Gay Marriage: For or Against?

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Personally, I'm not "for" gay marriage.

However, I am for a free society.

Freedom itself is sacred.

It is sacred? Where do you get it is sacred? We all actually serve a master. We choose which one. We can never have a free society.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment tells us until we are all identical, we will have certain folks seek to be domineering.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by coadie

It is sacred? Where do you get it is sacred? We all actually serve a master. We choose which one. We can never have a free society.

You don't get it. Freedom and liberty are concepts lost on you Coadie. Freedom. Maybe if someone took your freedoms, I mean really controlled your life politically, you'd understand.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment tells us until we are all identical, we will have certain folks seek to be domineering.

True... and it's obvious that you want to be one of them.

[Ory]

Originally Posted by Aquila

No doubt there was pride and inhospitality present in Sodom and Gomorrha. However, the text also mentions their "abominations". I think it's important to define those abominations. Most agree that it was fornication and general sodomy. But the way we define this may not be the way it was defined in ancient cultures.

Some claim that "fornication" was essentially connected to idolatrous practices among temple prostitutes. They also claim that the "homosexuality" mentioned in the text isn't your typical example as seen privately among law abiding citizens, but rather it was more of a homosexual "rape". We see this twice in Scripture. Lot was almost raped by the people of Sodom. They didn't invite him out for dinner. They attempted to rape him. Also, we see this in Judges when the Sons of Baal attempt to rape a traveling Levite and instead take his concubine. This was an act of violence... not so much "perversion". It's more akin to the KKK taking an African American traveler and attempting to rape him, just because they feel they need to "teach him a lesson". Beyond this we don't see anyone executed anywhere in the OT for the sin of homosexuality itself. We do see Sodomites (male temple prostitutes) vanquished from the land. But we never read of a homosexual being executed for simply homosexual behavior.

I'd say that we have to approach the issue with Christian grace. These are human beings who need Jesus just as much as any other sinner. Yes, they have different struggles than you and me... but Jesus died for them just as he died for us. I'm not convinced there isn't a "genetic" or "biological" component. For that reason I advocate grace, forgiveness, counsel, and healing for those who struggle in this area. I don't believe we should throw them to the enemy as trash. They are people desperately in need of the same grace and mercy we call upon every day.

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

Hey man.

I do believe that we as Christians should not cast the first stone. That we all have sinned, but I believe that there are some more scriptures in the Bible that shed light on how homosexuality:

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.” – Lev. 18:22 ( KJV)

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.” – Lev. 20:13 ( KJV)

“26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. “ – Romans 1:26-27 ( KJV)

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,” – 1 Corinthians 6:9 ( KJV)

I thank that there are more scriptures on this, and maybe even some mentioned in Revelation.

I do think that as Christians we should treat everyone with love and respect and that we should not try to cast the first stone (instead to be fast to spread the gospel), but I cannot say that I believe the homosexuality is something that is taken lightly among God according to the scriptures.

Just my input though.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Aquila

You don't get it. Freedom and liberty are concepts lost on you Coadie. Freedom. Maybe if someone took your freedoms, I mean really controlled your life politically, you'd understand.



True... and it's obvious that you want to be one of them.

What an ignorant comment from you. It is also very dishonest. We left Russia and came to America because of tyranny. People on a field trip from England several hundred years earlier never lived under communism or dictatorships.

My eyes are open and I see things in America that you can't relate to.

The topic is gay marriage. How about the judges in Iowa that got fired?

The judges think the vote of the people doesn't matter. The judges think they know better what is good for the people than the people do. That is why voting was not allowed in Russia. People didn't know who was the best candidate.

[Charnock]

Originally Posted by Charnock

Gay marriage will eventually be legal in the United States.

As such, what should the church have to say about the issue?

How do you feel about the issue?

Do you believe a gay person should have a legal right to marry? If so, which do you think is most important, that person's individual liberty (rights as an American), or God's opposition to homosexuality?

Should the church remain silent on this issue, or should the church work the political system to preserve traditional marriage to the exclusion of gays.

Which should a Christian be most concerned with; protecting individual liberties or declaring Bible absolutes?

I haven't posted much on this thread because I really wanted to listen before speaking.

From a strictly legal point of view, I don't believe it is the job of government to regulate marriage in any way. I don't believe the government should give tax breaks to married folks, or parents, that they don't give to single, childless, citizens. To me, that is discrimination. The easiest way to derail the entire gay marriage debate is for the government to completely remove all language recognizing marriage.

From a moral point of view, I have a hard time telling anyone that they do not feel what they say they feel. For instance, most homosexuals state that they have always been homosexual and that their homosexuality was never a choice. It is not my responsibility to decide whether or not they are mistaken or misled.

Spiritual issues are altogether different, however. God's opinion of homosexual behavior is very, very clear. As a minister, I have a responsibility to lovingly teach God's Word in a manner befitting a gatherer.

I do not believe the church should engage in political processes to the exclusion of evangelism. The only thing that can truly eradicate sin is the Holy Spirit which leads us into Truth.

Laws are poor substitutes for the righteousness of God.

[whoami]

Originally Posted by Charnock

I haven't posted much on this thread because I really wanted to listen before speaking.

From a strictly legal point of view, I don't believe it is the job of government to regulate marriage in any way. I don't believe the government should give tax breaks to married folks, or parents, that they don't give to single, childless, citizens. To me, that is discrimination. The easiest way to derail the entire gay marriage debate is for the government to completely remove all language recognizing marriage.

From a moral point of view, I have a hard time telling anyone that they do not feel what they say they feel. For instance, most homosexuals state that they have always been homosexual and that their homosexuality was never a choice. It is not my responsibility to decide whether or not they are mistaken or misled.

Spiritual issues are altogether different, however. God's opinion of homosexual behavior is very, very clear. As a minister, I have a responsibility to lovingly teach God's Word in a manner befitting a gatherer.

I do not believe the church should engage in political processes to the exclusion of evangelism. The only thing that can truly eradicate sin is the Holy Spirit which leads us into Truth.

Laws are poor substitutes for the righteousness of God.

Where on earth did this come from? I find myself kind of agreeing with you.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Charnock

I haven't posted much on this thread because I really wanted to listen before speaking.

From a strictly legal point of view, I don't believe it is the job of government to regulate marriage in any way. I don't believe the government should give tax breaks to married folks, or parents, that they don't give to single, childless, citizens. To me, that is discrimination. The easiest way to derail the entire gay marriage debate is for the government to completely remove all language recognizing marriage.

From a moral point of view, I have a hard time telling anyone that they do not feel what they say they feel. For instance, most homosexuals state that they have always been homosexual and that their homosexuality was never a choice. It is not my responsibility to decide whether or not they are mistaken or misled.

Spiritual issues are altogether different, however. God's opinion of homosexual behavior is very, very clear. As a minister, I have a responsibility to lovingly teach God's Word in a manner befitting a gatherer.

I do not believe the church should engage in political processes to the exclusion of evangelism. The only thing that can truly eradicate sin is the Holy Spirit which leads us into Truth.

Laws are poor substitutes for the righteousness of God.

Very good post!

[Charnock]

Originally Posted by whoami

Where on earth did this come from? I find myself kind of agreeing with you.

Sorry about that.

[Charnock]

Originally Posted by Charnock

I haven't posted much on this thread because I really wanted to listen before speaking.

From a strictly legal point of view, I don't believe it is the job of government to regulate marriage in any way. I don't believe the government should give tax breaks to married folks, or parents, that they don't give to single, childless, citizens. To me, that is discrimination. The easiest way to derail the entire gay marriage debate is for the government to completely remove all language recognizing marriage.

From a moral point of view, I have a hard time telling anyone that they do not feel what they say they feel. For instance, most homosexuals state that they have always been homosexual and that their homosexuality was never a choice. It is not my responsibility to decide whether or not they are mistaken or misled.

Spiritual issues are altogether different, however. God's opinion of homosexual behavior is very, very clear. As a minister, I have a responsibility to lovingly teach God's Word in a manner befitting a gatherer.

I do not believe the church should engage in political processes to the exclusion of evangelism. The only thing that can truly eradicate sin is the Holy Spirit which leads us into Truth.

Laws are poor substitutes for the righteousness of God.

Further, I really have no idea why hospitals can determine who gets to be at a dying person's bedside, or who can visit them. Where did that come from? IMO, a hospital has no business making value judgments about a person's relationships, regardless of their sexual preference.

I have the same problem with insurance companies. Why do insurance companies get to decide who can be on my policy? If I pay the premium, and clearly state the definition of my family unit, they (Insurance) should have no right of refusal.

It's all very Orwellian.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Charnock

Further, I really have no idea why hospitals can determine who gets to be at a dying person's bedside, or who can visit them. Where did that come from? IMO, a hospital has no business making value judgments about a person's relationships, regardless of their sexual preference.

I have the same problem with insurance companies. Why do insurance companies get to decide who can be on my policy? If I pay the premium, and clearly state the definition of my family unit, they (Insurance) should have no right of refusal.

It's all very Orwellian.

A private institution has the right to set it's own guidelines and standards. A similar situation would be a church refusing to recognize gay marriages or gay ministers.