Christian Position on Opposing the Legality of Same Sex Marriage of Non-Christians

[SkyWriting]

I don't really care what two consenting adults do either.

I do care what our children are taught, and I do care that Christians with a religious objection to providing specialized goods and/or onsite service for ss weddings are liable to prosecution, and I do care that heterosexual marriage, which provides both a mother and a father, is no longer promoted & protected as the best environment for raising the next generation.

On a more personal level, I care that my niece who is an expert cake decorator, and struggling to pay her way through university, can no longer put an ad on the community noticeboard at our local shopping center advertising her services without fear of being prosecuted for declining to decorate a cake for a ss wedding.

As Justice Bosson stated, Christian business owners "are now compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives."

If your niece wishes to have a same sex partner, you should be able to support her. And if she wishes to have a family with her partner, you should be supportive of that as well. A couple can always finish decorating a cake themselves and save money. Decorating a cake will not increase immorality. Even if it did, she has no basis for such discrimination.

Check 4 yourself ---->MAT 7: 12

 

[DrBubbaLove]

The "Christian" perspective is to treat others as you would have
them treat you. There is no other rational option.

We do have legislation that allows for people to close their
door and more rules that restrict search by authorities.

These laws contribute to the ability of same sex couples
to have relationships behind closed doors.
We allow unrelated people to live together in the same
dwelling....this list goes on and on with no discrimination
of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, habits, dreams,
height, age, hobbies, color, religion, etc.

You suggest that these laws should be removed becasue they
allow for increases in what you mistakenly call immoral.


Mark 12:31 - Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

Luke 10:25-28
...do this, and you will live.

I do not see Kenn777 commenting on all the privacy and civil rights legislation being suggested here or wanting to legislate bedroom busters.

This thread was specifically about Christians opposing the laws that make SS "marriage" a legality. The argument it should be opposed because it is encouraging immoral behavior is a valid point for a Christian to make. There is no privacy violation or discrimination/civil rights issues involved in making that argument.

 

[ken777]

The "Christian" perspective is to treat others as you would have
them treat you. There is no other rational option.

We do have legislation that allows for people to close their
door and more rules that restrict search by authorities.

These laws contribute to the ability of same sex couples
to have relationships behind closed doors.
We allow unrelated people to live together in the same
dwelling....this list goes on and on with no discrimination
of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, habits, dreams,
height, age, hobbies, color, religion, etc.

You suggest that these laws should be removed becasue they
allow for increases in what you mistakenly call immoral.


Mark 12:31 - Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

Luke 10:25-28
...do this, and you will live.

I am not saying anything you have claimed I said.

The conversation is about legalizing ssm not people living together.

You said: "The "Christian" perspective is to treat others as you would have them treat you."
Please note that is the second commandment. Our first duty is obedience to God's will revealed in holy Scripture (Matthew 22:37-39)

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. (Ephesians 5:11, NIV)

 

[ken777]

If your niece wishes to have a same sex partner, you should be able to support her. And if she wishes to have a family with her partner, you should be supportive of that as well. A couple can always finish decorating a cake themselves and save money. Decorating a cake will not increase immorality. Even if it did, she has no basis for such discrimination.

Check 4 yourself ---->MAT 7: 12

Again, I did not say anything you are claiming I said.

 

[FireDragon76]

As Justice Bosson stated, Christian business owners "are now compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives."

I'm sure Satanists find their religious beliefs "inspire their lives" too.

Christian bakers have made cakes for the divorced and remarried, no doubt... so why the big deal about gays? Christian businessmen seem to be willing to compromise every other principle but this one (save for maybe contraception/abortion... I guess this is the religion of controlling other peoples private parts). "Gays are worse sinners that everybody else and they deserve shaming", that's the message I see being promoted by this sort of logic.

And you know, that sort of thing just is very sad . No wonder people are increasingly turning away from the Church. This sort of pettiness is not consistent with the grace or mercy of Jesus Christ.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I'm sure Satanists find their religious beliefs "inspire their lives" too.

Christian bakers have made cakes for the divorced and remarried, no doubt... so why the big deal about gays? Christian businessmen seem to be willing to compromise every other principle but this one (save for maybe contraception/abortion... I guess this is the religion of controlling other peoples private parts). "Gays are worse sinners that everybody else and they deserve shaming", that's the message I see being promoted by this sort of logic.

And you know, that sort of thing just is very sad . No wonder people are increasingly turning away from the Church. This sort of pettiness is not consistent with the grace or mercy of Jesus Christ.

Spreading the Light in the world by loving everyone can never be conflated with the idea our activities should support the notion that sinning is OK.

It is never OK, whether a non-believer or a believer is the one sinning. To pretend it is OK by either endorsing or being seen as going through the motions of endorsing sin is not spreading that Light or loving. It is putting a cloth over the Light in attempt to not offend someone that desires to do whatever that sin is. And that would never be more evident to others than in the public practice/operation of a business. So the putting a cloth over the Light as part of one's business/daily activity is not just creating a false illusion of reality for the benefit of the customer who wants to remain a sinner. It is proclaiming the same illusion is real for everyone else, whether they believe it a sin or not. I would also see that effort as perhaps spreading doubt in the minds of some Christians that could change their opinion about whatever the particular sin is.

So I do not see the idea as being a matter of treating the sinner the same as everyone else. We should always treat everyone with the same love. That does not mean we should participating in hiding the truth from everyone. Assuming a Christian believes it a false illusion, helping others to create that false illusion about reality in their minds whether they be Christian or not, is not an example of loving them or being a Light unto the World.

 

[FireDragon76]

Dr. Bubba, you are acting like we know exactly what is right and wrong for everybody. In truth, we just don't know that. Human sinfulness taints even our ability to judge, it taints our moral theology as well. So I'm saying, it's better not to judge, and bake people the cake. Because by not baking cakes, it is a powerful statement of contempt for people that live differently from you- especially because same sex marriage is legal in the United States.

 

[ken777]

People who have declined to participate in ss weddings are judging their own behavior ... which a Christian is most certainly required to do.

 

[FireDragon76]

People who have declined to participate in ss weddings are judging their own behavior ... which a Christian is most certainly required to do.

Then they are pretending they can be righteous on their own merits. That's not a very Augustinian view of human nature, to say the least.

 

[ken777]

Then they are pretending they can be righteous on their own merits, then. That's not a very Augustinian view of human nature, to say the least.

You are giving the impression that you make no distinction between right & wrong behavior in your own life.

 

[FireDragon76]

You are giving the impression that you make no distinction between right & wrong behavior in your own life.

Not entirely true, but I tend to favor sinning boldly.

 

[ken777]

Not entirely true, but I tend to favor sinning boldly.

a very abused phrase

 

[FireDragon76]

a very abused phrase

I'm the one with "Lutheran" in my faith... I would think I know what "sinning boldly" means.

 

[ken777]

I'm the one with "Lutheran" in my faith... I would think I know what "sinning boldly" means.

it is certainly not a licence to sin ... as your posts have implied

 

[ken777]

Dave Rubin:

"I am a married gay man so you might think that I appreciate the government forcing a Christian baker or photographer or florist to act against their religion in order to cater, photograph or decorate my wedding, but you would be wrong. A government that can force Christians to violate their conscience, can force me to violate mine. If a baker won’t bake you a cake, find another baker, don’t demand that the state tell him what to do with his private business."

 

[SilverBear]

Dave Rubin:

"I am a married gay man so you might think that I appreciate the government forcing a Christian baker or photographer or florist to act against their religion in order to cater, photograph or decorate my wedding, but you would be wrong. A government that can force Christians to violate their conscience, can force me to violate mine. If a baker won’t bake you a cake, find another baker, don’t demand that the state tell him what to do with his private business."

B.S. Logic

 

[FireDragon76]

it is certainly not a licence to sin ... as your posts have implied

Go read more Luther, it is sort of a license to sin. Or at least, a license to live without fear of sin. The only thing that matters is to love God and love our neighbor, if our fear of sinning prohibits us from doing that, then we are still slaves to sin.

As a Lutheran, I reject the Calvinist idea of a "third use of the law". The Law cannot help us become more righteous. So it doesn't really matter in shaping a Christian life. What matters in shaping a Christian life is living a grace-filled life based on compassion and forgiveness.

 

[ken777]

Go read more Luther, it is sort of a license to sin. Or at least, a license to live without fear of sin. The only thing that matters is to love God and love our neighbor, if our fear of sinning prohibits us from doing that, then we are still slaves to sin.

As a Lutheran, I reject the Calvinist idea of a "third use of the law". The Law cannot help us become more righteous. So it doesn't really matter in shaping a Christian life. What matters in shaping a Christian life is living a grace-filled life based on compassion and forgiveness.

Can you tell me how this is related to the topic of the thread.

 

[ken777]

B.S. Logic

Vulgarity is unnecessary. That is why I rarely read your posts.

 

[SilverBear]

Vulgarity is unnecessary. That is why I rarely read your posts.

Name of the article. Though I suspect you don't want to read it for fear of learning something.