B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
I’m not of age to vote yet. One year off.
Besides, I stand by my statement… either way, no matter who’s president, we’re in the toilet. 
- Status
Besides, I stand by my statement… either way, no matter who’s president, we’re in the toilet.
W
wabrams
Guest
Any examples or just random generalizations?
X
xopher
Guest
Hey everybody, I’m relatively new to the forum. I joined a while back but haven’t been on in a long time and I’m really tired but can’t sleep because a number of issues just won’t leave my mind. So I hope I’m posting this in the right place.
I have friends who are gay and care for them very much. I know that they are a real people with very real feelings. I also believe that the very idea of “gay” marriage is a complete farce. There’s no such thing. But on a political level, in order to keep a democracy and to keep morale up, do we not need to maintain an equal treatment of all citizens, especially now that homosexuals are seen as homosexual instead of citizens who are gay? I’m not preaching this, I’m asking. I don’t know which way to go on the issue. My concern is for the stability of the nation. But am I trading in a freedom for a security by seeing things that way?
In my minds eye, things would be best if we all could have the freedom to live our lives as we each see fit, yet as soon as I say that I know that there are many on “the other side” who are not really wanting this. Many on the other side want to have an entirely gay world, or an entirely matriarchal society, or an entirely agnostic society. I’m a deep thinker, and it has always been in me to find ways to accomodate every body. But as much as it bothers me to say so, I just can’t figure out a way to get past this. I don’t understand why there is this sudden “explosion” of people, including youger celebrities (ones that the youger kids look up to), who seem to be “coming out”.
On the oen hand, I can see a civil war resulting (after so long a time naturally) from “religion” alledgedly “opressing” peoples “rights”. On the other hand, we seem to be growing more and more motivated by our passions with each new generation. This also scares me, because I can see us as a nation falling from the inside out, just as Rome did, because the people just get lazy, currupt, and greedy. And ironically, it seems that greed and laziness can be a great way to trick people into slowly accepting a socialistic government.
I don’t know what to do really. These just seem like very uncertain times. Is this new, or has politics always been this way and I just didn’t pay enough attention?
Thanx!
I have friends who are gay and care for them very much. I know that they are a real people with very real feelings. I also believe that the very idea of “gay” marriage is a complete farce. There’s no such thing. But on a political level, in order to keep a democracy and to keep morale up, do we not need to maintain an equal treatment of all citizens, especially now that homosexuals are seen as homosexual instead of citizens who are gay? I’m not preaching this, I’m asking. I don’t know which way to go on the issue. My concern is for the stability of the nation. But am I trading in a freedom for a security by seeing things that way?
In my minds eye, things would be best if we all could have the freedom to live our lives as we each see fit, yet as soon as I say that I know that there are many on “the other side” who are not really wanting this. Many on the other side want to have an entirely gay world, or an entirely matriarchal society, or an entirely agnostic society. I’m a deep thinker, and it has always been in me to find ways to accomodate every body. But as much as it bothers me to say so, I just can’t figure out a way to get past this. I don’t understand why there is this sudden “explosion” of people, including youger celebrities (ones that the youger kids look up to), who seem to be “coming out”.
On the oen hand, I can see a civil war resulting (after so long a time naturally) from “religion” alledgedly “opressing” peoples “rights”. On the other hand, we seem to be growing more and more motivated by our passions with each new generation. This also scares me, because I can see us as a nation falling from the inside out, just as Rome did, because the people just get lazy, currupt, and greedy. And ironically, it seems that greed and laziness can be a great way to trick people into slowly accepting a socialistic government.
I don’t know what to do really. These just seem like very uncertain times. Is this new, or has politics always been this way and I just didn’t pay enough attention?
Thanx!
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
Welcome back.
OK I am going to get slammed for this but here goes. I am going to change the word gay to murderer(no I don’t equate one with the other just an example) or you can put abortion or any other of the seven deadly sins in the place of the word gay.
B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
A little bit of both.
One example could Global Warming… but not many people believe in that, so an explanation would be futile.
A
Apologist78
Guest
The only way for a democracy to work is if the democracy is a MORAL one, and one which is not relativistic. When anything goes and truth becomes relative, it is not long before society eventually falls apart and the government with it. When people begin to be governed by their passions rather then truth and reason, society breaks down and the governement goes with it. Look at what happened to Rome.
Passions are beginning to rule humanity, rather then truth and reason. That is not a good thing. Just becasue someone feels a certain way, or has a passion does not mean society has to automatically endorse it. Again remember Rome.
Homosexuals are free to be homosexual. They are also to be treated with respect as fellow human beings. None of this however implies that society is required to endorse their feelings or passions.
You are confusing “Freedom” with “License.” Freedom is not getting to live as you want, but to live in accord with your purpose. What you are asking for is license. License is the ability to live as you please. To that I say go right head. People may live as they please. However the minnute they start trying to impose it on society, or infringe on everyone else that is when their needs to be restrictions.
The sacred instituion of marriage is NOT simply two very best excellent friends who come together and what to have their warm fuzzies walking on air feelings condified in some sort of contract. This goes equally for homosexuals OR heterosexuals.
The purpose of marriage is to harness the power of the male into an instittution whereby children and life are created. That is from a natural perspective. One cannot take marriage and define it any way they want to, simply becasue they feel they should be allowed to do so. Marriage IS what it IS, and always has been: One man, and one women. That is not intolerant, biggoted, or closed minded, that is FACT. Definitions cannot be changed just becasue they happen to be inconvienient for some people.
Why do we have to “accomodate every body?” We must tolerate every body, indeed, but why do we have to “accomodate” them? It is one thing to give people the lisence to live as they please, quite another for society as a whole to endorse it. Most supporers of prop 8 are not looking to restrict the behavior of homosexuals. They are quite free to live what they believe fits their personhood. They are quite free to express what they believe is love. They are quite free to have what they believe is a loving relationship, etc. No one desires to stop them, or restrict them. What they DO seek is a definition of what constitutes a marriage, so that activist judges cannot take it upon themselves to go around changing the definition to suit themselves or their personal agendas. If the courts had stayed out of this to begin with, we would not even be talking about prop 8!
Opressing people’s rights? People do not have a right to something which by definition does not exist! If prop 8 restricts rights, it restricts mine too! Hetero-sexuals cannot marry those of the same sex either, and homosexuals are not being forbidden marriage. What is invalid is a union of two people of the same sex. Homosexuals are just as free to marry as is everyone, should they choose to exercise their right. If they choose not to exercise that right, that is their business. But marriage cannot be redefined becasue they choose not to exercise their right to marry someone of the oppisite sex.
EXACTELY! You got it!
It scares me too. People more and more are being governed by passions, rather then truth, and reason.
B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
Let’s be honest. You can insert any word in place of “gay”, such as Catholic, worshipper, Satanist or parent.
X
xopher
Guest
Wow, thank you for the replies 
I just have strong feelings for people. Sometimes my desire to show love to people competes with my calling to show loving discipline.
I agree that there’s no such thing as “gay” marriage. I make music and I’ve been trying to appeal to people’s senses and emmotions for so long that sometimes I feel a need to remind myself, even in my music, of the basic ideas that I stand for. It’s easy to get out there trying to be on the local pop charts and forget why I’m doing what I do. I want to inspire people to go higher and do better, you know, onward and upward.
Plus it REALLY hurts when someone’s trying to make you out to be hateful. That’s the last thing I want to be.
I guess I’m also trying to define my persona as a musician, especially since I’m trying to be on the mainstream and not quite so much on the contemporary Christian curcuit like I used to want to be as a protestant. It’s not an easy road to walk, but I feel it’s my calling none the less.
Oh well. Here goes.
I just have strong feelings for people. Sometimes my desire to show love to people competes with my calling to show loving discipline.I agree that there’s no such thing as “gay” marriage. I make music and I’ve been trying to appeal to people’s senses and emmotions for so long that sometimes I feel a need to remind myself, even in my music, of the basic ideas that I stand for. It’s easy to get out there trying to be on the local pop charts and forget why I’m doing what I do. I want to inspire people to go higher and do better, you know, onward and upward.
Plus it REALLY hurts when someone’s trying to make you out to be hateful. That’s the last thing I want to be.
I guess I’m also trying to define my persona as a musician, especially since I’m trying to be on the mainstream and not quite so much on the contemporary Christian curcuit like I used to want to be as a protestant. It’s not an easy road to walk, but I feel it’s my calling none the less.
Oh well. Here goes.
E
estesbob
Guest
You could -but it woudnt make the excellent point Kathleen’s post did.She was poinitng out the fallacy of accepting sinful behavior because someone is a freind or family member.Let’s be honest. You can insert any word in place of “gay”, such as Catholic, worshipper, Satanist or parent.
B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
But it’s a horrible point, and this time, I’m saying it as a human being capable of understanding and reason. Something in the pit of my heart and soul tells me even God knew that wasn’t an excellent point.
A
AmyS
Guest
You make blanket statements for liberalism, likeI do not believe abortion is an equal right. Not at all. I see that horrid act as a special right that we do *not *need!Just because I seem liberal, don’t *ever *think I am pro-choice because I’m not.
I wonder where you get the idea that this progress was because of liberals? What about the women suffragist who weren’t liberal by the way are were pro-life. Or Abraham Lincoln (Republican) and Martin Luther King (Republican)… The Revolution was not started by liberals. Where do you get that? When it comes down to it though, liberals tend to be pro-abortion rights…
B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
Ugh!! I may be a form of a liberal, but, for the Love of God, I am NOT pro-choice! I’ve always hated the idea of abortion! It’s just so… illogical and unreasonable!
A
AmyS
Guest
That is wonderful… I love that! But, I was pointing out you can’t say because of liberalism this happened and not understand that because of liberalism abortion is what it is… I believe you are pro-life.Ugh!! I may be a form of a liberal, but, for the Love of God, I am NOT pro-choice! I’ve always hated the idea of abortion! It’s just so… illogical and unreasonable!
B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
Well, let’s put it this way: Because of both liberalism and conservativism (or however you spell it), there are so many disagreements between the two that we go astray from the problems that really matter.
Liberalism of certain times (such as times of slavery or women’s suffrage) were, thankfully, decent. I do, however, gladly acknowledge that conservatives have their moments in History. Don’t consider that I think liberalism is the star of History… even though differences between people, their societies, and state of mind have obviously shaped the world it is today.
A
AmyS
Guest
You are right there are issues on both ends, you can’t make liberalism or conservatism the star of History, but people will try. I don’t know if I would classify liberalism with decent. But, maybe I am misunderstanding what you mean by liberalism and conservatisim.
E
estesbob
Guest
I assume that means you did not vote for Obama?Ugh!! I may be a form of a liberal, but, for the Love of God, I am NOT pro-choice! I’ve always hated the idea of abortion! It’s just so… illogical and unreasonable!
B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
I am not of age.
B
Blade_and_Blood
Guest
I mean liberalism as “being open to new ideas”… that can be both good or bad.
Conservatvism, I feel, is very close-minded and favors the status quo.
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hello Benedictus,
Thus saith the LORD:
“Be fruitful and Multiply”
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”
Jesus curses a fig tree because it bore no fruit:
Mat 21:19 And seeing a fig tree by the wayside he went to it, and found nothing on it but leaves only. And he said to it, “May no fruit ever come from you again!” And the fig tree withered at once.
The Bible says
Lev 20:13 ** If a man lies with a male as with a woman**, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them.
The purpose of a married couple is to procreate, Gay marriage is an abomination to the Lord. It creates nothing.
Love the person hate the sin!
Gues by your standards there is nothing wrong with a man who ies with his daughter?
However the Bible states:
Lev 20:12 And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood [shall be] upon them
What about beastiality? that doesn’t hurt anyone?
Lev 20:15 And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast.
Lev 20:16 If a woman approaches any beast and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the beast; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them
The biblical problem with gay relationship is Man is made in the image of God (Gen 1:27). In male to male sex, the male(s) becomes less than a man. one becomes a beast, the other less than a man,
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
I have cousins. an aunt or two, an Uncle who live a gay life style, and some who hide it, I still love them, but never have approved of their gay living even before my conversion.
God Bless,
In Christian Love,
Johnnie o
J
JLSamuel818
Guest
- Status