Gay Marriage (A Different Perspective)

[SHW]

Fear? Of what? Redefining marriage is the issue. Men and women are biologically and psychologically compatible to conceive and raise the next generation of human beings. That is the natural, functional purpose of marriage; to provide a stable home for the young until they reach maturity.

You are so right! God defined marriage and He will not be ever be changing His definition. He is the judge; it’s best to find out how He will be judging if we desire to inherit eternal life! We already know His judgment on the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah for homosexual sins (brimstone and fire). The words “sodomy” and “Sodomite” define the sin/sinner of Sodom. (Genesis 19:1-10, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10) He will not be changing His mind on this since He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Hebrews 13:8) Jesus came in Person and He re-established God’s original purpose for marriage and it cannot ever be changed by anyone, not even the pope. (Matthew 19:3-9)

Marriage between a man and woman is both biologically and psychologically complementary and both genders are necessary for the continuation of the species of mankind in the manner ordained by God.

Marriage: One man and one woman united to each other in “one flesh,” joined together by God, until the death of one of the spouses.

Mark 10:6-12 "But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate. 10 In the house His disciples also asked Him again about the same matter. 11 So He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. 12 And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Notice that Jesus never tells them that they can remarry except for “unchastity” reasons? (Matthew 5:31-32) This “unchastity” is for so-called “marriages” which do not meet the criteria for lawful “marriage” in the first place, so they were not “real marriages” (marrying close biological relatives or marrying relatives of your deceased spouse from a previous marriage such as your father-in-law). The Mosaic law requiring brothers of deceased men to marry their surviving wives would have no force in the New Covenant either. (Matthew 22:23-30) Only death releases a person from the marriage covenant for possible remarriage; polygamy and remarriage after divorce are no longer lawful by Jesus’ definition of marriage.

Pax,
SHW

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

That depends on who is your bishop. But in any event, your message is brilliant and on the nose. Send your idea to Cardinal George, president of the bishops’ organization. He’s a bit weak-kneed, so send a copy to Archbishop Chaput, who is a warrior.

There’s no question our bishops are going to have to summon up some spine if we are to avoid extinction in this country. Praying it doesn’t get worse isn’t cutting it.

Extinction!? Are you being serious here? Us, homosexuals aren’t going to put the human race into extinction. The human race will continue to live on as long as there are a lot of heterosexuals having babies. Please don’t use that kind of insult. You didn’t say that homosexuals were going to put the human race to extinction but you were meaning that.

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

Pure and utter baloney.

Unquote

And that’s the way it should be, i.e., laws being made by the people through their representatives, and not by judges trying to force on society the academy’s latest cause célèbre.

You are baloney. If you must know same-sex marriage was legal 600 years ago. Here is some of the things about it:

Civil unions between male couples existed around 600 years ago in medieval Europe, a historian now says.

Historical evidence, including legal documents and gravesites, can be interpreted as supporting the prevalence of homosexual relationships hundreds of years ago, said Allan Tulchin of Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania.

If accurate, the results indicate socially sanctioned same-sex unions are nothing new, nor were they taboo in the past.

“Western family structures have been much more varied than many people today seem to realize," Tulchin writes in the September issue of the Journal of Modern History. "And Western legal systems have in the past made provisions for a variety of household structures.”

For example, he found legal contracts from late medieval France that referred to the term “affrèrement,” roughly translated as brotherment. Similar contracts existed elsewhere in Mediterranean Europe, Tulchin said.

In the contract, the “brothers” pledged to live together sharing “un pain, un vin, et une bourse,” (that’s French for one bread, one wine and one purse). The “one purse” referred to the idea that all of the couple’s goods became joint property. Like marriage contracts, the “brotherments” had to be sworn before a notary and witnesses, Tulchin explained.

The same type of legal contract of the time also could provide the foundation for a variety of non-nuclear households, including arrangements in which two or more biological brothers inherited the family home from their parents and would continue to live together, Tulchin said.

But non-relatives also used the contracts. In cases that involved single, unrelated men, Tulchin argues, these contracts provide “considerable evidence that the affrèrés were using affrèrements to formalize same-sex loving relationships."

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

You refer to ‘gay people’ to mean homosexuals. ‘Gay’ is not a noun and I’d like to see us recapture our language from those who have hi-jacked it. ‘Gay’ means happy and lighthearted. It does not mean homosexual. Can we say ‘gay’ when we mean gay and ‘homosexual’ when we mean homosexual? Spread the word. Thanks.

Gay did mean happy and lighthearted at one point in time. Hundreds of years ago it meant that. However now gay means homosexual. Look it up on wikipedia if you don’t believe me. I believe gay means homosexual it has lost its old meaning. The word happy means happiness. Why would we have that word happy if it didn’t mean happiness? Would you really want people these days to use the old version of the word gay? Like at a wedding or a prom have someone say, “Oh I am so gay.” or “This is is the gayiest night of my life.” Would you want people to use the term gay like that? Because according to you gay means happy and lighthearted.

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

I am not surprised by the attitudes I’ve seen on this thread about homosexuality. Its easy to judge those who are different than us, but it’s not right to be so righteously judgmental when “we” have never experienced or walked a mile in “their” shoes. There is a psychological component to homosexuality. Additionally, homosexuality has a genetic and environmental component as well. God does not hate homosexuals any more than any other person who fails to live up to the ideal.

People often use Paul’s writings as a pre-text to show how much God hates homosexuality. When properly understood within the culture of his day, men and women who were normally heterosexual were exchanging these relationships for unnatural ones, much like today’s problem in popular culture. Kids are being told go ahead and kiss boys and girls…it’s ok. That kind of indiscriminate sexual exploration is what Paul addressed, not those born with a genetic defect, those sexually molested or those suffering from a psychological condition. Common sense would dictate that those people truly afflicted would be incapable of living the ideal through no fault of their own will be held to a different standard. Its not our place to judge or discriminate against those who are different than most of us for those reasons. A person who steals a loaf of bread to feed their family (out of true need) would not be judged the same as a person who steals a bunch of clothes from a store just for the thrill of it even though both are equally wrong according to the law.

Frankly justifying homophobia and discriminating against people based on fear goes against the churches teachings. The church is not going to be “forced” to marry people they don’t want to. The wall of separation between church and state works both ways. The Catholic church can’t force the government to do anything it doesn’t want to and vice versa.

I believe the simple solution for the gay marriage issue is to simply get the state out of the marriage business. If the state no longer sanctions marriage by issuing licenses that grant automatic privileges, then it is up to their religious leaders who is married with a ceremony in a church and who is not. This would give the traditional marriage right to the church, while leaving the “right” of free association to those wishing to have alternative arrangements. For legal reasons everyone wishing to be responsible and obligated (legally) would go through the same civil process.

Wow. As a Catholic and a lesbian, I have to say I think you are right on about everything you said. The state should get out of the marriage of business. Gay marriage isn’t something people should have a vote on no one should be allowed to vote on gay marriage at all.

 

[Benadam]

Extinction!? Are you being serious here? Us, homosexuals aren’t going to put the human race into extinction. The human race will continue to live on as long as there are a lot of heterosexuals having babies. Please don’t use that kind of insult. You didn’t say that homosexuals were going to put the human race to extinction but you were meaning that.

Hi Amy, What is threatened, at least in our culture, is the marital bond as it’s foundational social structure. This is the feeling of extinction many respond out of. As the marital bond becomes weak it is replaced by the only other natural bond that can be the foundational structure of human society. In the absence of the marital bond the maternal bond becomes the foundational structure of human society as it already does other animal social structures.

It’s ironic because the bond that enables human freedom becomes replaced by a bond that no one is able to choose. All under the banner of human freedom!

God created man a self determined creature. When we choose to redefine the bond that enables that part of who we are to exist, we replace the bond that enables us to be trully free.

 

[mystagogia]

Gay did mean happy and lighthearted at one point in time. Hundreds of years ago it meant that. However now gay means homosexual. Look it up on wikipedia if you don’t believe me. I believe gay means homosexual it has lost its old meaning. The word happy means happiness. Why would we have that word happy if it didn’t mean happiness? Would you really want people these days to use the old version of the word gay? Like at a wedding or a prom have someone say, “Oh I am so gay.” or “This is is the gayiest night of my life.” Would you want people to use the term gay like that? Because according to you gay means happy and lighthearted.

Now this is interesting as a little microcosm of what’s at play here. Homosexuals appropriated the word “gay” and applied it to themselves. Now the original meaning is almost completely lost. It did not mean merely “happy”, but rather indicated a light-hearted, whimsical, cheerful mode of happiness. “Gay” closely approximated “merry”. If you do use the word in its original meaning that’s an anachronism.

The exact thing is at play here, with not just words this time, but with societal norms when it comes to the issue of gay marriage. What we, as a broad society of not just Catholics, think of as the institution of marriage will undergo the same fate as the word “gay”, and the original conceit of marriage, the current endangered norm, will become an anachronism. Gay marriage defeats the norm and marriage itself is not the societal institution it used to be. It becomes an arbitrary arrangement of convenience, nothing more. And of course with Catholics seen as the hidebound throwbacks from a bygone era who, the thinking goes, need to update their thinking to be brought in-line with the times.

 

[SHW]

Wow. As a Catholic and a lesbian, I have to say I think you are right on about everything you said. The state should get out of the marriage of business. Gay marriage isn’t something people should have a vote on no one should be allowed to vote on gay marriage at all.

Since you state that you are Catholic, but have same sex attraction, then according to Catholic teaching, in order to be a Catholic and to receive the Eucharist in the state of grace, you also believe that homosexual or lesbian “marriage” is impossible by definition and that sexual relations between women are also mortally sinful because the Church teaches that adulterers and fornicators and sodomites/sexual perverts do not inherit eternal life. The Church teaches that sexual unions are reserved for persons who fit God’s definition of marriage only.

I am wondering why this is even being discussed on a Catholic forum except to state orthodox magisterial Catholic teaching on the subject.

Ephesians 5:3-4 “But fornication and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is fitting among saints. 4 Let there be no filthiness, nor silly talk, nor levity, which are not fitting; but instead let there be thanksgiving.”

Those persons who commit adultery, fornication, and sexual perversion do not inherit eternal life.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

I feel sorry for all persons who have same sex attraction and I have friends who struggle with this issue. However, unmarried heterosexual persons are forbidden to have sexual relations also, and not every heterosexual person can find a suitable partner to marry so they, too, must remain celibate in order to inherit eternal life. I also have friends who want to marry but cannot find the “right” person, so they cannot have sexual relations either.

But, remember that Paul also warned and it is very true, (I’ve been married 30 years) that if you marry even according to God’s narrow definition of marriage, you will have troubles!

1 Corinthians 7:28 “But if you (man) marry, you do not sin, and if a girl marries she does not sin. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that.”

By God’s definition, marriage is an impossibility for homosexuals and lesbians. Call legalized cohabitation a “civil union.” “Gay” has already been changed to mean something not anything even close to its original meaning. “Rainbow” is being homosexualized right now which is really indecent and scandalous since it is the sign of God’s covenant with Noah as a reminder of His promise to not ever destroy the world’s population again by flood because of their sins!

Galatians 6:7 “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.”

 

[sedonaman]

You are baloney. If you must know same-sex marriage was legal 600 years ago. Here is some of the things about it:

Civil unions between male couples existed around 600 years ago in medieval Europe, a historian now says.

Historical evidence, including legal documents and gravesites, can be interpreted as supporting the prevalence of homosexual relationships hundreds of years ago, said Allan Tulchin of Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania.

If accurate, the results indicate socially sanctioned same-sex unions are nothing new, nor were they taboo in the past.

“Western family structures have been much more varied than many people today seem to realize," Tulchin writes in the September issue of the Journal of Modern History. "And Western legal systems have in the past made provisions for a variety of household structures.”

For example, he found legal contracts from late medieval France that referred to the term “affrèrement,” roughly translated as brotherment. Similar contracts existed elsewhere in Mediterranean Europe, Tulchin said.

In the contract, the “brothers” pledged to live together sharing “un pain, un vin, et une bourse,” (that’s French for one bread, one wine and one purse). The “one purse” referred to the idea that all of the couple’s goods became joint property. Like marriage contracts, the “brotherments” had to be sworn before a notary and witnesses, Tulchin explained.

The same type of legal contract of the time also could provide the foundation for a variety of non-nuclear households, including arrangements in which two or more biological brothers inherited the family home from their parents and would continue to live together, Tulchin said.

But non-relatives also used the contracts. In cases that involved single, unrelated men, Tulchin argues, these contracts provide “considerable evidence that the affrèrés were using affrèrements to formalize same-sex loving relationships."

You said, “The fathers of the constitution wanted equality for all no matter how different people are from each other”, which I challenged by providing a constitutional scholar’s statements. You completely changed the subject and argued something else … and provided only someone’s speculation at that.

 

[sedonaman]

You are baloney. If you must know same-sex marriage was legal 600 years ago. Here is [sic] some of the things about it:

Civil unions between male couples existed around 600 years ago in medieval Europe, a historian now says.

Historical evidence, including legal documents and gravesites, can be interpreted as supporting the prevalence of homosexual relationships hundreds of years ago, said Allan Tulchin of Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania.
…
If accurate, the results indicate socially sanctioned same-sex unions are nothing new, nor were they taboo in the past.

“Can be interpreted”? When we were kids we used to lie on the grass and look up at the sky and see all sorts of things in the clouds – horses, birds, fish, dragons, etc. According to this method of [non] proof, the things we saw in the clouds must be real because they “can be interpreted” as real.

I suppose that two men found buried side-by-side proves in your mind they were homosexuals, never mind they were brothers [in which case you can use that as proof of an **incestuous homosexual relationship and from that extrapolate its legality/social sanction].

The imagination is a wondrous tool for those trying to rationalize what they know is wrong. Has Tulchin produced any documents [e.g., marriage records, courthouse logs, or law books of the time to prove his theory? I kinda doubt it because of his use of terms like “can be interpreted” and “if accurate”.

Sodomy was legal and socially sanctioned in Sodom and Gomorrah, but that didn’t make it right.

But back to what the founding fathers intended.

You claim they wanted people to be treated the same no matter how different they were. If I’m “baloney”, how do you explain the following?

American Memory from the Library of Congress)]From The Writings of George Washington From the Original Manuscript Sources, 1745-1799; John C. Fitzpatrick, Editor:

“Head Quarters, V. Forge, Saturday, March 14, 1778: At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778) Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false Accounts, found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and do sentence him to be dismiss’d the service with Infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return; The Drummers and Fifers to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose” Emphasis in the original].
theamericanview.com/index.php?id=761

No need to speculate over what the words plainly say by using qualifiers like “can be interpreted” and “if accurate”.

Face it. If you have to justify it, you know it’s wrong, and like Tulchin, you are trying to re-write history to justify what you know is wrong.

 

[FromTheCrossroa]

Wow. As a Catholic and a lesbian, I have to say I think you are right on about everything you said. The state should get out of the marriage of business. Gay marriage isn’t something people should have a vote on no one should be allowed to vote on gay marriage at all.

Actually I’m a heterosexual male and married. Having said that, I do know quite a few people who are gay. My position doesn’t have anything to do with me wishing they are going to heaven. I believe strongly that the church is right. But, I also believe that God himself is a fair and honest judge of the heart. As much as the Bible is used to draw lines in the sand, Christ himself was silent on the issue. I believe that when we get to heaven, we will again be taught by the master that while our hearts were in the right place, sometimes we let our religious black and white nature treat the “least of these” in a very non Christ like manner.

The religious leaders of his day were often frustrated by his apparent subjectivity and seeming disregard for the rules and laws of his faith. Christ just applied the law and rules fairly and individually. Something the “church” may not ever be able to do but we certainly should.

The most interesting conversations I’ve had about homosexuality were with some close friends going through hell because they would give anything to be like everyone else. They tried to “choose” heterosexuality and they couldn’t. They want to be like everyone else but they can no better choose to be straight than most of us could choose to be gay. Sure some can, and some can be celibate. Not everyone can. At the end of the day, God created everyone of us and I believe our “judgment” as it were will be as individual as we are.

God loves “them” so I love them. You do not treat people you “love” with contempt.

 

[ladybri77]

Actually I’m a heterosexual male and married. Having said that, I do know quite a few people who are gay. My position doesn’t have anything to do with me wishing they are going to heaven. I believe strongly that the church is right. But, I also believe that God himself is a fair and honest judge of the heart. As much as the Bible is used to draw lines in the sand, Christ himself was silent on the issue. I believe that when we get to heaven, we will again be taught by the master that while our hearts were in the right place, sometimes we let our religious black and white nature treat the “least of these” in a very non Christ like manner.

The religious leaders of his day were often frustrated by his apparent subjectivity and seeming disregard for the rules and laws of his faith. Christ just applied the law and rules fairly and individually. Something the “church” may not ever be able to do but we certainly should.

The most interesting conversations I’ve had about homosexuality were with some close friends going through hell because they would give anything to be like everyone else. They tried to “choose” heterosexuality and they couldn’t. They want to be like everyone else but they can no better choose to be straight than most of us could choose to be gay. Sure some can, and some can be celibate. Not everyone can. At the end of the day, God created everyone of us and I believe our “judgment” as it were will be as individual as we are.

God loves “them” so I love them. You do not treat people you “love” with contempt.

I would not want to treat anyone I love with contempt, and hopefully I never will. As black and white as sin is, there is a way to tell the truth in a loving manner. I would pray that I do this every time I talk to a person with SSA. Yes, God is the true judge of people, that is why we shouldn’t judge one another, or as scripture says, we will be judged. However, it is right to judge right from wrong. Lawmakers judged right from wrong when they made certain laws. Laws are made for our own good. So are God’s laws. If we follow them, they keep us from destruction and we will live!

God loves us so much He told us what was sin and what wasn’t for our own good and because He wants us to live forever with Him. He doesn’t want to see a single one destroyed. Who in their right mind would want to die spiritually? I would hope that we would act in such a loving way as to draw all people to Jesus, gay and otherwise, but we must tell them the Truth, and to do so is very loving indeed.

 

[SHW]

As much as the Bible is used to draw lines in the sand, Christ himself was silent on the issue. I believe that when we get to heaven, we will again be taught by the master that while our hearts were in the right place, sometimes we let our religious black and white nature treat the “least of these” in a very non Christ like manner.

Actually, Jesus was not silent on the subject. He spoke through His Church; not everything that Jesus taught was written in Scripture. (Luke 10:16)

John 21:25 “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”

1 Corinthians 14:37 “If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.”

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

 

[HeWillProvide]

*Additionally, homosexuality has a genetic and environmental component as well. God does not hate homosexuals any more than any other person who fails to live up to the ideal. *

Actually, the APA has revised its previous claims regarding the “gay gene” fantasy:

worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=97940

 

[edwest2]

Actually I’m a heterosexual male and married. Having said that, I do know quite a few people who are gay. My position doesn’t have anything to do with me wishing they are going to heaven. I believe strongly that the church is right. But, I also believe that God himself is a fair and honest judge of the heart. As much as the Bible is used to draw lines in the sand, Christ himself was silent on the issue. I believe that when we get to heaven, we will again be taught by the master that while our hearts were in the right place, sometimes we let our religious black and white nature treat the “least of these” in a very non Christ like manner.

The religious leaders of his day were often frustrated by his apparent subjectivity and seeming disregard for the rules and laws of his faith. Christ just applied the law and rules fairly and individually. Something the “church” may not ever be able to do but we certainly should.

The most interesting conversations I’ve had about homosexuality were with some close friends going through hell because they would give anything to be like everyone else. They tried to “choose” heterosexuality and they couldn’t. They want to be like everyone else but they can no better choose to be straight than most of us could choose to be gay. Sure some can, and some can be celibate. Not everyone can. At the end of the day, God created everyone of us and I believe our “judgment” as it were will be as individual as we are.

God loves “them” so I love them. You do not treat people you “love” with contempt.

Have you read the Church’s clear teaching on this subject? Do you know that the same Jesus Christ is the God of both the Old and New Testament? What did he say to those who stoned the prophets? Moses wrote concerning Him.

I don’t believe anyone here wants to judge gay people. What is at issue is the desire of some to be married in full, 100% equivalence to heterosexual married couples.

What that means is simply this: they want gay sex to be approved by the greater society at large. However, this is not just about adults, kids in Massachussetts are being forced by the State to read gay story books in school. The parents cannot opt out. Consider that these kids are at an age where their own mental and physical growth is in their early stages.

I struggle with opposite sex attraction. It is difficult for me to be celibate. But ask yourself: who decides when you have sex? Who decides for each individual, gay or straight?

You’re right, we will all be judged as individuals. We will all stand before the same Jesus Christ to give an account. The Church gives us the Sacrament of Reconciliation when we fall and our’s is a God of infinite mercy and love toward us.

Respectfully, I ask you to consider how much support addicted people need. The group meetings, the words of encouragement. And the years it can take to overcome. For those who say I can’t help it, including myself sometimes, the honest answer is: who is in control? Certainly not someone else. I am responsible.

Will anything be solved by Gay Marriage? I don’t think so. The Church has given its clear reasons. And then there is the coming Beyond Gay Marriage. This means multiple conjugal partners. In Europe already, consensual incest. In the US, individuals who abuse animals, identifying themselves as ‘zoos,’ are talking about their rights.

I grew up in a period of time where people lived out their faith daily. Pornography was rare and hard to get. Television and most movies portrayed stories compatible with Christianity. Now, we live in a world where sex has become detached from love, where young couples cohabitate and fornicate, or just have multiple ‘sex partners.’ New cases of sexually transmitted diseases are at epidemic proportions, and there are now more STDs than there were in 1960.

I know homosexual people. I knew a young lady who was bisexual until she gave her life to Christ.

We just have to be honest with ourselves.

Peace,
Ed

 

[SHW]

*Additionally, homosexuality has a genetic and environmental component as well. God does not hate homosexuals any more than any other person who fails to live up to the ideal. *

God does not hate persons with same sex attraction. God loves His creation. However, if they engage in sexual sin and do not repent before death, then they will not inherit eternal life. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Homosexual acts and other unnatural sexual acts reap the wrath of God. Any person who teaches otherwise will also be punished.

Isaiah 5:20 “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”

2 Timothy 2:19 “Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity.”

Ecclesiastes 12:14 “For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.”

John 5:28-29 “Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.”

 

[ladybri77]

Actually, Jesus was not silent on the subject. He spoke through His Church; not everything that Jesus taught was written in Scripture. (Luke 10:16)

John 21:25 “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”

1 Corinthians 14:37 “If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.”

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

There are many verses in the bible teaching that homosexuality is a sin. Like I said in my prior post, God gives us these commandments because He “loves” us and doesn’t want to see anyone perish.

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

I grew up in a period of time where people lived out their faith daily. Pornography was rare and hard to get. Television and most movies portrayed stories compatible with Christianity. Now, we live in a world where sex has become detached from love, where young couples cohabitate and fornicate, or just have multiple ‘sex partners.’ New cases of sexually transmitted diseases are at epidemic proportions, and there are now more STDs than there were in 1960.

Well first of all I would like to defend that statement. You seem like a very kind and intelligent guy Ed, however I would just like to correct what you had said. I wasn’t born in 1960 so I don’t know what the STDs rate was back then. But times have changed now for the gay community. Lesbians have a lower percentage rate of catching STDs and gay men can take a pill to lower their risks of catching it. STDs isn’t something that is always in the gay community people always seem to think all STDs are in the gay community. Heterosexual couples can catch STDs. Drug addicts can catch HIV by sharing needles. There are many ways to catch STDs and HIV. What if there are some homosexuals who don’t have a religion? Would God cast them to hell? Homosexuals don’t come out to their family or friends for years because of fear. I have come out to my friends and my sister they are all supportive of me and don’t treat me any different than a straight person. However I HAVEN’T come out to my parents yet because I am scared of their reaction.

Peace,

Amy

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Yeah the sexual perverts you know who they are right? About 97% of sexual perverts in this country are straight people the rest 3% are homosexuals. Homosexuality isn’t one of the ten commandments and if it was I would be going to church every Sunday. Drunks can’t get into God’s kingdom? I find that personal because my grandfather was an alcoholic.

Peace,

Amy

 

[edwest2]

I grew up in a period of time where people lived out their faith daily. Pornography was rare and hard to get. Television and most movies portrayed stories compatible with Christianity. Now, we live in a world where sex has become detached from love, where young couples cohabitate and fornicate, or just have multiple ‘sex partners.’ New cases of sexually transmitted diseases are at epidemic proportions, and there are now more STDs than there were in 1960.

Well first of all I would like to defend that statement. You seem like a very kind and intelligent guy Ed, however I would just like to correct what you had said. I wasn’t born in 1960 so I don’t know what the STDs rate was back then. But times have changed now for the gay community. Lesbians have a lower percentage rate of catching STDs and gay men can take a pill to lower their risks of catching it. STDs isn’t something that is always in the gay community people always seem to think all STDs are in the gay community. Heterosexual couples can catch STDs. Drug addicts can catch HIV by sharing needles. There are many ways to catch STDs and HIV. What if there are some homosexuals who don’t have a religion? Would God cast them to hell? Homosexuals don’t come out to their family or friends for years because of fear. I have come out to my friends and my sister they are all supportive of me and don’t treat me any different than a straight person. However I HAVEN’T come out to my parents yet because I am scared of their reaction.

Peace,

Amy

Thank you for your support Amy. Have you investigated the way HIV/AIDS was handled by the gay community when it began? I read gay web sites, and I read articles from the time period as HIV/AIDS was being publicized. The gay community did not handle that particular problem very well.

I don’t believe God casts people into hell who don’t know Him. Our goal, as Catholics, is to evangelize the whole world.

On the issue of coming out to your parents I cannot comment.

Regarding STDs, I was talking about mostly straight people, knowing the LGBT community is a smaller part of the population. I listened to a doctor on Catholic Radio talking about the thousands of new cases reported daily in the United States. My point is, if straight people are going to have multiple sex partners, the odds of getting an STD go up. The published reports of multiple sex partners among gay men are similar.

I had no trouble treating my (formerly) bisexual lady friend as a regular person.

Peace,
Ed