Vet43 Taqamada in Spain, They were preist that were suposedly a little to zelouse. Can you tell me what punishments those rogue preist(so called) where given?
Gary, Who is talking about Rome? What does Rome have to do with the topic at hand.
The witches that were burned to death were killed by Puritains. The Inqusition was mostly done by Taqamada in Spain, in the name of Christ. You have the right to your belief but others do not have to agree with every nuance of the bible. We all are loved by Jesus and God.
I recently have just survived a major church split.. We had about 1000 members. I was as some have told me a very faithful, loyal & zealous deacon for 17 yrs. I became increasingly concerned with the direction that the church was going, after several years of very heart wrenching attempts to try to help in the situation & of trying to reason with my pastor & the elders I final resigned my post of duty.. A few years latter the split happened & we found that there was pedophilia, adultery etc being covered up. These things liked to have killed me, for I had put my whole, heart & soul into serving the Lord.
Now with out crying on your shoulder any further & going into more details I think I can sympathize with you a little bit.
May I say that man will most certainly almost always let us down. I CAN TELL YOU FOR A FACT THAT RELIGOUSE HYPOCRITES ARE THE SINGLE BIGGEST STUMBLING BLOCK TO THE GOSPIL.
But remember this also, we know that we have counterfeit 20 $ bills floating around. We cant have phony 20$ bills with out there being a genuine 20$ bill to make the copy from. Same with true Christians.
The Bible says that in the last days that the hearts of many would wax cold because of inequity. That word inequity means to know to do write but refuse to do it. Now you have been negatively affected by others inequity. God will always come to a desperately cold heart & breath new life into it.
I like you have had the rug pulled out from under me, & I thank God for it every day. I can assure you if it hadn't of happened my heart would have never been softened & I could of never spoken to you & others like I am today. And I mean never.
Now my Father owns a cattle on a thousand hills, He certainly does not need my money for anything. But from a grateful & giving heart I give because there are needs present in the church, neighbors etc. It has been my definite experience that I have never been able to out give the Lord. But thats not the reason why I tithe.
I believe that the Lord has heard your prayer right now. This isn't about emotions either my brother. Don't give up.
Thanks Gary White
Gary. sparing some bs like god depends on his flock etc. Why dochurches need money from the flock? I mean come on, my grandmother gave a lot of money to a crook who ran a cult..uh congregation. I prayed for the first time that one of his family members would get raped like my grandmohter and family, but god didn't answer my prayer and my dreams didn't come true. Why doesn't god make money for his church? Provide for the poor. uh , its all a scam. People need to think " i am going to heaven", else I couldn't get their plant working butt to come in and get sick from chemicals. I remind them god will take care of you because of your undying faith, now get back in that hot tank of toxic chemicals and work!. It Works! If you ever sold cars, your boss probably told you your church friends are the best suckers for car sales.
Will You have just expressed what you belive in, Why cant some of us do the same? Do you think I like to hear your blasphemy? But its still your right.
I have seen several FAT, UGLY, Mean AND Stinking people in this town. I would make it illegal for these people to marry. I would rather two clean cut homosexualsmarry than to procreate the fat people taking the motorized cart filling up with food on their lonestar card at walmart.
Vet43 I would ask you respectivly NOT to conect what ROME did & does to any thing that you may find in the teachings of JESUS.
Geek, What makes you think there is a heaven??
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
Not sure who Bighorn is referring to, but I always try to answer questions directly put to me when I have the time - I currently don't but if someone recaps them for me I'll happily oblige later.
Who has claimed to be gay? Must have missed that. I have heard several folks, myself included take issue with some of the religious logic, but that would not be anti-Christian. Am a bit anti-fanatic from any religion because when anyone presents each word of a book written by mortal men to be the absolute "truth". I remember how the Inqusition worked out. Belief at the end of a hot poker is not the way to save souls.
RedRage...Me too! Especially the lesbian variety :)
I'd rather be governed by a Book of "Fairy Tails, than ruled by a bunch of fairies.
Anyone else notice that the most anti-Christian gay guy on this forum NEVER answers a question put to him?
Let each live his or her own life and spend more time on how we each live ours. I think this is a place that government should not play a part in anyone's life.
I love porn! :)
Easy my friend. People don't go to hell for wrong deeds, sins, etc. They go to hell for lack of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. You would know that if you read God's word, that book that you so hate, and not just rely on heresay or things you were taught or heard as a kid.
I want you and anyone else who cares to know, that not speaking out against what is wrong by God's standard is worse than judging. And I try not to judge people, but as if one of your love ones were having a problem with alcohol, drugs, porn, or any other sinful act, you should try your best to encourage them to walk away from that lifestyle.
Beakus, how do you expect to get into heaven with all that judging?
Geek. I will see you in heaven. You will be the one with the pink sunglasses and a little off the main drag. I will be one of the street sweepers wearing a baseball cap.
Now the big question. Will this Jerry Springer/Maury type article that the VA pushed into the headlines reach 200 comments, and if so, is that a record?
Also, thanks for the speeddate.com ad on this page.It could turn a lot of men on this post straight.
Really, who cares if these "women" get married. How does if affect anyone else's lives? Now hobos affect other peoples' lives. They stop us trying to get out of the Wal-Mart parking lot, begging for money. I'm more scared of hobos than homos. Can someone please help me with my hobophobia?
Exactly Rebecca! The thought of men sleeping with men is repulsive isn't it! And the other way...
Someone asked if I was gay, and "if not, why not?" I do not have a choice. I am attracted to men and have been as long as I can remember. I do have something in common with many gay men: the thought of sleeping with a woman repulses me. ;)
Maryann makes a wonderful point below regarding discriminating. Might I add that marriage is ipso facto discriminatory. It has always been practiced that marriage is something and different than other relationships. It even discriminates heterosexuals because the choice to marry one person (or a few as in some cultures) disqualifies the rest of the options. In our culture, it is fair game to marry one person, but not fair game to marry two.
I also agree with another poster below regarding some of the common good reasons for marriage, propagation of the species being an important one.
WWW that was a well thought out argument. However, to compare civil rights to people (how did you refer to it?) that "bump the same uglies"is insane at best. Think about it. It is not discriminating. It is knowing the difference between right and wrong. And in many voters eyes it is WRONG.
This discussion has devolved into a place I'm just not willing to follow. A small warning for those of you who presume to know where God's line is... Be careful. Pride is a dangerous thing. Also know that without question you are doing more damage to 'the Kingdom of God' than good. I think that can well be proven by the droves of people who just don't have time for intolerant nonsense and leave pews empty across the county...
For me it is time to let this one rest in this particular thread... To those who offer love and support to a misunderstood, over-judged, marginalized and discriminated against population: Thanks! You have our attention. The rest of you... We stopped listening the moment you looked down your nose at us.
I can leave knowing full well that progress cannot be halted and gay marriage is on the way.
Anywho... See ya in heaven!!! Mine will be the big hot pink mansion blaring the techno beat down the streets of gold. Although, I'll be a block off the main strip cuz gold doesn't go with my belt buckle. Brushed nickel, y'all! Feel free to drop in... I won't discriminate! Peace out!
BTW, polygamy is not only bi-sexual marriage. Sorry if I implied that.
WWW, sorry about that- we posted at about the same time.
But you could possibly be discriminating against three people who love/lust after one another and denying them the benefits of marriage.
You see, if you say you open up marriage for homosexuals, you really have no leg to stand on to deny three people to marry or to deny siblilngs to marry.
It's called bi-sexual marriage, and in Europe, it's more well, known.In fact in Germany (I am still looking for the link.) a German man married to a woman was petitioning to marry a bisexual woman. I I remember seeing the picture and the were all happy about it, especially the man.
Do support bi-sexual marriage?
This issue can be discussed without talking about religion.
WWW said, "MY purview to tell people who love each other -- or for that matter, lust over each other -- to not act on their love or lust or whatever they have."
Where do you draw the line, Windy? Or do you? After all, discrimination is discrimination.....
Are you for polygamy?
If I recall correctly, you stated you were for the legalization of plural marriage one of the MANY times in the last few years this topic has been discussed on here.
What about incest? If a brother and sister really love one another, what's to stop them. And in your books, lust counts too!
If you believe that two people of the same sex who love/lust after each other should be able to marry, then why not a bro and a sister?
MaryAnn...I didn't say I was in favor of three people marrying. I said it wouldn't bother me. I also said that I couldn't have two wives because I get in so much trouble with one wife that two might be fatal. (That part was kinda intended to be humerous. Maybe it missed the mark.)
Hictoria..."The beauty of this country is we are a democratic nation. You do not like the laws? Then vote. Just remember I can vote as well. I am certain there are more against than for. WINNING DUH!"
The beauty of this country is we are a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC -- not a democracy. We are a republic in order to protect the rights of the minorities from the tyranny of the majority.
I don't know how old you are, but I'm old enough to remember the protest marches and sit-ins of the civil rights movement. Laws had been passed by the majority to prevent black people from voting, eating in restaurants with whites, sitting anywhere on the bus, drinking from the same water fountains and marrying whites. The laws were changed, not by majority vote, but by the courts striking down the discriminatory laws of the Jim Crow era. America is a vastly different nation now than it was in 1960 -- different and vastly better. Gays are the only remaining group that are legally discriminated against under force of law. Just as the laws changed to allow black people to enter the American mainstream, eventually, laws and attitudes will change and gay people will realize full equality in American society. I probably won't live to see it, but it'll happen.
And remember, no body says you will have to be civil to gay people and you won't be required to invite them for dinner -- just like you don't have to invite your black neighbor for dinner, but you can't keep him from buying into the neighborhood.
Red Rage and anybody else: Do you really think that laws are not being changed because of the Bible? Do you think that politicians are being pressured by religious voters? Or, is it possible that there are bigger pressures being put upon our leaders? Do big companies think or talk about the Bible at Board Meetings? I bet not too many. They talk about profit.
The very first comment that Kyle made was "Remove all federal tax and legal benefits from the religious institute of marriage and confer them upon civil unions."
Maybe it is not so much the "religious" part but more so the economic part.
Vet43 - We get our understanding of what happened to dead people before the cross from the story of the Rich man and Lazarus, incorrectly called a parable by some.(Luke 16:19-31) No one could get into heaven before the Lord’s blood was shed for them, but those who died believing from their Old Testament studies that a redeemer was coming to save them from their sins went to a place the Jews called Abraham’s bosom or Paradise. It was a place of comfort. It’s where Lazarus went. Unbelievers went to a place of torment like the rich man. Both were in the “abode of the dead” called Sheol in Hebrew and Hades in the Greek. While in sight of each other there was a giant chasm that separated them so no one could cross from one side to the other. When Jesus died He went to Paradise (Luke 23:43) and when He rose He brought the faithful to Heaven with Him (Matt. 27:54-55) Since that time all who die in faith go straight into the presence of the Lord. The unsaved dead remain in torment till the end of the Millennium when they’re brought back to life for their final judgment.(Rev. 20:11-15)
As for those who die having never heard of Jesus (if there be any) Romans 1:18-20 tells us that the minimum requirement of every man is that having looked upon the Creation, he realize there is a God Who created it and therefore Him. My own view is that when that happens, God will move Heaven and Earth to bring someone to tell Him about Jesus.
Vet43 To him that much is given much will be required, to him that little is given little is required. Translated into laymen terms it means we as His creation can only walk in as much light as He gives us, what ever amount of that light or truth He gives us then that is what will be required of us.
Now in His kingdom as in a family there are diferent positions that diferent persons may fill. Jesus has a wife (bride) & children(church) freinds (those that a braught a cup of cold water) Many may have eternal life but not many will have the honerd position as His wife. His bride will go in the rapture the rest wont but they may still have eternally life. Hope that helps God Bless GW
ned, the issue holding it back is called the BIBLE...the book of fairy tales :)
Cute story about the dog. When he isn't humping does he tell lies. I know humans are very good at that and call it their "belief system".
wow. Just checking in. The conversation has certainly strayed. Ya'll are talking about religion now. Seems to me that any straying from the issue should lean toward economics/politics. Think about how gay marriage would impact certain industries. Can you think of any that would have a negative impact if gay marriage were legal? What do you think is REALLY holding this issue back?
There are some things that separate humans from lesser members of the animal kingdom. To say that homosexuality is perfectly normal behavior in humans because the lesser members of the animal kingdom exhibit homosexual traits is ridiculous.My cousin has a dog that humps everybody's leg. Does that mean that is perfectly acceptable and natural sexual behavior for humans? Maybe to some of you, but not me.
It boggles my mind how many people put so much "faith" into this book written by MAN. It's a fraud! These are most likely the same people that demanded proof that Obama was a US Citizen! They wanted to see his birth certificate...yet, when it comes to religion such as Christianity there is no proof, but they'll believe it. lol
We can't even trust our own politicians of today, yet you trust the men that put together the bible for their own agenda. Just sayin'
Beakus, Help me understand. Does your statement tell us that every soul that died before Jesus is in hell? People that have never heard of Jesus are in or going to hell? Adam and Eve? Moses? Every other religion that is not Christian?
Speakup, www, others...
Christianianity is very exclusive. There is only one way to go to heaven. It is not by being good, going to church, obeying the 10 commandments ( which are all mentioned in the NT except keeping the sabbath because we are no longer under the Jewish law), giving money to the church, praying, etc.....
Jesus Himself said, I am the way, the truth, and the life. NO ONE comes to the Father, except through ME.
He also said, God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever BELIEVES in Him shall never perish, but will have eteranal life.
Now you either believe that Jesus is a fool, a liar, or who He says He is and BELIEVE in Him. Believe what? Believe that He died on a cross for the payment for all your and my sins and by doing so you have remove the penalty of sin, which is death or eternal damnation. This is basic. If you don't believe this, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. So easy, even a child can understand. You just have to be willing to BELIEVE this in your heart.
You and I were taught differently about the Bible; my experience has not left me a bitter person. On the contrary, I can love those who love me, and I’m working on loving those who don’t.
Homosexuals have the same rights as I do: to marry another person of the opposite sex. If they want to “bump uglies,” as you say, that’s their concern.
Changing the definition of marriage, however, becomes my concern, as it will affect how I will lead my life.
For example, If gay marriage is legalized, then any church or religious organization that doesn't agree with same-sex marriage will likely come under intense pressure to either change their views or go silent because of "discrimination." The military chaplains in the US had a brush with this earllier this year, and I can find more on that if you like.
Marriage has always been discriminatory: minors can't marry, so far three people can't marry; cousins usually don't marry, nor can one marry a pet. Nothing new about marriage being discriminatory.
You are for three people being able to marry if I remember correctly? At least you're consistent!
Also, reading passages of the bible in church can become “hate speech.” That is already happening in Canada. Recently, judges imposed same-sex marriage in three Canadian provinces. Today, the Canadian Parliament is discussing a bill (C-250) that Canadians claim could be used to outlaw parts of the Bible as hate speech and could criminalize individuals in organizations that teach that same-sex contact is immoral. John Leo, columnist for U.S. News and World Report, wrote on April 19, "The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ruled that a newspaper ad listing biblical passages that oppose homosexuality was a human-rights offense. The commission ordered the paper and Hugh Owens, the man who placed the ad, to pay $1,500 each to three gay men who objected to it.
There are more examples where in Canada and in Europe where speaking out on one’s point of view on homosexual acts has landed people in the hoosegow after homosexual marriage was made legal.
In the United States, the dominance of anti-bias laws and rules limiting free speech and free exercise of religion is clear on campuses, not so clear in the real world. Still, First Amendment arguments are losing ground to anti-discrimination laws in many areas." (John Leo, "Stomping on Free Speech")
" How same-sex marriage threatens liberty http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?A...
After following this thread for a few days I have come to believe that it is not rather you agree with the bible but what parts you choose to follow.
It may be called the word of God but man wrote and changes to meet what fits their agenda. When ego thumps truth we are just telling ourselves "we" know what God meant to say so we are purer than thou.
Just to add a bit more for Kyle...I know you do not agree we should have laws in place for this, however...
The beauty of this country is we are a democratic nation. You do not like the laws? Then vote. Just remember I can vote as well. I am certain there are more against than for. WINNING DUH!
As I stated earlier WWW, where does it stop? I think it was our generation that screwed America up. Give an inch take a mile...People are changing for the worse IMO. The closet was a good place for those folks.
I believe thewaywardwind has articulated a point of view supremely well - one that I agree with completely and, admittedly, much better stated than my own comments on the subject.
Good work WWW.
MaryAnn...When I was a kid, I was taught that EVERY WORD in the bible from "In the beginning..." to The End was absolutely true and a person couldn't be a Christian and not believe that. You're saying that it's kinda yeah most of it's true, but some of it's not, and some of it that's true doesn't apply any more, but it's still the rule book and you've gotta believe to go to Heaven. The more I looked at it and read, the less I believed until I had an epiphany of my own and realized it was a crock. I can be a good person and lead a good life and love and respect my wife without the threats from religion. I believe as firmly as you, but I believe differently from you.
This life we have here is ALL we will ever have and we should try to make the most of it. It isn't in MY purview to tell people who love each other -- or for that matter, lust over each other -- to not act on their love or lust or whatever they have. All I ask is that gay or straight, it should not be harmful to anyone. If bumping uglies with another person of your own sex is what does it for you, I'm happy for you. If you are sickened by the idea of same sex, that's fine...just don't make laws against it.
I firmly believe that gay people wouldn't be so in your face about their sexuality if it wasn't for the laws against their sexuality and the hate directed their way. I believe they would be happy to live their lives the same way most folks do if they were left alone. The gay people I've known have much the same concerns as straight people...taxes, unemployment, potholes and will the Astros EVER win a world series.
Speakup The Bible is Gods eternal word as He is ever unfolding so is His Word. His Word can not be read & understod like a news article in a news paper. The 10 comandments are followed today because they are very much in continuity with Christ teachings. If I aproached the Word with your mind set than I might easily find my self building an arch so that I might be saved from the oncomming storms of judgement. Why not it worked once before for Noah & his family. We must be in harmony with the beat of the composer of the music that we are trying to play or else it will just a bunch of noise. Many of the stories in the Old Testament were shadows & types that were only for telling of things to come. ex they used to slay a lamb to have there sins covered, today you can slay that same lamb & it will avail you no benifits. It only for shadowed that Jesus would one day come & be that slain lamb for us.
The Bible says of it self that these things are hidden from the wise & prudent but revealed unto babes such as will learn. Thats why Jesus said that unless we become as a little child we wont the His kingdom.
I think Beakus was on the right track in his comments.
In the early Church the Christians encountered many Jews who wanted to convert, and one group of Christians insisted that they follow the Jewish Law first to be good Christians also. But, as the years passed, other Christians, including some of the remaining twelve Apostles realized this was not necessary.
At the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 it was decided by the Apostles that the new converts to Christianity did not have to hold to the Jewish dietary laws or most of the strict traditions of men. This is part of the letter to be read to the various groups of Christians in the ancient world:
"It is the decision of the Holy Spirit, and ours too, not to lay on you any burden beyond that which is strictly necessary, namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood from the meat of strangled animals, and from illicit sexual union. You will be advised to avoid these things. Fare well." Acts 15: 28-29
Christians have been relieved of the Jewish Old Testament dietary laws, but we are still bound to other OT teaching, such as the 10 Commandments.
It's not that we're picking and choosing. It's there for all to read. :-}
We need to keep these scenarios in mind if go down the path of so-called gay marriage recognition. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/a...
@Lovechild....I keep having the Visit New Zealand ads...I keep wondering if the VA will pay for it....would be glad to go!
I do believe I haven't voted for or passed any laws that restrict or impede the right of Christians to believe what they wish.
Are you a English citizen or can you vote here in America?
Lovechild you will be back.
Geesh folks, we’re topping 160 comments which survived the censors.That sneaky rascal CC sure knows how to trick the natives into hitting his website.This is enough for me, I’m moving on to the soul sister dating website.
"In America, it is not customary for a father to give his virgin daughters to a violent mob so that the mob can do whatever they want with them."
You can thank the age of enlightenment inspired deist Founding Fathers for creating a secular government for that
I do believe I haven't voted for or passed any laws that restrict or impede the right of Christians to believe what they wish. I do believe that some Christians have voted to restrict and impede the choices homosexuals can make regarding life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Who decides the rules and laws? Could it be those who are in control? It's very rare to see a prisoner command that he should be freed and have it acted upon, wouldn't you say?
As to your culture - I don't know you so I don't know what exactly you are referring to here but, if you mean being African American - then I don't see your issue with aligning yourself with others who have suffered, and continue to do so, poor treatment around the world and it is only right and fair for me to compare one form of prejudice with another.
In America, it is not customary for a father to give his virgin daughters to a violent mob so that the mob can do whatever they want with them.
May I sugest that is exactly what most fathers do when they alow there teenage daughter to go out in the public in there string bikinis & thongs. It could be said that we have surpased Sodom. Is it any wonder why most of the Arab world does not want our religeon & way of life?
Aren’t you treating Christians as inferior? Gee that is like the pot calling the kettle black. My problem with you isn’t over gays or gay marriage, but it is the cheap shots at Christians and the cheap way of debating an issue. On top of that, the cheap excuse of using the Black man and the history of my culture to justified something that is deemed questionable. Control is one thing and order is another. Control is to dictate lifestyles and movements of man. Order is the rules and laws that governs and protects man. What you think is control in this case is actually order. I don't give a tinker's damn whether you care or not!!!!!
The Top TEN Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Unamerican!!!
1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
I am neither ashamed nor concerned with your anger. I am quite happy to continue to compare methods of control and subjugation of two types of people who both share the common trait of being persecuted for who they were born as. Enslavement and persecution of sexual minorities are just two of almost infinite outcomes of treating others as inferior.
How anyone can believe the Bible is the word of God is beyond me. The bible is the biggest scam EVAR! More and more people are realizing it everyday. :)
God hates? How human...
How any bible believing, born again Christian, can condone the homosexual lifestyle is beyond me. We are taking a known sinful act that is talked about in God's word, the bible, and are legitamizing it on a cultural change. Beware believers. If your church, pastor, or fellow believers are telling you that this lifestyle is okay by God because He accepts all His people as they are, they are not speaking for the God of the bible. He loves every one of us, but He does not love sin, in fact, he hates sin. Every sin.
Sir Writein You are a man after my own hart.
God Bless GW
For the most part this nations beginnings & most of its laws were based on the teachings of the Bible.
Now we are at this nations ending as we knew at one time. Many of us Americans still want to maintain our Christian foundations & principals, laws etc. Now many Americans want little or nothing to do with these old religious sentiments any more. These issues have to be discussed so that the majority of the people can form an educated decision as to what kind of country they want in the future. If the majority don't want a Christian nation then they can chose that route. But for now as long as we call our selves a Christian nation then we must strive to follow His teachings. As long as we call our selves a Christian nation then we must remember that we will be judged under those standards by the Lord.
The churches have let the gays down? I would say that many of the churches openly receive the gays & even ordain them as ministers etc.
To me I let the gays down if I don't care enough about them to hear them out & then care enough to try & help them. To the best of my knowledge that is what Jesus did when a prostitute was dragged before him by some self righteous Jews who also had an attitude against Jesus. He forgave her & said GO & SIN NO MORE. True love is always corrective when correction is needed.
Now if a Christian church offers that kind of help to a gay or a drunkard or a drug user & then the gay says thanks but no thanks I am happy with my lifestyle, Then would it not be reasonable for that church to say we have nothing in common & there for it would be best for them to move on & find a group where they have similar beliefs & opinions?
If I were running a home where I was trying to help people stop smoking & a person came & demanded acceptance but was not at all interested in quiting smoking, wouldn't I be with in my reasonable rights to encourage the person to move on? Nothing personal but the kind of love that Ophre & the rest are trying to extend to the gays & others is not the kind of LOVE Jesus showed & expressed It is not the kind of love that will help them to live a truly happy & content life.
Just wondering, I thought this soul sister dating ad followed me out of one of my porn sites. Gotta hand it to the VA, taking the readers over new horizons this week.
If this were a poker game, all of your chips would be mine. The attacks on chirstianity from KYLE and the use of African-Americans and slavery to justfied gay marriage sickens and ANGERS ME. Kyle should be ashamed of himself. This is why history, REAL History, should be taught in schools.
lol @ Kyle!
I'm getting an African American dating site.
The one for African dating?
Am I the only person getting that dating advertisement on the left of this article?
Katasongbird, please show me where I have demonstrated any hate. Thankyou GW
We watched a movie a while back about the "Gay Nineties". I hope we don't burn in hell.
In fact, after reading many of the religious comments you might have a hard time getting enought for a decent poker game.
Far from worried about what you and the gays do redrage... I am just stating my opinion. Just as others are theirs.
Why are you so worried about what gay people do hicktoria? Are they stealing your crops?
Rebecca/Kyle, are you gay? If not, why not.
"It is unnatural for people of the same sex to do what they do"
No, it isn't:
"The observation of homosexual behavior in animals can be seen as both an argument for and against the acceptance of homosexuality in humans, and has been used especially against the claim that it is a peccatum contra naturam ('sin against nature'). For instance, homosexuality in animals was cited in the United States Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas which struck down the sodomy laws of 14 states"
Rebecca, It is unnatural for people of the same sex to do what they do. I do not think they should be allowed any benefits. I have guy friends that I love with all of my heart, but I would not marry them lol
Hick, do you not see a difference between a consensual relationship between two adults and an imagined relationship between a man and his pillow? Come on. I know these stories are fun for you, but if the only CON you can offer up, in a discussion of human rights, involves a man and his pillow-wife... It makes me think that when the only CON against certain freedoms involves FEAR or illogical leaps, like these stories, then legitimate valid freedoms are being denied.
Probably more but there ya go...
Here is another interesting read lol...
It is already happening Rebecca....
Hick, do dogs and cats consent to exclusive relationships with humans? You really believe that animals and inanimate objects can enter into a contract? We are talking about consenting adults who wish to profess an exclusive relationship. We are talking about human rights.
Personally, if a person wants to marry their cat then go for it. I really don't care :) meowwww lol
Where does it stop then? I personally think it is sick for same sex couples to do what they do. The next thing you know You will be called "old fogies" for not allowing a person to marry a freaking dog, cat, or a mannequin. Some lines you should not cross. If you want to be gay be gay. Just realize there are those who do not agree with your lifestyle and particularly get tired of hearing how "proud" you are of it. I could care less to be honest.
If you are reading these comments and you are a young gay person (or older gay person for that matter) who feels disowned by this community and a church that you love, please go here and look at this.
*sigh* No, Beakus... Wrong again. I've already tried to give you some helpful advice about making assumptions. I'm none of those things...
The point is this... Why do you assume your brand of truth is the correct one? There is a LOT of room in the Bible for personal interpretation and dialogue. Each denomination and even each individual within a denomination comes up with widely divergent views on anything from the method of baptism to the role of speaking in tongues as evidence of the manifestation of the Holy Spirit. It is simply arrogant to assume that your interpretation is the RIGHT one. Other very learned and devout people see things differently than you do.
Your assertions hurt people. And I realize that they are not yours alone. The church at large has failed the gay community. I don't mean to accuse you or make you feel bad, but understand that when Christians portray Christ as a callous and hurtful person and ignore what his true message was, then we all lose.
Think about this... On this forum, by and large, it is the non-Christians and atheists who are standing up for the marginalized and the least of these. What does that say to you about the state of things in the church?
To those of you to whom this does not apply, I'm grateful.
And Kyle...as always... You make me laugh! /hi5
After reading all of this, I suppose there’s a whole lotta folk in Victoria who use Ben-Straight when them muscles ache.
Geek. I apologize for assuming you were not a student of the bible.
I now assume you must be a pastor of a local ELCA who is trying to fit in with mainstream America instead of standing on the truth of God's word.
All the answers to your questions about how active homosexuals should be treated in the local church would be "no". Ask all the same questions about someone who is a "drunk", a "adulterer", etc.. If someone is not repentant for their sin, Paul gives good advice for those.
Victoria is changing little by little. Bigotted points of view are changing little by little. Just a few years ago you couldn't find anyone in the Crossroads supporting "gay" anything on the VicAd. Now you have a mixture of both. It's only a matter of time before gays will be treated equally, and like someone else wrote, you won't even look twice when you see same sex couples holding hands down the street. The younger generation really doesn't care if someone is gay. It's the older people that are still up in arms. As bad as it sounds all the old fogies will have to die off before more progress is made for gays. It'll all work out. It just takes time.
No, Kyle, I don't refer to anyone as a "freak of nature". Freak of Humanity? Perhaps.
If I understand, high estimates of "gaydom" puts their numbers at around 9-10% of the population, regardless of culture. Minority, yes. Freak, no.
And I have known several gay folk (both genders), including a first cousin who was claimed by AIDS. One common trait I have found is that these people are not at peace with themselves or their lifestyle choices. And self abuse is a frequent part of their lives. Sad.
As for the couple featured in the paper, I find some of their stories, just that. Fiction. Read their comment regarding "changing banks" due to being chastised by a teller in a drive thru window. Do you really think a drive thru teller could tell two women were kissing, or even "making out" from that kind of distance? I'm dubious. Also, questioning "who will take care of kids if something happens to me", they mention having wills. A will would supercede "community property laws" in the State. An attorney would have informed them as such. Which leads me to the conclusion that the "wills" are merely self written, non legal documents. Therefore, no will exists.
Makes me question the entire story.
EDIT - Ok, we should worry about others but in a helpful, giving way not a self-righteous, "you're a worse sinner than me" way.
The gays taste like gaysberries!
I have now gotten bogged down for way too long reading all of the comments made here. But I had to comment because I just get tired of people like Gary and others showing off their abilities to find a quote in the bible that proves their case. We Christians do this so often and though yes, we should be reading the bible, and yes by all means, let's use it as a tool to shape and refine ourselves, why, why WHY must we overlook so much in the process? I believe that the ones who should worry about homosexuality are those who are actually homosexual. I believe the rest of us have so much more we could be doing with our time and energy than judging and persecuting or even just worrying about others. We are not supposed to throw stones - any gay-hating "Christians" recall that? We are called to proclaim Jesus as Lord and to be fishers of men. But, I have a feeling this hate talk leaves our nets vpretty empty. We are also supposed to love and help the needy. So hey chuches in America - how 'bout we focus on loving our neighbors and providing shelter and food and water for those who don't have it rather than staying focused on a very difficult issue that is not ours to solve!!??
I personally am thankful that it is not my job to dictate how other people should love and live. Furthermore, there are so many truly evil and scary things in this world and I'm sorry that I don't think that homosexual love is one of them! Love is not easy to find so when two people actually find it, I kinda think it is a good and hopeful thing.
Now, no matter what responses you have for what I have said, I am done. I have wasted enough time on this discussion board. I'm gonna go find something worthwhile to do with my doing-the- best-I-can-to-be-a-true-Christian self.
Christ's peace to you all.
1 Corr 6:9 Know you not that the unrighteous shall not not inherite the kingdom of God? neither fornicators , nor EFFEMINTE, nor ABUSERS of them selves with mankind. Abusers: in the greek it means Sodomite, to defile
So it is a tired argument when I am criticising the linguistic approach to the arguments and trying to encourage a more respectful dialogue instead of the mudslinging accusation throwing dialogue that we have seen so far? I cant see how my advocacy goes for a win lose situation, but instead as Rawls argues leads to a just society. If we are going to progress to an equal society...a joint polite dialogue needs to happen...not personal attacks. Its late so I am hoping this makes some type of sense. Frankly both sides have been guilty of this. I am just trying to call it out. And I thought you would be better than give me the middle finger through a Willie Wonka quote.
Say what you will Mr. Tree... It's a tired argument based in 'I'm right, you're wrong' logic.
And this is the PERFECT day to have this discussion... For those who are gay there is no more poignant day to remember that Freedom isn't free. I am STARKLY aware that not only am I free because of the sacrifice of others, but that I'm not as free as you are. I remember what it takes to afford Liberty to the least of these. This may be a simple debate to you, Mr. Tree. But to me, this is very much about freedom.
Good day to you, sir.
I SAY, GOOD DAY!
TheGeek....the tolerance debate is focused on consistant use of intolerance while preaching tolerance and whether it would be a better strat to not call people who had religious beliefs as "mentally retarded" and believing in "fairy tales". It was a kritik of language and really advocates overall tolerance of beliefs instead of using 115 comments to cut each others throats. It is sad that this gets 115 comments on a day when we should be remembering those who died to give us the right to have 115 comments.
And that intolerance argument is so tired I could vomit...
The basic Right Wing line "You people want tolerance but you're so intolerant of our beliefs!!! Where's your tolerance now?"
We would certainly tolerate your belief regardless of what it was if you didn't try so darned hard to codify it into law! This is not a theocracy! The Religious Extremists boycott companies who support gay causes (even suicide prevention I might add), they attempt to add discrimination into State and Federal Constitutions, they attempt to block legal protections afforded other minorities, they work against gay couples adopting children, they work to silence gay straight alliances in school settings, they bar gay people from serving in and sometimes even ATTENDING their religious gatherings... I mean the list goes on and on!
Be as intolerant as you want in your house. But don't expect anyone to sit idly by while you attempt to legislate morality based on your particular dogmas. I would point out, the church itself is split on this issue. Maybe not AS MUCH here in Victoria, TX, but nationally and globally certainly that is so. How dare you attempt to codify your beliefs into the law of the land when you can't even agree on what they are.
So you cant defend your veiws sucesfully nor with out the use of insults? Whats the answere banishment!!! Live & let live, practise what you preach please. If I am not hapy & I feel this good I cant wait till true hapiness comes.
We may strongly disagree but I want you guys to know that I have nothing but good thoughts in my hart for all of you.
@Beakus said - Geek. You are like many others who do not study the bible. So on and so forth...etc etc... Oh, by the way, homosexuality is wrong in both the OT and NT.
I suppose I didn't study the Bible hard enough when I got my BA at a Baptist University in Christianity. Or perhaps for the decade I worked in the mainline protestant church as an intern, office worker, and minister. But I digress... (friendly suggestion... try not to make assumptions about the people you speak to on the internet.)
But to the subject...
The New Testament actually doesn't provide any direct guidance for understanding and making judgments about modern homosexuality in the today's culture.
Where the NT does talk of homosexuality (a word which by the way does not exist in Greek - the NT language) it looks as if it is referring to a very particular type of same sex relation. It also bases a lot of premises about homosexuality in facts and language that are now regarded as highly dubious. It may well be true that we could paraphrase what the NT says about 'gayness' as follows:
If homosexuality is exploitive, then it is wrong; if homosexuality is rooted in idolatry, then it is wrong; if homosexuality represents a denial of one’s own true nature, then it is wrong; if homosexuality is an expression of insatiable lust, then it is wrong. But we could say exactly the same thing about heterosexuality, couldn’t we?
However, if homosexuality (as defined in today's culture) is not any of the above things then in point of face, the NT has nothing to say about it. In fact, the Pauline scholar Victor Paul Furnish says it like this.
"[Paul’s] letters . . . cannot yield any specific answers to the questions being faced in the modern church. Shall practicing homosexuals be admitted to church membership? Shall they be accorded responsibilities within a congregation? Shall they be commissioned to the church’s ministry? The Apostle never asks or answers these questions. . . . On these points there are no proof texts available one way or the other. It is mistaken to invoke Paul’s name in support of any specific position on these matters." To the point... the NT says nothing about whether homosexuality per se is good or bad or simply a fact of life.
In light of all Paul's writings and his message throughout the work it may even be that he would say something like this to the intolerant church of present day.
'For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is not male and female, there is neither homosexual nor heterosexual; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.'
I agree with you rosie. I am not against gays but I do like for them to show their affections for each other in their own privacy and not in public. BTW I feel the same about regular couples also. Get a damm room you do not have to make a statement about your feelings about each other in public. But Advocate you run a story and then do not let your readers comment on it. That is chicken caca.
Regardless of which side of this (or any other) argument you are on, PLEASE stop using the term "retard' or "mentally retarded" for those with whom you disagree!
Admittedly, homosexuals have some way to go before they reach the lofty heights of first cousins in this country...
John Rawles states that a just society must tolerate the intolerant otherwise it itself becomes intolerant. This is of course as Popper and Rawles both advocate except in times of extreme self-preservation. The problem with your popper argument is that it does not define who is the tolerant and intolerant. It becomes a circular argument that means that you become intolerant because of the intolerant, but then you yourself fall down the intolerant shoot and then someone must become intolerant because you are intolerant. I would love to know what religious system you would view (major not some random one church group) that you would tolerate....as far as I have seen, it has been none at least from your language...calling people that believe in a God as "mentally retarded", "believing in fairy tails", etc.
I'll defend any religious belief system as long as it doesn't interfere with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all citizens - not just some.
How are we interfering?? Are you going to let some words spoken by retards(your words) out of a fairy tale book (your words) ruin & so miserably affect your life?
This is, apparently, a case of "To each, His own". I personally think it is morally wrong and rather sickening. Those on the other side think that I'm prejudice, stupid, and uninformed for feeling the way I do. So what? Neither side is going to ever see it in a different way. No amount of name calling is going to be able to change our view of the matter, so quit trying.
Kyle, that is true but through out history there were times & places where they definantly escalated in there evil ways. It was prophesised that in the last days that esculation would be on the increase more than the norm.
How hard was it 50 yrs ago to get dirty magizens? child porn? adult porn, live porn? Today its on mainstream TV every night, pay per veiw, internet, novels & strip clubs every where in most any town. Go to the beaches & you will see real time homosexual acts consistantly, they are bold with it, brazen, its in your face with an attitude.
I'll leave it to Popper, since he framed it so well:
"Indeed, tolerance is doomed if it is extended to the intolerant, something philosopher Karl Popper worked out in the last century. “Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed and tolerance with them… We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.”
Or is it being intolerance while you are preaching tolerance not not putting up with intolerance? How can people who are intolerant learn to be tolerant if the example being set for them is also intolerant towards that people group? It's a performative contradiction at it's core.
Obviously it's intolerant not to tolerate intolerance...
wow Kyle you preach for tolerance for one people groups and beliefs but act intolerant to other people groups and beliefs. Are some groups beliefs more worthy of respect than others?
Those "sins" were being practiced far and wide before the fairy tales in the Bible, Gary - and they will be continued to be practiced for as long as we have sexual desires.
Don't swallow your moral code in tablet form.
Rebecaa, ask Elisebeth Smart how far we are from Sodom. Futher more the man in your own backyard that got 20 months for taking vulgar body pictures of little girls, do you think he wont be out in less than a year? & then go right back to try & full fill his masters desires? Our modern day word for sodomy comes from the city of Sodom. The perverted forms of sex that was so widly practised in Sodom is now widly being practicesd here in the U.S. just like Bible predicted.
Bighorn, I do not dismiss your subjective experiences but I will add that the gay and lesbian folk I have known have, for the most part, had wonderful childhoods and led "normal" happy lives.
How do you explain them? Freaks of freaks of nature?
"Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Sexual orientation is therefore not a choice." - The Royal College of Psychiatrists stated in 2007
"Currently, there is no scientific consensus about the specific factors that cause an individual to become heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual—including possible biological, psychological, or social effects of the parents’ sexual orientation. However, the available evidence indicates that the vast majority of lesbian and gay adults were raised by heterosexual parents and the vast majority of children raised by lesbian and gay parents eventually grow up to be heterosexual." -The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers stated in 2006
Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab state in the abstract of their 2010 study, "The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation."
No Where does The New Testament encourage or promote the type of slavery that we had durring the cival war. Some of the slave owners treid to message the scriptures in order to justify the sin of slavery in there day & it did not work. Old Testemant style of slavery was called bound servants. In some cases it was more closer to a employ/employer type of relationship.
This was still present in Israel after the Lords crucifiction, & so it was mentioned in the NT.
The NT does not condone slavery but it does condem gays & there lifestyles. No one here is sugesting that gays should be treated cruelly. Because I/we refuse to recognise them as a lawfull mariage is not persecution.
They are the ones that (some times militintly) demand acceptance of a union that is un natural, un healthy & un Holy. I do belive there un healthy life styles are an economic burden on the tax payers.
I doubt that the Lord will ever aquire the habit of obeying the people that HE created. Nor will satan ever like to be told no.
The Lord will not necesarily destroy this nation just because it has rebelled against His out stretched hands of mercey. but rather He will let us destroy ourselves with our own wisdom.
Some of you want to declare independence (freedom) from the Lord & so he will let you have it.
The mercey that you will one day hope for could be being extended to you right now, dont miss it my freinds.
Many thanks Gary White
www Your wrong again. Me and a lot of others will never walk down the street and pass a same sex married couple and think nothing of it. It is wrong, unnatural, and sinful. In the eyes of the Lord that will never change, so why should we? That couple is no better or worse than I am, we are all just sinners. But when we start calling sin normal and acceptable, we have gone astray.
Geek. You are like many others who do not study the bible. The old testament was written to the nation of Isreal, God's people. He gave the law to Moses and it was for the Hebrews, not the Gentiles. Then in the new testament God completed His promise. He sent His Son to be the Savior of all mankind. When was the last time you saw someone sacrifice an animal, observe all the feasts of the OT, etc...?? We Christians today are not tied to the law of the old testament, we should be living our lives under the grace given to us (gentiles) through the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Take some time and think about the difference, and if it doesn't make any sense, look up and read about Dispensationalism and things should make a little more since biblically speaking. Oh, by the way, homosexuality is wrong in both the OT and NT.
No, Kyle, you are wrong. I know, and have known several homosexuals of both genders. I have them all to be gentle, kind folk, with terrible turmoil in their lives due to self abuse, depression, and other maladies brought on by their CHOICES.
And don't flag me with cliches.....I can see the responses already.
Go read the revised AMA Journal. I will relive on experiences with the like to determine my CHOICES. Pressure and contributions from any fringe can motivate ANY group to endorse ANY behavior, no matter how abhorant.
It appears that your Anti-Christian views jade your opinion on any matter. Perhaps self examination is needed...
I don't know if you have seen this or not.
A.J. Jacobs "My year of living biblically": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5Mkpz...
It's a good thing you men and women of the Lord are here to 'straighten' us all out (pardon the pun tee hee). It's a good bet following Bible law to the letter is a sure fire way to earn our way into heaven!
"When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it is an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them:
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think is a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planing two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kids of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging."*
*quote portion borrowed from elsewhere on the internet.
Beakus...Your reply distresses me when I realize just how far right leaning some conservatives are on social issues. The bible may not have anything to say about mixed race marriages, but there were a lot of preachers who had a comment or two to about the topic. There were places that, if you were black and were caught even talking to a white woman, some God-fearing Christians were liable to seek you out and hang you from the nearest tree. They'd make a party of it; lots of beer and Red Man and even pictures. It was an occasion for celebration and victory -- it would show those uppity black people that they couldn't go 'round messin' with white women. Things like this were morally acceptable to lots of people. I don't know about you, but I'm glad things have changed. The same societal changes will occur about same sex marriage. It'll take some time, but we can already see change happening. Some day, you'll be mad about something else and you won't even notice the gay couple walking down the street hand in hand. This country facees so many bigger and more important problems. This is just a footnote in the passing of our time.
Windy and Speakup are both correct - there is no justifiable answer to that question except one where it's deemed acceptable for one person to impose control over another.
Homosexuality is as much as choice as is the color of your skin. Id like to think most of us understand that it's not acceptable to treat others differently based on that fact.
The seeds we call ignorance, prejudice, fear, hatred, adherence to exclusive creeds, to name but a few - bring forth rotten fruits of all shapes and sizes : treating as inferior, persecuting and torturing of homosexuals is one bitter fruit; slavery is but another. If you are unable to compare the bitter taste of both these fruits then you are, simply (or idiotlcally) put, a part of the problem.
SpeakUp..."Someone please explain to me how two men or two women marrying each other would affect everyone else's marriage. Please explain to me how that hurts my marriage to my wife?"
Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer to that. I've been asking the same thing every time this topic comes up. Nobody's answered yet. I'm guessin' it's because there is no answer they can give because you're right; one couple's marriage has NO effect on another couple's marriage.
May not want to believe this but we are a carnivorous mammal with a really good thumb. Our average behaviour is controlled by what the society and culture will let us get away with except for the occasional mass murderer. We each have a set of moral guidelines set by our parents, teachers, church and police.
Beyond that we have free will to make up our own rules that we will live by. And every once in a while we will stone someone that breaks our rules. In Salem they prefered burning at the stake, but they were God fearing so it was OK.
So, Kyle, we're no better than animals per your cited justification?
I reserve the right to criticize gays and their supporters. Per the 1st Amendment. Just as I might criticize (and do) those who wear their caps backwards, wear pants below their cracks, ink themselves beyond recognition, etc, etc. These are all CHOICES that invite attention, which is what that individual seeks in public. And a sense of violating "taboos" in private that make them feel special and entitled.
I don't see it as mean. I see it as a strength of character and the strength to control ones own body.
Wayward I wasn't speaking of your writings I believe Kyle was the one who brought slavery into the fray. And I agree with Beakus, if you don't believe the bible you do exactly what you want to do, but don't get all offended if someone disagrees.
WWW. I appreciate your honest opinion. It does assure me of how far left leaning some of our society can go on morality issues.
But, bringing the issue of mixed racial marriage up and people using the bible to defend their prejudice is just wrong. First of all the bible does not say anything against mixed raced marriages, it only states believers should not marry non-believers. Secondly, the bible does strongly warn against homosexual lifestyle and that it is considered an abomination to the Lord.
If you don't believe the bible, then just do what is right in your own mind as most non-believers do. But, our country desperately needs some type of moral compass, and yours ain't the majority. Yet.
Thank you for well reasoned statement. Our world is made up of people with as many core beliefs as there are fingerprints and each is valid to that person. Forcing religion on anyone is not belief. It is fear.
Beakus...You asked an honest question that deserves an honest answer. Brother/sister marriage is okay with me, but I also recognize that there are serious possible consequenses for the children of such unions. If close relatives were to decide to marry, they should consider remaining childless or, if they must be parents, they should adopt.
I don't know how old you are. I am old enough to remember Jim Crow laws and that black/white marriages were illegal. People used the bible and any other argument (including violence) they could find to fight them, but laws were changed and hearts and attitudes changed (for most) and now mixed race marriages are, while perhaps not common, are not looked on as abominations. We as a nation not only survived, but realized that mixed race marriages weren't the portent of the end of the world. The same is true of gay marriage. It will happen and we will survive and it will not be the end of the world. Maybe, you're right about the next question being close relatives wanting to marry. That will work itself out and it won't be then end of the world either. Maybe instead of brother/sister marriage, multiple partner marriages will try to come back. It is fine with me. I couldn't have more than one wife, though. I get into enough trouble with one; two might be fatal.
I don't have a problem with people being shocked or disgusted by the private behavior of others. I DO have a problem with people trying to use the force of law to require others to CONFORM to their own point of view. Scorpio's attitude is hers and she is entitled to it. But, she is not entitled to try to circumvent the United States Constitution to force her beliefs onto other people.
I have a question for the liberals. Especially Kyle, WWW, Rebecca....
Ten years down the road let's say that civil unions are acceptable in all or the majority of the states. We have accepted gay marriage. A new "issue" starts up where brothers and sisters want to marry, or even father and daughter or mother and son. Is this okay with you guys?
ddherring..."They can blather all they want about the hard life of discrimination that gays face but the idiot who compared it to slavery went way overboard."
Sigh. I didn't COMPARE homosexuality with slavery. I was noting the bible calling same sex activity an abomination in Leviticus, while the VERY SAME book, in a later chapter, says that slavery in perfectly acceptable and, indeed, provides rules for holding slaves.
According to the Christian rule book, people of the same sex expressing their love (or even lust) for each other in a physical way is disgusting while the holding of human beings in slavery as property who may be bought and sold and beaten (so long as the slave doesn't die immediately) is okay.
If you're going to use religion to oppose the marriage of a same sex couple, why would you not use that same religion to call slavery acceptable. That's what the bible does. Are you not a bible believer?
Slavery was legal in this country from prior to its founding until abolished at the time of the Civil War. Do you believe that Writein's ancestors and, indeed, Writein himself should still be slaves because the Bible says it's okay?
Born2Bme..."Hey, the Bible condemns "the act" between members of the same sex. People can love each other without "doing the deed", and if people cannot control themselves more than that, well, it's sad."
Hey, denying people the right to not only be with the ones they love but the right to express that love by "doing the deed" under force of law because of religion for as long as they live, well, that's just mean.
Writein...Please explain how this story is an affront to Memorial Day. Is it somehow more disrespectful than, oh, say a story about the two big car races or baseball games? If the paper printed ONLY stories pertaining to Memorial Day celebrations or the military, there probably wouldn't be much in the paper that day. There are still robberies and car wrecks and births and deaths and all are reported in the paper. Perhaps the reason you object to this story is that you are uncomfortable with the topic. Yeah, if I was a betting man, that's where I'd put my chips.
Hey I even agreed with much you had to say!
writein, ddherringStop it, you're ruining my image of you two.
This might be strange, but thank you. I see this story as affront to Memorial day. Second, the comments made on here is the reason why I am not a liberal.
I don't believe it but I agree with you Big J! They can blather all they want about the hard life of discrimination that gays face but the idiot who compared it to slavery went way overboard.
There are two or three things about the comments that troubles me. The baseless attacks on reglion (Chirstianity, Judism, and Islam) from people like Kyle (sorry about it, my friend), the slavery issue, and the sodemy issue.
Homosexuality and homosexual marriage is one of the major issues I can agree with Social Conservatives on. I believe that Civil Unions and/or changes in property ownership should be a great solution to this problem.
I never knew that.
Gary, I have to disagree. When I look up "Sodomy" I don't see America. What we are discussing here doesn't look like "Sodom." I differentiate between:
1. two consenting adults who wish to form an exclusive union
2. a horny violent mob wishing to break down doors to have sex with strange men, without the consent of those men.
In America, it is not customary for a father to give his virgin daughters to a violent mob so that the mob can do whatever they want with them.
We are far from Sodom.
Many animals engage in homosexual behavior:
civil unions verses marriageI feel that if a gay couple unites it will not affect me in anyway form or fashion. The only difference between civil union and marriage is CIVIL UNION HAS ALL THE RIGHTS AS A COUPLE EXCEPT TO BE ACCEPTED WITH RELIGION. A MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN AND IT IS RECOGNIZED BY RELIGION. I DID SAY IF THEY ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THE LAWS OF THE GREAT STATE OF TEXAS THEN MOVE TO A STATE THAT ALLOWS HOMOSEXUAL UNIONS. ITS THAT SIMPLE. OR CHANGES THE LAWS GET OUT THERE AND CAMPAINGE AND VOTE. MAKE A MOVEMENT. BUT STOP BLAMING PEOPLE FOR STANDING UP TO THEIR BELIEFS. DO NO CONDEMN THEM. CONDEMNATION LEADS TO ACTS OF VIOLENTS AND ATTACKS ON A PERSON OR PERSONS THAT STAND UP FOR THEIR OWN BELIEFS.
Hey, the Bible condemns "the act" between members of the same sex. People can love each other without "doing the deed", and if people cannot control themselves more than that, well, it's sad.Even animals do not breed with members of the same sex. I guess they have more sense that some people do, because it is just unnatural.
Scorpio...I brought up slavery because you were saying that religion is the reason same sex marriages should not happen. I figure if you are so adament about religion dictating laws about marriage then you would also want religion to dictate laws about other things. I could have used sacrifices, I suppose, but I picked slavery. I think our argument is basically that I'm argueing in favor of the Constitution and you prefer to ignor the Constitution in favor of religion.
Having religion dictate laws is just about the most dangerous thing I can imagine. Look at Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Religion runs those countries. Is THAT what you want for the US? Compare the liberty of citizens in the US with those in the middle eastern theocracies. This is WHY the Constitution is the trump card in the United States and NOT the Bible.
Okay, I answered your question about how slavery got into the conversation. Now, how about you answering my question about how you figure your marriage is affected by the marriage of another couple you don't know.
It's after midnight. I'm going to bed. I look forward to reading your answer tomorrow. Good night, Scorpio. Sleep well.
Where the heck did slavery come into this topic? This was a topic of same sex marriage! I believe that homosexuals should be allowed civil unions ONLY! Marriage is defined as between a man and a woman! It is like society today does not want to educate themself. If they do not agree with the proper definition, they want to change the entire dictionary. That is what is wrong with society. Answer this......Why is it when a person does not agree about homosexual topics you get attacked?...... OH and if your going to quote someone do not pick bits and pieces of the comment out and attack them over it! Because if you had used the entire comment you would not have a valid debate!
New and better, huh? " Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)
Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
At least the gay and lesbian people who marry aren't harming anyone or taking advantage of anyone. They are joining together in an expression of their love for one another -- and the Bible condemns them for it.
Fairy tales, myth and legend are not good enough reasons to subjugate our fellow men and women.
Using religion to treat people as less than others is a cowards way, it's the lazy way, it's the foolish way and, by god, it's the wrong way.
No doubt Sodom & Gamorah felt that the Lord should keep His nose out of there buisiness, out of there govt. I suport our govt untill it oposes Gods Laws, laws that are in place for our benifit & protection.
The Old Testament & The old days of Israel were far from perfect, They were shadowsd & types of things to come. Ex the slaying of a lamb for the covering of sins. The problem was that after the lamb was slain the repentant sinner left the sacrifice with same wrong desires as he had before the sacrifice. Today that Lamb that was slain was Jesus & when we acept that sacrifice into our harts then His life comes & perminantly dwells with in us, taking that desire away. THats why we had to have the New Testament. A new & better way.
Gary...Free after six years, huh? Really? " If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever." (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment." (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT
These are very interesting family values taught by your book of rules.
To compare slavery of the Old Testament to what we had in America is 2 very diferent institutions. In the OT the slave could sue his master, the slave after he served his time had the right to go free at the year of Jubile etc. The American slave trade proliferated at the time America began to grow tobaco, The nation has paid & is paying for these mistakes.
Scorpio..." If anyone has a problem with the state and its laws either move out of it and to a place where it is all legal or change the laws by voting. But you can not change religion."
Where are you gonna go? The Constitution -- remember that? The document on which this nation was founded -- says that Texas must recognize the legal proceedings (in this case, a marriage legally performed -- of Iowa. Unless you are planning to move out of the country, the Constitution is the trump where ever you go. Religion has NOTHING to do with this. Laws in this country do NOT have to pass biblical muster. Your church is perfectly within its' rights to preach against same sex marriages and does not have to recognize a same sex marriage as valid within the bounds of the church but your church cannot deny basic human rights to American citizens because of what your holy book says.
You evidently oppose homosexual behaviour because of what the Bible says about it. Are you in favor of slavery? Leviticus chapter 25 teaches: “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."
Leviticus (among other books) condems homosexuality, but Leviticus, just a few chapers later, says it's perectly okay to own slaves and to treat them as property for life. Since religion can't be changed..."But you can not change religion." (Your words in a post responding to and addressing me)...and you base your opposition to homosexuals to religion, therefore I must conclude that you also support slavery -- the buying and selling of human beings for your benefit. Since religion can't be changed and the Bible is your source book, you can't pick and choose which parts you believe and the parts with which you disagree. So, if homosexuality is wrong because the Bible says so, then slavery must be okay because the Bible says so. Interesting religion you have there. People freely expressing their love and happiness with each other is an abomination while it is acceptable to hold human beings in slavery.
And did tetestable things before me. Look up the word sodomy.
The Talmud for the most part is just what you said; a story. The facts are that Lot got drunk & laid with his 2 daughters, who by the way were virgins because there husbands in Sodom had no use for a women. From Lot came the race & country of Moab.
Why would the Lord create gays & then condem them in his Word.
Truth is thanks to Adam & Eve we all came to this world born in sin & speaking lies. No one had to teach us to do wrong, we came by it naturaly by our fist birth. Thats why we all have to be born again wether we are gay or just a common fonicators etc.
Ezekiel 16:49-50 (New International Version)
49 “‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." Meanwhile, the Talmud tells a very sad story about Lot's daughters and how they were tortured and killed because they gave food to a hungry stranger. One daughter burned alive and the other daughter covered in honey and hung to slowly die. The cries of a slowly dying tortured young girl, according to the Talmud, is what caught God's attention and led to the destruction of Sodom.
It was customary of Sodomites to offer up their virgin daughters to rapists? According to the Talmud, two kind girls were murdered for charity, and according to Ezekiel, Sodom was destroyed because "they did not help the poor and needy.."
Using the bible here is a crock of B.S. The good Lord created both homosexuals and homophobes.
"rape and child molestation are a part of the culture" ???I find these crimes more prevalent in the so-called straight society. I doubt there is an independent study that proves this statement.
At that, I might be and have been called a homophobe. Gay hair dressers give me the willies and I can't have those folks touch me. I've tried to let them cut my hair but I can't. The Good Lord made me that way.
Now I supose in your mind Yahew did wrong in intervineing, not alowing the gays to have there way?
They were born that way? many children are born with defects etc.
When this ocures we imediatly atempt to correct the situation in order to help them over come there adversity or condition. The same aproach needs to be attempted when a person is born gay (if thats possible) Not promote something that is contrary to nature & usually involves health risk to them selves & others.
Look up the word Sodamy & you will have the modern day America.
Now finish the Bible story, It should be mentioned that the crowd refused Lots offer, they were determined to have the 2 messengers because they were new & righteuse. Making there conquest extra enjoyable because it was extra evil.
Now the rest of the story is that God finally had eneough of there ways HE intervined before they could full fill there lust & HE smote them all blind. A perfect picture of where we are at today. Smart, intelectual, religouse people that cant discern even the basics of common sense. Now the same blidness that struck Sodom has struck most of the U.S.
Some of the citizens of Sodom wanted to screw the angels staying with Lot, but Lot being the honorable fellow, instead offered the crowd his two young virgin daughters to "do to them whatever you like."
Capricious Yaweh is nobody to judge how homosexuals should be treated.
Marriage implies something more civil and consenting than what I remember the Sodomites were trying to break down the doors to get and what was offered to them... Want to find the modern day S&G - look where rape and child molestation are a part of the culture... not at two consenting adults.
Remarkable, it is to me, that there are some people who choose to hurt, segregate, objectify, marginalize, disenfranchise, ridicule, torture and even kill other people because some words in an old book told them that those people are abominations.
The disservice to mankind, the harm that is done in the name of gods, ignorance or prejudice is a blight upon the progress we have made as a species. The end times will always be just around the corner and the moral fiber of this nation/world will apparently be always in decline but, ironically, it's these archaic attitudes that will end up facing extinction long before the rest of us do.
Gary you are spot on, we are living in that day where good is called evil and evil is called good, clean is called unclean ,etc. Not realy surprised by anything anymore!
I think we have found the "Flat Earth Society".
Thankfully this way of thinking is dying a slow death and I predict the youth of today, in a generations time, will have made this issue irrelevant.
This is exactly what the Bible perdicts in the end times, it looks like you & the Word have some things in common after all.
As it was in days of Sodoma & Gamorah so shall it be in the day of the comming of the LORD.
Except for the irrelevant part of course. There will always be a voice crying out against this kind of insanity. Just like in the days of Noah.
Thanks Gary White
So you think slavery and homosexuality are to comparable, How many homosexuals have been dragged from their homeland, sold as cattle, and then held against their will, families split up, made to work from sun up to sun down, beaten with metal rods, made to eat the throw away parts of animals, tell me again when these gays went through all of that? What planet did these atrocities take place on? The bottom line is that in the gay world there is no room for intolerance, anyone who dares to speak out is called every name in the book.
Kyle, Kyle, Kyle
The Lord is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
He does not make mistakes. 2011 is nothing to Him. He lives outside of time. A thousand years for us is like one day to Him. His word will be the same in 3011, and homosexuality will still be an abomination to Him.
Beakus, Beakus, Beakus...
Even I have to question the validity of evolutionary theory if your type of thinking is anything to go by.
This is 2011, need I remind you.
Once again, the VA "rag" has reassured me that cancelling my subscription several years ago was the right thing to do. You guys have fell in with the rest of the sick media throughout the USA.
You have taken something that has been unnatural and sinful in the sight of most civilized humans since time began. Where will we draw the line for morality if we condone same sex marriage, sodomy, and all that goes along with this abomination to the Lord of this universe.
KateOHanlanMD"Remember how silly the Catholic church looked after torturing Galileo to his death because he touted the scientific evidence that the universe was heliocentric, not geocentric like the church insisted? Was not the church just flat dead wrong"
No I don't remember this because you're flat wrong. This outrageous claim is a bald face lie and you know it. The Catholics and most learned people knew Galileo was right. What the church didn't know and was afraid of was how the masse's would react to this truth which contradicted the bible. Galileo was condemned in 1616. He died in 1641.
GOP_Lovechild, in response on facebook from Chris Cobler on the Memorial Day thing, his response is that there is no such thing as Memorial Day Eve. Personally I have never heard of Memorial Day Eve, but I have heard of Memorial Day Weekend.
"Marriage is the social institution"Sure is doc, and the majority of society see marriage as being being between a man and woman. Especially in the case of transgender Nikki Araguz who's trying to get between his deceased firefighter lover's death benefits and his children.
We better be careful of what the consequences are when we redefine marriage.
Also, next time the VA wants to take the focus off Memorial Day with a controversial gay story it should do a decorated Gay Veteran Story, there are plenty.
It seems the law changed in Texas about common law, or as the state calls it informal marriage in 97.
Instead of just presenting yourself s as married to co-workers, friends, utility companies , ect. as it use to be, your suppose to go to the district clerks office and declare yourselves married.
Of course the sworn form asks if you are the same sex.... if you are, you can't have a common law marriage.
VictoriaAdvocateStaff, hate to tell you, but this is anything but a balances story. Your front page article calls this a debate, but does not put anything of the con side on the front page, instead relegating it to near the back of the section...even set apart from the continuation of the pro story. Also the "con" side of the debate is hardly that..instead just a history lesson and polls. Also, the fact you call the objections to this story happening on a Memorial Day weekend a smokescreen is insulting. It is insulting to your readers, to our troops and to society in general. You have 51 other weekends, over 300 other days to run this story...to run it on your SUNDAY edition before Memorial day if flat out repugnant..add on to the fact that it is seriously one sided without any type of equal treatment to the other side.
Passing laws against humans because of their sexual orientation - an orientation that poses no risk to others is, as is slavery, dehumanizing.
Marriage, Civil union....Which whatever.
Texas is one of the states that recognize a common law marriage. Not one legal right according to the federal government, no tax break ect.
BUT, to dissolve a common law marriage you have to jump through the same legal hoops as a regular marriage and a civil union. A divorce in other words, with all the bells and whistles included.
If you google Dr. Kate s name it's easy to understand her comments.
I wonder if a same sex couple in Texas followed the requirements to be considered a common law marriage if the state would recognize it?
Marriage is usually recognized by the state, a religious authority, or both. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage is the legal concept of marriage as a governmental institution irrespective of religious affiliation, in accordance with marriage laws of the jurisdiction. The only difference is religion and the state you live in.So if you do not agree with the laws of the state you live in either move to one that shares your same views or get out and vote to change that law. But don't attack people because they don't agree with your views.
thewaywardwind----Texas will probably be the last state to ever pass a law allowing same sex unions of any kind. The couple in the paper united in a state that allowed same sex couples to wed. If anyone has a problem with the state and its laws either move out of it and to a place where it is all legal or change the laws by voting. But you can not change religion. I was only expressing the difference between the definition of a MARRIAGE and CIVIL UNION. Where you are getting the other things your spewing out I have no idea. THE BIG DIFFERENCE IS RELIGION! You need to go back and read all the comments before you start attacking people!
"So let me get this right, if anyone for any reason whatsoever is against gay marriage you are an illiterate hatefilled bigot. Is that how this tolerance thing works?"
Similar comments were made in defense of slavery, in defense of keeping the electorate rich, white and male, and dozens of other situations where one section of the population felt the need to control another.
Scorpio..."If people would just take the time to look up Marriage verses Civil Union they would know they are both recognized by our government."
From the story..."In 2005, both same-sex marriage and civil unions were banned under Proposition 2 (2005), a voter-approved amendment to the state constitution and the Texas Family Code."
So, your argument again is...what? People with the same narrow-minded, bigoted attitudes toward homosexuality as you profess voted to ban BOTH marriage for same sex couples AND civil unions as well.
You wrote: "Civil unions are recognized by state and country. Marriage is recognized my state, country and church. BIG DIFFERENCE." If there is such a big difference between civil unions and marriage -- as YOU state there is, how can you then say that one is just as good as the other? Especially since the state of Texas recognizes NEITHER for same sex couples.
If people would just take the time to look up Marriage verses Civil Union they would know they are both recognized by our government. They both can file federal taxes together. They both can insure each other. They both give the partner legal rights. They both require DIVORCE. The two differences is--- Marriage--- is between a man and a woman and is recognized in a church.--- Civil Union--- is between two partners either same sex or not and is not recognized in a church. It has a different name but the legal rights are the same.
So let me get this right, if anyone for any reason whatsoever is against gay marriage you are a illiterate hatefilled bigot. Is that how this tolerance thing works?
people really need to not put it in the News .. then there wouldn't be all these posts.. I don't really care either way....I believe people deserve Happiness, actually thats what is wrong with Our world!
You can attack me all you want about religion but to say I am a bigot is unfounded. I have a gay son who does not want to seek marriage because he believes marriage is between man and woman as he was raised in a religious home. He on the other hand wants civil unions legalized. As do I.
Marriage is usually recognized by the state, a religious authority, or both. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage is the legal concept of marriage as a governmental institution irrespective of religious affiliation, in accordance with marriage laws of the jurisdiction.
The only difference is religion.
Great minds discuss ideas;Average minds discuss events;Small minds discuss people.
Would like to see ideas discussed without the personal attacks.
Kate then you should not be offened by a Civil Union if you are atheist. Your anti religious beliefs are your right but if your so anti religious why want a union recognized by the church? Why not take one that is only recognized by the government alone?
kyle the difference between civil union and marriage is only religion thats it. Both are recognized by government. Civil Union is same sex not recognized by the church and Marriage is Man and Woman recognized by the church.
Scorpio, your right to your bigoted religion is protected. Go to your church and express yourself, but don't try to inscribe your baseless bigotry into the laws of our country. Marriage was a state institution founded to establish inheritance since heterosexual men were not faithful, and fathered children outside of their primary relationships. It is still a state institution, and your religion is already free to NOT certify the civil marriage contracts that your state, one day, will indeed issue to us same-sex couples. Why don't you reserve civil unions for yourselves and see how equal you feel? We gay folk grew up in the tradition of marriage, and we revere it and will have it soon enough, as a federal right. You will be embarrassed then knowing that you took the bigoted side of history. I am a devout atheist, so there is no need for me to look to any fake mythologies to make me be a good girl.
There should be no tax or legal benefits to being married - it's a religious institution and should not be sponsored by the government. Remove them and confer them upon civil unions.
They only way they can consciencely be gay is to go against religion.
You spout rights of the people but part of that is a persons right to religion. Marriage originated as a religious ceremony of a union between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN. Now you want to come back and change the whole meaning of it. Civil Unions are of state and country. Not of religion. Look it up. If you don't like it got to all the churches in your area and picket and protest your beliefs but don't try to turn someone against religion because your gay!
Scorpio, why would anyone ever believe in your baseless religion? And why would you ever try to foist your silly beliefs on anyone else, much less onto the laws of our state and country? Remember how silly the Catholic church looked after torturing Galileo to his death because he touted the scientific evidence that the universe was heliocentric, not geocentric like the church insisted? Was not the church just flat dead wrong? When the churches go into the scientific realm and base their policies on NOTHING, they venture into trouble that is harmful to many. There is simply no basis for what you believe, and all of the published science says you are wrong. You shall see, Dearie.
KateOhanlanMD= Marriage is the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. A civil union is a legally recognized union similar to marriage. Many people are critical of civil unions because they say they represent separate status unequal to marriage. Civil Unions are often viewed by same-sex marriage supporters as "separate but equal." It's not recognized in the church.
I think that the advocate shining the light on a lesbian couple is wrong. I am a woman that got married to a man in 2007. Did the advocate talk about me, my kids, my failed first marriage and the new love of my life? NO because I was not breaking any state laws I was not doing anything that went against religion. But they run the gay marriage story and it glorified it as well. When it does break state laws and does go against the church and the christian beliefs. I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. I am not against a civil union for gays but not a marriage. Civil unions are recognized by state and country. Marriage is recognized my state, country and church. BIG DIFFERENCE.
AltonEaston, you want to reserve that special word marriage for heterosexuals only? is that because you think we are not quite as good as you? We were raised with the same revered traditions as you were. Do you need to protect that word marriage from us gay people because we would suddenly be, what, equal to you?
I don't understand why gays desire so strongly to using the term marriage and are not satisfied with a civil union. I contend they have a larger group of individuals that would support a legal civil union than a marriage.
ParkPork..."Do any of you have a line that you stand firmly on and say, that's ok, but my goodness, that's not ok?Tell me, where is the line? At what point is the behavior not OK? Does anyone have a limit?I do."
I don't know how old you are, Park, but I am old enough to remember when people had these same questions and made these same comments about inter-racial marriages. It took a while, but in most places, mixed race marriages don't create a lot of comments and are accepted as perfectly normal relationships between people who love each other.
This isn't even about what some people perceive as "right and wrong" -- your line in the sand. It's about the Constitutional gurantees that the unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness the Declaration of Indepencence says was endowed by the creator upon ALL American citizens -- not just those citizens of a certain race or sexual persuasion or degree of wealth -- will be upheld by the laws of the land.
Ok, this is just wrong in so many ways. This story could have happened without a picture of the happy couple. This just puts images in my head that I just don't want there.People's personal lives should stay, what is the word? Personal!
Rather than make gay rights a popularity contest , lets ask America’s best experts on family, mental health and children. They would not be biased, and they have a duty to base their policy statements on the best interest of America.
From the American Psychological Association: homosexuality is normal; homosexual relationships are normal.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Association and American Psychiatric Association have endorsed civil marriage for same-sex couples because marriage strengthens mental and physical health and longevity of couples, and provides greater legal and financial security for children, parents and seniors.
America’s premier child/mental health associations endorse marriage equality. There is no further reason to discriminate, except ignorance or bigotry. SO WHY WOULD ANYONE FIGHT THIS?????? Think of what you would want for yourself or your your family.
To those that are trying to use "Support our Troops" sloganeering to justify bigotry and homophobia....Gays, Lesbian, and Bisexual American military members have ALSO been among those that have been killed in our Nation's wars and military actions. Memorial Day honors ALL those losses.
From the article: "Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott intervened in the divorce case, arguing that because Texas doesn't recognize gay marriage, a Texas court can't dissolve one through divorce.
"On Aug. 31, 2010, the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas sided with Abbott, reversing the lower court's ruling and finding that the Texas constitutional ban on same-sex marriage does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."
Uh huh. I see. Equal protection except for when that protection is not equal. Good going. That makes no sense. The relevant clause in the 14th Amendment says, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States..." The Court is saying by its' decision that states MAY make and enforce laws that abridge the privileges of citizens of the United States IF those citizens are homosexual. The Court is saying by its' decision that homosexuals ARE LESS than full citizens with the privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution to heterosexual citizens. I guess it's gonna take a judge to explain that one to me.
Then there's that pesky Article IV of the US Constitution. Section 1 states: "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof." Marriage is a public act, recorded by the state, and is a judicial proceeding (the ladies in the story were married by a judge). Section 2 states: "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States." HOW can the state of Texas NOT recognize the validity of their marriage?
I was married in Texas, but the other 49 states recognize that marriage as valid because of the Full Faith and Credit clause. If my wife and I move to another state and decide to divorce, we do not have to return to Texas for that to happen.
I can understand that Texas law does not allow same sex marriages to be performed within the state, but Article IV, Sections 1 and 2 SHOULD require Texas to recognize a marriage performed in Iowa as valid in all respects.
Why does anyone else care who gets married? One of the big problems in this country is that people cannot mind their own business.
We limited the comments to this story and to our online poll on the same subject because we want to encourage discussion about the issue and not the subjects of our story.
To the point about this being the wrong weekend for the story, we have extensive coverage of Memorial Day in our Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday editions. We consider this objection to be a smokescreen. No one is complaining because we have a story about art cars or a paperless society in today's editions. They have less to do with the reason for Memorial Day.
We consider this a responsible and balanced local look at a national issue. We hope people will read the entire package and discuss the issue. If you want to criticize the reporting or the writing and editing, that's fair game, too.
Personally, I don't have any objection to their sexuality or lifestyle. But, should this be a feature story on Memorial Day Weekend? What next? A gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender fatal funnel series?
Will someone at the VA think about the lame B.S. I post and is continuously deleted by your "community newspaper" censors? Talk about a newspaper having it both ways when it comes to community standards.
Remove all federal tax and legal benefits from the religious institute of marriage and confer them upon civil unions.
Seriously Victoria Advocate we can make comments on this article but not on the lesbian couple that recently got married? The Advocate has gone to an all time low. Nothing better to report on than that. Give me a break. I guess thats why I no longer buy the advocate!!!