Pope Francis backs same-sex civil unions

[stevevw]

Do you think people who do not wish to procreate but still want to have sex should be allowed to have sex?

Thats is not a simple question that can have a simple answer. In secular society people are allowed to have sex whenever and with whoever they want provided it is not against the law.

But for Christians sex should be within the confines of a loving committed relationship and that includes being able to have sex besides procreation as the act of sex is the ultimate act of a loving relationship. Christians acknowledge the right of non Christians to live how they want. They just dont agree with it.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Not a single thing, I believe.

He didn't have to. It was well-established that this was prohibited in the Law.

 

[Kylie]

Thats is not a simple question that can have a simple answer. In secular society people are allowed to have sex whenever and with whoever they want provided it is not against the law.

But for Christians sex should be within the confines of a loving committed relationship and that includes being able to have sex besides procreation as the act of sex is the ultimate act of a loving relationship. Christians acknowledge the right of non Christians to live how they want. They just dont agree with it.

Yes, it is a simple question.

Someone comes up to you and says, "I wish to have sex with my partner. We are not going to procreate, but only wish to have fun, because we both find sex enjoyable."

Do you tell them they shouldn't, or do you tell them they should?

 

[Kylie]

He didn't have to. It was well-established that this was prohibited in the Law.

Then why is it that all those other laws from Leviticus are no longer in effect?

 

[stevevw]

Yes, it is a simple question.

Someone comes up to you and says, "I wish to have sex with my partner. We are not going to procreate, but only wish to have fun, because we both find sex enjoyable."

Do you tell them they shouldn't, or do you tell them they should?

Thats a logical fallacy of an either and or arguement. I can choose not to answer due to not wanting to get involved in other peoples sex lives. I can choose to qualify my answer which I have a right to do. You are asking someone to answer the question according to how you think people should answer. I mean what do you mean by enjoyable, peoples idea of this can be varied. I just think its more of a personal thing.

You have to remember that Christians have certain moral beliefs and you should respect that. I showed that I respect non-Christian views by acknwledging that these will be different to mine and I cannot deny this or stop people from having them.

 

[hedrick]

You have to remember that Christians have certain moral beliefs and you should respect that. I showed that I respect non-Christian views by acknwledging that these will be different to mine and I cannot deny this or stop people from having them.

Then you seem to agree with the Pope's support for civil unions. (Note that in your response Christian should be replaced with "conservative Christian", since many Christians don't have a problem with gay marriage.)

 

[stevevw]

Then you seem to agree with the Pope's support for civil unions. (Note that in your response Christian should be replaced with "conservative Christian", since many Christians don't have a problem with gay marriage.)

I think I gave my response to this in this post #201.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Yes, it is a simple question.

Someone comes up to you and says, "I wish to have sex with my partner. We are not going to procreate, but only wish to have fun, because we both find sex enjoyable."

Do you tell them they shouldn't, or do you tell them they should?

That's an illogical question you are asking.

Is this person asking the bolded question asking my permission? It sounds as if it is only a statement.

I would make no response at all to a mere statement and merely go about my business.

No one has asked a question.

Or do I have influence over the person in any sense of the word? Am I being asked whether it is right or wrong and in what context? Am I his parent, pastor, employer, what? All of this makes a difference.

As parent, I am definitely going to tell my child what the Word of God says, though I cannot make him do anything.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Then why is it that all those other laws from Leviticus are no longer in effect?

Because we no longer follow the ceremonial law, not since the curtain was torn when Jesus said, "It is Finished". The Jews don't even follow it, or make animal sacrifices anymore.

We are always under moral law, however. Moral law never changes and we must always follow it, Honor God, don't, kill, commit adultery, steal, lie, or covet. This remains because it is moral law, while killing a calf was ceremonial law and does not remain after the New Covenant. God established marriage with Adam and Eve and Jesus reiterated it, when He said that a man leaves his father and mother, cleaves unto his wife, and the two shall become one.

 

[Kylie]

Thats a logical fallacy of an either and or arguement. I can choose not to answer due to not wanting to get involved in other peoples sex lives. I can choose to qualify my answer which I have a right to do. You are asking someone to answer the question according to how you think people should answer. I mean what do you mean by enjoyable, peoples idea of this can be varied. I just think its more of a personal thing.

Okay, I admit, that is a false dichotomy. Let me rephrase it.

If two people wish to have sex and they are going to take steps to ensure procreation does not take place, do you think they are doing something wrong?

You have to remember that Christians have certain moral beliefs and you should respect that. I showed that I respect non-Christian views by acknwledging that these will be different to mine and I cannot deny this or stop people from having them.

Yes, and I do respect a Christian's right to their moral beliefs.

However, that respect ends at the point they try to enforce their moral beliefs on others.

 

[Kylie]

That's an illogical question you are asking.

Is this person asking the bolded question asking my permission? It sounds as if it is only a statement.

I would make no response at all to a mere statement and merely go about my business.

No one has asked a question.

Or do I have influence over the person in any sense of the word? Am I being asked whether it is right or wrong and in what context? Am I his parent, pastor, employer, what? All of this makes a difference.

As parent, I am definitely going to tell my child what the Word of God says, though I cannot make him do anything.

I can't help but feel you are trying to make it more complicated in an attempt to muddy the waters. I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm getting at here, so please stop trying to avoid it.

 

[Kylie]

Because we no longer follow the ceremonial law, not since the curtain was torn when Jesus said, "It is Finished". The Jews don't even follow it, or make animal sacrifices anymore.

We are always under moral law, however. Moral law never changes and we must always follow it, Honor God, don't, kill, commit adultery, steal, lie, or covet. This remains because it is moral law, while killing a calf was ceremonial law and does not remain after the New Covenant. God established marriage with Adam and Eve and Jesus reiterated it, when He said that a man leaves his father and mother, cleaves unto his wife, and the two shall become one.

So how do you tell which parts of Leviticus are moral law and which are ceremonial law? I've read it, and I don't recall seeing anything which specifies.

In any case, the things that you included in moral laws are things that can be shown to cause harm to people and society (apart from the honouring God thing, since I don't, and yet I don't cause harm to society - if you disagree, please tell me how I do). But I can't for the life of me figure out how what a gay couple does in private can harm society.

 

[stevevw]

Okay, I admit, that is a false dichotomy. Let me rephrase it.

If two people wish to have sex and they are going to take steps to ensure procreation does not take place, do you think they are doing something wrong?

How can I be the judge of that. Are these people married or unmarried as this makes a difference. Though a committed and loving relationship can happen without being married the commitment of being married has been found to make a difference.

As far as secular society goes there is nothing wrong with two people having sex without procreation regardless of their relationship and circumstances. But as a Christian the destinction of a couple being in a committed relationship is important to determining the difference between having sex as part of a committed relationship and casual sex.

Yes, and I do respect a Christian's right to their moral beliefs.

However, that respect ends at the point they try to enforce their moral beliefs on others.

I think I made that destinction myself when I said
I showed that I respect non-Christian views by acknwledging that these will be different to mine and I cannot deny this or stop people from having them.

But imposing views on people can go both ways as we have seen in todays society. The important thing is everyone should have the right to express those views so long as they don't promote hate without there being any ramifications.

 

[SkyWriting]

He makes out that homosexual "couples" are in a genuine family. The man is a heretic. Flat out.

I'm sure he thought it through first. Did you consider that he already knew what your response would be? But did you consider how you would respond if the Pope declared something you didn't agree with? Because they usually do.

 

[Kylie]

How can I be the judge of that. Are these people married or unmarried as this makes a difference. Though a committed and loving relationship can happen without being married the commitment of being married has been found to make a difference.

None of that makes a difference.

As far as secular society goes there is nothing wrong with two people having sex without procreation regardless of their relationship and circumstances. But as a Christian the destinction of a couple being in a committed relationship is important to determining the difference between having sex as part of a committed relationship and casual sex.

So you admit to allowing your beliefs to influence your judgement over what other people should or should not do?

But imposing views on people can go both ways as we have seen in todays society. The important thing is everyone should have the right to express those views so long as they don't promote hate without there being any ramifications.

Unfortunately, same-sex couples have received a lot of that hate.

 

[stevevw]

None of that makes a difference.

It doesnt make a difference to you but it does to Christians and you are asking a Christian.

But not just that, it does make a difference. Regardless of morality the research shows that having a committed relationship makes a positive difference for a number of outcomes including for sex. The obvious one is falling pregnant as the result of having casual sex without a commitment has more negative consequences such as more likely to have an abortion, fatherless children, economic problems, mental and physical problems ect. Facts show high rates of pregnacies with casual sex and consequently high rates of abortion.

So you admit to allowing your beliefs to influence your judgement over what other people should or should not do?

Ah that is what belief and morality is lol. But thats like saying a persons ethics influences what they think people can and cannot do. An organisations code of conduct influences what people can and cannot do. That stands to reason.

Unfortunately, same-sex couples have received a lot of that hate.

I agree. But if a person of belief expresses their belief that they disagree with same sex marriage for example that is not being hateful. Today people interpret this as hateful but it is not under a society that allows the right for people to have the freedom of religion and belief. But even non religious people have the same right to express their personal views on this without being accused of being hateful.

 

[SkyWriting]

Some people just have same sex attraction. I get it. But God calls practicing that lifestyle sin. These people are not converted.

Sin is decided by oneself, for oneself. Scripture covers this in a vast number of places.
What Does the Bible Say About Judging Others?

 

[SkyWriting]

The bottom line is people are either going to live by God's standards and commandments or not.

Loving others as themself. Correct.
What Does the Bible Say About Do To Others?

 

[SkyWriting]

I truly thought that this was a joke or over exaggerating a press release of some kind.

Then I looked at the news...

Can they excommunicate the Pope?

I know that they are about to have a civil war within the ranks.

The Pope is the Pope. It's not an easy process to get there.

 

[SkyWriting]

That's like stating we dont share the religios beliefs of, thou shalt not steal, kill, or bear false witness.

This isn't some mild disagreement on theology, we're talking damnable sin here.

You don't get to do the damning though. That's decided by another guy.
What Does the Bible Say About Do To Others?