Can faggots reproduce through sodomy? What is the by-product of sodomy? Besides AIDS...Not good.
toldailytopic: Same-sex marriage: for it, or against it?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Can faggots reproduce through sodomy? What is the by-product of sodomy? Besides AIDS...Not good.
Buzzword
New member
zippy2006 said:
It's called SEPARATION of church and state for a reason.
Our country was founded on the idea that religious dogma should not influence legal proceedings.
Thus, us Christians who realize that are able to form opinions about political issues WITHOUT a spiritual bias.
We realize that our government is not "Christian", will not make decisions like Christ would, and as ADULTS we try to find a path which will protect the rights of ourselves and others.
Oh, and the only people who can't agree to disagree on abortion and homosexuality are those with an emotional stake in one or both of them.
Um, my wife and I would disagree.
We don't have children, and more and more it's looking like we WON'T be having children.
So where does that leave your "purpose"?
Mr.Razorblades
New member
Right off the bat there is the presupposition that there has to be a hand guiding law. So far not a very strong argument.
The sanctity of marriage is not being questioned.
Nor is the definition of marriage as a sacred covenant being questioned.
The availability of marriage between consenting adults as a civil contract is the question.
Mr.Razorblades
New member
Can heterosexuals reproduce through sodomy? Your question is irrelevant, however I will say that you are the epitome of ignorance.
Not a single argument can be made against it that isn't rooted in Judeo-Christian tradition so, pretty much any objection is a non-starter in my book. If there's an appeal outside of ancient religious mores that could made, I'd at least be interested in hearing it.
But every objection's rooted in religious tradition:
a) the "sanctity" of marriage
b) the bearing and raising of children
c) "natural"--a substitute for "created"--law
d) the Ick Factor
But every objection's rooted in religious tradition:
a) the "sanctity" of marriage
b) the bearing and raising of children
c) "natural"--a substitute for "created"--law
d) the Ick Factor
The same as hold true for any contract should be sufficient. It isn't a matter of being for or against the particulars of the contract, but for an adult's right to do so without undue or inequitable interference on the part of outside parties.
:e4e:
the protection is there whether you use it or not
we don't want to check once a month to see if you have any
most married couples do have children one way or another
you get a pass
zippy2006
New member
Clearly, like many, you don't understand what SoCaS is. When people think that SoCaS attempts to make people separate out their religious beliefs when it comes to politics they are merely speaking in impossibilities.
It is a guard against theocracy as well as a stronghold for religion against government meddling, not an order to marginalize faith itself.
Selaphiel
Well-known member
I do not agree. Europe and US are secular pluralistic societies, the opinions of any church or any other religion have no special influence on the laws in such a society, nor should they. The religious convictions of one group should have no special influence over the life of a group of people who do not hold to those convictions.
I suspect I do hold to a more liberal conception of Christianity and the Bible than you do. I think those texts can be questioned and that Christianity can change and I don't necessarily think that a changing Christianity is something new, it has changed in many ways many times. Even the sacred texts change, there is progression of thought within scripture itself.
Abortion and murder can be argued against on a secular basis.
Reflecting on sanctity of a thing makes little sense in a secular context. There is no sanctity (in the religious sense) of marriage in the secular idea of marriage, that is an addition held to by religious people.
In the end the question is not whether the churches or other religions should marry homosexuals, but whether the secular state that represents a pluralistic secular society can do it.
:e4e:
So is bigotry.
Who's morals?
Jesus never confronted it.
Being Homosexual isn't immoral.
But the interaction/sexual side would be against God's commandments.
Cheating on taxes is immoral, we should revoke all convicted of that of their marriage licenses.
Ever read Matthew 5:43-48. You are told to love your enemies and provide them, just as God did. Do you provide for your enemies by denying a gay couple the same protection as a couple you receive?
If the church wasn't such a bigot filled establishment, when this chat started you could have had kept marriage the word for marriage and used unions or whatever and given them the rights. But the Church, was against it, they tried to legislate their faith which is ANTI-CHRIST.
This forced the alphabet community, (g,l,b,t,tv,ts,tg,q) to make a legal move for marriage. Because each state honors the other states marriage license. There is a legal term for that, but I forget what it is.
They do this so a family can't appeal and find a sympathetic judge and rewrite a deceased person's Will because they didn't approve of the relationship. That happened, often, and most often by church members.
If you want to do the Xian thing, you back off of what the govt needs to do to run the company. IT IS NOT A THEOCRACY that won't happen until Christ returns. IT IS NOT SUPPOSED to be run as a theocracy. The friggin CHURCH is to be involved in SERVING their neighbors, and their enemies. NOT legislating.
I can tell you this with a Certainty. The people that speak the loudest on this topic, from the Xian community, are NOT the ones witnessing to people, and talking about God with seekers, or forsakers. They are not serving Him in any way, they are sitting on the a$$, and talking about it.
Nobody hands on in the trenches would make such a move.
btw, where I said those in the ... speaking loudest.... I'm not directing at you, I don't know how you are in the community.
so are you in favor of same sex marriage?
Really? How is that? What we call a marriage today, Jesus' parents NEVER went through. The concept of a Xian marriage today, is ONLY one that has a GOVT issued license. ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL Do you realize how far you've drifted from what a "marriage" was in the NT?
zippy2006
New member
When God revealed to us that man is made for women and women for man and that they are joined to be one flesh (as is quite obvious even to non-Christians historically), was there a disclaimer? Marriage is merely the consequence of that eternal truth, there is no such thing as a neatly separated "civil marriage" and "sacred covenant marriage." Marriage is merely a reflection of that eternal truth, which holds everywhere.
:e4e:
Quincy
New member
Natural Law doesn't have to require any more of a "guiding hand" than evolution does. Some believe God writes these instincts on some creature's heart and others see as a behavioural precept we figure out through reason. If you believe the latter, than you probably have no problem with same-sex marriage
.Against it via natural law. Maybe a poll would be interesting Knight? :e4e:
Used to be for it, used to think I would always be for it, am no longer for it.
What natural law?
Can you post the natural laws?
Nature has homosexual critters. And it's estimated (hard to poll otters, etc..) they are at about the same % as we know of homosexuals in humanity.
Seems natural law works FOR the marriage, not against it.
Mr.Razorblades
New member
Right, because classical reasoning and logic worked so well when first discovering the rules of quantum electrodynamics.
One Eyed Jack
New member
Who do you think gave the Law to Moses?
- Status