Was it necessary to repeal DADT?

[James Griffin]

Now that Dan did my job and presented a great logical well reasoned legal argument I guess I will give a brief shot at common sense.

Really guys, your whole scenario seems to revolve around the "horror" of open showers.

Common sense brethren, exactly how long do you think an overtly gay guy hitting on straights in the shower is going to last in the military?

Wouldn't even make it up to command. VERY self-regulating. So with that straw man dead, kindly stick to the facts of equal protection under the constitution of the US.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

Now that Dan did my job and presented a great logical well reasoned legal argument I guess I will give a brief shot at common sense.

Really guys, your whole scenario seems to revolve around the "horror" of open showers.

Common sense brethren, exactly how long do you think an overtly gay guy hitting on straights in the shower is going to last in the military?

Wouldn't even make it up to command. VERY self-regulating. So with that straw man dead, kindly stick to the facts of equal protection under the constitution of the US.

Thank you sir. Coming from you that is a great compliment. I too believe the shower argument is frivolous and has always been self-regulated among us macho men.

I will write a little more on Romans 1 ... as the homophobic crowd adulterates its context ... chopping out parts and never moving on to chapter 2.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by canam

First the gays want their rights ,then its nambla,then someone wants to marry their dog etc etc. and if were against any of it, we all just have a phobia that we need to get over, Well guess what, call me a homophobe too.wrong is not right wrong is wrong, whether by a majority or a minority.No i wont get over it.

Simple enough!

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

I have already stated PLAINLY that such a lifestyle leads to eternal damnation. (AND have not seen Dan advocating such a lifestyle is not sinful ) HOWEVER, its is NOT the place of GOVERNMENT to micromanage it.

So should government stay out altogether? such as with multiple wives? Marriage age? etc....

[Cindy]

Tone down personal arguments and rhetoric gentlemen, please. Take heed to Mr. Griffin. Use logic if at all possible.

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

So should government stay out altogether? such as with multiple wives? Marriage age? etc....

Of course not. The issue becomes micromanagement. When the government steps in at what point is enough?

There are some states which make illegal certain sex acts between consenting heterosexual married couples. So there is a danger when government gets too involved with malum prohibitum as opposed to malum in se type "offenses"

In this case there is a dichotomy in which some apparently have trouble dealing. Namely difference (not separation, difference) between church and state. Homosexual sex per se is legal in the US and as such should be protected from job discrimination.

Having said that, WHATEVER the government decides will not affect the word of God nor how I preach. Homosexuality is a sin, specifically enumerated both in OT and NT. But it is NOT the unpardonable sin. It is no more or less damnable than those listed around it.

[Jason B]

Joe Biden on Gay Marriage: Legalization Is 'Inevitable'

Vice President Joe Biden, who in the past has backed civil unions for gay men and lesbians, says a national consensus for the legalization of gay marriage is inevitable.

Biden, in an interview Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America," said the acceptance of gay marriage will become part of public consciousness in the same way that the repeal of the ban on gays serving openly in the armed forces eventually won favor with many Americans, including military leaders.
source:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12...is-inevitable/


This CONFIRMS my entire argument, keep your heads in the sand if you wish.

[DAII]

I find the treatment of the beginning of Paul's treatise of our justification by faith through Christ to be distorted and warped by those who take a few verses in isolation as if he is color coding sins in Romans 1 ... or prioritizing. This would be far from his authorial intent.

To prooftext exclusively as it being a condemnation of homosexual behavior only or primarily .... while its context in the entire chapter and in chapter 2 deals with all sin from lying to dishonoring parents ... INCLUDING SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS ... from thinking that showing kindness to being circumcised makes us right with a holy God ... culminating with the conclusion HOW WE ALL FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD ... is a violation of the treatise's purpose.

In Paul's biblical treatise, not Jefferson's deist one .... he tells us: NONE OF US HAVE RIGHTS BEFORE A HOLY GOD AND HIS LAWS ... not a single one ... (an equality indeed) ....other than death under the law of sin ....

our access to Him is through our justification by faith through Christ ... a major theme of his Roman letter.

As Paul begins to lay out his argument ... he makes a case for what happens to man when he focuses on self ... and submits to the desires of his lusts and ALL UNGODLINESS.

Among those unrighteous things is homosexuality ... indeed ... but also he is just as adamant against those who love their selves over Him .... Showing how the fruit of carnality all men ... not just homosexuals ... leads to God's wrath ... WHILE OFFERING THE HOPE OF SALVATION FROM THESE THINGS IN CHRIST JESUS.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.17 For therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous shall live by faith.18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness;

After including those in humanity (men) who have entered into all forms of licentiousness ... including deviant sexual behavior ... he is sure to include other sins the ungodly engage in ...

And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting;29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity; whisperers,30 backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,31 without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, unmerciful:

That's a long list of ungodly sinning ... dontcha think?

In full context he is making a case, the thesis of his treatise per se, for why ALL MEN are sinners and deserve DEATH, imo.

verse 32 boldly states:

Quote:

Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Yet ... He does not stop there with the ungodly ... He continues his thought in Chapter 2 .... (never knowing we'd separate his words into chapters) .... declaring that we can judge others for their sins but that we are guilty of THE SAME THING!!!!!!

In Romans 2:1, he projects a spear into the heart of the moral living man ...
Quote:

Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

The ASV says:

You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things

Essentially ... Do you think your self-righteousness or morality makes you holier? You're just as guilty, Jason and Daniel, according to Paul ... an equality indeed, my friend.

So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment?

The fact is God has no favorites !!!!

For God does not show favoritism.
12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.

He then tells the Jews that their circumcision and law obeying still does not make them any better than a Gentile ... see end of Chapter 2.

Then in Chapter 3 more rhetorical questions but finally drives the thought home:

Quote:

What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

Paul answers his own question saying ... with words that reverberate in the consciousness of man

Quote:

What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

He finally proclaims who makes us ... ALL SINNERS ... just before God ...

Quote:

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

We are made right by JESUS CHRIST.

The wages of sin, DEATH ... but the gift of God ... eternal life.

[sandie]

A call for righteousness is now considered bigotry.

Stunning.

Jason you've been called every name in the book on this thread and you've maintained great dignity and your Christian witness.

I wonder what those who defend this unrighteous act will do when the government says all ministers of the Gospel must marry homosexuals or face the law?

Who will be the hypocrite then?

[DAII]

Originally Posted by sandie

A call for righteousness is now considered bigotry.

Stunning.

Jason you've been called every name in the book on this thread and you've maintained great dignity and your Christian witness.

I wonder what those who defend this unrighteous act will do when the government says all ministers of the Gospel must marry homosexuals or face the law?

Who will be the hypocrite then?

Ever read Ethan Frome ... by Edith Wharton ???... your doom and gloom arguments sound like the raving, malady ridden Zenobia ... who was once munificent and optimistic but have resigned yourself to the apocalypse of your hypochondria.

Truth be told your heroic crusader ... has gaping holes in his theology, logic and civic mindedness.

But alas, there is hope ... he once was a flaming 3 stepper.

Biblical righteousness comes through Jesus Christ ... not American laws.