Assault on marriage!!!

Candide · Oct 24, 2007

About separation of church and state. This nation was founded on democratic principles, and was formed by Deists or in some cases Theists, but most of our founding fathers were not in fact Christian.

The "Christian Principles" that you speak of are in fact those of John Locke, and they were included mainly because Locke was the king of England's favorite philosopher, thus making it harder for him to argue with the revolution.

Ainustorm · Oct 24, 2007

Candide said:
About separation of church and state. This nation was founded on democratic principles, and was formed by Deists or in some cases Theists, but most of our founding fathers were not in fact Christian.

I agree, Benjimen Framklin, for example. The principles come from the Bible. And some of the forefathers were Christian in value. So they served this country with Biblical values. This country was founded on Biblical principles (better to say than Christian values/ principles)

The "Christian Principles" that you speak of are in fact those of John Locke, and they were included mainly because Locke was the king of England's favorite philosopher, thus making it harder for him to argue with the revolution.

Agreed, but where did he get that foundation, the Bible. He did not make them up on his own. He may have been a favorite Philosopherby the King of England, he still took from the principles and standards of the Bible. Thus making our foundation on the directing and counsel of God. It is because we put God first in this country that it lasted as long as it has. And it is by the freedom of God that we have such freedom in this country. It was on the bases that man should be equal.

So the law stating that marriage is between a man and women, where does that come from? Do you think the Diest, athiest, Christian, Theist, and many that were presented... made up that structure? It came from the Bible, from the begining of time. That was the standard, that was the naturality, that was the purest form of marriage. It is we who have destroyed that standard of God with... divorce, Homosexuality, rape, and similar acts. It is because we are a selfish, lustful (sex filled), adulterous people. We are starting to look like the Roman empire. We break down our standards, we lose what made this nation so great. When you take God out of the picture, you get polaticians, lol joke... seriously you lose yourself.

I for one live by a standard, its foundation is the bible. When people are trying to destroy what this nation stands by, it is destroying my home. Sin is sin, Homosexuality is against the foundation of this Nation of a family structure. Worst it is sinning against an Almighty God, whose hands protect and defend this country. I do not want to lose the Sovereignty of the United States of America.

Ainustorm · Oct 24, 2007

CoreyTheMagnificent said:
Number one: I said that I know that you are right on the percentage of people but what you failed to mention is that the number of people against gay marriage has been declining.

I do not think it has been declining, the tolerance of the life style what is be accepted. You see, I asked many guys at work, Christian and non-Christian (an Atheist for one). They stated that it a sick/sinful life style, but tolerate the style even though they really do not accept it. I have not met one person so far that states it is right. The only ones that i have run into who are so called "acceptable" of the style are those they like to debate, fight, attack, and/or live in the style... of which most are single

Number two: We could go ahead and argue about the constitution all day and I could go ahead and bring up the fact that what really shaped the U.S. government were the philosophies of John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and others; but much greater people than me and you have done this and I'm sure we wouldn't do nearly as good of a job.

Where do you think those "philosophies" come from? oh, wait... yeah the Bible

Number three: So are you blaming this issue on removing family values or removing biblical values? I wonder what you mean by teach boys to be men and girls to be women; I believe that teaching equality is the best thing for us. I agree that the high divorce rates stem from the fact that we, the U.S., are a selfish country and your reasoning there is sufficient to me.

Both are an issue of why
Men and women can strive to be equality, but physically and emotionally they will never be. We need to strengthen those values in us and our children.

Number four: perhaps you should review your situation. You seem to think that you are in the majority but if that were true then you would get your way. You explain this by saying that the majority doesn't speak out, about this I am almost certain you are wrong. It could be that you really are not part of the majority. Remember that ulcer.

As i said before... majority is be tolerant... not accepting. Because we are afraid to stand up... we are like sheep... we follow the sheperd (MEDIA). And lower our standards.

Candide · Oct 24, 2007

Agreed, but where did he get that foundation, the Bible.

It was influenced by the Bible, yes. But Locke came up with many ideas on his own, apart from Biblical influence.

It is because we put God first in this country that it lasted as long as it has.

You have no way of proving this statement, and you have no way of knowing if it is true or not. And we don't put God first in this country. At least not any specific God. Freedom of religion makes that pretty clear. And there are plenty of examples throughout history of non-Christian nations and empires (though the USA isn't Christian by any means) that have lasted much longer than the US, by not putting God first.

It came from the Bible, from the begining of time.

Exactly. It came from the Bible, not from our constitution. Thus, it shouldn't influence our constitution or our government, at all. It's not the government's job to make sure that "Biblical standards" are upheld. Rather, it's the government's job to make sure that all of it's citizens are safe, and enjoy equal rights, regardless of their political, religious, socio-economic, or ethnic background.

It was on the bases that man should be equal.

I'm sorry, but if you think that "all men should be equal" is a Biblical principle, you're just wrong. Yes, the Bible says that, but so do the sacred books of many many other religions, and the rule books of many ancient civilizations pre-dating the Bible and Christianity. I'm afraid Christianity isn't original in that regard. And while that idea is in the Bible, it's hardly unique to the Bible.

We break down our standards, we lose what made this nation so great.

What do you mean by great? A great, stable place to live? If that's what you mean, I'm terribly sorry, but it's been anything but living to Biblical standards that have made this country great. This nation has routinely violated Biblical law to ensure the safety of it's citizens, and that's it's job. Diversity is another thing that has made this nation great. Homosexuals and Heterosexuals living together, with white people, Latino people, black people, Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Atheists and many other religions, all living together in a successful social experiment. That's America what America is built on. Not Christianity.

When you take God out of the picture, you get polaticians

Well, you should, since politicians are working for a secular government, and not a religion.

I for one live by a standard, its foundation is the bible.

That's great. Me too! But it's completely unfair and unconstitutional for your or I to expect others to be subject to that which we believe. You're allowed to live the way you want to in this nation, that's why it's so great (and that's also a Biblical principle). Forcing people to abide by "Christian" laws (though I certainly don't think that gay marriage is anti-Christian) is the most unconstitutional thing you can do. There is nothing that we could do that would spit more in the face of religious freedom than to do that. It's not the government's job to tell people what religion to follow, and it shouldn't be. If the people who wrote our constitution wanted it to be, they would have made that perfectly clear.

I do not want to lose the Sovereignty of the United States of America.

But it's not about what you want. It's about what God wants. And I think it's dumb to say that God likes the US more than any other nation, and would want it to rule over the other nations or anything like that. You're a citizen of God's, not a citizen of the US. Instead of "God Bless America", we should be saying "God bless the world".

Diane_Windsor · Oct 24, 2007

Currently in New Jersey and big one on a Lesbian couple trying to sue a church for not allowing them to use the church for marraige ceremony.

And????

Also there is a Rich GAY guy putting tons of money in the candinates, who will side with changing the values of marriage to allow gay and lesbian marriages/ support.

And? Bob Perry is a major political donor in Texas and I don't agree with every political campaign (usually Republican) he supports, but it's his $$$ and he can spend it as he chooses.

Their are major donors on both sides of every issue.

Did you also know that Gov Arnold passed a law that allows boys and girls to use opposite bathrooms and locker rooms. Which allows shared showers in public shools if they are gay, lesbian, or Bi ??!!!!

Did you know that you would have more credibility here if you posted your sources for this post?

CoreyTheMagnificent · Oct 24, 2007

Ainustorm,

Number one: You speak of the majority being afraid to speak up, do you apply this to the people you ask about such contrversial topics as this? I do say that homosexual marriage is natural and right. I will never deny that I enjoy debating, but that is because I like to have my mind changed by things that make sense and try to change the minds of others if what I have to say seems to make more sense; I imagine that the same should be said for every one of you Christians because you are called by your God to change the minds of others. I don't say that marriage of homosexuals is right for the purpose of arguing, I say it because I believe it. I live a peaceful life and promote pacifism in nearly everything.

Number two: I will only say that one of the main beliefs of Thomas Hobbes was that the government was above everybody; that means the church too. If a Christian disagrees with the government's command he could either obey or "Go to Christ in martyrdom."

Number three: It seems to me that you mean we should teach boys that they are stronger and should do labor; girls we should teach that they are more emotional and should involve themselves with things of the sort. I think that by doing this we would effectively supress the other half of what people are; though I am male should I not be allowed to cry?

Number four:Yes and no. Of course I agree with you on the topic of media, I can just look around me and see what people are wearing to know that, but would you honestly claim to believe that your "majority" are the only ones lulled into submission by the media?

CoreyTheMagnificent · Oct 25, 2007

Oh I just noticed another thing, I suppose that seperation of church and state is not a law per se. It is more of a right, like the bill of rights, like the very first amendment to our constitution.

Ainustorm · Oct 29, 2007

Candide said:
Agreed, but where did he get that foundation, the Bible.

It was influenced by the Bible, yes. But Locke came up with many ideas on his own, apart from Biblical influence.

I agree with you!

It is because we put God first in this country that it lasted as long as it has.

You have no way of proving this statement, and you have no way of knowing if it is true or not. And we don't put God first in this country. At least not any specific God. Freedom of religion makes that pretty clear. And there are plenty of examples throughout history of non-Christian nations and empires (though the USA isn't Christian by any means) that have lasted much longer than the US, by not putting God first.

I should add also it is of our alliance to israel that has also helped as well. But if you look at many nations that once existed, fell. Why? Look at how the people started to become. Soddom and Gomorrah, Israel (though they are God's choosen), Egypt (kingoms, just a memory), U.S.S.R (Russia is not the same nor as powerful as once was), Germany (was a respected nation now not as pwerful as once), Roman Empire, Greek Empire. Some of these lasted for long time but eventual fell... for various reasons. From pride of leaders ( who looked at themselves as gods), to people living if what they felt was right. Also look at many of the nations in the bible. Some that even followed God with one leader and then denied Him another, fell like rocks in water. Just as Abraham asked God if there are 10 people that still followed Him would He spare Sodom and Gomorrah, God said yes, there was only 4, Lots family. I do believe it is of God and those that still honor Him, in the homes and in governing positions.

It came from the Bible, from the begining of time.

Exactly. It came from the Bible, not from our constitution. Thus, it shouldn't influence our constitution or our government, at all. It's not the government's job to make sure that "Biblical standards" are upheld. Rather, it's the government's job to make sure that all of it's citizens are safe, and enjoy equal rights, regardless of their political, religious, socio-economic, or ethnic background.

Not saying it is the government's job to uphold "Biblical Standards", even though they should, I was sayin that the standard the government was based on is of a bilical standard.

It was on the bases that man should be equal.

I'm sorry, but if you think that "all men should be equal" is a Biblical principle, you're just wrong. Yes, the Bible says that, but so do the sacred books of many many other religions, and the rule books of many ancient civilizations pre-dating the Bible and Christianity. I'm afraid Christianity isn't original in that regard. And while that idea is in the Bible, it's hardly unique to the Bible.

I do not thing it is a principle of the bible. Um where do you get your info on that there were writings older than bible? When the bible is the history of the Jews. Which has writings since the flood, and therefore was of Noah and his sons. So what writings are before bible. Even before the flood, from Adam and Eve, basis of God's authority. Now if you are talking about the full bible, I agree, but the bible (old testiment) is waaaaayyyy older. If you knew, the book of Job was written before the flood.

We break down our standards, we lose what made this nation so great.

What do you mean by great? A great, stable place to live? If that's what you mean, I'm terribly sorry, but it's been anything but living to Biblical standards that have made this country great. This nation has routinely violated Biblical law to ensure the safety of it's citizens, and that's it's job. Diversity is another thing that has made this nation great. Homosexuals and Heterosexuals living together, with white people, Latino people, black people, Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Atheists and many other religions, all living together in a successful social experiment. That's America what America is built on. Not Christianity.

I agree with you, but I am just saying the standard is build upon biblical standard of governing. It is up to the governing authority to govern the state/ country/ providence it is over for the best of the people. I agree.

When you take God out of the picture, you get polaticians

Well, you should, since politicians are working for a secular government, and not a religion.

That was a joke! I know, lol

I for one live by a standard, its foundation is the bible.

That's great. Me too! But it's completely unfair and unconstitutional for your or I to expect others to be subject to that which we believe. You're allowed to live the way you want to in this nation, that's why it's so great (and that's also a Biblical principle). Forcing people to abide by "Christian" laws (though I certainly don't think that gay marriage is anti-Christian) is the most unconstitutional thing you can do. There is nothing that we could do that would spit more in the face of religious freedom than to do that. It's not the government's job to tell people what religion to follow, and it shouldn't be. If the people who wrote our constitution wanted it to be, they would have made that perfectly clear.

I do not want to lose the Sovereignty of the United States of America.

But it's not about what you want. It's about what God wants. And I think it's dumb to say that God likes the US more than any other nation, and would want it to rule over the other nations or anything like that. You're a citizen of God's, not a citizen of the US. Instead of "God Bless America", we should be saying "God bless the world".

Um not saying God likes US more. I agree, God bless the world, but if you know scripture then you know that the next action is judgement to the world. I agree, it is not what I want, it is what God wants.

Well, it seems we agree, and also have different ideals. In a way you did read into what I ment. Yes, I have a Christian view, but I was not trying to take my view and implying that, that view has to be it. Because if I wanted it my way... I would have to start my own country for this country is not close. But I love this country for what it is, though I disagree of the values that have been lowered to tolerate what it once was against.

Ainustorm · Oct 29, 2007

Diane_Windsor said:
Currently in New Jersey and big one on a Lesbian couple trying to sue a church for not allowing them to use the church for marraige ceremony.

And????

Also there is a Rich GAY guy putting tons of money in the candinates, who will side with changing the values of marriage to allow gay and lesbian marriages/ support.

And? Bob Perry is a major political donor in Texas and I don't agree with every political campaign (usually Republican) he supports, but it's his $$$ and he can spend it as he chooses.

Their are major donors on both sides of every issue.

Did you also know that Gov Arnold passed a law that allows boys and girls to use opposite bathrooms and locker rooms. Which allows shared showers in public shools if they are gay, lesbian, or Bi ??!!!!

Did you know that you would have more credibility here if you posted your sources for this post?

Um, I did have a website on my first post.

As for Arnold's approval: Here is an article, plus I heard on the news.

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
'Mom' and 'Dad' banished by California
Schwarzenegger signs law outlawing terms perceived as negative to 'gays'

Posted: October 13, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger

"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" effectively have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.
"We are shocked and appalled that the governor has blatantly attacked traditional family values in California," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.
"With this decision, Gov. Schwarzenegger has told parents that their values are irrelevant. Many parents will have no choice but to pull their children out of the public schools that have now become sexualized indoctrination centers."
"Arnold Schwarzenegger has delivered young children into the hands of those who will introduce them to alternative sexual lifestyles," said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, which worked to defeat the plans. "This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms.
"Shame on Schwarzenegger and the Democrat politicians for ensuring that every California school becomes a homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination center," he said.
(Story continues below)adsonar_placementId=1270202;adsonar_pid=663759;adsonar_ps=1451068;adsonar_zw=300;adsonar_zh=250;adsonar_jv="ads.adsonar.com";

Analysts have warned that schools across the nation will be impacted by the decision, since textbook publishers must cater to their largest purchaser, which often is California, and they will be unlikely to go to the expense of having a separate edition for other states.
The bills signed by Schwarzenegger include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices.
There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.
"SB 777 will result in reverse discrimination against students with religious and traditional family values," said Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Institute. "These students have lost their voice as the direct result of Gov. Schwarzenegger's unbelievable decision. The terms 'mom and dad' or 'husband and wife' could promote discrimination against homosexuals if a same-sex couple is not also featured.
"Parents want the assurance that when their children go to school they will learn the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic not social indoctrination regarding alternative sexual lifestyles. Now that SB777 is law, schools will in fact become indoctrination centers for sexual experimentation," she said.
England told WND that the law is not a list of banned words, including "mom" and "dad." But she said the requirement is that the law bans discriminatory bias.
"Having 'mom' and 'dad' promotes a dicsriminatory bias. You have to either get rid of 'mom' and 'dad' or include everything when talking about [parental issues]," she said. "They [promoters of sexual alternative lifestyles] do consider that discriminatory."
Also signed was AB394, which targets parents and teachers for such indoctrination through "anti-harassment" training, CCF said.
Schwarzenegger had vetoed almost identical provisions a year ago, saying existing state law already provided for penalties for discrimination.
"We had hoped that the governor would once again veto this outrageous legislation but he obviously decided to side with the out-of-touch extremists that control the legislature. This law does not reflect the true values of the average Californian," said England. "True leadership means standing up for what is true and right."
Thomasson said SB777 prohibits any "instruction" or school-sponsored "activity" that "promotes a discriminatory bias" against "gender" the bill's definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes as well as "sexual orientation."
"Because no textbook or instruction in California public schools currently disparages transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality, the practical effect of SB777 will be to require positive portrayals of these sexual lifestyles at every government-operated school," CCF noted.
Offenders will face the wrath of the state Department of Education, up to and including lawsuits.
CCF noted that now on a banned list will be any text, reference or teaching aid that portrays marriage as only between a man and woman, materials that say people are born male or female (and not in between), sources that fail to include a variety of transsexual, bisexual and homosexual historical figures, and sex education materials that fail to offer the option of sex changes.
Further, homecoming kings now can be either male or female as can homecoming queens, and students, whether male or female, must be allowed to use the restroom and locker room corresponding to the sex with which they choose to identify.
AB394 promotes the same issues through state-funded publications, postings, curricula and handouts to students, parents and teachers.
It also creates the circumstances where a parent who says marriage is only for a man and a woman in the presence of a lesbian teacher could be convicted of "harassment," and a student who believes people are born either male or female could be reported as a "harasser" by a male teacher who wears women's clothes, CCF said.
Thomasson said Schwarzenegger also signed AB14, which prohibits state funding for any program that does not support a range of alternative sexual practices, including state-funded social services run by churches.
Affected will be day cares, preschool or after-school programs, food and housing programs, senior services, anti-gang efforts, jobs programs and others.
Thomasson said it also forces every hospital in California even private, religious hospitals to adopt policies in support of transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality and opens up nonprofit organizations to lawsuits if they exclude members that engage in homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual conduct.
"It's the height of intolerance to punish individuals, organizations, businesses, and churches that have moral standards on sexual conduct and sexual lifestyles," said Thomasson, in response to the signing of AB14. "This is another insensitive law that violates people's moral boundaries."
The vitriol over the issue rose to new levels in its latest campaign.
As WND reported, a board member for the homosexual advocacy group Equality California verbally attacked and threatened CRI for its opposition to the bill earlier.
The board member sent an e-mail and video to CRI threatening the group would be buried if it continued efforts opposing the homosexual advocacy.
"The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance," said England. "Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools."
She also cited an informational document published by the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center that already is lobbying for special treatment in the school system.
"If you want to use a restroom that matches your gender identity you should be allowed to do so," it advises. "Whenever students are divided up into boys and girls, you should be allowed to join the group or participate in the program that matches your gender identity as much as possible."
Further, the groups advise, "If you change your name to one that better matches your gender identity, a school needs to use that name to refer to you." The advocacy group also warns schools against bringing parents into any such discussion with students.
WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators, including leaders in California, have taken it upon themselves to promote a homosexual lifestyle to children under their charge.
WND reported California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, under whose supervision hundreds of thousands of children are being educated, has used his state position and taxpayer-funded stationery to praise a "gay" pride event used in the past to expose children to sexually explicit activities.
That drew vehement objections from several educators, including Priscilla Schreiber, the president of the Grossmont Unified High School District governing board.
"I am outraged that a person in this high-ranking elected position would advocate an event where diversity is not just being celebrated but where pornography and indecent exposure is being perpetrated on the young and innocent children of our communities," she said.
</SPAN>

SpiritMeadow · Oct 29, 2007

Am I going to be required to divorce my husband and marry another women if gays are allowed to marry?

Candide · Oct 29, 2007

I do not thing it is a principle of the bible. Um where do you get your info on that there were writings older than bible? When the bible is the history of the Jews. Which has writings since the flood, and therefore was of Noah and his sons. So what writings are before bible. Even before the flood, from Adam and Eve, basis of God's authority. Now if you are talking about the full bible, I agree, but the bible (old testiment) is waaaaayyyy older. If you knew, the book of Job was written before the flood.

Even the most fundamentalist Christian doesn't believe this. The theologically most conservative view is that Moses wrote the Pentateuch (which I don't agree with), which places authorship around the time of the exodus, or shortly thereafter. The Old Testament is a sacred history for the Jewish Nation, which means that it was mostly written at one time, not in different pieces. The story of Job was just that, a story that was passed down orally within Jewish culture, but like the creation story, it had heavy Babylonian influence.

My point is that most of the ideas found in the Bible can be found in ancient documents that do predate the Bible (believe it or not, the Bible isn't the oldest document in history), or came during or after the Bible, in different parts of the world.

Ainustorm · Oct 29, 2007

Candide said:
I do not thing it is a principle of the bible. Um where do you get your info on that there were writings older than bible? When the bible is the history of the Jews. Which has writings since the flood, and therefore was of Noah and his sons. So what writings are before bible. Even before the flood, from Adam and Eve, basis of God's authority. Now if you are talking about the full bible, I agree, but the bible (old testiment) is waaaaayyyy older. If you knew, the book of Job was written before the flood.

Even the most fundamentalist Christian doesn't believe this. The theologically most conservative view is that Moses wrote the Pentateuch (which I don't agree with), which places authorship around the time of the exodus, or shortly thereafter. The Old Testament is a sacred history for the Jewish Nation, which means that it was mostly written at one time, not in different pieces. The story of Job was just that, a story that was passed down orally within Jewish culture, but like the creation story, it had heavy Babylonian influence.

My point is that most of the ideas found in the Bible can be found in ancient documents that do predate the Bible (believe it or not, the Bible isn't the oldest document in history), or came during or after the Bible, in different parts of the world.

I did not say the bible was the oldest book, there are books in the old testament that are. Job, most say it was not written by Moses, but was written years before him. I do not believe that the Pentateuch was written soley by Moses. I agree written later as the Pentateuch, but I believe the writings were written down. Not just told, as stories. For stories by man can change, but the word of God, I believe whole heartily, is and will be protected by God so that it stays accurate. I do think there are books older than bible, I also know from scripture that from old to new testaments... the picture of Christ (Messiah) is foretold and symbolized in the entire book. So the basic idea of Christianity has been around alot longer than when Jesus died for the world and resurrected. It is because of the ne covenant (testament), that we do not have to sacrifice animals to ask forgiveness. We only need to go thru Jesus, accepting Him as Savior, He was the Sacrifice (Lamb of God). God's Word, Promises became flesh thru Jesus Christ. The Symbolism has been around since the fall of man.

CoreyTheMagnificent · Oct 29, 2007

Ainustorm,

Why didn't I get a resopnse? Feeling left out here!

I did notice that you mentioned the people in governing positions who are Christians along with the families that feel the same are the ones holding this country together. If you look at the politicians it seems to me that they are capitolists first, politicians second, then when it will get them votes they are Christian. Of course there are some real Christians in office out there, but I really doubt that they are in any position to be holding an entire country together.

Ainustorm · Oct 30, 2007

Sry bro, did not intend to do so... I had some time, and I was only able to answer them above quickess.

Well, I agree with you on the Christian Politician... I have told my friend, politics is not for Christians... too much compromise. But those Christians that do decide to go into politics, have it hard. Though if a politician would hold to the principles, and not with his own desires, ways... which are usually corrupt. Then I feel it would help out the country.

CoreyTheMagnificent said:
Ainustorm,

Number one: You speak of the majority being afraid to speak up, do you apply this to the people you ask about such contrversial topics as this? I do say that homosexual marriage is natural and right. I will never deny that I enjoy debating, but that is because I like to have my mind changed by things that make sense and try to change the minds of others if what I have to say seems to make more sense; I imagine that the same should be said for every one of you Christians because you are called by your God to change the minds of others. I don't say that marriage of homosexuals is right for the purpose of arguing, I say it because I believe it. I live a peaceful life and promote pacifism in nearly everything.

As for God has called us to change peoples minds, NO! We cannot change anyone's mind. Only God can do so. We are to live for Him, serve Him, and love others as best as we can. First of all, I do not hate the person of homosexuality, I hate the life style, for God hates it to. It is a sin, in God's eyes it is unnatural... that is stated in the bible. Homosexual is as much as a sin as prostitutes, murder, stealing, divorce (after divorce, after divorce, or divorcing for the wrong reasons), and having sex before marriage (going from bed to bed). If you noticed the sins above are not people, but life styles, yes?? In each situation, the person can stop doing each activity, yes?? The sin is the action, God hates sin. God loves the person, and as for me... I hope that person will see love of God through me. By speaking up, they do not like the style but do not hate person. Is that not how they say it towards Christians, stop hating!! Well, Many people will say the style is disgusting, but they do not want to judge In other words, it is not my problem or since it has nothing to do with me, I'm not going to worry about it. So when Homosexuals said they wanted to put there books and teach young kids about this "alternate" life style. Letting them know it is ok to want someone of the same sex, you are comfortable about that? If you had a daughter (16 yrs old), very good looking figure, and the law was passed for if guys and gals feel they are of one gender, but are a guy(or a girl); and that 18 year old guy states "i am girl", walks in locker room while she is striping... you would be fine with that? What if he says he feels he is a "girl", but really is not... because they want to have sex during gym class, you are fine with that? I can tell you this, my baby girl will not being to public schools if that law passes here. Do you see the door that has been opened because of Gov Sch stupid dicision.

Number two: I will only say that one of the main beliefs of Thomas Hobbes was that the government was above everybody; that means the church too. If a Christian disagrees with the government's command he could either obey or "Go to Christ in martyrdom."

or move... Government to be over, and we should submit. But Government controling groups, is infringing on peoples rights. So even if he did believe what you stated, then he would be going against the constitution. It is the fact that the our government did not want a single religious group to control state of affairs, agree?? But as you look at our constitution, the principles are taken from the Bible, not necessarily Christian belief, but of the Ten Commandments.

Number three: It seems to me that you mean we should teach boys that they are stronger and should do labor; girls we should teach that they are more emotional and should involve themselves with things of the sort. I think that by doing this we would effectively supress the other half of what people are; though I am male should I not be allowed to cry?

Now you are taking what i said to the extreme. NO, crying is good, but making me wear makeup, to explore my feminity, I do not think so! Teaching a girl to go out and play NFL football, no. Now if we were playing football for fun, fine. A women should not be out there playing football with 360 lbs. A womens frame is lighter and not made for that. I am not going to let my son wear makeup at age 16 to see if he is suppose to be a girl. There needs to be balance. I will teach my boy, to love, cry, be gentle, caring, and share fellings. But I am also going to teach him to be a hero, to fight back if someone hits him, to wrestle his brother for the last cookie, play sports, play music, to be what my God has prepared for him. I am goin to teach my girl to stand up for herself, to think for her self, to burp, to be strong as a women, and to work hard. But I am also goin to teach her to be a women, love, gentle, caring, how to take care of herself, to be a lady, teach her to be cherished, tell her she is beautiful, and build up her character. Female and male are not equal, but they should find a balance. If they are questioning their sexuality, then they are lost and need to find who they are. And God will help them if they seek after Him. God made you as you are for a reason only He can understand.

Number four:Yes and no. Of course I agree with you on the topic of media, I can just look around me and see what people are wearing to know that, but would you honestly claim to believe that your "majority" are the only ones lulled into submission by the media?

Nope, everyone is effected by the media. It is your choice to believe or to live life as yourself. The bible states, To be in the world, but not of it. Many Christian live like the world, sometimes it is hard to be different. Alot of times it makes you and out cast. I can relate, but in the long run, when you live for Christ, many will notice and will desire to how they can b the same. All it takes is for one to stand and b different. It is easier to follow, its harder to be the leader.

I hope these answer your questions, sry for not writing back sooner, God Bless!
</IMG>

CoreyTheMagnificent · Oct 30, 2007

Yay! got my response. I was beginning to think that you had forgotten me.

Okay, I think we both knew that this argument would come down to religion for us, and we may now be at a sort of stalemate.

Number one: I do not mean to criticize you at all with this question, I would just like to know; when you say that God changes people's minds do you also mean that when non-Christians change the minds of others that they are still doing it through God or something? I suppose that what I meant by the remark that Christians are supposed to change the minds of others I simply meant what you just said there, so we're agreed there I think.
This would be where religion comes into the mix; you say that your God hate it because it is not natural. I can't vouch in any personal experience but from what I have learned from the gay people I know I do not think that they choose to be gay in any way. This conversation would be easier if we were both willing to consider the other's side, but I realize that you believe what your God tells you and I'm fine with that.
I am comfortable with thinking that a child of mine would be taught that "alternative" lifestyles as you say are acceptable. This again comes to the argument of whether or not someone is born gay or just chooses to be gay; again I believe that it is very likely that gay people are born gay. The Governator's decision to bring something like your example up was indeed foolish and if nothing else very rash. We certainly need to consider the very strong possibility that guys will claim gay to check out pretty girls, so I think that you are right in saying that this should not be a law.

Number two: I don't want to argue about philosophers so I'll just leave poor Hobbes behind. I fail to see what you mean by saying that the constitution is shaped by the Ten Commandments. Could you present some examples?

Number three: I guess I just don't see how men and women are not equal. I see the differences in the seperate sexes of course, but I think that through those differences we can still be equal. I realize this slightly implies "seperate but equal" so I guess you can call me a fool if you want. I see what you mean in saying that you will teach your different children different things, but I just can't help but feel that in teaching them different things you could be discouraging other behaviors that you (and maybe your God) don't like. This may be the point you were trying to make to me, but it seems to me that if the behaviors you don't like are unnatural then by the will of yourself and your God it wouldn't happen no matter what. Perhaps you could clear this up for me.

Thanks for the response!

Ainustorm · Oct 30, 2007

CoreyTheMagnificent said:
Yay! got my response. I was beginning to think that you had forgotten me.

Okay, I think we both knew that this argument would come down to religion for us, and we may now be at a sort of stalemate.

Number one: I do not mean to criticize you at all with this question, I would just like to know; when you say that God changes people's minds do you also mean that when non-Christians change the minds of others that they are still doing it through God or something? I suppose that what I meant by the remark that Christians are supposed to change the minds of others I simply meant what you just said there, so we're agreed there I think.

I do not know what you have heard of how God can change a heart or mind. So, what I believe is God is in control of everything, but allows freedom of choice. Which is why a Christian who strays away from his/her walk (relationship) with God can and will act as if they are not a Christian. Saved and Un-saved alike, God will persue, but He will not force a mind or heart to change. Unless He changes for something of His will, as He did to Pharoah in the book of Exodus. So we sin out of our choice, as a Christian we have the Holy Spirit which helps us discern right and wrong... for the right reasons. I believe that an unsaved person can do good actions, but not for the right reasons... even if it is to make one self feel better. When I do good actions, it is in the majority for the love of God. I will admitt, I sometimes do, do good things for self glorifing... which is sin. Another verse also states about non-Christians, if they ment something for evil, God will use it for good. It may not be right away, it could also be years down the road. People manipulate people. God seeks your heart, like when we persue a true women... we have to seek her heart, persue it, and then win it. Same with God, He will not force you to change... unless you are truelly seeking truth.

This would be where religion comes into the mix; you say that your God hate it because it is not natural. I can't vouch in any personal experience but from what I have learned from the gay people I know I do not think that they choose to be gay in any way. This conversation would be easier if we were both willing to consider the other's side, but I realize that you believe what your God tells you and I'm fine with that.
I am comfortable with thinking that a child of mine would be taught that "alternative" lifestyles as you say are acceptable. This again comes to the argument of whether or not someone is born gay or just chooses to be gay; again I believe that it is very likely that gay people are born gay. The Governator's decision to bring something like your example up was indeed foolish and if nothing else very rash. We certainly need to consider the very strong possibility that guys will claim gay to check out pretty girls, so I think that you are right in saying that this should not be a law.

Well, there is no scientific truth in gays are born gay. what have they said about when they start liking guys? How was their family life, look deeper, how were they brought up? What have you heard?

Number two: I don't want to argue about philosophers so I'll just leave poor Hobbes behind. I fail to see what you mean by saying that the constitution is shaped by the Ten Commandments. Could you present some examples?

The foundation of the whole governing setting. I not word for word from the 10 commandments. But take the one that states... though shall not covet... how many of the constitution or laws fit that commandment? Or the newer laws that Jesus spoke of in the new Testiment- Love your neighbor as yourself- how many fit that law?

Number three: I guess I just don't see how men and women are not equal. I see the differences in the seperate sexes of course, but I think that through those differences we can still be equal. I realize this slightly implies "seperate but equal" so I guess you can call me a fool if you want. I see what you mean in saying that you will teach your different children different things, but I just can't help but feel that in teaching them different things you could be discouraging other behaviors that you (and maybe your God) don't like. This may be the point you were trying to make to me, but it seems to me that if the behaviors you don't like are unnatural then by the will of yourself and your God it wouldn't happen no matter what. Perhaps you could clear this up for me.

Some guys seem to have a feminine actions, but are not gay, why? Were they a boy with 3 sisters, mayb he was a mama's boy, and the dad was not really that much evolved, or mayb it was a single mom, playin both parts. I have seen that... also in Guys that are the only child, some cases. The influence was mostly feminine. I have seen the opposite, the dad or brother was the greater influence... so the boy becomes a caveman/ jock... with a cold heart. There needs to be a balance with a focus on there individual male/female trates. Hopefully you would not want your boy to grow long hair and start wearing braids and pic-tales, would you? You won't want your baby girl, shavin her hair to a buzz cut and whiping her nose and spitting like a guy would ya? Teaching them to be men and women needs to start as children, not at age 13, the most confusing time of their life. Confusion starts because the parents negleted to teach at young age, so that is why the exploring of sex and identity begins. Teach them young so that by the time they hit 13, they know who they are as a young man and young woman. They should be searchin for who they are as a person, not wondering if they are a guy or girl.

Thanks for the response!

You are welcome!

Carey · Oct 30, 2007

CoreyTheMagnificent said:
Yay! got my response. I was beginning to think that you had forgotten me.

Okay, I think we both knew that this argument would come down to religion for us, and we may now be at a sort of stalemate.

Number one: I do not mean to criticize you at all with this question, I would just like to know; when you say that God changes people's minds do you also mean that when non-Christians change the minds of others that they are still doing it through God or something? I suppose that what I meant by the remark that Christians are supposed to change the minds of others I simply meant what you just said there, so we're agreed there I think.
This would be where religion comes into the mix; you say that your God hate it because it is not natural. I can't vouch in any personal experience but from what I have learned from the gay people I know I do not think that they choose to be gay in any way. This conversation would be easier if we were both willing to consider the other's side, but I realize that you believe what your God tells you and I'm fine with that.
I am comfortable with thinking that a child of mine would be taught that "alternative" lifestyles as you say are acceptable. This again comes to the argument of whether or not someone is born gay or just chooses to be gay; again I believe that it is very likely that gay people are born gay. The Governator's decision to bring something like your example up was indeed foolish and if nothing else very rash. We certainly need to consider the very strong possibility that guys will claim gay to check out pretty girls, so I think that you are right in saying that this should not be a law.

Number two: I don't want to argue about philosophers so I'll just leave poor Hobbes behind. I fail to see what you mean by saying that the constitution is shaped by the Ten Commandments. Could you present some examples?

Number three: I guess I just don't see how men and women are not equal. I see the differences in the seperate sexes of course, but I think that through those differences we can still be equal. I realize this slightly implies "seperate but equal" so I guess you can call me a fool if you want. I see what you mean in saying that you will teach your different children different things, but I just can't help but feel that in teaching them different things you could be discouraging other behaviors that you (and maybe your God) don't like. This may be the point you were trying to make to me, but it seems to me that if the behaviors you don't like are unnatural then by the will of yourself and your God it wouldn't happen no matter what. Perhaps you could clear this up for me.

Thanks for the response!

1 Politics . ..
1 Timothy 2

1I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone 2for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth

Demons will effect all politics one day.

Revelations 16 : 14They are spirits of demons performing miraculous signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world,

Number 2 ...the US constitution has nothing to do with the 10 commandments or Christianity. It needs to be ammended to make Christianity the State religion and outlaw Islam though.

Number 3 ...yes by a parent doing his Job properly as God and the Bible commands the child will never adopt unnatural behavioral patterns.

I think you answered your own question on how men and women are not equal.

Candide · Oct 30, 2007

It needs to be ammended to make Christianity the State religion and outlaw Islam though.

I can't tell if you're being serious right now. I mean, seriously? Have we forgotten what has happened in history every single time Christianity has been the state religion? It's been much worse than those nations that have Islam as their national religion these days (though I'm not a big fan of any theocracy, for that reason. They all end up horribly. I can't think of anything more anit-Christian than making Christianity a state religion.

Secondly, he's not arguing that men and women are equal...that'd be ignorant. For the most part, they have very different attributes (though there are always statistical outliers). Rather, he's arguing that they should be treated equally. That means that they should have all of the same opportunities, et. al.

In addition, how can we argue that homosexuality is not natural when roughly 10% of most species exhibit homosexual behavior? And even if you decide to dismiss that point (though I don't see how you can, logically), don't most Christians believe that humans are "higher" than nature, in some way? Isn't this how they justify eating meat, and killing the environment and such? I obviously disagree with that, as well, but it seems to me that if you pride yourself on being "higher" than other nature (trees, animals, etc.), than you would want to exhibit unnatural behavior, no?

Ainustorm · Oct 31, 2007

Candide said:
It needs to be ammended to make Christianity the State religion and outlaw Islam though.

That is why the US has made it to be freedom of religion, as long as it does not rise against the US in Treason.

I can't tell if you're being serious right now. I mean, seriously? Have we forgotten what has happened in history every single time Christianity has been the state religion? It's been much worse than those nations that have Islam as their national religion these days (though I'm not a big fan of any theocracy, for that reason. They all end up horribly. I can't think of anything more anit-Christian than making Christianity a state religion.

If you are talking about states that followed after the history of the Roman Catholic church, then yeah... that era the Roman Catholic Chruch was all about greed and power. They are not true Christian nations. To be honest the US is the closes Governing state that has a Christian bases or as I should say Bible foundation. Do not be putting the Catholic Church of that corrupted time in with the Church of Christ. Those Catholics abused and missused the Lord's name for their pride and greed. If you really researched the Christian Chruch you would know there were only pockets in all the countries. They feared showing themselves because of the Catholic churches unethical ways. It was not the Reformers that discovered the truth, it was there... they just stopped blinding themselves to the lies. Yeah, I agree that the Roman Catholic Nations of the past were one of the worst nations of religious standard. What about Communist/ athiest states... you think they were better than Catholic church nations of the pasts?

Secondly, he's not arguing that men and women are equal...that'd be ignorant. For the most part, they have very different attributes (though there are always statistical outliers). Rather, he's arguing that they should be treated equally. That means that they should have all of the same opportunities, et. al.

I agree with that, was not agrueing that, just clearifing. He asked me to clarify, read before jumping on me.

In addition, how can we argue that homosexuality is not natural when roughly 10% of most species exhibit homosexual behavior? And even if you decide to dismiss that point (though I don't see how you can, logically), don't most Christians believe that humans are "higher" than nature, in some way? Isn't this how they justify eating meat, and killing the environment and such? I obviously disagree with that, as well, but it seems to me that if you pride yourself on being "higher" than other nature (trees, animals, etc.), than you would want to exhibit unnatural behavior, no?

First of not all Christian believe that you can do what you want with nature, that is not biblical. Yes were are made above nature, but we are to protect, use it, and respect it. God gave us the supply for our use. If you want to equal us with nature, then we should take away laws, and do as we please. Because in nature is no law, only the naturality of their species. We are accountable to our actions, were nature it self is not. Otherwise we should sue nature for the destruction they do... ooohhh wait they do not make money. Why, do they not? Because we are human, not animal. We do not have the same animal instincts, well some of us act like it. We are set at a higher position, a higher responsiblity. We have our own unique nature, made from the image of God, so yeah... God says that homosexuality is unnatural it is unnatural in the Human species. If it is in nature (animal kingdom) that is because they are animals. We were made in a different light, that even the angels are curious about us. God does care for animals, states that in bible, but we are of a different design. You want to call yourself an animal go ahead... I do not act like one, and I do not look like one. I am a human being.

Candide · Oct 31, 2007

If you are talking about states that followed after the history of the Roman Catholic church, then yeah... that era the Roman Catholic Chruch was all about greed and power. They are not true Christian nations. To be honest the US is the closes Governing state that has a Christian bases or as I should say Bible foundation. Do not be putting the Catholic Church of that corrupted time in with the Church of Christ. Those Catholics abused and missused the Lord's name for their pride and greed. If you really researched the Christian Chruch you would know there were only pockets in all the countries. They feared showing themselves because of the Catholic churches unethical ways. It was not the Reformers that discovered the truth, it was there... they just stopped blinding themselves to the lies. Yeah, I agree that the Roman Catholic Nations of the past were one of the worst nations of religious standard. What about Communist/ athiest states... you think they were better than Catholic church nations of the pasts?

First of all, why isn't the Catholic church a valid example? Or the British state church, for that matter? It doesn't make any sense why they wouldn't be. Second of all, can you name any theocracy that has been successful/peaceful? You'd be rather hard pressed to do so, because theocracy's don't work, because people get corrupted. Jesus was fighting against a theocracy, not for one. Give to Cesar what is Cesar's, etc. And no, there's obviously no anarchic state that was successful, since and anarchic state hasn't ever existed. Capitalistic states have proved to be the most successful throughout history, and I'd argue that that's the most un-Christian economical system.

Thirdly, the U.S. Government is far from being Christian, and it always was, as it should be. It's un-Constitutional to want a theocracy (Christian or otherwise). This nation was founded on the principle that there should be no state religion, at all. Yes, that's really in the Constitution. It's worked so well, by producing far and away the best free government in history, why should we change it and allow a vehicle of greed and corruption take it's place in the form of a Christian theocracy? Makes no sense to me.
I agree with that, was not agrueing that, just clearifing. He asked me to clarify, read before jumping on me.

I was referring to Carey, not you. Sorry for the confusion.
First of not all Christian believe that you can do what you want with nature, that is not biblical. Yes were are made above nature, but we are to protect, use it, and respect it.

I never said all Christians believe that. I'm a prime example of one who completely rejects it. I certainly agree that we need to protect and respect God's creation. Though use....I'm not so sure of.

Because in nature is no law, only the naturality of their species.

No, there are laws of nature. They just aren't written down anywhere.

We are accountable to our actions, were nature it self is not.

How so?
God says that homosexuality is unnatural it is unnatural in the Human species.

Where? Where in the Bible does he explicitly state that homosexuality is unnatural in the human species, or unnatural at all?
If it is in nature (animal kingdom) that is because they are animals. We were made in a different light, that even the angels are curious about us. God does care for animals, states that in bible, but we are of a different design. You want to call yourself an animal go ahead... I do not act like one, and I do not look like one. I am a human being.

Exactly. We act a little bit differently than nature does. We do many things that aren't found in nature, and most people look on those things with pride, not shame. So why is "homosexuality is unnatural" a valid argument? War is unnatural, and we're not outlawing that. Economics are unnatural, and we're not outlawing that. So why is it such a big deal to be doing something "unnatural", when most of the things we do are unnatural? (this is all, of course, ignoring that homosexuality to a small degree is natural.

Assault on marriage!!!

Regular Member

Active Member

Active Member

Regular Member

Senior Contributor

Hoopy frood

Hoopy frood

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Regular Member

Active Member

Hoopy frood

Active Member

Hoopy frood

Active Member

Contributor

Regular Member

Active Member

Regular Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency