Was it necessary to repeal DADT?

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by DAII

While I respect your view and position would you attend the wedding of this man ... if he was your son?

GREAT question, but I'm afraid I already know the answer, and if it's what I expect, that would be incredibly sad.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

GREAT question, but I'm afraid I already know the answer, and if it's what I expect, that would be incredibly sad.

And probably have a lifelong consequence of bitterness and estrangement... of course ... justified in tough love.

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Love does not require support or tacit approval of every action, and in fact sometimes requires precisely the opposite.

Indeed it does as stated by reading the quote in context of the surrounding posts. :-)

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

Nope, that's where I believe you're completely off-base. Their sin is exactly the same as yours.

The union of a homosexual couple is in no way comparable to the union of a heterosexual couple. A heterosexual couple who is fornicating can make their relationship legitimate (and potentially righteous) by marrying. A homosexual couple is making nothing right at all with their union, and nothing righteous results. There is nothing sacred or respectable about their union.

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

The union of a homosexual couple is in no way comparable to the union of a heterosexual couple. A heterosexual couple who is fornicating can make their relationship legitimate (and potentially righteous) by marrying. A homosexual couple is making nothing right at all with their union, and nothing righteous results. There is nothing sacred or respectable about their union.

So....if I love someone and they're dear to me, I should boycott their wedding just to show my disapproval? Why? What does that accomplish? Is it really THAT important that everyone know where you stand? I know it tweaks anyone here to be called a "Pharisee", but I'm sorry, these sound just like the words hurled at Jesus when he hung out with people of which religion didn't approve.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by DAII

Bump for my favorite theocratic legalist who dabbles in grace.

I assume your targeting me, my favorite militant liberal, who dabbles in magic.

I don't know what response your wanting from me, so I will respond to the scripture, if your seeking something else, rephrase the bump.

I agree that the law increases transgression. I agree with Paul that the law defines sin and brings wrath. That is the very PURPOSE of the Law. The LAW was never intended to SAVE by having someone keep it. It was given so that the trespass might INCREASE.

The more someone seeks to be right through keeping the law the more they sin (knowledge of the law reveals sin), they understand they can NEVER make it that way, and the LAw, which increases our knowedge of our own transgression and sinfulness causes us to cry out to God for grace, because we cannot save or justify ourselves. In this WAY[the law revealing sin] the law is our school master to bring us to Christ.

[James Griffin]

MB don't know if you went back that far, but the scenario was Smith was asked to perform a same sex marriage. He explained to them why he could not support it, but he would attend.

They understood he did not approve of their lifestyle, it sounds like a love the sinner hate the sin scenario to me.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

The union of a homosexual couple is in no way comparable to the union of a heterosexual couple. A heterosexual couple who is fornicating can make their relationship legitimate (and potentially righteous) by marrying. A homosexual couple is making nothing right at all with their union, and nothing righteous results. There is nothing sacred or respectable about their union.

AMEN Brat.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by DAII

While I respect your view and position would you attend the wedding of this man ... if he was your son?

Coming from the home of a father who only attended two of four of his daughters' marriages, I can tell you that I share his strong view on whether one should support a marriage and how that support is shown.

To your question directly: I don't know. I wouldn't recommend a large, celebratory wedding to begin with. I think it's inappropriate when the precursors are...less than respectable. I love my children unconditionally, but I don't confuse unconditional love with unconditional support and approval. In all fairness, my children aren't grown, so you really need to ask again in twenty years. I'm aware that we all have soft spots for our kids, but I haven't had any problem expressing disapproval so far, without making them feel that I hate them when they displease me. (Albeit, in small matters.) There are practical things to consider, such as not alienating my son by too strong a reaction, which might affect my decision.

Would you? Attend the wedding of your child if they were behaving badly and throwing propriety to the wind? Would you pay for it? Would you advise discretion instead? What do you envision?

To put my opinion in perspective, I would feel more comfortable having a homosexual couple to dinner than I would attending their wedding. To take vows *before God* to form a union that is a perversion of God's original plan is sacrilegious. I couldn't in good conscience offer any support.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I assume your targeting me, my favorite militant liberal, who dabbles in magic.

I don't know what response your wanting from me, so I will respond to the scripture, if your seeking something else, rephrase the bump.

I agree that the law increases transgression. I agree with Paul that the law defines sin and brings wrath. That is the very PURPOSE of the Law. The LAW was never intended to SAVE by having someone keep it. It was given so that the trespass might INCREASE.

The more someone seeks to be right through keeping the law the more they sin (knowledge of the law reveals sin), they understand they can NEVER make it that way, and the LAw, which increases our knowedge of our own transgression and sinfulness causes us to cry out to God for grace, because we cannot save or justify ourselves. In this WAY[the law revealing sin] the law is our school master to bring us to Christ.

I'm so glad we can agree theologically with so much regularity .. it must only mean you are struggling with your grace theology ... and still working on understanding your civic mindedness in regards to the Constitution and the notion of equal protection of the law ....

I guess all this is NOVEL to you ... so I will give you some time, padawan ... the other option would be I'd hate to think this is the bucking of an obstinate jackass/donkey.

I still don't get the inconsistency as to why you allow for freedom religion ... but I guess you're not a lost cause after all.