Christian responds to gay marriage

[jzeidler]

Well this is an interesting day when a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want. On this historic day I ponder what Jesus would say about this gay-marriage law. First I think he would say that he didn’t come to make America a theocracy so don’t try to make it one. But I firmly believe he would say something along these lines, “I’ll love you despite what you choose to do or who you love. But don’t call a union a marriage that I and my Father don’t call marriage.” This law doesn’t change the simple fact that marriage is between a man and a woman, nothing else. You can call a gay relationship a civil union that’s fine, but it’s not a marriage. It just isn’t. Now if you’re an atheist this law is irrational since gay marriage does nothing for society. It doesn’t bring children into the world to bring about the upward evolution of humanity. Now there are going to be people who will say to those who disagree with this law that you’re ‘homophobic.’ If that’s the case in also 'suicidalphobic’ since I disagree with suicide. Do you see the illogical mindset of people who say 'because you disagree with this you’re homophobic’? So, the moral of this whole long post is be like Jesus, love everyone and accept them with grace, but don’t call it marriage.

 

[meshak]

Well this is an interesting day when a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want. On this historic day I ponder what Jesus would say about this gay-marriage law. First I think he would say that he didn’t come to make America a theocracy so don’t try to make it one. But I firmly believe he would say something along these lines, “I’ll love you despite what you choose to do or who you love. But don’t call a union a marriage that I and my Father don’t call marriage.” This law doesn’t change the simple fact that marriage is between a man and a woman, nothing else. You can call a gay relationship a civil union that’s fine, but it’s not a marriage. It just isn’t. Now if you’re an atheist this law is irrational since gay marriage does nothing for society. It doesn’t bring children into the world to bring about the upward evolution of humanity. Now there are going to be people who will say to those who disagree with this law that you’re ‘homophobic.’ If that’s the case in also 'suicidalphobic’ since I disagree with suicide. Do you see the illogical mindset of people who say 'because you disagree with this you’re homophobic’? So, the moral of this whole long post is be like Jesus, love everyone and accept them with grace, but don’t call it marriage.

You made two exactly alike except the title. You should delete one.

 

[glorydaz]

Well this is an interesting day when a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want. On this historic day I ponder what Jesus would say about this gay-marriage law. First I think he would say that he didn’t come to make America a theocracy so don’t try to make it one. But I firmly believe he would say something along these lines, “I’ll love you despite what you choose to do or who you love. But don’t call a union a marriage that I and my Father don’t call marriage.” This law doesn’t change the simple fact that marriage is between a man and a woman, nothing else. You can call a gay relationship a civil union that’s fine, but it’s not a marriage. It just isn’t. Now if you’re an atheist this law is irrational since gay marriage does nothing for society. It doesn’t bring children into the world to bring about the upward evolution of humanity. Now there are going to be people who will say to those who disagree with this law that you’re ‘homophobic.’ If that’s the case in also 'suicidalphobic’ since I disagree with suicide. Do you see the illogical mindset of people who say 'because you disagree with this you’re homophobic’? So, the moral of this whole long post is be like Jesus, love everyone and accept them with grace, but don’t call it marriage.

Simple enough. :thumb:

 

[Rusha]

love everyone and accept them with grace, but don’t call it marriage.

You are not required to call it marriage. See how easy that was ...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Well this is an interesting day when a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want.

And if the majority had wanted it, would that have made it right?

On this historic day I ponder what Jesus would say about this gay-marriage law. First I think he would say that he didn’t come to make America a theocracy so don’t try to make it one.

I didn't know that in order for a society to value marriage between one man and one woman, that it first must be a theocracy (the things we learn from newbies).

But I firmly believe he would say something along these lines, “I’ll love you despite what you choose to do or who you love. But don’t call a union a marriage that I and my Father don’t call marriage.”

And here I thought He'd say something like repent your sinful behavior as "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

LOL...welcome to TOL newbie, you'll fit right in with your fellow pagans and atheists.

 

[meshak]

LOL...welcome to TOL newbie, you'll fit right in with your fellow pagans and atheists.

What are you complaining about? He is against gay marriage.

 

[TracerBullet]

Well this is an interesting day when a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want.

the federal government didn't pass a law. The courts found laws prohibiting marriage equality to be unconstitutional.

On this historic day I ponder what Jesus would say about this gay-marriage law. First I think he would say that he didn’t come to make America a theocracy so don’t try to make it one. But I firmly believe he would say something along these lines, “I’ll love you despite what you choose to do or who you love. But don’t call a union a marriage that I and my Father don’t call marriage. This law doesn’t change the simple fact that marriage is between a man and a woman, nothing else. You can call a gay relationship a civil union that’s fine, but it’s not a marriage. It just isn’t.

it is a marriage weather you like it or not.

Now if you’re an atheist this law is irrational since gay marriage does nothing for society.

It does exactly the same thing as heterosexual marriage.

It doesn’t bring children into the world to bring about the upward evolution of humanity.

Neither does a significant portion of heterosexual marriages.

Age, infertility and even the conscious choice to not have children does not disqualify heterosexuals from marrying. There is no requirement of fertility or of intent to reproduce in marriage.

Now there are going to be people who will say to those who disagree with this law that you’re ‘homophobic.’ If that’s the case in also 'suicidalphobic’ since I disagree with suicide. Do you see the illogical mindset of people who say 'because you disagree with this you’re homophobic’?

Homophobia - an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. It includes antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and hatred of homosexuals.


Nothing about disagreeing.


So based on your contempt and defense of prejudice and discrimination you are a homophobe

 

[Dan Emanuel]

the federal government didn't pass a law. The courts found laws prohibiting marriage equality to be unconstitutional.



it is a marriage weather you like it or not.




It does exactly the same thing as heterosexual marriage.




Neither does a significant portion of heterosexual marriages.

Age, infertility and even the conscious choice to not have children does not disqualify heterosexuals from marrying. There is no requirement of fertility or of intent to reproduce in marriage.








Homophobia - an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. It includes antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and hatred of homosexuals.


Nothing about disagreeing.


So based on your contempt and defense of prejudice and discrimination you are a homophobe

I basically agree. The Church is smart enough to remember the difference's between a legal marriage and a valid 1. Valid marriage's may or may not be legal, and legal marriage's may or may not be valid.


Daniel

 

[genuineoriginal]

Well this is an interesting day when a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want. On this historic day I ponder what Jesus would say about this gay-marriage law. First I think he would say that he didn’t come to make America a theocracy so don’t try to make it one. But I firmly believe he would say something along these lines, “I’ll love you despite what you choose to do or who you love. But don’t call a union a marriage that I and my Father don’t call marriage.”

Jesus is more likely to say, "I love you enough to die for you. If you love me enough to repent of your sins (same gender sex among them), then we can be together in eternity. If you do not love me enough to repent of your sins, then you will be cast into outer darkness, and there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

 

[Dan Emanuel]

Jesus is more likely to say, "I love you enough to die for you. If you love me enough to repent of your sins (same gender sex among them), then we can be together in eternity. If you do not love me enough to repent of your sins, then you will be cast into outer darkness, and there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

Have you ever repented of a sin, and then did the same sin again at some point? Moment's of weakness count.


Daniel

 

[genuineoriginal]

Have you ever repented of a sin, and then did the same sin again at some point? Moment's of weakness count.

Moments of weakness count for what?

 

[Dan Emanuel]

Moments of weakness count for what?

If you sin in a moment of weakness, you still sin.


Daniel

 

[genuineoriginal]

If you sin in a moment of weakness, you still sin.

Yes, you can still sin, and then have to repent for the new sin.

Proverbs 24:16 16 For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief.​

Matthew 18:21-22 21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? 22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.​

1 John 1:9 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.​

The biggest problem with "gay marriage" is that it is a statement that the people pretending to get "married" have no intention of repenting, so there is no chance for forgiveness.

Were you going somewhere else with this?

 

[Dan Emanuel]

Yes, you can still sin, and then have to repent for the new sin...

So if you covet, and then you repent of you're coveting, but then you in a moment of weakness, covet again: In spite of you're moment of weakness, heres what you did: You sinned, you repented of that sin, and then you did it again.

So which "the new sin" are you talking about above? The coveting? Or, and this is where I'm going with the question, the sin of repenting and then sinning again anyway ("moment of weakness" or not, it doesn't matter). Spiritual perfidy. That sin.

Which 1 do you mean?

...The biggest problem with "gay marriage" is that it is a statement that the people pretending to get "married" have no intention of repenting, so there is no chance for forgiveness...

Of what sin? Is it a sin to enter into a legal contract that does not require consummation, like the marriage contract? I trow not. Is it a sin to remain in this contract? No again. If it is, then prove it, show me the scripture's, or, show me the popes' teaching that entering into the contract itself --apart from any S.S.B. (same-sex sexual behavior) --is sin, and show me that being in the contract is sin too.

...Were you going somewhere else with this?

I think I covered it.

No wait. Divorcee's who remarry while there ex's still live also enter into a legal marriage, but not a valid marriage. Are these living in sin? If so, what are they to do about there state? If they repent, they are still married after repenting. Repenting doesn't wash away there legal state of affair's.


Daniel

 

[jgarden]

Jesus Forgives the Woman Taken in Adultery (John 8:1-11)

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

I believe that the message conveyed in "Jesus Forgives the Woman Taken in Adultery" is applicable in this case.

The Mosaic Law was quite explicit that adultery was an offense punishable by death - but unlike some of the religious conservatives in this forum, Jesus chose not to condemn but show compassion.

The Supreme Court decision doesn't require churches to either recognize or perform "gay marriages."

This was a strictly secular decision that recognizes "gay marriage" as it relates to the state.

 

[genuineoriginal]

So if you covet, and then you repent of you're coveting, but then you in a moment of weakness, covet again: In spite of you're moment of weakness, heres what you did: You sinned, you repented of that sin, and then you did it again.

So which "the new sin" are you talking about above? The coveting? Or, and this is where I'm going with the question, the sin of repenting and then sinning again anyway ("moment of weakness" or not, it doesn't matter). Spiritual perfidy. That sin.

Which 1 do you mean?

You claim to be a member of the Church of Rome.
When you go to confession, which sin are you confessing?
One you already said 10 Hail Mary's and 15 Our Father's for, or the new one that you haven't done penance for yet?

The only difference is that non-Catholics understand that penance is a doctrine of man that is not necessary.

Of what sin? Is it a sin to enter into a legal contract that does not require consummation, like the marriage contract? I trow not. Is it a sin to remain in this contract? No again. If it is, then prove it, show me the scripture's, or, show me the popes' teaching that entering into the contract itself --apart from any S.S.B. (same-sex sexual behavior) --is sin, and show me that being in the contract is sin too.

Are you a moron, or do you honestly believe that two homosexuals are getting "married" in order to live together without having sex with each other?

No wait. Divorcee's who remarry while there ex's still live also enter into a legal marriage, but not a valid marriage.

No, a divorcee getting married is a valid marriage.

Are these living in sin?

No

If so, what are they to do about there state? If they repent, they are still married after repenting. Repenting doesn't wash away there legal state of affair's.

Let's see if you came up with a valid comparison.

A "gay marriage" is two people committing a sin that is explicitly named as a capital offense (death penalty offense) pretending that they are married.

A divorced woman is allowed to remarry without penalty in that same law.

So, your comparison fails.

 

[Dan Emanuel]

You claim to be a member of the Church of Rome...

What do you mean. I don't know what your talking about and have never made such a claim if so post link to post.

...When you go to confession...

I don't "go to confession."

...which sin are you confessing?
One you already said 10 Hail Mary's and 15 Our Father's for, or the new one that you haven't done penance for yet?...

:AMR:

Again, I don't know what your talking about.

...The only difference is that non-Catholics understand that penance is a doctrine of man that is not necessary...

And this is where, you slithering snake, you dishonestly attempt to distract from the veritable and obvious fact that you completely ignored my question completely. With all these word's, surely it must look like I've answered --or at least addressed --the question --so you think! --and you didn't! --you didn't answer it!

Ah well! Maybe you'll answer it later on in the post. If so I'll eat my word's, and I'm O.K. with that, because that will have meant that you indeed did something imaginative and creative and surprising, and I do not expect any of that from you. So either way, I win.

...Are you a moron, or do you honestly believe that two homosexuals are getting "married" in order to live together without having sex with each other?...

Why do you even do internet forum's? Honestly? Your timer say's you've been at this for over 10 year's now? Seriously? How many hour's of you're life have you wasted here.

I shouldn't say that. Its not wasted. Every time I find that I've spent a whole bunch more on a prospect than I originally agreed to early on, when I decided to make the investment in the 1st place, I alway's chalk it up as an investment, the whole thing. Just because an investment doesn't pan out doesn't mean it was a bad decision --investment necessarily involve's prediction --investment involve's the future, an unknowable --fundamentally unknowable thing! Investment therefore sometime's lead's to disaster, beside's it sometime's leading to naught/nothing/nihilo.

The seed's we sow are related in a cause-and-effect relationship to the harvest's we reap. But we still need deep, rich organic soil free from rock's and gravel, we need the bird's kept away until they sprout, and we need worker's for the harvest. Without these thing's our seed's will never find purchase and/or we'll have no harvests.

...No, a divorcee getting married is a valid marriage...

Not according to the Church. And not according to Jesus. Do I have to quote Mark 10:10-12 KJV in its entirety, are you going to make me? I suppose you are . . . .

10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. 11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.​

Plain and simple. Cut and dried. Its tough to know what to do with something like this from Jesus. I know people who are remarried divorcee's. What am I supposed to think of them. Do they believe in Jesus? Should they divorce? Would another divorce be better than them being invalidly married and in a continual state of adultery?

Thats a tough 1. The pope's, for there part, counsel, of all the potential option's, that the couple live in continence. Thats the moral thing, the right thing, and the recommended thing, and therefore whenever the couple come's together conjugally they sin again. For these, this teaching is harsh. Damning. What have they got themselve's into. They have to live as roommate's, friend's without benefit's, just as two celibate people.

If two men or two women got legally married and were celibate, is they're a sin their somewhere? Can you point it out?

Anyway, that worked out well, thank's for making me quote the whole thing. Did I point out how Jesus had earlier talked about marriage and divorce? He compared divorce to separating a mixture, like a baker mixing together ingredient's, and then us performing filtration and applying separations technology to break apart the mixture back to the original ingredient's again. Later on, in order to clarify what He was teaching, He say's that divorcing and then remarrying is adultery, plain and simple, cut and dried.

So all of this is to say, in direct answer to you're "a divorcee getting married is a valid marriage" --Jesus --say's absolutely, definitively, no; your wrong.

And the successor's of Peter alway's agree with Him. 'D'you know that?

...No...

In direct contradiction with our Lord and Savior (Mark 10:11-12 KJV).

...Let's see if you came up with a valid comparison.

A "gay marriage" is two people committing a sin that is explicitly named as a capital offense (death penalty offense) pretending that they are married.

A divorced woman is allowed to remarry without penalty in that same law.

So, your comparison fails.

And which "law" are you saying supersede's Mark 10:11-12 KJV again? The "law" that has more authority and power over our live's than the verbatim word's of Jesus Christ?

Is this where you get to claim that Jesus isn't our Creator in the flesh, so His Word isn't the pinnacle of all authority?

Lets see if you answer anything substantive in my post.


Daniel

 

[genuineoriginal]

You claim to be a member of the Church of Rome...

What do you mean. I don't know what your talking about and have never made such a claim if so post link to post.

...When you go to confession...

I don't "go to confession."

...which sin are you confessing?
One you already said 10 Hail Mary's and 15 Our Father's for, or the new one that you haven't done penance for yet?

:AMR:

Again, I don't know what your talking about.

Are you claiming you didn't write this post?

...I love especially praying the core of the Rosary; the Our Father, ten Hail Mary's, Glory Be, and O My Jesus. Over and over again. I can meditate on the Mystery's, or even simultaneously meditate upon them and put forth in my prayer whatever happen's to be on my mind, whether troubling or wonderful. And I love how I can teach my children the heart of the whole Gospel story by reading to them from the Bible and talking about each of the Mystery's, and how they all come together into the 1 Gospel...

 

[Dan Emanuel]

Are you claiming you didn't write this post?

Of course I wrote that post.

Are you going to address anything in my post specifically to you?


Daniel

 

[aikido7]

Well this is an interesting day when a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want. On this historic day I ponder what Jesus would say about this gay-marriage law. First I think he would say that he didn’t come to make America a theocracy so don’t try to make it one. But I firmly believe he would say something along these lines, “I’ll love you despite what you choose to do or who you love. But don’t call a union a marriage that I and my Father don’t call marriage.” This law doesn’t change the simple fact that marriage is between a man and a woman, nothing else. You can call a gay relationship a civil union that’s fine, but it’s not a marriage. It just isn’t. Now if you’re an atheist this law is irrational since gay marriage does nothing for society. It doesn’t bring children into the world to bring about the upward evolution of humanity. Now there are going to be people who will say to those who disagree with this law that you’re ‘homophobic.’ If that’s the case in also 'suicidalphobic’ since I disagree with suicide. Do you see the illogical mindset of people who say 'because you disagree with this you’re homophobic’? So, the moral of this whole long post is be like Jesus, love everyone and accept them with grace, but don’t call it marriage.

I am confused.

You assert that "a federal government passes a law that the majority didn’t want," yet the poling I have seen shows that most Americans have moved on from any sort of fixation on gay sex.

In Pew Research polling--and this was back in 2001--Americans opposed same-sex marriage by a 57% to 35% margin.

Since then, support for same-sex marriage seems to have steadily grown.

Today, a majority of Americans (57%) support same-sex marriage, compared with 39% who oppose it.

Please don't take my word for this. Try and check it out for yourself.