1
   

A constitutional amendment barring gay marriage!!

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 03:39 pm
sozobe wrote:
PD is trying to make everyone homosexual? I thought that was Gautam?

McGentrix, so non-religious heterosexuals should be satisfied with a civil union too, right? My husband and I shouldn't have had the temerity to assume that we could get married just 'cause we, ya know, love each other and want to spend the rest of our lives together, seeing as how neither of us believe in God.


Uh, yeah. That's about right. If neither of you believe in God, why would the recognition of a religious ceremony be important to you? The only reason I was married in a church is that my wife is "very Catholic" (her words). I could have cared less.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 03:40 pm
So, that's why it's a shame that homosexuals who believe in god and want to be married under their religion can't be.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 03:43 pm
Because, MOST religions do not condone homosexual relationships. Should they find a religion that does condone it, then they should be more than free to express themselves. The issue here is that religions should not have external doctrine thrust upon them. Especially by our government...seperation of church and state and all that...
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 03:47 pm
It's not just external pressure - how many gay clergy have we recently heard about?
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 03:47 pm
Yep, littlek.

If you couldn't care less, you couldn't care less.

There are many homosexual couples who couldn't care less.

But for the ones who DO care, who is it hurting to let them get married?

I would be rather incensed if I had to state that I was religious before I could get married. Marriage and civil unions are not the same. There are different rights, different connotations, different priveleges, lots of differences. I wanted to get married. I got married. (In an a very old temple that has became a park building, non-denominational, filled to bursting with friends and relatives.) I'm glad I had that option, and think it's a shame that people find it so horrifying to allow gay and lesbian people that option.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 03:51 pm
McGentrix, aren't we discussing whether we are supporting an amendment to BAN same-sex marriages? Not an amendment to force churches to acknowledge same-sex marriages?

Do you support the proposed ban?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 03:51 pm
littlek wrote:
It's not just external pressure - how many gay clergy have we recently heard about?


One?
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 04:05 pm
Quote:
For a quarter of a century, gay Catholics and gay priests have clung to the reed of the 1976 doctrine that homosexuality as a condition is not sinful, and that homosexuals are persons with dignity who belong in the Church. Now Navarro-Valls, a member of the Opus Dei sect that now dominates the Church hierarchy while the pope declines into aged irrelevance, has abandoned that doctrine. Gays cannot be ordained, he says. Worse, their ordinations are invalid. He's almost daring gay priests to quit. You know how many American priests would be left? Perhaps half of the current number.



Bishop Accountability
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 04:17 pm
How about an article directly from a catholic website:

Catholic News
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 04:44 pm
Oh, good point soz.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 04:52 pm
littlek wrote:
Quote:
For a quarter of a century, gay Catholics and gay priests have clung to the reed of the 1976 doctrine that homosexuality as a condition is not sinful, and that homosexuals are persons with dignity who belong in the Church. Now Navarro-Valls, a member of the Opus Dei sect that now dominates the Church hierarchy while the pope declines into aged irrelevance, has abandoned that doctrine. Gays cannot be ordained, he says. Worse, their ordinations are invalid. He's almost daring gay priests to quit. You know how many American priests would be left? Perhaps half of the current number.



Bishop Accountability



Fact is, homosexuality never has been a sin in the Church. And the Bible does not say that homosexuality is a sin.

Homosexual conductis the sin -- and homosexual conduct is what the Bible speaks about.

As we all know, the god of the Bible demands that homosexual conduct be treated with stones.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 04:58 pm
I dunno, Frank, I am not a theologist. Never, though, seems like a strong word to use.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 05:05 pm
The Catholic church without it's gay priests would be as likely as Congress without lawyers. More so, the Episcopalians. The priggish Puritan mindset is still alive and well in America.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 05:13 pm
It would be interesting to see what would happen if they all up and quit. Apparently there is some discussion of that. But, I can't see it ever happening. They are in the service because of their passion for their religion, yes?
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 05:27 pm
And give up their Papal Drag?
0 Replies
 
kjvtrue
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 06:12 pm
Dose The Hederalsexual's want to sacrifice their Freedom, so that Homosexual's can marry legally? Question
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 06:26 pm
What freedom would be sacrificed?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 06:45 pm
sozobe wrote:
McGentrix, aren't we discussing whether we are supporting an amendment to BAN same-sex marriages? Not an amendment to force churches to acknowledge same-sex marriages?

Do you support the proposed ban?


No. I thought I said that earlier... I believe that this issue does not neccessitate a change in the constitution.

But, I do not support gay marriage either.
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 06:45 pm
kjvtrue wrote:
Dose The Hederalsexual's want to sacrifice their Freedom, so that Homosexual's can marry legally? Question


That's absurd. Where are you getting this stuff?
0 Replies
 
kjvtrue
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2004 07:50 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
littlek wrote:
Quote:
For a quarter of a century, gay Catholics and gay priests have clung to the reed of the 1976 doctrine that homosexuality as a condition is not sinful, and that homosexuals are persons with dignity who belong in the Church. Now Navarro-Valls, a member of the Opus Dei sect that now dominates the Church hierarchy while the pope declines into aged irrelevance, has abandoned that doctrine. Gays cannot be ordained, he says. Worse, their ordinations are invalid. He's almost daring gay priests to quit. You know how many American priests would be left? Perhaps half of the current number.



Bishop Accountability



Fact is, homosexuality never has been a sin in the Church. And the Bible does not say that homosexuality is a sin.

Homosexual conductis the sin -- and homosexual conduct is what the Bible speaks about.

As we all know, the god of the Bible demands that homosexual conduct be treated with stones.


God's plan for sexuality

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Genesis 1:27
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
Genesis 2:18-25
The image of God is both male and female and is reflected in a godly union between male and female where the creative power of God, His life-giving, His self-giving and His moral nature are perfectly expressed. This is only possible in a heterosexual union.
When God created a partner for Adam He created Eve - not another Adam. This means that perfect partnership requires some level of difference as well as a level of similarity so great that Adam could cry out loudly, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh". Heterosexuality is the normal method of human bonding and the one for which our bodies and emotions are designed.

If God had intended the human race to be fulfilled through both heterosexual and homosexual marriage, He would have designed our bodies to allow reproduction through both means and made both means of sexual intercourse healthy and natural. Homosexual anal intercourse carries a high risk of disease, this is recognized in Scripture where gay men are said to receive in their bodies the due penalty for their error (Romans 1:27).

[Editor's Note: Various studies indicate that homosexual behavior makes both men and women more vulnerable to disease and decreases lifespan. See: R.S. Hogg, S.A. Strathdee, KJ Craib, MV O'Shaughnessy, JS Montaner and MT Schechter, "Modelling the impact of HIV disease on mortality in gay and bisexual men," International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 26 (Oxford University, 1997), pp. 657-661. ("If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday") / Executive Summary, "Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality," Medical Institute of Sexual Health (1999) ("Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk for HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections." "Women who have sex with women are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women.") / L.A. Valleroy, D.A. MacKellar, J.M. Daron, et al, "HIV prevalence and associated risks in young men who have sex with men," JAMA, 284 (2000), pp. 198-204. (Discusses the prevalence of HIV infection and high-risk behaviors in study group of 3,492 young men who have sex with men.) / D. Binson, W.J. Woods, L. Pollack, J. Paul, R. Stall, J.A. Catania, "Differential HIV risk in bathhouses and public cruising areas," American Journal of Public Health, 91 (2001), pp. 1482-1486. (demonstrates that high risk behaviors are still quite common among homosexual men).]

What Jesus taught

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Matthew 19:4
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Mark 10:6
When Jesus was asked questions about marriage he went straight back to the defining passages in Genesis that say that marriage is between male and female and is meant to be life long. He saw the creation accounts in Genesis as authoritative in His day. And what is authoritative for Jesus is authoritative for Christians also. While Jesus did not specifically teach on homosexuality, His establishment of the Genesis passages as the fundamental passages on marriage (even more fundamental than the Law) leaves no doubt as to the outcome.
What else does the Bible say?

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Romans 1:26-27
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
1 Timothy 1:9-10
© Jeremiah Films

These three references indicate that homosexual passions and acts are unnatural, shameful, contrary to sound doctrine and deny entrance to the Kingdom of God. This being so they cannot be the basis of a Christian marriage sanctioned by God's Church. The Church exists to save people, not to bless the means of their damnation. No marriage can be sanctioned by the Church if the very basis of the marriage involves acts that put the couple outside of eternal salvation. No matter what our society may legislate, the law of God is clear - that a marriage is not a godly marriage if it is a same sex union.
Are emotions a sufficient basis for marriage?

© Jeremiah Films
Hollywood has propagated the myth that when it comes to marriage "all you need is love." This is simply not true. Marriage is not based on emotion any more than any other partnership in life is. Marriage, like many human activities, involves emotion but it is not constituted by the presence of any particular set of emotions. I do not deny that many homosexuals feel deeply for their partners; however I do assert that no matter how deep the feelings, what they have is not a marriage in God's sight. It is a beautiful deception.

Just because an emotion is deep or powerful does not justify acting upon it. Like drugs, like adultery, like the abuse of alcohol or the love of money, or the power rush of human ego trips, there are emotions which are powerful and addictive and ultimately terribly destructive. Same sex marriages must satisfy criteria other than emotion. A marriage is more than a sexual pleasure center. A marriage is a social unit that is interwoven with dozens of other lives.

Same sex marriages do not last. Less than 5% of gays have ever had a relationship that lasted 3 years or more. Sex is not enough. Passion cannot sustain an inherently unstable social unit.

Society, the Church and same sex marriages

© Jeremiah Films

Marriage is a fundamental social institution that does not exist just for the emotional satisfaction of two individuals but for the greater good of the community which stands under the blessing or curse of God. Societies that put emotional fulfillment before right actions and principles will soon give way to a multitude of addictions and deep corruptions and collapse. God will judge any society that institutes same sex marriages.

I also believe that God will judge a society that permits adoption of children or the use of sperm banks by same sex couples. His Word stands over society and when it is deliberately flaunted in the name of progress and enlightenment, then it is not light but deep darkness that results. We cannot bend the principles of God's Word to suit vocal minority groups. While some nations may enact laws permitting these evils, the true church of God must stand resolutely firm and never allow the sanctioning of same sex marriages by Christian clergy. No church that takes the Bible seriously can sanction a union between homosexuals or lesbians.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 04:06:26