What Is the Big Deal With Gay Marriage?

Status
Not open for further replies.
TXgolfer said:
I think you are wrong on this.....Time will tell.
Click to expand...

It always does. I have hope for the social consciousness of mankind. It has always won out in the end.
 
jillio said:
It always does. I have hope for the social consciousness of mankind. It has always won out in the end.
Click to expand...

Meh, battles are won and lost.... But I already know who wins the war. :)
 
jillio said:
It always does. I have hope for the social consciousness of mankind. It has always won out in the end.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Future generations will judge us for how we treat gay people, and how we allow others treat them.
 
naisho,:ty: for answering-

what I would do about various ideas as you mention depends on exactly what they are. A convicted ex-con, sex offender or rapist living in my neighborhood requires one line of thinking....someone into bestiality may or may not be my business depending on how that person who does that approaches it in terms of animal welfare.

but not everyone's "greater good" is the idea of Christ, nor is it anyone's duty to make it such-
 
I really agree with you, whatdidyousay!, about sep. of church and state-
 
This is a never-ending debate that I have participated in many times and, I'm sure, will participate many more times in my lifetime. I think, for me, the bottom line always seems to be the same and a quote from post #275 highlights that bottom line - " ... now-homosexual father". There are those that believe that sexual orientation is a choice. This quote appears to uphold that view by inferring that the father 'was' straight but is now homosexual. There are those that believe sexual orientation is genetic, no more a choice than a person's skin or eye color. This difference in views also escalates to the 'anti-gay' argument that, "Ok, even if it is genetic, a person can still "choose" not to act upon it", to which the counter-argument is, "imagine your life if you were told not to act upon your hetrosexual feelings and ideas and had to live a homosexual life." All arguments, on both sides, seem perfectly clear and valid in the eye of the beholder. However, the one big difference I have found consistently over the course of my lifetime is that the majority of those who are most vocal and steadfast in their view about evils, or even repulsiveness, of gays is that they themselves have never grown up with a friend or family member who is gay. They have not truly listened, with an open mind and heart, to the thoughts, feelings and experiences of gay individuals and weighed those words against circumstances, evidence and actions. Although I believe, rather sadly, that this topic will be debated/argued for a long time to come, I am glad to see that at least it is now a debate that is present and public and no longer confined to dark hushed quiet corners.

[SIZE=-1]As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.[/SIZE]
​
[SIZE=-1]ALBERT EINSTEIN[/SIZE]
​
 
The slippery slope argument is the not a logical argument. People can base their decision on it, but it's not rational. I feel more comfortable with logic and facts than emotions. Many people make decisions in a very emotional way, though, and that's their personality style. A person is entitled to her opinion but not the facts. Just say that it's your emotional state that determines your decision. Don't twist the facts in an effort to justify it.
 
Reba said:
John 8
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

In other words, she was forgiven of her sin of adultery, and commanded to quit committing the sin of adultery.

Jesus didn't say that adultery was not a sin; He told the woman to stop doing the sin.
Click to expand...

I condescended the story a bit just so you know. :)
 
The point of that passage is that people should not judge other people. It's not our place to judge others.
 
Reba said:
...with added editorial comments and inaccuracies.


Good. Those legal rights that I have include the right to speak out. :)


Each person has their own sources of reference for making decisions. One could say each person justifies his or her decisions using different sources.


God does let us know, thru His Word, the Holy Bible.

No, God doesn't need me to speak up but I have that right, and as a Christian, God does command me to not be ashamed of the Gospel, and to speak the truth.


Jesus offered freedom from the bondage of sin to all people. He died equally for all. He doesn't withhold salvation from any person. His blessings are available to all who will trust Him. I believe and support all that Jesus did and does, so how is that marginalizing?
Click to expand...

What inacurracies? These are your own expressed opinions I am simply repeating.

Regarding your tendency to preach at me and others, I guess you didn't get the memo. Your religious beliefs are yours and they are best used to justify whatever it is in your life that you feel needs a rule book for. It has no place being involved in making those decisions for others. No matter how much space you devote to quoting your interpretation of your Bible, it does not increase it's validity in this discussion. All it does is confirm exactly what is being said, and that you seem to think is an inaccurate portrayal of your opinion. You are the one that keeps confirming the fact that you use religion as an excuse to marginalize and judge others.

If you don't want others to see that side of you, then I would suggest you cease to bring religion into every discussion.
 
Reba said:
John 8
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

In other words, she was forgiven of her sin of adultery, and commanded to quit committing the sin of adultery.

Jesus didn't say that adultery was not a sin; He told the woman to stop doing the sin.
Click to expand...

That is the way you interpret it, and that is perfectly within your right. Where you cross the line is when you attempt to apply that to ALL and to determine who is right and who is wrong, who is moral and who is amoral, who deserves legal rights and who doesn't deserve legal rights based on a choice you have made for yourself.
 
sallylou said:
The point of that passage is that people should not judge other people. It's not our place to judge others.
Click to expand...

And no one is being judged. A behavior is being judged. And we DO have a right to decide what behaviors we will allow. In fact we do it all the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top