Gay Marriage: For or Against? - Page 21

Charnock · #**201** 08-31-2010, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Not every constitution legislates a religions view of morality. Most of a secular code of morality one that does not infringe on the liberty of others.

Our own constitution and our laws do not force people to not fornicate except in certain conditions of age. But they do have laws where you can't force another person against their will to have sex (rape).

Every constitution in the world exists as a moral code. They exist to define acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. BTW, the law in bold enforces righteousness.

Praxeas · #**202** 08-31-2010, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charnock

Every constitution in the world exists as a moral code. They exist to define acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. BTW, the law in bold enforces righteousness.

That's what I said. The law in bold enforces a law, one law. Obeying that law does not make you righteous.

Keeping a civil code might make one legally righteous but not necessarily religiously righteous

Praxeas · #**203** 08-31-2010, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charnock

Every time you vote on a proposition in the affirmative you are making a law.

And laws against speeding, drunk driving and rape enforce righteousness.

Should we do away with them?

You still did not support your assertion.

Here is your assertion in case you forgot

Quote:

Your mindset, carried to its logical conclusion, would require Christians to stay silent on issues such as rape, theft, and slander as well. After all, those are legal issues just as much as marriage is a legal issue. Why enforce righteousness in those areas?

Im waiting for you to clear up the non-sequitor

Cindy · #**204** 08-31-2010, 07:08 PM

No Gay divorce in Texas.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....aa8079fa.html

Jermyn Davidson · #**205** 08-31-2010, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charnock

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

In this case, declaring Bible absolutes.

Sin is sin and the church can never (and I add will never in America) be forced to condone sin.

jfrog · #**206** 08-31-2010, 07:25 PM

I think the goal of lawmaking has been missed. Laws cannot create righteousness. This is a fundamental principle of Christianity for not even the law that God gave Moses could create righteousness.

So what is the true goal of lawmaking from a Christian perspective if its not individual righteousness? Lawmaking and government ought to be for the benefit and protection of the people. So, with this Christian perspective on lawmaking, can gay marriage be shown to harm anyone or to affect society in an overly negative way? I don't think so.

So since banning gay marriage doesn't meet the criteria of benefiting or protecting the people, then from a Christian perspective on lawmaking gay marriage should be allowed.

Is that to say that Christians ought to not say being Gay is sin? Not at all. They have every right to. But the Christian perspective on lawmaking will prevent laws being made that simply try to legislate righteousness.

DAII · #**207** 08-31-2010, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charnock

Your mindset, carried to its logical conclusion, would require Christians to stay silent on issues such as rape, theft, and slander as well. After all, those are legal issues just as much as marriage is a legal issue. Why enforce righteousness in those areas?

Charnock the statement said what our job is ... is your job to enforce righteousness or to preach it?

Please answer wisely.

coadie · #**208** 08-31-2010, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII

Charnock the statement said what our job is ... is your job to enforce righteousness or to preach it?

Please answer wisely.

The resident fruit inspector demands an answer.

DAII · #**209** 08-31-2010, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coadie

The resident fruit inspector demands an answer.

Your postings speak volumes, homophobe.

Your hermeneutic lacking.

MissBrattified · #**210** 08-31-2010, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charnock

Your mindset, carried to its logical conclusion, would require Christians to stay silent on issues such as rape, theft, and slander as well. After all, those are legal issues just as much as marriage is a legal issue. Why enforce righteousness in those areas?

First of all, I didn't endorse silence at all. Secondly, I do believe it's the job of the government to protect its citizens, keep order and exact justice when crimes are committed. It is not the job of the church to handle that. We have a different purpose. We cooperate with the government and its authority, recognizing it's ability to enhance our lives, but we shouldn't BE the government. And no, that doesn't mean I believe Christians can't be involved in politics, but when they are, they have to use a lot of discretion and wisdom.

From that perspective, I believe firmly in separation of church and state. Not only because I don't want the government overly involved in my life, but also because many Christians start trying to legislate righteousness, which isn't what we're supposed to be about. And when I say "legislate righteousness", I mean trying to legislate obedience to God in all areas--not just trying to keep order in society.