RE: Homosexuality in the News

RE: Homosexuality in the News (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/18/2008 1:02:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Veritas quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. In that case why can't the state allow anything that we would consider evil? Murder, theft, rape, etc. Because in cases of murder, rape, theft, et c., someone is harmed. Sadly (yet justly) a life of homosexuality is an eternal death sentence... So the concept of there not being harm is not really true. As well sin doesn't reside in a vacuum so there is harm; complete rebellion against God cannot exist without harm being done. John

tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/18/2008 5:14:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kernsfamily Were those other court decisions determined by "activist judges"?....because, we all know that those very rulings "thwarted" the "will of the people".....and were considered as pushing ahead an "evil" and "anti-Biblical" agenda??? So, which is it? and, which one is what? Very good point, KF. I don't recall right-wing activists worrying much judicial activism when they tried to get the "activist" courts to overturn Oregon's Death With Dignity Act which was voted for by a majority of those in that state in a referendum. Would they have decried the a ruling in their favor as judicial activism, even though it would have overturned the will of the people? I doubt it somehow. In any case, all of the judges on the Californian panel have been reelected with over 70% of the vote, so the Californians who care enough to vote see to be happy with them, and let's not forget that the California legislature -- all of them directly elected officials -- voted to legalize gay marriage twice in the past few years. But anyway, the "people of California" may have one more say in the matter come November, but it would not be surprising if the will of the people of California has changed sufficiently since 2000 to find that the majority actually agree with the ruling. P.S. Still waiting for all those horrible things that were predicted to happen to Massachusetts since the enactment of gay marriage there. Last I looked, they still had one of the lowest divorce rates in the country, one of the lowest rates of teen pregnancies, and low STD rates. Hmm. Perhaps gay marriage doesn't have any effect on traditional marriage after all... What a concept!

humbleinspirit -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/18/2008 8:47:05 PM)
quote: P.S. Still waiting for all those horrible things that were predicted to happen to Massachusetts since the enactment of gay marriage there. Last I looked, they still had one of the lowest divorce rates in the country, one of the lowest rates of teen pregnancies, and low STD rates. Hmm. Perhaps gay marriage doesn't have any effect on traditional marriage after all... What a concept! Now the experts said that the negative effects wouldn't happen right away, but over a generation of 20 years or more instead. It is just way too soon to tell!

everythingat -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 12:43:00 AM)
Some of the views expressed in this topic are a little out there. Such as SonInMe1 suggesting that there is no such thing as a committed homosexual couple. I guess there's no such thing as any committed couple that's not Christian? Marcus., it's my opinion that your arguments are a little weak. The general idea is "it shouldn't be legal because it's wrong." And you followed that up with, "Then why don't we legalize everything that Christianity considers wrong?" But you didn't follow that with anything logical, instead speaking about rape and murder. Which harms people. As opposed to homosexual relationships, which only harms the two consenting adults involved. The problem with rape and murder is that it's not consented between two adults. If a person gave consent to be raped, then it wouldn't be rape. Just like if you consent to a person stealing an object from you, then it wouldn't be stealing. And no rational person would consent to be murdered. And then you mentioned homosexuality being a criminal offense in the 1700's. The penalty was death? If anything, that hurts your argument. To even think of people being murdered for being homosexual in post-New Testament times is ridiculously mental. Also, with your logic used in this conversation, you may as well make divorce illegal. Don't forget about premarital sex, anyone that commits that sin should be put in prison. We should also make profane language illegal, should censor books for the sins they speak of in detail, and make gossip illegal. But then what would we have to talk about when we eat our $20 meals after church? SovereignIsHe, you are correct. Sin does harm. But the problem with homosexuality is that it only harms those who consent. Those who agree with homosexuality, yes...they are being harmed...but it is by their own consent. The problem I have is that we're trying to legislate people's actions...then we say it's out of the love of Christ. God would prefer that these people come to Him of their own accord. I don't think spending millions of dollars on a campaign says anything but "We hate you, and don't really care if you come to Jesus, just as long as we can give ourselves a pat on the back at the end of the day for doing God's work." Look at the world events of the past two weeks. The death toll in China will rise to 50,000 people...not to mention the almost 5 million people without homes. It shows where our priorities are...rather than give the millions of dollars raised to persecute homosexuals and deny them of their basic rights as American citizens, we should think of what Jesus would do in this situation...which wouldn't be raising millions of dollars for a political campaign when 5 million people are without homes, and I'm not even mentioning the thousands of children that died in Myanmar. We are self-obsessed in this nation, and we are hateful. But we use the guise of love to spread our hate of anything different. Homosexuality is not right in God's eyes, according to the Bible. But in a country that says every man is equal, we should not deny them of their basic rights.

mapachito13 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 5:15:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: everythingat "Then why don't we legalize everything that Christianity considers wrong?" you may as well make divorce illegal. Don't forget about premarital sex, anyone that commits that sin should be put in prison. We should also make profane language illegal, should censor books for the sins they speak of in detail, and make gossip illegal. But then what would we have to talk about when we eat our $20 meals after church? Homosexuality is not right in God's eyes, according to the Bible. But in a country that says every man is equal, we should not deny them of their basic rights. Excellent point in your post! So are we to judge all heterosexual couples who divorce and remarry for other reasons than "lewd conduct" as adulterers and fornicators who are destined for hell? Put 'em in jail!! [:D]The Bible says so, but it also prohibits us from judging others. That's God's job! The US Constitution is not a religious book (although some treat it with the reverence of such). It is a legal document and nowhere in there have I found any wording that prohibits the state being able to marry gay people. My challenge stands, show me the wording in the US Constitution that expressly forbids the state to marry gay people and I'll shut up concerning this issue. BTW. my cousin, who is gay, has been in a committed relationship for more than 20 years; longer than I have been married.

Marcus. -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 9:48:43 AM)
Consent has nothing to do with morality. Morality comes from God and He condemns homosexuality. Homosexuality is a societal rebuke from God. It is meant to wake people up who are denying God. He is lifting His protection from us and turning us over to our sinful, lustful nature. God has in effect given our society a slap in the face. Wake up and repent! Homosexuality is a weakness. It is a perverted version of God's design for sexual relationships. Homosexuality is degrading and is meant to be. Committed homosexual relationships are an oxymoron. From the studies done so far, a committed homosexual relationship includes other people being sexually involved in the relationship and the majority don't last for any appreciable length of time. Homosexuals and their supporters are trying to change god's Word to suite themselves and don't believe the reality of what God has said he will do to the unrepentant sinner. Telling them they are ok and normal will send them to the wrong place. What do you think a homosexual would do when they finds they find themselves before God at the judgement and He condemns them because of their sins and includes homosexuality in the list? Will they be like David and repent or will they continue in their unbelief and rail against their Creator and Judge? There is a thread for divorce and remarriage already but I will say I would be in favor of making divorce illegal and remarriage not possible until the original spouse passed away. I see too many of our society's problems coming from the destruction of families and lack of working through the difficult years. The majority of divorces are over trivial things that should be worked out. The number of folks divorcing over abuse of some sort is very small. Remarriage to another is a 400 year old heresy. It was not allowed by the Apostles or the early Church Fathers because they knew either first hand or from those who heard Jesus teach on this that remarriage is adultery. There is no allowance implied or otherwise to marry another while separated from your spouse. There are verses condemning that in fact.

tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 10:03:13 AM)
And what you're advocating, Marcus, smacks of theocracy, which is the only way the marriage laws you advocate would even come to pass again in the USA.

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 10:45:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: everythingat SovereignIsHe, you are correct. Sin does harm. But the problem with homosexuality is that it only harms those who consent. Those who agree with homosexuality, yes...they are being harmed...but it is by their own consent. I don't agree... Sin tends to be like a rock hitting the water and the ripples head in every direction.... The more the behavior is legitimize the worse it will get and drag others into the pit of filth� quote: But we use the guise of love to spread our hate of anything different. Homosexuality is not right in God's eyes, according to the Bible. But in a country that says every man is equal, we should not deny them of their basic rights. Those who think it is ok for homosexuals to marry are the ones who hate them... They are contributing to their eternal death sentence and maybe even their own... Bad enough these lost folks are heaping coals on their own heads, but others are stoking the flames for them as well... John

Marcus. -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 10:48:26 AM)
Theocracy would include a state approved Church which I'm not after. I'm simply after a return to the Christian moral values underlying our legal structures instead of secular humanist ones.

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 10:56:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mapachito13 Excellent point in your post! So are we to judge all heterosexual couples who divorce and remarry for other reasons than "lewd conduct" as adulterers and fornicators who are destined for hell? Put 'em in jail!! [:D]The Bible says so, but it also prohibits us from judging others. That's God's job! Not to judge... Hmmm... How where people remove the church in regards to what Paul penned about removing those who will not repent from the church? quote: My challenge stands, show me the wording in the US Constitution that expressly forbids the state to marry gay people and I'll shut up concerning this issue. The US Constitution doesn't make sin right... It will not absolve the homosexual on Judgment Day... quote: BTW. my cousin, who is gay, has been in a committed relationship for more than 20 years; longer than I have been married. And is also committed to a life in rebellion to God which will have him and partner spending eternity in hell... How anyone can champion that is beyond any biblical reason...It�s truly sad� John

stellaluna -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 11:06:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mapachito13 quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. In that case why can't the state allow anything that we would consider evil? Murder, theft, rape, etc. The government doesn't consider it "evil" just "illegal". For example, if I killed someone because they killed a family member, that's murder and illegal. If the state killed someone because they killed my family member, that's execution and legal. You can object to homosexual marriages on religious or moral grounds but not on legal grounds through objectively applying the law especially as it pertains to the US Constitution. I was thinking about this when I heard the ruling. While I don't like what these judges have done, while I believe homosexuality is wrong and while I believe marriage should be reserved for heterosexual couples...it may be that gay marriage is not illegal in California according to the laws of the state. One must look very carefully at the verbage. This is the reason some states--including my own--are moving toward defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. If the law is ambiguous in its wording, judges upholding such a law may find no legal reason to deny marriage between two people of the same sex.

everythingat -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 11:14:07 AM)
Marcus., the man who wrote about the "studies" spoke nothing but nonsense. In his point of view, it should be illegal for there to be single parents. Not only that, but it implied that homosexuals who actually are in monogamous relationships are more susceptible to HIV. That makes no sense unless your partner already has HIV, or is cheating on you...then that wouldn't really be a monogamous relationship, would it? You pretty much want this country to be a theocracy controlled by the Christians, except you don't want it to be called a theocracy. You want to control other people's actions through law, and not only that...but you want to punish them for disobeying this "law." That puts you in an awkward position, because it means you're the one dealing judgment and punishment to the people for their sins, not God. You said that you just want a return to the moral values underlying our legal structure...so you want things to go back to the way they were? You want people who disagree with you to be put in prison? Saying that almost implies that you would agree with what you said about the executions of homosexuals in the 1700's...and I'm sincerely hoping you wouldn't agree with that. In my opinion, this type of thinking takes us back to the Old Testament and belittles Jesus' death and resurrection. SovereignIsHe, I understand your point of view. The only part of what you said that I have a problem with is "Those who think it is ok for homosexuals to marry are the ones who hate them." That statement seems to imply conditional love. Seemingly implying that those non-Christians who have a favorable opinion on homosexuals getting married can't possibly love them because they are helping to reserve their place in eternity. And it seems to imply that those who are more than outspoken about the issue are ones who truly love them. Even though there is a time and place when we have to learn to shut up and listen, instead of constantly pronouncing judgment. Our condemnation of homosexuals goes beyond just preaching God's word, it certainly turns into hate. Not to drag others into this conversation, but we say things like "Ellen Degenerate" and go on about how disgusting it all is. There's a difference between looking at sin with aversion and calling the people who commit it degrading names.

Jhud -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 11:16:38 AM)
quote: My challenge stands, show me the wording in the US Constitution that expressly forbids the state to marry gay people and I'll shut up concerning this issue. This is irrelevant. The US Constitution doesn't expressly forbid bestiality, child pornography, polygamy, or any number of horrendous and unimaginable activities - but if your bizarre theory of law holds, they would all be 'constitutional'. But that (thankfully) is not how it works. The constitution defines for us the rights that the state must respect - and homosexual marriage is definitely not listed there - so the state is free, under an ordinary understanding of the constitution, to make such a thing illegal, and courts overstep there bound significantly when they overturn a legitimate statute.

Jhud -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 11:19:58 AM)
quote: One must look very carefully at the verbage. This is the reason some states--including my own--are moving toward defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. If the law is ambiguous in its wording, judges upholding such a law may find no legal reason to deny marriage between two people of the same sex. I don't know that this statute was particularly vague - it said, "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California." - that doesn't seem very vague to me.

stellaluna -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 11:36:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: One must look very carefully at the verbage. This is the reason some states--including my own--are moving toward defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. If the law is ambiguous in its wording, judges upholding such a law may find no legal reason to deny marriage between two people of the same sex. I don't know that this statute was particularly vague - it said, "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California." - that doesn't seem very vague to me. Well, there you go. I wasn't sure what the California law said. (But I do know other states have laws that are more vague.)

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 1:22:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: everythingat SovereignIsHe, I understand your point of view. The only part of what you said that I have a problem with is "Those who think it is ok for homosexuals to marry are the ones who hate them." That statement seems to imply conditional love. Seemingly implying that those non-Christians who have a favorable opinion on homosexuals getting married can't possibly love them because they are helping to reserve their place in eternity. Any Christian that supports gay marriage doesn't love them... One cannot support the gay lifestyle and say they truly love the person. In a sense you'd be serving two masters... As for those outside the body of Christ... They love sin first and foremost so they are in the same boat as those they support in their sin... They are serving their master, sin... quote: And it seems to imply that those who are more than outspoken about the issue are ones who truly love them. Anyone who it truly concerned for the spiritual well being of a person loves them more than those who fight for their right to lead a sinful life that will only end up having the person spending eternity in hell. The most loving parent of homosexual who thinks they are being compassionate when they support their child isn�t really acting in love. The same parent might as well allow the child to play next to the stove so they surely burn themselves. quote: Even though there is a time and place when we have to learn to shut up and listen, instead of constantly pronouncing judgment. There is no debate in regards to the sin of homosexuality and judgment is brought upon homosexuals by their actions, not by anyone pointing fingers and or discussing this topic on a forum... quote: Our condemnation of homosexuals goes beyond just preaching God's word, it certainly turns into hate. It's disingenuous to lump everyone together... Not everyone opposed to the sin of homosexuality fits into your stereotype. Btw... Like it or not there is NO defense for homosexuality... Even if the ENTIRE body of Christ was mean and nasty about it would still be absolute rebellion against God... John

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 1:27:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: My challenge stands, show me the wording in the US Constitution that expressly forbids the state to marry gay people and I'll shut up concerning this issue. This is irrelevant. The US Constitution doesn't expressly forbid bestiality, child pornography, polygamy, or any number of horrendous and unimaginable activities - but if your bizarre theory of law holds, they would all be 'constitutional'. But that (thankfully) is not how it works. The constitution defines for us the rights that the state must respect - and homosexual marriage is definitely not listed there - so the state is free, under an ordinary understanding of the constitution, to make such a thing illegal, and courts overstep there bound significantly when they overturn a legitimate statute. There was comments regarding the open ended concept of "equal protection under the law" that the judges used to make this ruling that already people are wondering when brother and sister, father and daughter, etc are going to press for the same ruling if they so choose to marry... You can already marry a first cousin in California... John

Marcus. -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 2:17:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: everythingat Marcus., the man who wrote about the "studies" spoke nothing but nonsense. In his point of view, it should be illegal for there to be single parents. Not only that, but it implied that homosexuals who actually are in monogamous relationships are more susceptible to HIV. That makes no sense unless your partner already has HIV, or is cheating on you...then that wouldn't really be a monogamous relationship, would it? You pretty much want this country to be a theocracy controlled by the Christians, except you don't want it to be called a theocracy. You want to control other people's actions through law, and not only that...but you want to punish them for disobeying this "law." That puts you in an awkward position, because it means you're the one dealing judgment and punishment to the people for their sins, not God. You said that you just want a return to the moral values underlying our legal structure...so you want things to go back to the way they were? You want people who disagree with you to be put in prison? Saying that almost implies that you would agree with what you said about the executions of homosexuals in the 1700's...and I'm sincerely hoping you wouldn't agree with that. In my opinion, this type of thinking takes us back to the Old Testament and belittles Jesus' death and resurrection. So the infection rates are nonsense? This is well documented by many medical studies. The link even referenced some. A theocracy would be ruled over by clerics and not elected representatives. I was referring to the underlying moral basis of the law being Christian instead of secular humanist. That doesn't mean I want a theocracy at least until Messiah returns. He will take back what is His and then we shall have a theocracy. But what I do want is law based on a solid foundation instead of passing societal whims. From what I've read the common definition of monogamy isn't what homosexuals mean by it. They include other people in their so called monogamous lifestyle. That is why they have high rates of infections of all types irregardless of what they call monogamous or committed. The government already judges and punishes folks for violating the law. I'm not talking about us becoming a dictatorship but returning to solid time tested beliefs. Where do you get putting people in prison who disagree with me from? tThat is your own straw man argument. Not going back to the way things were but back to the original moral foundations of our law. As for executions of homosexuals goes, what do you think will happen to the unrepentant when He returns anyway? They won't be welcomed into Heaven unless they do repent. It will become increasingly difficult to speak out against this evil as society becomes less moral and embraces this immorality. But we already know what happens to those who call good evil and evil good.

Jhud -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 2:21:08 PM)
quote: There was comments regarding the open ended concept of "equal protection under the law" that the judges used to make this ruling that already people are wondering when brother and sister, father and daughter, etc are going to press for the same ruling if they so choose to marry... You can already marry a first cousin in California... Well basically the judges have extended to homosexuals the designation of a protected class, like race or gender or religion. It seems to be a perfect storm of bad judicial and legislative decisions - the recognition of the vague "right to privacy" per griswold, the groundwork laid by supposed 'civil unions', the effort by states to extend to homosexuals a 'protected class' status. In every instance arguments are made that these weren't the beginnings of a larger erosion of fundamental institutions; that they were not the camel's nose under the tent, and at every point this was a lie. And now, the same people on the left are saying this ruling doesn't necessitate a larger ruling that will require our entire country to succumb to the same judicial tyranny, that whom we elect for President or to Congress doesn't effect these sorts of movements - and these are all lies, all the more damnable because now they are so blatant. Christians need to get there head out of the sand now, or they will wake up in a decade or so, and find themselves completely and absolutely ostracized in a society they now call home.

mapachito13 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 7:57:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. Consent has nothing to do with morality. Morality comes from God and He condemns homosexuality. Homosexuality is a societal rebuke from God. It is meant to wake people up who are denying God. He is lifting His protection from us and turning us over to our sinful, lustful nature. God has in effect given our society a slap in the face. Wake up and repent! Homosexuality is a weakness. It is a perverted version of God's design for sexual relationships. Homosexuality is degrading and is meant to be. Committed homosexual relationships are an oxymoron. From the studies done so far, a committed homosexual relationship includes other people being sexually involved in the relationship and the majority don't last for any appreciable length of time. Homosexuals and their supporters are trying to change god's Word to suite themselves and don't believe the reality of what God has said he will do to the unrepentant sinner. Telling them they are ok and normal will send them to the wrong place. What do you think a homosexual would do when they finds they find themselves before God at the judgement and He condemns them because of their sins and includes homosexuality in the list? Will they be like David and repent or will they continue in their unbelief and rail against their Creator and Judge? There is a thread for divorce and remarriage already but I will say I would be in favor of making divorce illegal and remarriage not possible until the original spouse passed away. I see too many of our society's problems coming from the destruction of families and lack of working through the difficult years. The majority of divorces are over trivial things that should be worked out. The number of folks divorcing over abuse of some sort is very small. Remarriage to another is a 400 year old heresy. It was not allowed by the Apostles or the early Church Fathers because they knew either first hand or from those who heard Jesus teach on this that remarriage is adultery. There is no allowance implied or otherwise to marry another while separated from your spouse. There are verses condemning that in fact. We are in agreement that the BIBLE forbids homosexuality. It very clear in Leviticus and Romans. I don't think anyone is arguing that fact. (At least I am not.) What I am arguing is from the cold, legal standpoint. The US CONSTITUTION doesn't expressly forbid it. The states can sanction civil marriage as they see fit. BTW, if there is legal verbage in the US or CA Constitutions that expressly prohibits it, I'd like to see it. But if not, then a Constitutional amendment needs to be passed and good luck with that!

mapachito13 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 8:03:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. But what I do want is law based on a solid foundation instead of passing societal whims. Such is the bane of any democracy OR republic! In fact the very nature of the republic is to have elected officials that do the will of the people (who donate campaign funds to them).

mapachito13 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 8:07:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud Christians need to get there head out of the sand now, or they will wake up in a decade or so, and find themselves completely and absolutely ostracized in a society they now call home. "If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own;but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hate you." John 15:19

Veritas -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 9:56:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: There was comments regarding the open ended concept of "equal protection under the law" that the judges used to make this ruling that already people are wondering when brother and sister, father and daughter, etc are going to press for the same ruling if they so choose to marry... You can already marry a first cousin in California... Well basically the judges have extended to homosexuals the designation of a protected class, like race or gender or religion. It seems to be a perfect storm of bad judicial and legislative decisions - the recognition of the vague "right to privacy" per griswold, the groundwork laid by supposed 'civil unions', the effort by states to extend to homosexuals a 'protected class' status. Can someone explain to me how granting a privilige that heterosexual couples currently enjoy to homosexual couples can possibly be contrued as the designation of a protected class?

Marcus. -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/19/2008 9:59:04 PM)
Actually when I mentioned that homosexuality was a criminal offense was to show that there is a long standing history of law against this activity.

michlang -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/20/2008 1:06:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mapachito13 quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. Consent has nothing to do with morality. Morality comes from God and He condemns homosexuality. Homosexuality is a societal rebuke from God. It is meant to wake people up who are denying God. He is lifting His protection from us and turning us over to our sinful, lustful nature. God has in effect given our society a slap in the face. Wake up and repent! Homosexuality is a weakness. It is a perverted version of God's design for sexual relationships. Homosexuality is degrading and is meant to be. Committed homosexual relationships are an oxymoron. From the studies done so far, a committed homosexual relationship includes other people being sexually involved in the relationship and the majority don't last for any appreciable length of time. Homosexuals and their supporters are trying to change god's Word to suite themselves and don't believe the reality of what God has said he will do to the unrepentant sinner. Telling them they are ok and normal will send them to the wrong place. What do you think a homosexual would do when they finds they find themselves before God at the judgement and He condemns them because of their sins and includes homosexuality in the list? Will they be like David and repent or will they continue in their unbelief and rail against their Creator and Judge? There is a thread for divorce and remarriage already but I will say I would be in favor of making divorce illegal and remarriage not possible until the original spouse passed away. I see too many of our society's problems coming from the destruction of families and lack of working through the difficult years. The majority of divorces are over trivial things that should be worked out. The number of folks divorcing over abuse of some sort is very small. Remarriage to another is a 400 year old heresy. It was not allowed by the Apostles or the early Church Fathers because they knew either first hand or from those who heard Jesus teach on this that remarriage is adultery. There is no allowance implied or otherwise to marry another while separated from your spouse. There are verses condemning that in fact. We are in agreement that the BIBLE forbids homosexuality. It very clear in Leviticus and Romans. I don't think anyone is arguing that fact. (At least I am not.) What I am arguing is from the cold, legal standpoint. The US CONSTITUTION doesn't expressly forbid it. The states can sanction civil marriage as they see fit. BTW, if there is legal verbage in the US or CA Constitutions that expressly prohibits it, I'd like to see it. But if not, then a Constitutional amendment needs to be passed and good luck with that! Leviticus "forbids" many things--what's your point?

Page: << < prev 46 47 [48] 49 50 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI