Proposition 8 overturned in California

[Exiledoomsayer]

I honestly don't have the time it would take to go through this thread and find all the examples of forcing a viewpoint or intolerance. From what I have read in multiple threads in E&M right now (since Prop 8 was overturned) I have noticed quite a bit of intolerance toward Christians who don't believe in gay marriage and I have also noticed a lot of comments directed at Christians challenging their beliefs in a disrespectful way. It's difficult to try to have a respectful discussion when people resort to calling you a religious nutjob, conservative fundie wacko, or a racist bigot.

I think you have to make a distiction though. Between christians that do not belief in gay marriage, and christians that want the law to prevent gay marriage.
I do not think you will find much anger towards someone simply expressing their view. Which falls under freedom of speech which is respected even if its not agreed with.
And a group that are trying to trample upon the rights of another group which may give rise to people who are pasionate about equal rights.

And there is a third group somewhere that are the religious nutjob conversative funidie wacko racist biggots which really seem more like a bad comedy sketch then anything else believing the gays are trying to rape their children which we see post and want to act on that irrational belief. I am not sure what to make of that but reason certainly does not seem to fase them.

I nearly forgot the forth group.
Christians that have no problem with the legal right of gays to marry.

 

[Gishin]

well, ideally, yes we would want laws based on Christianity.

How about no.

 

[Jase]

well, ideally, yes we would want laws based on Christianity.

No you wouldn't, because if the laws in this country can be based on Christianity - they can also be based on Islam.

It's society that has determined that religious values have no place in government, not God.

The Founders of this country made that decision, and for good reason, considering how they were being treated in England under Christian rule.

God certainly tells us to respect the authority placed over us, but God never said that law was supposed to be secular law.

Considering history proves to us that theocracies are a disaster in most cases, I have a very hard time believing God would ever support one in this world.

For Christians it is certainly a religious issue. Our beliefs and values are not based on what society thinks is right, but what our God tells us is right.

The US Constitution does not allow this to be a religious issue. And a minor but important correction is, God never told you what is right, you believe what the Bible says in English is what God intended it to say. There is zero evidence that this is the case. God did not command the Protestant English Bible created in the last 30 years to speak as his authority on all matters. I don't understand why you guys don't realize that not everyone agrees with your interpretation. There are over 30,000 Christian denominations who would disagree with at least some of your views, and billions of humans who would disagree with all of your views, and neither one of you has any evidence that the other is wrong.

 

[Gishin]

I honestly don't have the time it would take to go through this thread and find all the examples of forcing a viewpoint or intolerance. From what I have read in multiple threads in E&M right now (since Prop 8 was overturned) I have noticed quite a bit of intolerance toward Christians who don't believe in gay marriage and I have also noticed a lot of comments directed at Christians challenging their beliefs in a disrespectful way. It's difficult to try to have a respectful discussion when people resort to calling you a religious nutjob, conservative fundie wacko, or a racist bigot.

Well now you know how it feels.

 

[Old Catholic Man]

Of course it is! When has a complex of the christian persecution nature, it is natural to fall back when the ungodly point out your mistakes.



It is because they say it is. They don't need evidence for these claims...they are being persecuted after all.



It is the job of every True Christian to force their godly morals upon the ungodly. Those who refuse to turn from their wicked ways will be dispatched!



*bolded* to emphasize my agreement with this.

It has been my experience that American Christians who claim persecution have no clue as to what persecution is truly going on elsewhere in the world. We are fortunate in this country. Very fortunate.

T

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I think this is a calm, respectful and well thought-out response. Thank you for taking the time to clearly explain your position. Well I agree with the majority of what you have said, I don't agree that most of the participants in this thread really do respect the rights of Christians to consider marriage as between a man and a woman. I also think most participants really are forcing their views on Christians and they get really annoyed if Christians support their viewpoint with Scripture.

Well, from the point of view of non-Christians, it's a vacuous answer - especially when those people are trying to push their opinion into law. If you genuinely believe that X should be illegal, fine, make your case. But if your case is nothing more than a scriptural one, then expect people to get frustrated at wasting their time and money - and, if it happens to actually become law, their rights.

For what it's worth, a Biblical basis for an individual's belief is fine by me . Obviously I, the baby-eating atheist, won't use that basis any time soon, but I can accept it as reason enough for that person's views.

When Christians explain their reasoning for believing as they do they get flamed, mocked and ridiculed, and called names such as bigots, racists and fundies.

Depends on their view. Christians on the Left-hand-side of the political spectrum get labelled all sorts as well - but only from the Right. Loony Liberals rarely attack a Christian who supports gay marriage for religious reasons, and likewise the Religious Right rarely attacks a Christian who condemns gay marriage for religious reasons. So, I don't think it's fundamentally intolerance to Christianity, but rather the opinion itself.

That said, there are plenty of people on both sides (with more on the Left, it has to be said) who really are intolerant of Christianity.

If we as Christians point out a verse that says homosexuality (man with man, woman with woman) is an abomination in the eyes of God, we are accused of calling homosexuals abominations. If we quote a verse about the actions that lead to condemnation and hell, then we are accused of saying all homosexuals are going to hell.

Well, you are, aren't you?

 

[b&wpac4]

It has been my experience that American Christians who claim persecution have no clue as to what persecution is truly going on elsewhere in the world. We are fortunate in this country. Very fortunate.

Very, very true. There are places where people would be killed for practicing Christianity, or any number of religions that disagree with the established religion.

 

[Jase]

It has been my experience that American Christians who claim persecution have no clue as to what persecution is truly going on elsewhere in the world. We are fortunate in this country. Very fortunate.

T

And of course, when they scream persecution, it devalues those who have truly been persecuted. As a Jew who very well may have had family in the Holocaust, I take great offense at claiming the overwhelming majority of the most powerful nation on Earth is being persecuted because they can't inflict their prejudice onto the entire country.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

No you wouldn't, because if the laws in this country can be based on Christianity - they can also be based on Islam.

That's not the point. As Christians, we would want laws based on Christianity.

The Founders of this country made that decision, and for good reason, considering how they were being treated in England under Christian rule.

And they did it based on society's perceptions, not God's.

Considering history proves to us that theocracies are a disaster in most cases, I have a very hard time believing God would ever support one in this world.

I have a hard time believing God supports most of our secular laws.

The US Constitution does not allow this to be a religious issue. And a minor but important correction is, God never told you what is right, you believe what the Bible says in English is what God intended it to say. There is zero evidence that this is the case. God did not command the Protestant English Bible created in the last 30 years to speak as his authority on all matters. I don't understand why you guys don't realize that not everyone agrees with your interpretation. There are over 30,000 Christian denominations who would disagree with at least some of your views, and billions of humans who would disagree with all of your views, and neither one of you has any evidence that the other is wrong.

Just a minor point of correction: we use the Hebrew and Greek texts as well as current translations.

Who are "you guys" anyway?

God did indeed tell me what was right through His word. I stand firmly by that.

 

[b&wpac4]

That's not the point. As Christians, we would want laws based on Christianity.

To anybody disagreeing here, there is no problem with that desire.

However, this is exactly why we have the Constitution. It lays out the type of laws that are going to be made in this country.

 

[pgp_protector]

That's not the point. As Christians, we would want laws based on Christianity.
..snip...

So Christianity states that one should worship no other god then the Lord, do you want laws written on that ?

Jesus stated 2 Laws were the most important, what were they, and do you want them written into the State Laws ?

 

[Sojourner1]

Well, from the point of view of non-Christians, it's a vacuous answer - especially when those people are trying to push their opinion into law. If you genuinely believe that X should be illegal, fine, make your case. But if your case is nothing more than a scriptural one, then expect people to get frustrated at wasting their time and money - and, if it happens to actually become law, their rights.

For what it's worth, a Biblical basis for an individual's belief is fine by me . Obviously I, the baby-eating atheist, won't use that basis any time soon, but I can accept it as reason enough for that person's views.

Why do people always use that line? The baby-eating atheist one? I have nothing against atheists. Yes, I genuinely believe that gay marriage should not be allowed and I will vote that way when the issue comes up. Everyone should vote how their "conscience" leads them to vote.

Well, you are, aren't you?

I'm not personally calling anyone an abomination. I'm quoting the word of God and letting God speak for Himself.

 

[Old Catholic Man]

well, ideally, yes we would want laws based on Christianity. It's society that has determined that religious values have no place in government, not God. God certainly tells us to respect the authority placed over us, but God never said that law was supposed to be secular law.

Ok and who gets to decide which version of Christianity? I assume that being Lutheran you use wine when celebrating the Sacrament. If up to Fundamentalists (if we use their version of Christianity) you will not be able to do so, or baptize babies, or claim that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist.

If we use the Roman Catholic version of Christianity then you will have to accept Transubstantiation, accept that Mary was assumed into Heaven and that she is the queen of heaven.

If we use the ...... well you get the message. Besides not even all Christians believe that homosexuals shouldn't marry.

For Christians it is certainly a religious issue. Our beliefs and values are not based on what society thinks is right, but what our God tells us is right.

Your personal response is a religious issue, the matter before the courts is not since we have a secular government.

I have stated before on this thread that I wouldn't preside over a same sex marriage but I recognize the difference between my Church and the Federal Government.

T

 

[Gishin]

Why do people always use that line? The baby-eating atheist one? I have nothing against atheists. Yes, I genuinely believe that gay marriage should not be allowed and I will vote that way when the issue comes up. Everyone should vote how their "conscience" leads them to vote.



I'm not personally calling anyone an abomination. I'm quoting the word of God and letting God speak for Himself.

Cop out.

 

[Jase]

That's not the point. As Christians, we would want laws based on Christianity.

Which group of Christians would you want them based on? Considering the kind of arguments I see between just Protestants and Catholics, would you agree that not all the laws based on Catholicism would be in line with your beliefs? If Christians can't even agree on doctrine within their own churches, how are they ever going to agree on the religious laws that run the nation?

And they did it based on society's perceptions, not God's.

They did it based on the poor treatment they received from the Christian ruling class in England. I think God would support their decision to create Freedom of Religion in this country to prevent that issue from happening again.

I have a hard time believing God supports most of our secular laws.

While he may not like all of it, I doubt he prefers the alternative that we see in Iran. Jesus, afterall, submitted to the laws of Rome - even if he didn't agree with them. He also heavily chastised the Pharisees, who essentially tried to create a theocratic society based on literalism and overzealous adherence to the law.

Just a minor point of correction: we use the Hebrew and Greek texts as well as current translations.

I would argue most American Christians do not, considering our unwillingness to explore other languages and cultures. I guarantee you the overwhelming majority of Christians in this country will only pick up a KJV or NIV and assume every word in English is what God intended. They are oblivious to language differences and translation bias.

And if you genuinely followed the Hebrew and Greek, you would be more objective in your views of certain issues. For example, you wouldn't be quoting the English version of 1 Cor 6:9 that uses the word homosexual in it, when no Hebrew or Greek text ever uses that word, nor has it ever been translated that way. Nor would you quote say Deut 23 which translated the word Qadesh to sodomite/homosexual in modern English - because that word has never meant that in Hebrew. It means temple prostitute - always.

Who are "you guys" anyway?

Conservatives/Literalists. Those who stand on the opposite side of all these issues.

God did indeed tell me what was right through His word. I stand firmly by that.

God told me what was right too. Why is your revelation more valid than mine, or anyone elses? Everyone claims the Holy Spirit guides them to the truth, and yet no 2 Christians on Earth agree.

I hope he won't mind, but take Beanieboy for example. An excellent display of Christian compassion and love. He has been praying to God for over 40 years regarding his orientation and the homosexuality issue. God has always given him peace and understanding, and never condemned him, telling him he's wrong and an abomination. Why is his revelation from God any less valid than yours?

 

[Belk]

I honestly don't have the time it would take to go through this thread and find all the examples of forcing a viewpoint or intolerance. From what I have read in multiple threads in E&M right now (since Prop 8 was overturned) I have noticed quite a bit of intolerance toward Christians who don't believe in gay marriage and I have also noticed a lot of comments directed at Christians challenging their beliefs in a disrespectful way. It's difficult to try to have a respectful discussion when people resort to calling you a religious nutjob, conservative fundie wacko, or a racist bigot.

I am not asking for all of them, I am asking for a couple so I have an idea of what you consider "forcing". So far all I have seen has been people disagreeing with the opposing view point. Arguing and disagreeing is not forcing in my book so I wanted to be sure my assessment was correct and trying to see if you are seeing something I am not.

 

[selfinflikted]

Cop out.

It is a copout. It's as if I say, "Well, all you guys are abominations, and you are all going to burn for eternity in hell!" ..."Oh, I'm not saying that, I'm just quoting the Bible." It's a convenient way to absolve oneself from any blame, a convenient cover. It's an easy way to say hurtful things and promote bigotry, without looking guilty of such.

 

[Cabal]

Cop out.

^ This.

The number of times I've spoken to non-Christians who have been put off church etc by people passing the buck like this is ridiculous.

It matters little if the Christian "passing on the message" believes in God or not - the point is, the person they're interacting with usually won't. To them, you're insulting them and passing the buck on to your imaginary friend - and even if they don't think that way, many would at least say you should have the courage to own what you are saying, even if you think God is the originator.

 

[selfinflikted]

I hope he won't mind, but take Beanieboy for example. An excellent display of Christian compassion and love. He has been praying to God for over 40 years regarding his orientation and the homosexuality issue. God has always given him peace and understanding, and never condemned him, telling him he's wrong and an abomination. Why is his revelation from God any less valid than yours?

Standard answer: Because that's not god talking to him. It's the DEVIL!

 

[Jase]

I'm not personally calling anyone an abomination. I'm quoting the word of God and letting God speak for Himself.

Just to be clear, God isn't saying anything. You are quoting what one particular translator wanted, and then assuming God approved of that translation.

No where has God ever indicated his desire or command for the Bible to ever be translated, nor has he ever promised that a translation would be without bias.