Gay Marriage Amendment - Page 3

gwalchmai · 09-13-2011, 08:15

I would say on balance that the government has been involved in far more promotion of humanist ideas than religious ones, especially for the last 50 years or so. Many people give great lip service to separating church and state, except for the church of liberalism, which is promoted by the state at every turn.

morrismma · 09-13-2011, 08:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by GLWyandotte

So I guess Theology wasn't your strong suit.

Well thats the funny thing about religion and the bible. I could go to 10000 different christian church and all of them would have a different view on something. I could ask Millions of christians their interpretation on any verse and they would be differrent. So you tell me were in that post I was lacking in Theology so that I may better my point of view.

Glock30Eric · 09-13-2011, 09:16

Why they don't just accept "Civil Union" and end with it? They won't because they want to be on par with the straight people. Sorry they will never get to it. Sorry we gotta to be discrimination agaisnt gay, like or not then move to different country.

GLWyandotte · 09-13-2011, 09:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by morrismma

Well thats the funny thing about religion and the bible. I could go to 10000 different christian church and all of them would have a different view on something. I could ask Millions of christians their interpretation on any verse and they would be differrent. So you tell me were in that post I was lacking in Theology so that I may better my point of view.

Well for one, there is nothing in the Bible about glass houses and rocks- that is a proverb.
Millions of Christians will indeed have a million interpretations, but the one constant is that the Bible does not change. Whenever a cause du jour erupts, many Christians interpret the Bible and manipulate their interpretation to fit what they see as a needed change.

morrismma · 09-13-2011, 09:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glock30Eric

Why they don't just accept "Civil Union" and end with it? They won't because they want to be on par with the straight people. Sorry they will never get to it. Sorry we gotta to be discrimination agaisnt gay, like or not then move to different country.

Why should they settle for anything? Are they less of a person not to be on par with straight people? Why not make it legal there is no reason not to and then anybody that does not like Gay marrage being legal can move to another country?

ETA: Why would anybody strive for something more? lets all just give up sit on our couches and defficate on ourselfs.

morrismma · 09-13-2011, 09:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by GLWyandotte

Well for one, there is nothing in the Bible about glass houses and rocks- that is a proverb.
Millions of Christians will indeed have a million interpretations, but the one constant is that the Bible does not change. Whenever a cause du jour erupts, many Christians interpret the Bible and manipulate their interpretation to fit what they see as a needed change.

Yes I now they didnt have glass houses. John 8:7 I think says "He who is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone at her." . Same idea of the glass house, My point is everybody saying that it is a sin need to look at themselves and see that they commit sins as well. (Please do tell me where I was laking again) Also lets look at Matthew 7:1-6 I thank you may learn something.

The Bible does not change is my point. Now please tell me, who gets to deside what it means? I think somebody like maybe King james or how about the catholic church. We can agree that they would not want to change the original text at all for their sake right?

Can you please tell me what this word arsenokoit mean? Does it mean homosexual in the meaning we use it? Could it have been translated wrong?

GLWyandotte · 09-13-2011, 11:21

The glass houses thing was likely referring to seeing the speck in a brother's eye rather than the beam, but the context is basically the same.

The fact that we are all sinners and should not judge is a basic foundation; because we are sinners, we do.
Homosexuality is a sin of choice. You may have been born that way, but like many facets of the human psyche, it is a sin only when acted upon.
I believe if you accept Jesus as your Savior, no matter what sin you have committed, you will be forgiven.

I don't know if transcribers want the Bible to change- who knows, maybe they hated their jobs like a lot of us do. I do know that King James had a bunch of folks doing the transcription in order to reflect his views as they aligned with the Church of England.
Humans interpret the Bible in so many ways, in my mind, you do as best you can, only God knows the absolute Truth, which can indeed differ from divinely inspired writings due to the machinations of human error, concious or not.
I don't believe arsenokoites was used to describe homosexuality the preference, I think it was used to describe and condemn the acting upon the feelings, lumping sins of the flesh along with thievery, murder, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by morrismma

Yes I now they didnt have glass houses. John 8:7 I think says "He who is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone at her." . Same idea of the glass house, My point is everybody saying that it is a sin need to look at themselves and see that they commit sins as well. (Please do tell me where I was laking again) Also lets look at Matthew 7:1-6 I thank you may learn something.

The Bible does not change is my point. Now please tell me, who gets to deside what it means? I think somebody like maybe King james or how about the catholic church. We can agree that they would not want to change the original text at all for their sake right?

Can you please tell me what this word arsenokoit mean? Does it mean homosexual in the meaning we use it? Could it have been translated wrong?

AlexHassin · 09-13-2011, 11:46

I’m sorry but how is “ because a religious book says something” and argument for a law at all in this country? This is America, not some third world tribe state. Dam it people start acting like it.

Glock30Eric · 09-13-2011, 11:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by morrismma

Why should they settle for anything? Are they less of a person not to be on par with straight people? Why not make it legal there is no reason not to and then anybody that does not like Gay marrage being legal can move to another country?

ETA: Why would anybody strive for something more? lets all just give up sit on our couches and defficate on ourselfs.

Ok I am an American white guy, but I want to call myself as a negro or African-American because I want to be on par with black people. Does it make sense to you? No way! You are doing this in the same way with the gay marriage.

The marriage is between a man and a woman and nothing else. Sorry.

I will support for the civil union but I won't support gay marriage. If those gay people want to get “married” then it is better for them to move out of this country. We simply don't need them and their issues.

If everyone on this earth is gay and then the human beings will come to end. We already knows that the gay act is abhor thing to do. However, some people wants to sin so I gave them a chance to get “married” under the civil union, but they don’t like “Civil Union” and they want get married under “gay marriage” definition. Sorry get out of our land.

AlexHassin · 09-13-2011, 11:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glock30Eric

Ok I am an American white guy, but I want to call myself as a negro or African-American because I want to be on par with black people. Does it make sense to you? No way! You are doing this in the same way with the gay marriage.

The marriage is between a man and a woman and nothing else. Sorry.

I will support for the civil union but I won't support gay marriage. If those gay people want to get “married” then it is better for them to move out of this country. We simply don't need them and their issues.

If everyone on this earth is gay and then the human beings will come to end. We already knows that the gay act is abhor thing to do. However, some people wants to sin so I gave them a chance to get “married” under the civil union, but they don’t like “Civil Union” and they want get married under “gay marriage” definition. Sorry get out of our land.

You shore don’t sound like the ideal of an American. Are you new to the country and having some adapting issues? And who is the our? Maybe if people have problems with the freedoms and liberties in America they should move. Its not for everyone.

gwalchmai · 09-13-2011, 12:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexHassin

I’m sorry but how is “ because a religious book says something” and argument for a law at all in this country? This is America, not some third world tribe state. Dam it people start acting like it.

Are you saying we should abandon all laws which are derived from religious documents? Like murder and theft?

GLWyandotte · 09-13-2011, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexHassin

I’m sorry but how is “ because a religious book says something” and argument for a law at all in this country? This is America, not some third world tribe state. Dam it people start acting like it.

We are a country where 83% of people claim religious affiliation and 76% of them are Christians, we are about as far from third world as you can get.
Laws are based on commonalities in morality and human decency. The fact that so many of our laws have basic biblical premise should be a clue.
When the United States had a higher church-going population so many years ago, the crime rates weren't near what they are today. Chipping away at organized religion and the good it does is furthering the moral decay and creating a nation of thugs and dirtbags. I'm not saying if you don't go to church you are either of those, but denying that there are more people living now that have no regard for humanity is a serious case of denial.

AlexHassin · 09-13-2011, 12:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwalchmai

Are you saying we should abandon all laws which are derived from religious documents? Like murder and theft?

well considering how universal those laws are I don’t think any religion can lay a claim to them. (well ok maybe Shamash) also we see there codification by secular courts and governments. not to mention that they are, unlike the case hear, necessary rules of a state to maintain order and civilization. unlike this case we have plenty of laws that are created in our secular legal system that are just and necessary. Just because they also exist or do not exist in a religious book is only a reflection on how close their attempt at defining justice is to ours

gwalchmai · 09-13-2011, 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexHassin

well considering how universal those laws are I don’t think any religion can lay a claim to them. (well ok maybe Shamash) also we see there codification by secular courts and governments. not to mention that they are, unlike the case hear, necessary rules of a state to maintain order and civilization. unlike this case we have plenty of laws that are created in our secular legal system that are just and necessary. Just because they also exist or do not exist in a religious book is only a reflection on how close their attempt at defining justice is to ours

Could you help me out and provide a list of "laws that are created in our secular legal system that are just and necessary" which do not exist in the Bible?

AlexHassin · 09-13-2011, 12:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by GLWyandotte

We are a country where 83% of people claim religious affiliation and 76% of them are Christians, we are about as far from third world as you can get.
Laws are based on commonalities in morality and human decency. The fact that so many of our laws have basic biblical premise should be a clue.
When the United States had a higher church-going population so many years ago, the crime rates weren't near what they are today. Chipping away at organized religion and the good it does is furthering the moral decay and creating a nation of thugs and dirtbags. I'm not saying if you don't go to church you are either of those, but denying that there are more people living now that have no regard for humanity is a serious case of denial.

I don’t deny that at all. ( the common morality part) I feel its part of the reason we see very similar laws and legal ideas across cultures. Some things have to be in place for a society to run. Sometimes religions successfully capture these ideas and put them in writing. Unfortunately they also have some rules that well, might have appeared moral at the time but are not moral now. the problem is we seem to have an issue with people that cannot observe that and notice that what was moral 2000 years ago must be moral now.
As for the church and crime thing. If I am not mistaken form statistics the general trend has been downwards in crime. Some of it may be that I am lucky to live in a below average crime level city in a borough that despite still not being the best is improvising. There are a lot of facts contributing to high crime levels but I am not shore if church attendance is much of one. During spikes of crime we saw in the 60s and inter war years was there a decrees in church attendance? In the hood I live the big bad gangsters use to be Italians who generally are church goers. Not shore how much water your idea holds.

AlexHassin · 09-13-2011, 12:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwalchmai

Could you help me out and provide a list of "laws that are created in our secular legal system that are just and necessary" which do not exist in the Bible?

Don’t remember the list of laws in the bible. But I am pretty shore they lacked traffic and torts law.

GLWyandotte · 09-13-2011, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwalchmai

Could you help me out and provide a list of "laws that are created in our secular legal system that are just and necessary" which do not exist in the Bible?

Well, Gwalch, the only one I can think of is in Minnesota a person may not cross state lines with a duck atop his head.

It may be in Deuteronomy though.....

gwalchmai · 09-13-2011, 12:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexHassin

Don’t remember the list of laws in the bible. But I am pretty shore they lacked traffic and torts law.

I think there were similar laws, but can you be specific about anything substantial, that has helped people?

gwalchmai · 09-13-2011, 12:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by GLWyandotte

Well, Gwalch, the only one I can think of is in Minnesota a person may not cross state lines with a duck atop his head.

It may be in Deuteronomy though.....

I think Zule was bad about doing that...

AlexHassin · 09-13-2011, 12:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwalchmai

I think there were similar laws, but can you be specific about anything substantial, that has helped people?

Well less funny then the others we do outlaw slavery, remove silly restrictions on interest, and have child pornography laws. not to mention there are lots of bad laws in the bible we wisely do not fallow.

Bilbo Bagins · 09-13-2011, 12:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by PurplePirate

The NC House has decided to let voters decide next May as to whether or not they want to add a provision to the state constitution that defines marriage between one man and one woman.

I was just curious as to whether or not your state has a similar provision in your states constitution?

http://www.witn.com/home/headlines/129638638.html

Even voters in California of all places shot down gay marriage. I say let the voters vote on it, and the issue will die.

gwalchmai · 09-13-2011, 12:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexHassin

Well less funny then the others we do outlaw slavery, remove silly restrictions on interest, and have child pornography laws. not to mention there are lots of bad laws in the bible we wisely do not fallow.

I'm sorry, I can't understand what this gibberish has to do with the question I asked. Could you rephrase it?

Calico Jack · 09-13-2011, 13:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilbo Bagins

Even voters in California of all places shot down gay marriage. I say let the voters vote on it, and the issue will die.

That is what I found interesting. I wasn't even aware that it was being discussed in Raleigh, but I think it is going to get heated as the day to vote nears.

Another thing I find surprising is the amount of people on here that assume all people who oppose gay marriage are "religious zealots". That's like saying all people who support gay marriage are gay.

BlayGlock · 09-13-2011, 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by nelamvr6

I am saying that it is immoral to restrict someone's rights based on their sexual orientation.

And I am saying that it is immoral for a religious zealot to attempt to force his/her beliefs on others.

Is that what you meant?

Precisley, but ultimatley says who? Why is it immoral for a "religious zealot" to attempt to "force" his or her beliefs. Also, is that not what you are also doing, attempting through force of government to push your moral belief system by saying the "religious zealot" is not allowed to bring thier morality to the table of public discourse, but you are?

morrismma · 09-13-2011, 14:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilbo Bagins

Even voters in California of all places shot down gay marriage. I say let the voters vote on it, and the issue will die.

Fine then lets put everything on the table for voters to vote lets start with Gun issues(thats has about the same break down as gay marriages 75% aginst and 25% for).Why is it anybody business what People do if its not physically harming Anybody else? Its not!!!!