MovieChat Forums > Milk (2009) Discussion > I would really love an answer from our r...

I would really love an answer from our resident Christians...


This quote is from a Christian on the board about Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas (the extremist anti-gay family run religious cult that protests outside of funerals of US soldier because they believe America is too permissive of gays)!


"Well, actually, I'm one of many Christians [...] who shares the same view on homosexuality as Fred [Phelps] does [that it is sinful]. However, the difference between Fred [Phelps] and I is that I speak in love, while Fred [Phelps] speaks in hatred."



I wonder if you have ever stopped to consider that it was just basic ignorance of human sexuality and its diversity plus the need for large populations for basic defense (hence any sexual acts which did not lead to procreation were discouraged) AND it was those factors which led these bronze age tribes to consider homosexuality a "sin"?

Keep in mind they also thought mixing different fibers was a sin and that eating pork was a sin but I don't see anyone protesting outside Wendy's trying to save people from the evil of bacon cheese burgers??!!

But here is my very biggest complaint:

Jesus himself spoke out against divorce at the marriage of Canna where he stated: "What god hath brought together let no man put asunder."

Now I don't know what your interpretation of Jesus' words are but I suspect he considered getting a divorce as a very big offense, and if the divorced people remarry they then commit adultery... Yet another sin! But in the entire time I have been alive (well over 50 years) I have never, ever heard a religious leader speak out against divorce and never has there been a push to make divorce illegal anywhere (in fact they have made the dissolution of a marriage extremely easy, simple and quick).

I have to wonder why something that Jesus himself clearly called wrong is completely disregarded and almost never called a sin (except by the Catholics and even they let people $lide with expen$ive annulment$). Yet an act of love between two consenting adults deserves votes and laws, and amendments and vitriolic hatred??!!???

Please explain to me why I should not conclude that the coordinated religious agenda against gays is being motivated by ordinary "leftover" prejudice and bigotry and has absolutely NOTHING WHAT-SO-EVER to do with sin, morality or what is right and wrong!

I really, really would love to understand how a real "Christian" answers this???



reply

"Now I don't know what your interpretation of Jesus' words are but I suspect he considered getting a divorce as a very big offense, and if the divorced people remarry they then commit adultery... Yet another sin! But in the entire time I have been alive (well over 50 years) I have never, ever heard a religious leader speak out against divorce and never has there been a push to make divorce illegal anywhere (in fact they have made the dissolution of a marriage extremely easy, simple and quick). I have to wonder why something that Jesus himself clearly called wrong is completely disregarded and almost never called a sin (except by the Catholics and even they let people $lide with expen$ive annulment$). Yet an act of love between two consenting adults deserves votes and laws, and amendments and vitriolic hatred??!!??? "

Good luck getting responses. I've been saying the same thing about this blatant hypocrisy. By the numbers in the U.S. population, how many more people are affected by heterosexual divorce, than would be in any way by same-sex marriage? Yet where are the priorities?

reply

[deleted]



Good luck getting responses. [] I've been saying the same thing about this blatant hypocrisy. By the numbers in the U.S. population, how many more people are affected by heterosexual divorce, than would be in any way by same-sex marriage? Yet where are the priorities?


Yeah, what the hell could they possible answer since the "logic" is pretty iornclad? However, I refuse to let these slimebag religious bigot (ESPECIALLY THE "LOVING" CHRISTIAN ONES) just ignore this issue.

Here is what I am going to do and I suggest every gay person (or those bright non bigoted heterosexuals) do it too!!! Re-post my entire Original Post from this thread into every forum where gay rights or gay marriage is being discussed by "so called" religious people!!

For years the prejudiced religious bastards have attempted (and as in the case of California and Maine succeeding) to ruin my chances at real equality; they deserve to be confronted endlessly with the real cruel truth of their intentions! It is NOT concern for "tradition" marriage (whatever the hell that is??!!) and not because homosexuality is a sin but simply because they want to hold onto their irrational fear and hatred of gay people and religion become a perfect and easy excuse.

Well, it stops here and now...

Come on Christians, show some balls and answer my original post. Explain, using the bible, logic, history or whatever why homosexuality is a bigger, more important "sin" and a "bigger" threat to marriage then divorce or adultery..,

WE ARE ALL WAITING BREATHLESSLY FOR YOU ANSWERS!!!

reply

alpeaston,

This may not be what you are looking for, but I'll tell you EXACTLY how a real Christian justifies this hypocrisy: they don't.

See, I've been a Christian for years. And while as a child I had the tendency to simply parrot my family and church's beliefs on homosexuality (and the larger political spectrum as a whole), as a reasonably intelligent adult, I've learned to evaluate things for myself, and I find no discrepancy in believing in Christ AND supporting gay rights. After all, I find little in the Bible that justifies blanketing an entire group with hate, or, for that matter, finds Jesus (the obvious figurehead of Christianity) at odds with homosexuality in the first place. I do, however, see the harmfulness of divorce, especially as it pertains to the family.

But that's just me. Some Christians choose love, some find it easier to hold on to archaic prejudices. :)

reply

louderthandrew,
Thanks! It is very encouraging that, someone who is a Christian, can also see what I see; that the bigotry against gays is not based on religion or dogma but just plain old "left over" prejudice. You cam also see that there are so many other areas where Christian could put their money and effort.

It is easy to understand why Christians do NOT want to toughen divorce laws - because they want the "right" to avail themselves of divorce (keep in mind here that Christian have a higher divorce rate then either atheists or, where gay marriage is available, gays!.

I image, if gays and atheists banded together to toughen or change the divorce laws, that Christians would be furious that their "choice" to divorce was being challenged.

I wish we were willing to do it... Might be fun to give these hypocrites a taste of their own BS.

reply

God Send Death1!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TzcANOHiDo

reply

[deleted]

"I think the reason Christian put less emphasis on divorce is because, well, the majority of the time it just HAS to happen. Marriages go through turmoil, spousal abuse, one person gets saved and the other doesn't, and the only solution is to rid yourself of that person for the sake of your well-being."

But according to the Bible, your "well-being" isn't allowed to trump remaining in such a volatile marriage. So it is assumed that one is supposed to tolerate the termoil, spousal abuse, "getting saved" or not....the only allowable Biblical exception is adultery.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

"God equally hates homosexuality and divorce. I was not trying to say that divorce was any less of a sin than homosexuality is. I was trying to explain that I think Christians put more emphasis on one of them because the situation is different."

Different yet equally unacceptable Biblically. So although you are only speaking for yourself, surely you can admit based upon this, that a great number of other Christians are in fact complete hypocrites when it comes to comparing the implications of divorce and homosexuality. Right? Pretty simple question here, ofuoku71.

reply

[deleted]



They should. A sin is a sin. God equally hates homosexuality and divorce. I was not trying to say that divorce was any less of a sin than homosexuality is. I was trying to explain that I think Christians put more emphasis on one of them because the situation is different.


Yeah, only 10 % (or less by Christian standards) of the population are gay but 50% of heterosexuals want the OPTION to divorce if they are UNHAPPY (and there is no scripture that say UNHAPPY is a valid reason for a divorce - in fact the only reason given in the bible was adultery). But that's the difference; its not about scripture or religion or anything else, it is the difference of what the "majority" wants as opposed to a left over prejudice that cretins over 35 can't let go.

The constitution was created to protect US Citizens from "MOB" (Majority) rule. That is why denying gay marriage is wrong, it is being denied out of a religious "prejudice" and has nothing to do the civil and legal aspect of it!

The really great news is that in the under 35 crowd, they get it! Even if we don't get gay marriage, they will - it is just a matter of time.

I just wish I had more time so I can see it happen!



"Atheism is a 'Religion' sort of like NOT collecting stamps is a hobby!!!"

reply

You are a dishonest piece of filth.
The Westboro Baptist Church????

They don't represent Christians and they certainly don't speak for Baptists.
This is a fringe bunch of radical nutjobs that protest with their vulgar signs at the funerals of serviceman who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan.
They represent Christians like the Ku Klux Klan represents White people.

Whenever you make a dishonest argument like this, it makes your agenda look even more pathetic than it already is. It is this kind of crap that turns the public against you and is why Americans continue to be squarely against gay marriage.

reply

Al never said or implied that the Westboro Baptist Church represented Christianity in general, and your attempt to vilify him with this implication is just as pathetic as the behavior of which you're accusing him (behavior which, for the record, did not actually occur).

Of course Fred Phelps is a radical fringe nutjob, but he also has a huge number of vocal supporters (and, one might imagine, a fair number who agree with him but are smart enough to keep rather quiet about it).

Exactly what was "dishonest" about referring to Fred Phelps (a real man with a real, hateful, anti-gay agenda)? What was "dishonest" about supplying a direct quote from one of his supporters? What was dishonest about asking a valid question regarding what appears to be, at least from the perspective of an outsider, a fundamental Christian hypocrisy?

So you think that gay people wanting the right to marry is a "pathetic agenda". Fine. But your disgusting accusation that you and "the public" would turn against us because of something like this? That is the truly pathetic behavior on this thread.
Here's what it looks like to me. You're fully aware that the Christian obsession with homosexuals cannot be reconciled, biblically, with their general refusal to take exception to divorce. Rather than be forced to answer that hypocrisy, you manufacture a false offense - this fiction that Al accused all Christians of being like Phelps - and then blame homosexuals for your hatred of them.

Wrong.

You're "squarely against gay marriage" because you don't like gay people. You justify your personal dislike for gay people by using the bible. And you ignore other rules in the bible because they're not convenient to you.

Which is exactly the point that Al was making in the first place. Congratulations, you've demonstrated the precise hypocrisy he was trying to bring to light.




I am the sod-off shotgun.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I'm not going to restate my position. It's all been done before.

'Almost' doesn't count. I don't see a federal law allowing this craziness in the near future. Once you convince the brain deads that rights you have never had are being 'taken away', you might get it.

I'm not going to relive past debates but every time interracial marriage, womens' rights, civil rights, court precedent, the 'homophobe' and "intolerance' name calling is brought up, you immediately lose the argument. None of this is germaine and/or true. Hadmatter told a lie about me hating gays. He also lied saying I was using the bible and religion in my comments. Also lies. This is how you do business. You don't HAVE an argument. It is based entirely on your own selfish demands and hope.

I'm not 'afraid' of further debate. You have nothing new and our side has won each time. As far as 'court cases' are concerned, when you win at the Supreme Court, the place you lost 39 years ago, you will have succeeeded in 'winning'.
It certainly could happen one day, so good luck.

reply

[deleted]

There's no 'pressure'. I've engaged in these so-called arguments with the pro-gay marriage side as have many others. You always come out on the short side because as I stated, you don't have a valid agument. It is just something that you want and hope for. Been there, done that. I illustrated how hadmatter told three lies in that one post about me and you misdirected the conversation to the Prop 8 proponents. Stefan, you're absolutely full of sh-t. You're living a delusional life.

You just keep on believing that you're as normal as the rest of us and that you have every 'right' to be married. Keep on believing that Baker v. Nelson isn't the controlling federal precedent on this issue. Meanwhile, the United States refuses to recognize this folly as 'marriage' as does most of the world. Keep hoping, wishing, and wanting. I'll keep laughing at your baseless
'arguments' and you can go waste your time trying to convince someone else.
So long, chump.

reply

I think you are confused.

Human beings are born with the 'right'... to be human beings. To live and love and exist as they see fit... the ONLY other 'right' - we, as a people are entitled to, is the right to live free from harm from our fellow man.

The state does not, our rights as human beings, make.

So, yes -according to being born- we all deserve these fundamental 'rights' and -according to being born- when one isn't allowed to pursue these "GOD-GIVEN" rights, they are having something, which is inherently human, taken away from them.

I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand.

You're really into Jesus, and Jesus was really into this whole concept. Tolerance, acceptance, compassion, forgiveness, humility...

At least, this is what I'm told. Judging from the words/behaviours of many of his so-called 'disciples', I believe HE has been let down.

I find it sad that a 'message' that was supposed to represent goodness and purity of heart, is (consistently even, historically speaking) used as tool of oppression, hatred, and as a conduit to the ugliest parts of mankind's soul.

reply

You're right; I misspoke. Have to admit I saw 'Westboro Baptist Church', scanned the post, saw the usual rhetoric and thought he was speaking about just them. He even mentions their funeral antics in the lead paragraph! My bad. I apologize to Al for my remarks re: this.

Now to the rest of your post, hadmatter.
It is my belief that the public isn't coming around on gay marriage for a number of reasons and much of it has to do with the way this has been presented. Most of it is based on half-truths, outright lies, and a demand for phantom 'rights' that do not exist. This has been discussed before at length and I'm not going to get involved in that again. It's just so easy to pick your arguments apart. I've done it on several boards and so have others. You don't have a leg to stand on so you play the 'equal rights' card. It's become boring because you guys lose the debate every time.

The reason I am against gay marriage has nothing to do with liking or disliking gays. It has to do with good old fashioned common sense. I happen to like most of the gay people I interact with on a regular basis. I'd even go so far as to say I like a larger percentage of them than heteros. They tend to be nicer, less aggressive, and share my love for animals.

'You justify your personal dislike for gay people by using the bible. And you ignore other rules in the bible because they're not convenient to you.'

This is one of those outright lies that I just spoke of. I never stated that religion or the bible have anything to do with my position on gay marriage. You just made that up. I happen to be agnostic. Thanks for proving my point.



reply

You don't have a leg to stand on so you play the 'equal rights' card. It's become boring because you guys lose the debate every time.


Not really. "Equal rights" is winning us this debate, and it's not taking any longer than we expected.

The reason I am against gay marriage has nothing to do with liking or disliking gays. It has to do with good old fashioned common sense.


And you call me a liar?

There is no "common sense" reason for a person to be opposed to gay marriage, because unless you're gay and want to get married, it has no effect on you at all. If you can demonstrate how gay marriage will negatively impact you, then perhaps you'll have an argument, but you clearly can't.

This is one of those outright lies that I just spoke of. I never stated that religion or the bible have anything to do with my position on gay marriage. You just made that up. I happen to be agnostic. Thanks for proving my point.


For me to be telling a lie, you'd actually have to prove that I knew I wasn't telling the truth. When you come in preaching against gay marriage and defending baptists, one can only draw a conclusion from context.




I am the sod-off shotgun.

reply

Not really. "Equal rights" is winning us this debate, and it's not taking any longer than we expected.


Right. That's why gays still cannot marry in most of the U.S., and much of the world. You're as delusional as stefanwhatsizname.
You already have equal rights.
The laws apply to everyone. Adult men can marry adult women and vice-versa.
If you are a man, it would apply to you as well

There is no "common sense" reason for a person to be opposed to gay marriage, because unless you're gay and want to get married, it has no effect on you at all. If you can demonstrate how gay marriage will negatively impact you, then perhaps you'll have an argument, but you clearly can't.


LOL!! I love you guys. You live in a constant state of denial. This has nothing to do with a marriage making a direct impact on my life. It has everything to do with society endorsing a 'marriage' among two people of the same gender. It is absolutely ridiculous. When a union of two homosexuals can biologically produce a family, we'll talk. Until that happens, you sound like an idiot.

For me to be telling a lie, you'd actually have to prove that I knew I wasn't telling the truth. When you come in preaching against gay marriage and defending baptists, one can only draw a conclusion from context.


LOL!!!!! The only thing I stated was that Westboro doesn't represent Christians anymore than the KKK reps White people. You sat there and fired off three lies about me and now you throw out even more bullsh-t that these were "conclusions you drew from context". This is nothing more than the hateful rhetoric that you regularly manufacture when someone opposes gay marriage and is precisely why people are turned off by it. Since you have no basis for your position, this is the only tactic that remains; lies, personal attacks, and the victim card. And you wonder why people despise you and your silly agenda.

reply

You already have equal rights.
The laws apply to everyone. Adult men can marry adult women and vice-versa.
If you are a man, it would apply to you as well


Wrong. Marriage is about a commitment between two people. You can marry the person you love. Until I can marry the consenting adult that I love, we do not have equal rights. End of story.

This has nothing to do with a marriage making a direct impact on my life. It has everything to do with society endorsing a 'marriage' among two people of the same gender. It is absolutely ridiculous. When a union of two homosexuals can biologically produce a family, we'll talk. Until that happens, you sound like an idiot.


As soon as you can prove that the purpose of marriage is to produce a family, we'll talk. Until that happens, you sound like an idiot, and every childless marriage must really get you hot under the collar.

And it has EVERYTHING to do with marriage making a direct impact on your life. If it doesn't, then your opinion on the matter is really quite meaningless.

That being said, if the federal government rescinds all special rights that are associated with marriage, then I'll consider us equal.

You sat there and fired off three lies about me and now you throw out even more bullsh-t that these were "conclusions you drew from context".


They were indeed. Can you prove otherwise?

This is nothing more than the hateful rhetoric that you regularly manufacture when someone opposes gay marriage and is precisely why people are turned off by it.


Oh, really? So nobody was opposed to gay marriage before? Nice try.

What this is, my ignorant friend, is the same hateful rhetoric that your type regularly employs. Wait until a supporter of gay rights says something you don't like, then tell them "that's why we're opposed to gay rights". You've already done that at least once in this thread.

Since you have no basis for your position


Other than "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"...

lies, personal attacks, and the victim card.


More like "accurate deductions, deserved personal attacks, and the righteous position of a second class citizen whose rights are being infringed." But I guess that's just splitting hairs.

And you wonder why people despise you and your silly agenda.


No, I don't. It's because of religion and fear.


I am the sod-off shotgun.

reply

Your latest message is composed of more of the same tired gay radical rhetoric. Every one of your half-baked arguments has been destroyed many times over by myself as well as others on this board. Too bad you still haven't come up with a valid REASON why governments should sanction a 'marriage' between two people of the same gender. Just because you desire it, doesn't mean that the feds are obligated to make an exception in the law to accomodate YOUR lifestyle. You're not as special as you think. You're just another schmuck who happens to prefer men. One day when you grow up and come out of your prison of delusions you might understand.

I will make my final reply to your last statement.
I said 'and you wonder why people despise you and your silly agenda' and you replied, 'No, I don't. It's because of religion and fear'.

I always get a kick out of radical loons like you who say that people 'fear' gays. Why would anyone 'fear' about 2% of the population that is wired differently sexually? The only thing people 'fear' is the fact that we have to listen to homosexual nutjobs drone on about how they believe they have the right to marry each other! Certainly, SOME folks are opposed to your agenda because of their religious beliefs, but those are the more hardcore folks, the ones who refuse to use birth control, and of course, those whacky Mormons. Most of us understand biology and have learned in grade school that the anus isn't a reproductive organ. We know that 'gay marriage' is an oxymoron.

Anyway, I've had enough laughs at your expense for awhile. I'll check back in a year or so when you'll no doubt still beating the same tired drum and begging to be like everyone else when you clearly are not.

reply

Your latest message is composed of more of the same tired gay radical rhetoric. Every one of your half-baked arguments has been destroyed many times over by myself as well as others on this board.


Whined about and denied, but never destroyed. You and your ilk seem to believe that merely disagreeing with someone counts as "winning".

Too bad you still haven't come up with a valid REASON why governments should sanction a 'marriage' between two people of the same gender.


Can you come up with a reason why a government should sanction a 'marriage' between two people of ANY gender?
As long as the government gives prizes to heterosexuals for being heterosexual, then we do not have equal rights. Either same-sex marriage should be legal, with all the same rights and rewards, or heterosexual marriage should come with NO ENDORSEMENT FROM THE GOVERNMENT.

I always get a kick out of radical loons like you who say that people 'fear' gays. Why would anyone 'fear' about 2% of the population that is wired differently sexually?


I don't know, scaredy-cat. You tell me.

Most of us understand biology and have learned in grade school that the anus isn't a reproductive organ. We know that 'gay marriage' is an oxymoron.


In spite of your denial, your argument is boiling down to a belief that marriage only exists for the purpose of reproduction. Which I can prove is untrue. Do you have any OTHER arguments, or is this the part where you run away because you've nothing else to say?





I am the sod-off shotgun.

reply

In spite of your denial, your argument is boiling down to a belief that marriage only exists for the purpose of reproduction. Which I can prove is untrue. Do you have any OTHER arguments, or is this the part where you run away because you've nothing else to say?


LOL! Another famous tactic by you losers is once someone says goodbye, you have to get the last word in and then accuse the opposition of 'running away'.
Since you are incredibly dense, I'll help you out this one time.

I've said about 3 or 4 times that these arguments have been done to death. The reproductive area of this debate has been discussed many times. There are always exceptions, and this is just another desperate attempt to make your unbelievable weak case. Yes, the exceptions here are sterile folks, older people, and couples that choose not to have children. These exceptions do not change the primary factors why marriage is between a man and woman. Homosexuals are just 2% of the population and have zero possibility of creating a family in a homosexual union. That's why, excepting the 9 or 10 small countries, the world continues to have marriage exclusively between opposite genders.

Can you come up with a reason why a government should sanction a 'marriage' between two people of ANY gender?
As long as the government gives prizes to heterosexuals for being heterosexual, then we do not have equal rights. Either same-sex marriage should be legal, with all the same rights and rewards, or heterosexual marriage should come with NO ENDORSEMENT FROM THE GOVERNMENT.


As usual, you sound like a spoiled child who isn't allowed to have his candy.
We don't have to provide any 'reasons'. The onus is on you to supply a valid argument because you are the ones that want the law changed.
Since you are unable to do this, the laws will remain as they are. Until it gets back to the Supreme Court, the only hope you have is to go state-to-state and play the whiny 'we want equal rights' card, even though you already have the same rights as every other citizen of the U.S. You happen to prefer your own gender and that's fine, but it isn't going to get you a marriage license.

I am confident that you will respond again because you have to get the last word even though you cannot win this debate. Unfortunately, it will fall on deaf ears. You can repeat the same tired nonsensical arguments to the next person who opposes this gay marriage scam.

See ya, chump

reply

"The reproductive area of this debate has been discussed many times. There are always exceptions, and this is just another desperate attempt to make your unbelievable weak case. Yes, the exceptions here are sterile folks, older people, and couples that choose not to have children. These exceptions do not change the primary factors why marriage is between a man and woman. Homosexuals are just 2% of the population and have zero possibility of creating a family in a homosexual union."

This is merely your grand personal societal planner opinion, which has nothing to do with the law. The contention of "this is the way it's always been so that's the way it should always be" is also not a legal conclusion. The debate is about a legal contract between two people, not about families, children, pets, houses with picket fences, tradition, religion, etc.... If any of this had legal merit, it would have been covered in the now concluded Proposition 8 trial.

reply

LOL! Another famous tactic by you losers is once someone says goodbye, you have to get the last word in and then accuse the opposition of 'running away'.


Hm, indeed. Nearly as famous as your frequent tactic of announcing that you're leaving so you don't have to support your position. Since, as we both know, it is completely unsupportable.

I've said about 3 or 4 times that these arguments have been done to death. The reproductive area of this debate has been discussed many times. There are always exceptions, and this is just another desperate attempt to make your unbelievable weak case. Yes, the exceptions here are sterile folks, older people, and couples that choose not to have children. These exceptions do not change the primary factors why marriage is between a man and woman.


The primary factors why marriage is between a man and a woman is because women were considered property which could be trades with other strong families to increase their social standing and forge bonds.
Since this is NO LONGER the primary reason that men and women marry each other, there must be a DIFFERENT reason why the contract still exists, yes? And it has nothing to do with reproduction. It's an idiotic suggestion! Reproduction is not contingent on marriage, and marriage is not contingent on reproduction. The two have NOTHING to do with each other.

Homosexuals are just 2% of the population


Care to prove that? I mean, it's not like it makes a difference, but you seem to love throwing that figure around as though it was significant.

and have zero possibility of creating a family in a homosexual union.


Duh?

That's why, excepting the 9 or 10 small countries, the world continues to have marriage exclusively between opposite genders.


You're only guessing about the reason, and you fail (as usual) to acknowledge the significance of WHICH countries have legalized same-sex marriage. It's not about size, darling.

We don't have to provide any 'reasons'. The onus is on you to supply a valid argument because you are the ones that want the law changed.


Not when you argument is that there is "NO REASON" for the government to sanction a union between members of the same gender. For this argument to be valid, there must (conversely) BE A REASON for the government to sanction a heterosexual union. If there is no such reason, then there is no such argument.

Since you are unable to do this, the laws will remain as they are.


That's what you think.

You happen to prefer your own gender and that's fine, but it isn't going to get you a marriage license.


Who says I want a marriage license? I just want the right. And in spite of your oft-repeated lies and obvious cognitive dissonance, I don't have equal rights.

I am confident that you will respond again because you have to get the last word even though you cannot win this debate.


Of course I will respond, because I am not afraid. And so far, since I have provided meaningful points while you have provided none aside from "This is how things have been and therefore this is how they shall remain!", I am winning this debate. In fact, anybody could win this debate if you're the only representative that the other side can conjure up. Have you got any tactics besides poking your head in, yelling "gay marriage is a scam!" and then running away before you have to hear all the reasons why you're wrong?





I am the sod-off shotgun.

reply

Since you are unable to do this, the laws will remain as they are.

Nice try, but DOMA was just struck down. Your attempt to keep gays down through bigotry and hatred is doomed.

Tell you what, if you don't like seeing gays get married in the US, why don't you try moving to places like North Korea? There you can enjoy having the government force you into leading the life THEY see fit.

reply

The question you pose isn't exactly an easy one to answer. This entire post is about Christians vs. homosexuals. Christians then will defend themselves with scriptures or opinions based on their beliefs, which in turn, offends homosexuals, and a battle occurs.

I will tell you what the probably is: Christians are their own worst enemies. I've been a christian all my life, I went to a christian high school, raised in a christian household, and been in the christian church all my night. However, I find it absolutely detestable that Christians are going out, in the name of God, and boycotting a homosexual's funeral. A human beings that was overseas, fighting for our rights to be a christian or a homosexual, who was good enough to fight and die along the sides of the other American soldiers, so why shouldn't he deserve and have the rights to a funeral of a true American hero? There is no real logical reason that a christian can give you.

This is the issue, Christians, because of how they are raised and what they believe, hold themselves higher then every other human being. They think because they are Christians, they are therefore entitled and they apparently have the right to tell people how to live their lives. After a christian is running around with a picket sign, screaming out homosexuals are going to hell, they go home and commit their own personal sins. But it isn't the same, because they're Christians. It's extremely hypocritical and disgusting. It's horrible to see how people run around, preaching about how it is their jobs to rid the world of homosexuals because "God told them too." God did not tell them to do that, they are using their religion for their own personal agenda.

As a christian, God called me to love. He called me to love everyone, not just other Christians. Now to answer the marriage question, as well as the shellfish dispute. Most Christians will tell you is it now ok to eat shellfish and pork and get tattoos and piercings and that basically Lev. and it's laws are no longer is play. They do this because when Jesus came, He lifted the law for Christians. Christians are no longer under the law, but under grace. No does that mean that Christians now have the right to go crazy and kill anyone they want, as depicted by Jesus? No of course now, because even though Jesus lifted the law, he also raised it for Christians. Before the sixth commandment, I believe, was though shall not murder. When Jesus came, He said, you shouldn't murder someone, but now if you hate someone in your heart, you have murdered them by hating them. So Jesus did away with certain laws and raised the bar on other laws.

Now marriage. Marriage is a difficult thing nowadays. Most Christians go into marriage with the attitude of " oh I love my partner sooooo much, so because I have so much love for them, God will sustain my marriage." And when that doesn't happen, they assume that God is telling them to divorce. That is a horrible assumption. For Christians, divorce shouldn't even be an option. Marriage is suppose to be a sacred promise that you make to your partner and God, that says that you will be with that person for the rest of your life, til death do you part isn't optional. But marriage isn't taken as seriously as it should be nowadays. It is spoken about in the Bible that if your spouse cheats on you, abuses you, or leaves you, then dirovce is permitted.

Now, as a Christian, I believe that all people are created equal. And that since we are all created equal, we should all have the same rights, and if someone doesn't think another person should have all the same rights, then they shouldn't count themselves any better then a nazi in WWII. Christians become very upset and defensive when someone threatens their rights as a religion group, but they don't seem to understand that they are doing the same thing to other people groups daily.

The whole thing is about respect. Do you respect other people's God given right to make their own life choices? I have several homosexual friends, who know that I'm a Christian and where I stand on these issues, they also know that I may or may not agree with some choices they make, as well as they may or may not agree with my choices I make in life. However, they do know that I respect the decisions they make in their lives. I respect their right to make the decision on how to live their lives. They know that, although I am a Christian, I am not going to start preaching to them about how homosexuality is the wrong way to go and that they are going to burn in hell, and blah blah blah. I'm going to let them live their lives, because I have no right to tell them otherwise. So as long as I respect them and their choices, and they respect me and my choices, we don't have issues.

The problem with Christians nowadays (and probably in the past also), is that they go around telling people how to live, when they themselves don't even live that way. It's horrible and extremely hypocritical. It's just like the abortion debate. Christians say that abortion is NEVER AN ANSWER!!! And although I can understand why they push that, understanding and condoning are two very different things. If a young lady gets raped or something happens, and a pregnancy occurs and an abortion is done, okay. I can understand how that can come to that conclusion. But if someone is out and they are just going with everyone and they have 6 or 7 abortions, then I don't think that's okay. You should have some kind of consequences to your actions. And if you don't agree with me on that, then that's fine, it's just an option. But I'm not changing it because of something that someone else says.

And before other Christians jump on me about what I'm saying about the Christian community, don't. You all know it's true. Christians cannot calm down for a second to get together and agree on anything. At least Mormons can all agree on what they believe, there are some many different kinds of Christians and whatnot, that we are always fighting over something or another. We are always attacking someone, or saying someone about something else. And we are always quick to point of the passage where it says that homosexuality is an abomination, or the point that life begins at, or whatever other passage that supports whatever we are saying at that time. (Never mind that most of the time that those passages are taken completely out of context.) But no one ever seems to consider the passage where Jesus says let the first among you who is without sin cast the first stone, or in Luke, where it says you who judge will also be judged. When those passages come into play everyone shies away. Remember something, Jesus didn't just die to cover Christians sins, He died and covered EVERYONE'S sins. Even at His death, He CRIED to His Father, to forgive the unbelievers, who were putting Him to death.

I could never understand why Christians would rather pick up a Bible and condemn others will it, then pick up a Bible and see people the way God sees them, and loves them to their best ability that God has given them.....

reply

[deleted]

08/15/10

Unless you have studied Canon Law as I have Then I suggest that you can keep quiet about matters that do not concern you, if you are NOT ROMAN CATHOLIC!

I am very tired of people spouting info. about a dogma that they DO NOT KNOW!!!

There are VERY strict lines drawn about annulment and Roman Catholics take this very seriously. So you can put away your $ signs.

I WILL NOT tollerate bigotry against Roman Catholics NO matter what form they may be!!

If you are a lapsed Catholic then go seek peace and keep your hatred to yourself!

If you are not, then again , do not spout info of which you do not know!

Just because you are over 50-ish does not mean that you are informed or intelligent!

Yes, everyone Catholic Bashing The Acceptable prejudice!

reply

Unless you have studied Canon Law as I have Then I suggest that you can keep quiet about matters that do not concern you, if you are NOT ROMAN CATHOLIC!


Then tell the stupid roman catholics to keep their stupid churchy fingers out of my business.


I am very tired of people spouting info. about a dogma that they DO NOT KNOW!!!


Fascinating. I feel the same way about you holier-than-thou god types shooting your mouths off about homosexuality.

There are VERY strict lines drawn about annulment and Roman Catholics take this very seriously. So you can put away your $ signs.


Your churches are made of gold and jewels. Put away your own $ signs first, ass hole.


I WILL NOT tollerate bigotry against Roman Catholics NO matter what form they may be!!


Yeah? What are you going to do about it? Damn me?

Yes, everyone Catholic Bashing The Acceptable prejudice!


Oh, poor poor you. It must be so challenging to be in the majority.


I am the sod-off shotgun.

reply

08/17/10

Just WHAT EXACTLY is YOUR BUSINESS!

ALL of the three main religions including Orthodox Judiaism and ISLAM have dim views on homosexuality.

I am not an Iman nor a Rabbi, so study their dogma and read the Holy Qaran (look it up), and you will see what I Mean!

To the line about gold and jewels, sounds like I am dealing with a brain washed WASP! Tell me as the Queen is the head of the Anglican Church then how much of her revenue has she donated to help the poor?? What British Monarch has ever done so. This in a country where they HUNG an 11 yr. old girl for stealing a loaf of bread (19th Century) Yeah sure old Queen Vicky really cared about the little people.

I can believe that you would rely on that nonsense, as it is someone else's bilge. Do you or more importantly can you, have an origional thought. When you actually find one then write back.

I do not damn because that is the Lord's domain to judge everyone NO matter what are their sins and to get off this, your blab was about Roman Catholics and annullment NOT on homosexuality, remember, do not go for the cheap jab; otherwise you are not worthy of my time!

And Roman Catholics are in the minority, (will you learn to do some research) instead of shooting off your "pie hole" notice I did not call you an ass hole as you did me. TACKY TACKY and a cheap shot!

Oh by the way there is the antidefamation league and the Catholic league.

What is exactly a sod-off shotgun? Like I really care!! REMEMBER read theHOLY Qaran first and the Tanakh. DO not waste my time!!

reply

Just WHAT EXACTLY is YOUR BUSINESS!

ALL of the three main religions including Orthodox Judiaism and ISLAM have dim views on homosexuality.

I am not an Iman nor a Rabbi, so study their dogma and read the Holy Qaran (look it up), and you will see what I Mean!


I already know. And guess what? Don't care. It matters not one bit whether your religion or any other has a "dim view" of homosexuality. MY SEXUALITY IS NOT YOUR BUSINESS unless WE ARE HAVING SEX WITH EACH OTHER.

Which, I guarantee, we are not.

To the line about gold and jewels, sounds like I am dealing with a brain washed WASP!


Or anybody that has ever seen a church, dumbass. You people are disgusting.

Tell me as the Queen is the head of the Anglican Church then how much of her revenue has she donated to help the poor?? What British Monarch has ever done so. This in a country where they HUNG an 11 yr. old girl for stealing a loaf of bread (19th Century) Yeah sure old Queen Vicky really cared about the little people.


And you think that trying to deflect attention onto somebody else's church is going to make me forget how disgusting you are?

I can believe that you would rely on that nonsense, as it is someone else's bilge.


What "nonsense"? Oh, you must mean what I have seen with my own eyes.

I do not damn because that is the Lord's domain to judge everyone NO matter what are their sins and to get off this, your blab was about Roman Catholics and annullment NOT on homosexuality, remember, do not go for the cheap jab; otherwise you are not worthy of my time!


No, it was about homosexuality. And I am not striving to be "worthy" of you in any way. But when you came on here whining about the poor defenseless (gigantic powerful and made-of-solid-gold) Roman Catholic Church, I had to comment.

And Roman Catholics are in the minority, (will you learn to do some research) instead of shooting off your "pie hole" notice I did not call you an ass hole as you did me. TACKY TACKY and a cheap shot!


Waah waah waah. The Catholic church is the largest religious body in the word. Christianity in general accounts for about a third of the ENTIRE POPULATION OF EARTH. You are not a minority. You people can fracture yourselves into five thousand denominations and cry "discrimination!" all you want, but it doesn't change the truth. You're huge, powerful, and in charge.

Not calling me an ass hole doesn't make you better than me, or make you less of an ass hole. Cheap shot, perhaps, but still true.

Oh by the way there is the antidefamation league and the Catholic league.


So what? Are you going to go tell on me for thinking your church and everyone who belongs to it are hypocritical monsters? Go ahead!

What is exactly a sod-off shotgun?


Go find yourself a working brain and a sense of humor. Maybe you can figure it out by yourself.

REMEMBER read theHOLY Qaran first and the Tanakh.


I've read the Qu'Ran. What's your point? Oh right, you don't have one, except to try to justify your own religion's sweeping hatred by comparing it to the sweeping hatred of other religions. But guess what? Three people beating up a defenseless gay guy in an alley are not more justified than one person beating up a defenseless gay guy in an alley.


I am the sod-off shotgun.

reply

Well, I am a Roman Catholic and I was raised to have nothing but respect and love for all people, regardless of their race, religion, or sexual orientation. I went to an all girls Catholic high school, the only one in my state, and I will attest that not even once were gay people bashed. Being gay was never taught to be a sin. The only thing concerning homosexuals that was ever labeled a sin was sex- and simply because gay sex is not life giving, and therefore premarital- we were taught that it is no more a sin than premarital sex... And honestly, who on this earth, gay or straight, has NOT participated in a form of premarital sex?

I will admit that I did not read all of the arguing and negative feedback on this thread because I honestly did not care to. At the end of the day, not one person on this Earth knows if the Bible is the 100% accurate word of God (so for all of my evangelical friends out there, do not throw Bible quotes at me. I am not looking for a debate). People are not perfect, and I'm sure that there was some word-twisting going on to better fit whatever agenda was going on at the time... The God I was raised to believe in is one of love, and I do not believe that He would condemn anyone for being homosexual- as we are led to believe that God creates all of us in his image- or that gay marriage is as big of a deal as people make it out to be. I'm pretty sure that at this point, God would rather see two gay people get married and honor the sacrament, rather than two heterosexual people get married and then divorce six months later, simply because they do not take it seriously, and because they take the right for granted.

Also, there is this separation of church and state thing that our country was founded upon...

Anyway, I hope this has given a glimor of hope to some people who fear that all Christians are hateful, hypocritical people.

reply

Homosexual feelings are not a sin.

Its homosexuals acts that are sinful.

Let's understand that right now.

reply

That's about rediculous. You're saying that I'm supposed to go through life and never have any kind of relationship?

reply

"Homosexual feelings are not a sin. Its homosexuals acts that are sinful. Let's understand that right now."

Well it depends on whether those "homosexual feelings" involve lust. How can a homo or hetero feeling that's sexual not involve lust? And of course, lust outside of [heterosexual] marriage is a terrible horrible terrible horrible thing that one should feel terribly horribly guilty about. Let's also understand that this is called passive aggressive behavior.

"You're saying that I'm supposed to go through life and never have any kind of relationship?"

Yeah. If you can't try harder and become heterosexual, it's really for your own good. There are people who can actually say this and not be kidding.

reply

Homosexual feelings are not a sin.

Its homosexuals acts that are sinful.

Let's understand that right now.


Potassium Man, you said in another thread that you find girl on girl action hot. Well that's just hypocritical. You're implying that it's okay for two girls to go at it with each other because you're into that but two men can't do the same?

And where did you get your source anyway? The BIBLE? The Bible also said it's a sin to wear a fabric of two different fibers (like polyester), touch pigskin (like football), and eat shellfish. Are THOSE sins, too? Grow up.

It's exactly attitudes like yours that make people turn against Christianity. As if straight people don't have pre-marital sex or get divorces. Where are the Christians judging them for their "sin" then? Hypocrites.

reply

[deleted]

I'm a Christian and I agree 100%. And as a gay man, that is the reason I remain a Christian. The anti-gay *beep* from Christians is just that: *beep*

To my knowledge, Jesus never spoke against homosexuality. There is evidence that the early Christians homosexually married with the blessings of the Church.

Hell, Jesus may have been a homosexual. He never married, surrounded Himself with men, and told people to hate their families, in so many words.

reply


I have a theory that a random guy came onto Luke...and he got offended so decided to make homosexuality an abomination. It is a man made book after all.

If all else fails you should join the Quakers...they love the gays.

reply