be more liberal or conservative than the general population. If gays want whatever right, then they should have to persuade the majority of people in a referendum that they are entitled to it. If they can do that then fine, if they can't then they just have to deal with it.

To be honest I think the concern with gay rights is very much a matter of fashion; if these people really cared about "rights" then they would give as much support to animal lovers and those into incest (between consenting adults). Sure those things are perverse, but so is gay sex. I don't have any problem with sexual perversion, but I object to gays getting special privileges over animal lovers or whatever. (Although there are obviously legit reasons to stop someone from ever marrying a horse which wouldn't apply to the issue of gay marriage, but when it comes to what people do in the privacy of their own home there shouldn't be any special privileges to gays.)

 

[thessalonian]

Although there are obviously legit reasons to stop someone from ever marrying a horse

That is quite intollerant you know. Why should anyone be denied marrying a horse if they are attracted to them. What is wrong with different species attraction. Pandora's box opened.

 

[ArtGuy]

Folish words soma. Society will not stand if gay marriage is allowed. God will not be mocked and will judge this nation accordingly if we allow his laws to be undermined.

That explains all the holy wrath that's descended upon Denmark.

Oh, wait, my bad. There hasn't been any holy wrath.

 

[thessalonian]

A day is a thousand years and a thousand years is a day. Why do you mock God for his forbearance? That he delays that a few more may be saved? Where are the Greeks and the Romans today after they accepted homosexuality. I haven't noticed those two societies dominating the world. As I recally my history, their end was not exactly pretty.