Ellen's wedding

[lizaanne]

I am SO glad i joined this site.

Wonderful! So glad to have you!

God tells us to not judge one another. He is in the only position to judge.

By my very nature as a human being I make judgments about things. I judge whether or not it is safe to cross the street, trust a stranger at my front door, make a business decision, or if I like a particular flavor of ice cream over another. I am also capable of judging - based on what I see in front of me - whether or not someone will succeed at a job, at a marriage, or at getting to heaven. That’s not to say that I make a judgment on their SOUL - but I am absolutely able to judge their actions and what I believe the result of those actions might be.

And Jesus also said, “…lest ye be judged.” So - judge me!!! I’m totally open to judgment! Please!

Why do you think you’re better than someone that’s a homosexual?

In what way do you define “better”? If you are to look at whether or not someone has a more likelihood of being in a state of mortal sin, and NOT being in that state is a “better” place to be, well then, yes I am “better”.

Because you supposedly follow the scripture…apparently you need look further because you are not a person of God.

We are all persons of God. Try again.

Everyone saying that it is so diguisting, honestly makes me sad and is making my stomach turn. A person is a person, and God may not like what they are doing, but he says that he hates the sin, not the sinner.

Where does God say this? Please give me the quote for this.

Someone also said that they “liked Ellen before she came out of the closet but now she can’t stand her”. Why? did she all of a sudden change because you now are aware that she is attracted to women. Get over it.

I was not the one who said this, but I will respond for myself because I agree with the comment. The second ANY comedian starts talking openly about their sex life, regardless of their orientation, it totally turns me off. So yes, as soon as she started making a point of her lesbian tendencies I couldn’t stand watching her either. Sign me up on that list.

Everyone sins, no sin is more excusable then another.

This is not true. There are venial sins, and there are mortal sins. Mortal sins cut us off from the grace of God. These people live in a state of mortal sin.

There is also a distinction between occasional mortal sin, and the person who CHOOSES a mortally sinful lifestyle is entirely different. It is a wider issue than just the sin itself - it is a lifestyle choice.

~Liza

 

[shayla675]

I have always felt that while I believe the lifestyle to be sinful, and we are called to try to help our brothers and sisters to Christ…God will be the final judge of us ALL.

Thanks for the welcome : )

I understand that being homosexual is a sin, and religious people do not have to agree with it. I’m not all about gay pride, nor am I a homosexual, it just really makes me upset when people are posting comments like that, because it’s hard to tell someone who is not religious or that is searching for answers that Catholics, baptists, etc are not all judgmental, when i’ve been looking through posts and it seems most of the answers have harsh remarks. I guess I’m confused as to what bible these people are reading.

 

[shayla675]

Wonderful! So glad to have you!

By my very nature as a human being I make judgments about things. I judge whether or not it is safe to cross the street, trust a stranger at my front door, make a business decision, or if I like a particular flavor of ice cream over another. I am also capable of judging - based on what I see in front of me - whether or not someone will succeed at a job, at a marriage, or at getting to heaven. That’s not to say that I make a judgment on their SOUL - but I am absolutely able to judge their actions and what I believe the result of those actions might be.

And Jesus also said, “…lest ye be judged.” So - judge me!!! I’m totally open to judgment! Please!


In what way do you define “better”? If you are to look at whether or not someone has a more likelihood of being in a state of mortal sin, and NOT being in that state is a “better” place to be, well then, yes I am “better”.

We are all persons of God. Try again.

Where does God say this? Please give me the quote for this.

I was not the one who said this, but I will respond for myself because I agree with the comment. The second ANY comedian starts talking openly about their sex life, regardless of their orientation, it totally turns me off. So yes, as soon as she started making a point of her lesbian tendencies I couldn’t stand watching her either. Sign me up on that list.

This is not true. There are venial sins, and there are mortal sins. Mortal sins cut us off from the grace of God. These people live in a state of mortal sin.

There is also a distinction between occasional mortal sin, and the person who CHOOSES a mortally sinful lifestyle is entirely different. It is a wider issue than just the sin itself - it is a lifestyle choice.

~Liza

I will not judge you, I do not know you, and I am not in the position to judge you.

Whether or not God exactly says “hate the sin not the sinner” is probably not the quote. but I am certain God does not teach hate, he teaches love. So why should someone hate their sister because of their sexual orientation?

I do not know the difference between mortal sins and venial sins. You’re trying to tell me that if someone commits a mortal sin they are cut off from God completely? I thought God wanted his children to come back to him so they could have eternal life and not be damned to hell.

 

[Island_Oak]

Hi Island;

There is no proof scientifically, rather speculation by well meaning scientists, to show that there is in fact a gay gene. If the media hypes up something long enough though, people start believing it. That being said, I don’t believe Scripture would teach against a lifestyle, and then God create the person to have a gene to bear a lifestyle, He never intended. I don’t believe that God would create us to be procreative in marriage (this is a component) and then at the same time, create/design people to be attracted to something that goes against His Laws.

If you mean there is no generally recognized and identifiable genetic marker that can predict or “prove” someone was in fact born gay, I’m never claimed there was. I simply observed that a condition that has existed throughout the recorded history of mankind–which causes so much social ostracism is not likely something one chooses casually. For that matter we had many, many years of being unable to “prove” the world was not flat, that the earth orbited the sun and not the other way around…it didn’t make these truths any less real, it just took US a while to learn them.

 

[whatevergirl]

If you mean there is no generally recognized and identifiable genetic marker that can predict or “prove” someone was in fact born gay, I’m never claimed there was. I simply observed that a condition that has existed throughout the recorded history of mankind–which causes so much social ostracism is not likely something one chooses casually. For that matter we had many, many years of being unable to “prove” the world was not flat, that the earth orbited the sun and not the other way around…it didn’t make these truths any less real, it just took US a while to learn them.

Well, now we can prove the world is not flat…but while I understand the example here, (the analogy rather) it doesn’t intertwine with morality issues, really. Whether or not you or I agree about the world’s surface, etc…it doesn’t intermingle with sin. I think that Tantumergo explained it pretty well, do you think? Even if there is a genetic tracing to “explain” homosexuality–would everyone have the gene that predisposes one to homosexuality, and if not, why not? It would seem that if it “skips” people, and yet those people are homosexual…then, are they choosing the lifestyle? I think when we start trying to interject God into lifestyle choices, we come up shorthanded. One thing left out, will cause the whole house of cards to fall, so to speak…

If we say that there is a gene…then is it not a choice? If it’s not a choice, then how do some people ‘overcome’ homosexuality? How about bisexual people then? Nevermind…let’s stick with one topic! lol

I’m not expecting answers from you or others here…lol, Island. I am merely thinking out loud.

I lean towards the post by Tantum…

 

[lizaanne]

I will not judge you, I do not know you, and I am not in the position to judge you.

I do not mind, but that is your choice.

Whether or not God exactly says “hate the sin not the sinner” is probably not the quote. but I am certain God does not teach hate, he teaches love. So why should someone hate their sister because of their sexual orientation?

Please show me one single post in this entire thread where anyone said they hated someone because of their sexual orientation.

I do not know the difference between mortal sins and venial sins.

Please read THIS so you will now understand the difference.

You’re trying to tell me that if someone commits a mortal sin they are cut off from God completely? I thought God wanted his children to come back to him so they could have eternal life and not be damned to hell.

See the link above.

~Liza

 

[whatevergirl]

shayla–the thing about sin…is really more simple than we make it. God doesn’t ever cut us off…we turn our backs on Him, when we sin. Whatever the sin is…adultery, fornication, homosexuality…whatever it is…if we know something to be sinful…if we feel that this truly is not how God wants us to be living, but still carry on anyways–we are turning our backs on Him. Sometimes sin fools us though into thinking we are living correctly, in the eyes of God. Most people wouldn’t sin, if there wasn’t some type of benefit–when you think about it.

The beauty about the love of God, is that all it takes is for us to turn from sin, and back towards Him. A person cannot serve God and himself.

That is really as simple as it gets, when it comes to sin. God is all loving, but sadly, sometimes, we push away His love. With love, comes responsibility. (I wish I could lay claim to such a phrase, but Pope JP2 beat me to it haha)

Hope that explanation helps.

 

[GratefulDad]

I would say the 5000 year old, scholarly teachings of the Old Testament and the 2000 year old teachings of the New Testament show us God’s complete and committed, life giving love for His children and the effects of people rejecting His love as Whatevergirl points out.

Romans Ch1

16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel. It is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: for Jew first, and then Greek.
17
For in it is revealed the righteousness of God from faith to faith; as it is written, “The one who is righteous by faith will live.”
18
The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness.
19
For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them.
20
Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse;
21
for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.
22
While claiming to be wise, they became fools
23
and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.
24
Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies.
25
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,
27
and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.
28
And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.
29
They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips
30
and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents.
31
They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32
Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

 

[Ruthie]

Well, I’ve had close friends of all sexual orientations. I’ve only seen 4 long-term relationships among my homosexual friends, and they’re split down the middle. One gay male couple would appear as “normal” men to the outside world, ditto for one lesbian relationship. And one of each had definite gender roles in which the “butches” wore 3-piece suits and smoked pipes, and the “fems” wore aprons and were housekeepers by choice. So there!

I’ve always had lesbian friends, because I’ve never defined myself by what man I was with or what I wore. That’s the biggest difference I’ve noted. (Now that I’m married to “Mr. Right,” I’m happy to be “Mrs. Right.”)

Homosexual marriage offends me, both because it offends God, and because I think there is a better way to handle it. I think one should be able to declare someone a “legal next of kin.” That would take care of inheritance, insurance, and hospital visitation rights in one swell foop. (Yes, I can see some problems with it!) And it would cover long-term platonic roommates and best friends as well as homosexual couples.

Ruthie

 

[fannypanny]

although…its a little off the topic
i find ellen’s talk show pretty clean and holds more value as opposed to the Tyra Banks show(completely relative). I think it is because - ellen is trying to clean up the whole homesexual image.
however, like everyone - i am not for homesexuality and i do not support it.

 

[Exalt]

OP: As a gay person myself, I’m very happy with the tone of your post. Thank you for approaching this issue with sensitivity, with an interest in understanding the issues at hand - not condemning.

Full disclosure: I’m a gay person. I consider myself to be pretty liberal. As a gay person, I’ve obviously met a great deal of gay people myself. I’m sure there are probably certain patterns of gay people, but I’m afraid that most gay people I know come in all different shapes, sizes, mannerisms, personal history, preferences, etc. It’s very easy to take the examples that you know from your own private life or in the public life and try to see patterns in them - I understand that. However, the more I get to know different gay people, the more I understand that each one is pretty unique.

That being said, I too have observed this kind of “masculine”/'feminine" role in gay relationships. However, I think it’s important to note that Ellen, and other gay people - male and female - are simply acting the way that’s comfortable to them. She didn’t wear a dress because she’s not comfortable in a dress. She wore a pant-suit because that’s how she’s comfortable. I can’t speak to why she’s attracted to her partner, but I would suspect that it’s because she is attracted to the more feminine, “lipstick lesbian” type. So, in this instance, perhaps you are right, *for some gay people that, *they are indeed attracted to their “opposite”

but it got me to thinking that we as human beings, are really naturally drawn to “an opposite” in our relationships, from a gender standpoint.

However, I’ve found that to not be the case in many other gay people that I know. I have a friend, a programmer, who is a pretty masculine girl who’s attracted to other masculine girls! I have another couple that I know where both men are pretty masculine as well. Another couple, both men are rather “feminine.”

To me, I think you observation raises a scientific question. The better understanding of our sexual preference and behavior is definitely something we don’t understand yet - but I think science will be approaching the question soon.

But–in legal unions–should the Church stay separate from state laws?

As a non-believer and as a gay person, please stay out of state laws. I ask that you put your shoes in the place of one who does not believe in your religion and look at how we have been spoken about and treated in the public eye in regards to the questions you have brought up.

All that being said, if you’d like to address the philosophical or constitutional grounds for our objection to the making gay marriage or civil unions or equal protection rights illegal, please ask and I’ll start typing them up.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Homosexual marriage offends me, both because it offends God, and because I think there is a better way to handle it. I think one should be able to declare someone a “legal next of kin.” That would take care of inheritance, insurance, and hospital visitation rights in one swell foop. (Yes, I can see some problems with it!) And it would cover long-term platonic roommates and best friends as well as homosexual couples.

Ruthie

Smart. Also, when gay people split up, I think they should split up property, etc. as when heterosexual couples divorce. It should be a legal mandate.

 

[Thinks4Himself]

Hi Annn…I appreciate your opinion…and candor. I have often wondered why that is? In essence…why would a person want to display behaviors, that they don’t find appealing in the gender he/she mirrors (for lack of better word)? I don’t know if I’m asking that right…I hope you know what I’m trying to say. lol

You are assuing gay people are attracted to behaviors when in fact its GENDER they are attracted to, regardless of the behavior.

 

[PaulinVA]

As a non-believer and as a gay person, please stay out of state laws. I ask that you put your shoes in the place of one who does not believe in your religion and look at how we have been spoken about and treated in the public eye in regards to the questions you have brought up.

All that being said, if you’d like to address the philosophical or constitutional grounds for our objection to the making gay marriage or civil unions or equal protection rights illegal, please ask and I’ll start typing them up.

Exalt, the premise of your post is that people with religious convictions can not use those convictions when participating in the democratic process, but non-religious people can use any pop-culture or secular system of belief to arrive at their political views.

Does that make sense? Why discriminate against people of faith in that way?

We all arrive at our beliefs through different paths. Judging one of those paths (belief in God) as not suitable for participation in the democratic process is hateful and Godophobic.

Be honest - in the democratic process some group is *ALWAYS *imposing their views on other groups.

 

[whatevergirl]

OP: As a gay person myself, I’m very happy with the tone of your post. Thank you for approaching this issue with sensitivity, with an interest in understanding the issues at hand - not condemning.

Full disclosure: I’m a gay person. I consider myself to be pretty liberal. As a gay person, I’ve obviously met a great deal of gay people myself. I’m sure there are probably certain patterns of gay people, but I’m afraid that most gay people I know come in all different shapes, sizes, mannerisms, personal history, preferences, etc. It’s very easy to take the examples that you know from your own private life or in the public life and try to see patterns in them - I understand that. However, the more I get to know different gay people, the more I understand that each one is pretty unique.

That being said, I too have observed this kind of “masculine”/'feminine" role in gay relationships. However, I think it’s important to note that Ellen, and other gay people - male and female - are simply acting the way that’s comfortable to them. She didn’t wear a dress because she’s not comfortable in a dress. She wore a pant-suit because that’s how she’s comfortable. I can’t speak to why she’s attracted to her partner, but I would suspect that it’s because she is attracted to the more feminine, “lipstick lesbian” type. So, in this instance, perhaps you are right, *for some gay people that, *they are indeed attracted to their “opposite”

However, I’ve found that to not be the case in many other gay people that I know. I have a friend, a programmer, who is a pretty masculine girl who’s attracted to other masculine girls! I have another couple that I know where both men are pretty masculine as well. Another couple, both men are rather “feminine.”

To me, I think you observation raises a scientific question. The better understanding of our sexual preference and behavior is definitely something we don’t understand yet - but I think science will be approaching the question soon.

**
As a non-believer and as a gay person, please stay out of state laws. I ask that you put your shoes in the place of one who does not believe in your religion and look at how we have been spoken about and treated in the public eye in regards to the questions you have brought up. **

All that being said, if you’d like to address the philosophical or constitutional grounds for our objection to the making gay marriage or civil unions or equal protection rights illegal, please ask and I’ll start typing them up.

not sure why you’re addressing me like this? I didn’t attack you – I’m asking a question to gain insight…and opinion. Not sure why you posed this to me like this.

 

[Annn]

I highly recommend watching Ellen’s stand-up, too. It’s super clean compared to most other comedians.

 

[whatevergirl]

I highly recommend watching Ellen’s stand-up, too. It’s super clean compared to most other comedians.

I agree…she is one of my fave comedians.

 

[GratefulDad]

OP: As a gay person myself, I’m very happy with the tone of your post. Thank you for approaching this issue with sensitivity, with an interest in understanding the issues at hand - not condemning.

Full disclosure: I’m a gay person. I consider myself to be pretty liberal. As a gay person, I’ve obviously met a great deal of gay people myself. I’m sure there are probably certain patterns of gay people, but I’m afraid that most gay people I know come in all different shapes, sizes, mannerisms, personal history, preferences, etc. It’s very easy to take the examples that you know from your own private life or in the public life and try to see patterns in them - I understand that. However, the more I get to know different gay people, the more I understand that each one is pretty unique.

That being said, I too have observed this kind of “masculine”/'feminine" role in gay relationships. However, I think it’s important to note that Ellen, and other gay people - male and female - are simply acting the way that’s comfortable to them. She didn’t wear a dress because she’s not comfortable in a dress. She wore a pant-suit because that’s how she’s comfortable. I can’t speak to why she’s attracted to her partner, but I would suspect that it’s because she is attracted to the more feminine, “lipstick lesbian” type. So, in this instance, perhaps you are right, *for some gay people that, *they are indeed attracted to their “opposite”

However, I’ve found that to not be the case in many other gay people that I know. I have a friend, a programmer, who is a pretty masculine girl who’s attracted to other masculine girls! I have another couple that I know where both men are pretty masculine as well. Another couple, both men are rather “feminine.”

To me, I think you observation raises a scientific question. The better understanding of our sexual preference and behavior is definitely something we don’t understand yet - but I think science will be approaching the question soon.

As a non-believer and as a gay person, please stay out of state laws. I ask that you put your shoes in the place of one who does not believe in your religion and look at how we have been spoken about and treated in the public eye in regards to the questions you have brought up.

All that being said, if you’d like to address the philosophical or constitutional grounds for our objection to the making gay marriage or civil unions or equal protection rights illegal, please ask and I’ll start typing them up.

Exhault, just in case you missed my post earlier.

I would say the 5000 year old, scholarly teachings of the Old Testament and the 2000 year old teachings of the New Testament show us God’s complete and committed, life giving love for His children and the effects of people rejecting His love as Whatevergirl points out.

Romans Ch1

16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel. It is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: for Jew first, and then Greek.
17
For in it is revealed the righteousness of God from faith to faith; as it is written, “The one who is righteous by faith will live.”
18
The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness.
19
For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them.
20
Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse;
21
for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.
22
While claiming to be wise, they became fools
23
and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.
24
Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies.
25
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,
27
and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.
28
And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.
29
They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips
30
and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents.
31
They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32
Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

 

[Roamin_Xian]

As long as the Church maintains a ban on same-sex marriage, I don’t care what the secular state does. We live in a secular democratic republic, meaning that partisan religious views should not be imposed.

I’m a conservative, and I don’t care what consenting adults do in the privacy of the bedroom.

 

[whatevergirl]

As long as the Church maintains a ban on same-sex marriage, I don’t care what the secular state does. We live in a secular democratic republic, meaning that partisan religious views should not be imposed.

I’m a conservative, and I don’t care what consenting adults do in the privacy of the bedroom.

That’s a good way of putting it…as long as the Church maintains the ban, then that is mainly what concerns me. I can see how secular law changes like this, however, can affect us all…in particular children raised in environments where they will ask…why do i have two moms or dads…who’s my dad…can i meet my dad…

A dad is not a sperm donor, for the record. So, not sure how that dialogue would go…but whatever. I don’t think that kids are considered a whole lot in this country, and largely to blame is abortion. That is a secular law, that crosses religious lines…that disallows anyone to stand up for the innocent. If no one stands up for babies, in the womb…it’s a slippery slope to treating kids like property. So, people feel they have a ‘right’ to kids, like they have a right to a house. It’s sad.

So for me, who I feel the saddest for is the kids who are caught in the middle of these ‘laws’