11 states vote on gay marriage

[MadelynIris]

amen to that.

What about the whole male and female thing?

 

[BVS]

amen to that.

What about the whole male and female thing?

Well I won't join you in the amen.

As for the male-female thing...he states one thing so other scenarios must be a sin? I don't believe in those types of leaps of logic.

 

[MadelynIris]

Well I won't join you in the amen.

As for the male-female thing...he states one thing so other scenarios must be a sin? I don't believe in those types of leaps of logic

You won't join me in saying that adultery is a bad thing? Ok.

Leap in logic? Jesus said

Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' {5} and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?

You see know significance in what Jesus is saying here?

 

[BVS]

You won't join me in saying that adultery is a bad thing? Ok.

I'm a divorcee who didn't have any control of the situation and I get tired of the judgement cast upon people without knowing every side of the story.

Leap in logic? Jesus said

You see know significance in what Jesus is saying here?

I do not see Jesus saying that a man and a man or a woman and woman is a sin. It says man and woman will marry, but we're assuming that anything else would be a sin. You are filling in the blanks. Name one other sin that is derived by filling in the blanks and not specifically stated by God or Jesus in the Bible?

 

[Stonewall]

Right-on from a good Shark!

... What say do you have in whether it is sinful for them to marry? You don't get to judge. Only God can do that.

The fundamental different as of today is that race is beyond one's control. There is a difference of opinion regarding sexual preference.

Well said and sensibly thought, Sharky!

P.S. When MARY CHENEY was born Gay, her father was a Democrat! Same with RON REAGAN, Jr., and so many others.

 

[Dutch Partygirl]

In my country gays are allowed to get married in a civil clerk's office (is that what you call it???). There aren't a lot of churches that will marry gays, but that's fine. Everybody's entitled to their own opinion, so if the christian church is agains gay marriages they shouldn't marry gays. I think for this country (with a big percentage of Christians) this is the best solution. Of course there are people that still oppose it and there are people that think it should be taken further, but the majority of the people is happy with the way it goes.

 

[Sherry Darling]

I've heard different methods of dismissing the different passages - but there has been no consistent, principled method of explaining away these passages.

My point, NBC, about the "silence in church" or hair texts is that, while you and I don't take this view, historically and in some places currently, they ARE read this way (I actually had a women tell me once that based on those texts and the "submission" texts, women shouldn't run for elected office ). It was relevant to my point about how conservatives understand most scripture in context of the Bible itself and in the context of history.

That is my "consistent, principled" method of hermenutics: understanding the historical context. You choose (rightly in my view) to read the texts I referred to as being about orderly worship, rather than as something to be taken literally, because of the context surrounding them. Why not the texts on homosexuality? I still have not heard a rationale for that.

Ok, time for Sherry to start getting serious about her finals.


sd

 

[Irvine511]

In my country gays are allowed to get married in a civil clerk's office (is that what you call it???). There aren't a lot of churches that will marry gays, but that's fine. Everybody's entitled to their own opinion, so if the christian church is agains gay marriages they shouldn't marry gays. I think for this country (with a big percentage of Christians) this is the best solution. Of course there are people that still oppose it and there are people that think it should be taken further, but the majority of the people is happy with the way it goes.

that's for the Netherlands, for being just a generally great country. i'm a big fan, and love visiting.

 

[nbcrusader]

That is my "consistent, principled" method of hermenutics: understanding the historical context. You choose (rightly in my view) to read the texts I referred to as being about orderly worship, rather than as something to be taken literally, because of the context surrounding them. Why not the texts on homosexuality? I still have not heard a rationale for that.

We too have felt the effects of those who take passages of Scripture as rules instead of precepts. Specifically over my wife leading a bible study for 300 women - in their view this was wrong and they ended a 10-year friendship over it.

To the issuse at hand, looking at Scripture only through a historical context filter may result erroneous interpretations. The Gospel message could potentially be dismissed.

When we apply a historical analysis to references to sexual sins, I doubt we get a different result. There are some references to sexual acts as part of pagan temple worship, but that is not consistently the case. Repeated references to pornea (sex outside marriage) for example encompass a wider view that certain behaviors were wrong at any time.

 

[Dutch Partygirl]

Thanks Irvine! At the moment the Netherlands is not that great with the aftermath of the murder of Theo van Gogh. People are attacking muslim schools and churches which is very frightning.

Have you been here often? Where?

 

[joyfulgirl]

This bit of humor which someone just sent me seems fitting--you may have seen it before:

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. As you said, "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man and a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may ! not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: 27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

 

[Irvine511]

Thanks Irvine! At the moment the Netherlands is not that great with the aftermath of the murder of Theo van Gogh. People are attacking muslim schools and churches which is very frightning.

Have you been here often? Where?

i lived in Belgium for a while, and would take the train up to Amsterdam almost once a month. i also visited Delft, Rotterdam, and the Hague. Amsterdam is one of my very favorite cities in all of Europe, and for the art and the bridges and the bicycles (not just for the reasons so many young tourists like Amsterdam ... not that i have any objections to all that other stuff).

i also taught at an international school in brussels, and had several students who were Dutch. they were in the ages of 3-6, but i was impressed by their parents, who seemed much more concerned with their child's overall development and happiness in school rather than being focused upon their child starting to read and write (like many of the American and British parents).

generalizations based upon my experiences, i know, but that was one impression i walked away with.

the Van Gough murder is very sad. there was a *very* interesting article in the New York Times about it on Sunday, and the main point of the article was that the Dutch -- who are famously tolerant -- are now in a position of trying to be tolerant of those who are famously intolerant (radical Muslims) and resent the results of Dutch tolerance -- religous plurality, homosexual rights, legalization of drugs, rights of women.

it was very intersting. and i fear Europe is heading for some sort of cultural reckoning with it's large, growing, and -- in some parts -- increasingly radical Muslim population.

Fortuyn also struck me as very interesting as well, but that's a whole other thread of discussion.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

This bit of humor which someone just sent me seems fitting--you may have seen it before:

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law...

I was amused by your post, but I did find that every single biblical reference is from the Old Testament. My interpretation of the OT is that God is in our face because of our sin. We were separated from God until Jesus was crucified.

Jesus showed the loving side of God by reaching out to social outcasts and transforming them. He was quoted referring to the Old Testament many times. If man was fully responsible for the Old Testament, why would Jesus, the son of God, not point out the "many flaws" in it?

 

[nbcrusader]

This bit of humor which someone just sent me seems fitting--you may have seen it before:

There may be some who take their theology seriously that would find this offensive, not humorous.

I think we can leave it, however, in the humor category for now as it represents a lack of understanding of Scripture.

 

[Dutch Partygirl]

Irvine: Interesting story! Would love to hear more, but maybe this thread isn't the appropriate place for it...

 

[joyfulgirl]

There may be some who take their theology seriously that would find this offensive, not humorous.

I take the civil rights of my gay friends seriously and am offended daily by those who would deny them these rights based on theology. This "humorous" piece is related to Sherry Darling's questions which have never been answered adequately in any discussion of gay rights I've ever seen in this forum, or anywhere. The Christian interpretation of homosexuality, and the rights that are denied as a result, is just as ludicrous and offensive to me as anything in these "humorous" examples. So frankly, I am not concerned with how this may have offended anyone.

 

[BVS]

I take the civil rights of my gay friends seriously and am offended daily by those who would deny them these rights based on theology. This "humorous" piece is related to Sherry Darling's questions which have never been answered adequately in any discussion of gay rights I've ever seen in this forum, or anywhere. The Christian interpretation of homosexuality, and the rights that are denied as a result, is just as ludicrous and offensive to me as anything in these "humorous" examples. So frankly, I am not concerned with how this may have offended anyone.

Scripture has been abused by men since the dawn of civilization; slavery, women's rights, civil rights, etc.

If this offends maybe they should take a theology class and find out the context of all these quotes.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

sort of OT maybe, but I thought this was interesting..

Tue Nov 16

By Alison McCook

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Teenagers raised by two women appear to be as well adjusted as those who are raised by male-female couples, a new report indicates.

"Their adjustment is pretty normal - that is, indistinguishable from a matched group of kids being raised by opposite-sex parents," said study author Dr. Charlotte J. Patterson of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville.

Specifically, teens with same-sex parents appeared to be no more likely to have psychological problems, struggle at school, try intercourse, or have problems at home, the investigators found.

Critics have argued that same-sex parents "may in some way harm the children that are raised in these households," Patterson told Reuters Health. "And I think that our results speak to that concern, to some degree."

Previous research about children raised by same-sex parents has shown that by and large they tend to fare as well as their peers raised by a man and woman.

One study of teenagers raised by divorced lesbians found they had similar self-esteem as teenagers of divorced heterosexual parents, and appeared to fare better if their mothers had a partner living at home, their fathers were supportive of the relationship, and they learned of their mothers' orientation when they were relatively young.

To investigate further how teenagers fare with same-sex parents, Patterson and her colleagues reviewed information collected from a national sample of 44 12- to 18-year olds -- 23 girls and 21 boys -- living with mothers in same-sex partnerships.

The researchers compared those adolescents to 44 teens with mothers in opposite-sex relationships.

As reported in the journal Child Development, the investigators found that, overall, teens with parents in same-sex relationships appeared to have relatively high levels of self-esteem, little anxiety, few signs of depression, and to do well in school.

They were no more likely than other teens to have symptoms of depression, problems with self-esteem, or anxiety. They also reported feeling equal levels of warmth from their parents, and caring from adults and their peers.

Moreover, teens with mothers in same-sex unions appeared to get comparable grades, and be just as likely or unlikely to get in trouble in school. They were also no different in whether or not they had had sex, or been in a romantic relationship in the previous 18 months.

Patterson noted that teens who appeared to be most well adjusted in school also tended to have a particularly warm and close relationship with their parents. Clearly, parental closeness is connected to teenage well-being, she added; whether one causes the other is still unclear.

SOURCE: Child Development, November 2004.

 

[Stonewall]

Sexual orientation should not be an issue!

With rare exception, all of your convictions and opinions and introspections are praiseworthy and, personally, I am proud! This compliment comes from someone who actually fought the New York City police and started the now famous Stonewall Rebellion for Gay rights. Parades are now thoughout the world celebrating this historic event.

See a recent (June) feature story in The New York Times about some of the original 1969 Stonewall cops -- and Me -- and our long-last reunion and Stonewall forum at:

www.STONEWALLvets.org/parade/SW-35.htm

By the way, some people forget -- or don't know -- that one of the pilots of one of the hijacked four planes on Seprtember 11th, 2001 was GAY! And a few of U do know, via me, that one of the Stonewall Rebellion Vetz ("Ronnie") was murdered in one of the W.T.C. Twin Towers, where he was trapped without a chance to live on the 106th floor!

The main point is that the cowardly killers didn't care if someone was straight, Gay, bisexual, transgendered or none-of-the-above!

 

[Macfistowannabe]

There may be some who take their theology seriously that would find this offensive, not humorous.

I think we can leave it, however, in the humor category for now as it represents a lack of understanding of Scripture.

I'm not offended at all, I can tolerate a different view, and I think it presents a healthy debate. However, those who don't care to understand scripture will surely get lost in the debate.

 

[nbcrusader]

I take the civil rights of my gay friends seriously and am offended daily by those who would deny them these rights based on theology. This "humorous" piece is related to Sherry Darling's questions which have never been answered adequately in any discussion of gay rights I've ever seen in this forum, or anywhere. The Christian interpretation of homosexuality, and the rights that are denied as a result, is just as ludicrous and offensive to me as anything in these "humorous" examples.

If you have any follow-up questions to Sherry Darling's, please ask them.

I will be the first to agree that Scripture is mis-interpreted and abused historically and today. That is not a problem of Scripture, but with the individuals abusing it.

So frankly, I am not concerned with how this may have offended anyone.

I personally was not offended, but I only suggest that care be taken; otherwise, this only perpetuates the problem.

 

[Irvine511]

I will be the first to agree that Scripture is mis-interpreted and abused historically and today. That is not a problem of Scripture, but with the individuals abusing it.

or maybe it's to do with the nature of Scripture itself. since all reading is interpretation, perhaps the fault lies both with individuals seeking to manipulate scripture to further personal gain, political control, etc., and the fact that -- as any post-modernist would attest -- that there are no correct readings, simply valid ones that are necessarily contested.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

or maybe it's to do with the nature of Scripture itself. since all reading is interpretation, perhaps the fault lies both with individuals seeking to manipulate scripture to further personal gain, political control, etc., and the fact that -- as any post-modernist would attest -- that there are no correct readings, simply valid ones that are necessarily contested.

Fact is, the scripture was not written during our era, and we have misinterpretations based on this. Slavery is wrong, etc... but it wasn't a spiritual issue as much as it was a political issue. The bible is about love and truth. Some Christians are more about love than truth, others are more about truth than love. It's not easy to have a perfect balance of the two.

 

[Renne]

I personally was not offended, but I only suggest that care be taken; otherwise, this only perpetuates the problem.

So people have to take care not to offend those who believe in the Bible, yet it's okay to rant on about how homosexuality is immoral?



Yay double standards!

 

[Macfistowannabe]

So people have to take care not to offend those who believe in the Bible, yet it's okay to rant on about how homosexuality is immoral?



Yay double standards!

Relax, relax, relax. If you read my response, I told you my point of view: I'm not offended by people who choose not to accept Biblical principals, and I'm also not offended by those who disagree with the lifestyle. I think if everyone took a deep breath , we wouldn't have to see opposing views as if someone was trying to rip them to shreds. May we all get along.

 

[Sherry Darling]

If you have any follow-up questions to Sherry Darling's, please ask them.

LOL--NBC, if she had a question to ask me, she would have. As she clearly stated, her point was not to follow up or question me. It was to note that my questions regarding the interpretation of these verses have not yet been answered.

RE Irvine's point about the "nature of Scripture", I agree and I'd even expand on that point. I think these difficulties are inherent in human beings interacting with text. It's inherent in language itself.

Peace,
Cheryl

 

[nbcrusader]

LOL--NBC, if she had a question to ask me, she would have. As she clearly stated, her point was not to follow up or question me. It was to note that my questions regarding the interpretation of these verses have not yet been answered.

I would think that you are in the best position to note if your questions had been answered to your satisfaction.

RE Irvine's point about the "nature of Scripture", I agree and I'd even expand on that point. I think these difficulties are inherent in human beings interacting with text. It's inherent in language itself.

Perhaps we could discuss this point further (maybe in a different thread). I feel there is always a danger to take one persons misuse of Scripture and use it as a basis to dismiss interpretations of other passages.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but my interpretation of scripture is strict and to the point (but not in a cut out your eyes kind of way). I'm a little tired of some people telling me that my biblical, "homophobic views" aren't welcome here just because I happen to disagree with a certain lifestyle. Is diversity (in this case, a different view) a threat to you?

 

[Irvine511]

can someone please, please, please tell me what the "gay lifestyle" is? because the people who know the most about it don't seem to be gay.

 

[BVS]

can someone please, please, please tell me what the "gay lifestyle" is? because the people who know the most about it don't seem to be gay.

So true.