A opinion about Christians whining about same sex marriage

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reba said:
People don't but God does. He created marriage, and He created it for one man and one woman. He was very specific about what marriage was.
Click to expand...

I can believe certain authors from very specific eras were specific about that, but I disagree with the idea that God created marriage or even cares about the procreation if He actually exists. I consider that an illusion but I honor the free will that people have in believing things.

Human beings were very invested in procreation during ancient times - they were a creative lot with rich emotional/spiritual lives that put faith in their roles and leaders.
 
DeafCaroline said:
One does not have to be religious to get married. they can get a civil wedding. No religious text has any business interfering with that. It's like saying corporal punishment should not be banned in school because the bible says "spare the rod, spoil the child." Keep religion out of it. We have no business telling two adults they cannot love and be together just because we don't approve. There was a time once when blacks and whites couldn't marry because it was considered an abomination.

Marriage is an official declaration of love and commitment to one another for life. We have no business telling gay people that sex is fine, but love and commitment is wrong. It's none of our damn business and it's not our place.

The bible also says if a woman cheats on her husband and gets pregnant, she has to abort the baby or put burnt at stake. So, if we're going to wave the bible in the air and say "god says..." we would be seeing a significant number of female pregnant adulteresses being put to death by fire all around the world if they choose not to abort. Oh wait, that's not happening even though GOD says we're supposed to do that. What hypocrites we are and how defiant we are of God's word.

We can't just apply biblical laws to justify bigotry and prejudices. We can't disregard some laws and apply others according to what WE think it's right despite what God actually said and told us to do. That's bullshit.

And lastly, why is it only the bible that matters when it comes to the law? What about buddhism? the koran? the torah? America is made up of many cultures, many religions. So, if we're going to insist the law must be so according to the bible, then we might as well insist the law must be so according to all religous texts and that's impossible.

it's no one's business if two adult gay people want to swear an official declaration of their love for each other. stay of it.
Click to expand...

I think the primary issue most religious people have is that it seems as though religions were the first ones that "came up with the concept", and now it's being used in a non-religious context, and essentially by using it in a non-religious context, they feel that the potency of using it in a religious context is diminished.

If that's actually the case, though, then I'd agree with what Daredevel and TxGolfer and a few others have said on the subject before, and revoke all government contracts and processes called "marriage" and make them all "civil unions", specifically reserving "marriage" for religious ceremonies, and making anything currently dependent upon "marriages" (such as insurance benefits, inheritance laws, etc) legally required to be dependent upon "civil unions" (since requiring a religious ceremony for anything would be preferring a specific religion and would then be a form of religious discrimination). At that point, everyone complaining about how "gay marriage" somehow ruins the "institution of marriage" (presumably the diminished potency that they see) should have no more issues with the universal "civil unions" being available for all couples, straight and gay.
 
Nope, DC, even with you getting help from StSapphire, you are not getting off the hook for your post#18.

The Neverending War (my term) between the Arabs and the Jews over a specific land is a conflict that has one, and only one, source of explanation. The Jews, the Arabs, even the United Nations accept that source as coming from what you call "fairy tales with fables"
To just stop and think that so-so many years have been lost and so-so much blood has been wasted over a "fairy tale" is a real tragedy and, to me, unthinkable.

Here is the reverse of your own previous post.......Just because you don't believe the writtings are accurate, does not mean they are not accurate.

If you, as a scholar, can post a secondary source of the Neverending War, do so. Keep in mind which came first...the "fairy tale with fables" or your secondary source.

If you have noticed, I have not brought any religious arguments nor discussions into this thread. I've only appealed to your sense of fairness of history standards. Your main problem is with applying equal standards to those historical events for we do not have first person accounts, and there are many. I encourage you to re-evaluate your position.
 
Last edited:
Nah. My position was based on research and education. I see no need to change it especially since you are not understanding my point about history being distorted in the bible to promote a religious ideology. I will concede on one point - I used the wrong word, fables. I meant stories, parables. I am disengaging from this debate any further.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Nah. My position was based on research and education. I see no need to change it especially since you are not understanding my point about history being distorted in the bible to promote a religious ideology. I will concede on one point - I used the wrong word, fables. I meant stories, parables. I am disengaging from this debate any further.
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll bite. If the writtings of the source is historical, which means the NeverendingWar is based on Abraham and his sons, who and how is this historical event being distorted?

I realize this is just one example but, I'll be the first to admit, if it is proved that there is distortion going on then everything written in the source is susceptible. Keep in mind that two people can view an event a different way but that is not a distortion. It has to be proved that the person knows the real truth but ignores that knowledge for material gains at the price of others.
 
rolling7 said:
Nope, DC, even with you getting help from StSapphire, you are not getting off the hook for your post#18.

The Neverending War (my term) between the Arabs and the Jews over a specific land is a conflict that has one, and only one, source of explanation. The Jews, the Arabs, even the United Nations accept that source as coming from what you call "fairy tales with fables"
To just stop and think that so-so many years have been lost and so-so much blood has been wasted over a "fairy tale" is a real tragedy and, to me, unthinkable.

Here is the reverse of your own previous post.......Just because you don't believe the writtings are accurate, does not mean they are not accurate.

If you, as a scholar, can post a secondary source of the Neverending War, do so. Keep in mind which came first...the "fairy tale with fables" or your secondary source.

If you have noticed, I have not brought any religious arguments nor discussions into this thread. I've only appealed to your sense of fairness of history standards. Your main problem is with applying equal standards to those historical events for we do not have first person accounts, and there are many. I encourage you to re-evaluate your position.
Click to expand...

Shoo, fly.

(For the record, I wasn't "helping" DC - if anything, I think she's being a bit liberal/nice in granting an extremely shaky premise in the first place.)
 
rolling7 said:
Ok, I'll bite. If the writtings of the source is historical, which means the NeverendingWar is based on Abraham and his sons, who and how is this historical event being distorted?

I realize this is just one example but, I'll be the first to admit, if it is proved that there is distortion going on then everything written in the source is susceptible. Keep in mind that two people can view an event a different way but that is not a distortion. It has to be proved that the person knows the real truth but ignores that knowledge for material gains at the price of others.
Click to expand...

keep_on_trollin.jpg
 
StSapphire said:
Shoo, fly.

(For the record, I wasn't "helping" DC - if anything, I think she's being a bit liberal/nice in granting an extremely shaky premise in the first place.)
Click to expand...

Ok, just so we're clear - which premise you're referring to exactly?
 
DeafCaroline said:
Ok, just so we're clear - which premise you're referring to exactly?
Click to expand...

The premise that it's even possible that any religions could be correct or "real" (the things they believe in, that is - obviously the religion itself is real, since you can see the adherents everywhere, lol).
 
DeafCaroline said:
One does not have to be religious to get married. they can get a civil wedding. No religious text has any business interfering with that. It's like saying corporal punishment should not be banned in school because the bible says "spare the rod, spoil the child." Keep religion out of it. We have no business telling two adults they cannot love and be together just because we don't approve. There was a time once when blacks and whites couldn't marry because it was considered an abomination.

Marriage is an official declaration of love and commitment to one another for life. We have no business telling gay people that sex is fine, but love and commitment is wrong. It's none of our damn business and it's not our place.

The bible also says if a woman cheats on her husband and gets pregnant, she has to abort the baby or put burnt at stake. So, if we're going to wave the bible in the air and say "god says..." we would be seeing a significant number of female pregnant adulteresses being put to death by fire all around the world if they choose not to abort. Oh wait, that's not happening even though GOD says we're supposed to do that. What hypocrites we are and how defiant we are of God's word.

We can't just apply biblical laws to justify bigotry and prejudices. We can't disregard some laws and apply others according to what WE think it's right despite what God actually said and told us to do. That's bullshit.

And lastly, why is it only the bible that matters when it comes to the law? What about buddhism? the koran? the torah? America is made up of many cultures, many religions. So, if we're going to insist the law must be so according to the bible, then we might as well insist the law must be so according to all religous texts and that's impossible.

it's no one's business if two adult gay people want to swear an official declaration of their love for each other. stay of it.
Click to expand...

The Bible does not say "Spare the rod, spoil the child".
 
DeafCaroline said:
One does not have to be religious to get married. they can get a civil wedding. No religious text has any business interfering with that. It's like saying corporal punishment should not be banned in school because the bible says "spare the rod, spoil the child." Keep religion out of it. We have no business telling two adults they cannot love and be together just because we don't approve. There was a time once when blacks and whites couldn't marry because it was considered an abomination.

Marriage is an official declaration of love and commitment to one another for life. We have no business telling gay people that sex is fine, but love and commitment is wrong. It's none of our damn business and it's not our place.

The bible also says if a woman cheats on her husband and gets pregnant, she has to abort the baby or put burnt at stake. So, if we're going to wave the bible in the air and say "god says..." we would be seeing a significant number of female pregnant adulteresses being put to death by fire all around the world if they choose not to abort. Oh wait, that's not happening even though GOD says we're supposed to do that. What hypocrites we are and how defiant we are of God's word.

We can't just apply biblical laws to justify bigotry and prejudices. We can't disregard some laws and apply others according to what WE think it's right despite what God actually said and told us to do. That's bullshit.

And lastly, why is it only the bible that matters when it comes to the law? What about buddhism? the koran? the torah? America is made up of many cultures, many religions. So, if we're going to insist the law must be so according to the bible, then we might as well insist the law must be so according to all religous texts and that's impossible.

it's no one's business if two adult gay people want to swear an official declaration of their love for each other. stay of it.
Click to expand...


Also, can you refer me to the verses that say a woman has to abort her baby or be burnt at the stake, please?
 
Secretblend said:
The Bible clearly teaches us not to judge others. I do my best not to judge others. After all I am only human and I've done wrong things. Since I've done wrong, who am I to judge others?
Click to expand...

Actually the bible DOES tell us to judge, just not in the harsh way that people usually assume.

The bible teaches that you shouldn't judge non believers, but that you should judge fellow believers according to the bible. For example, the hypocritical Christians that DeafCaroline describes, do need to be judged according to The Bible and need to be lovingly corrected.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13
"I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside."
 
DeafCaroline said:
Google.
Click to expand...

Sorry, that is not in the Bible. You do seem like a very cool and tolerable person, but please don't distort facts. I know there are lots of horrible things in the Bible but aborting babies and burning at the stake are not.
 
I have read the bible and I do read the bible, and that is not in there. If you believe it is, can you please show me verses where it refers to that?
 
If you had, you would know it does say spare the rod spoil the child, that expression came from the bible! Ask your grandparents. You're embarrassing yourself.
 
My grandparents are dead thank you very much. And the bible does say "He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" but nowhere in any translation does the bible say "Spare the rod, spoil the child".
 
You're inanely picking at semantics in an attempt to prove me wrong. I'm still not wrong.
 
The Phrase "Spare the rod, spoil the child" came from a poem written in 1662 by Samuel Better. Popular culture would have you believe that it is a Bible verse, but alas, 'tis not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top