The LGBT movement will self destruct

[Thorolfr]

I think it’s still there but is drowned out immensely by straights who are looking to be PC in order to impress their friends on Facebook feeds and go along with what’s cool

Which is why I advise GLBTQ persons to be very careful around such individuals.

There are also a lot of GLBTQ people who support gay marriage even if they aren’t interested in getting married themselves.

 

[SuperLuigi]

There are also a lot of GLBTQ people who support gay marriage even if they aren’t interested in getting married themselves.

Unfortunately, that is the case. However, so-called gay “marriage” cannot stand on its own merits.

 

[JonNC]

Thing to keep in mind is none of that would even be remotely possible if Christians would not betray their values.

Our values are not their values, and they hold the courts at this time, but I know what you mean; if Christians voted the faith (not talking theocracy here) then those judges would never have gotten on the bench

 

[PRmerger]

Our values are not their values, and they hold the courts at this time, but I know what you mean; if Christians voted the faith (not talking theocracy here) then those judges would never have gotten on the bench

I should like to remind everyone that Roe vs Wade was passed by a Supreme Court whose judges were very much in line with Catholic teaching.

 

[jinglebelle]

When I was in college, I knew a few homosexuals, and they said they disagreed with gay marriage because it was “playing hetero” - they wanted to be accepted based on who they are, and not because they’re copying off of the heteros (“marriage”).

I wonder what happened to that viewpoint lately.

Absolutely,for every partnership that mimics straights,there are 10 more who would never.Our obsession with what happens behind their bedroom door exceeds ours. They are probably equally repulsed by our behaviour.

 

[JonNC]

I should like to remind everyone that Roe vs Wade was passed by a Supreme Court whose judges were very much in line with Catholic teaching.

Really, PR? They had to dig into unknown portions of the 14th amendment, and infer into the thinking of its authors to find, 1) the soon to be born have no rights, 2) a woman’s right to end a pregnancy.
One doesn’t need religious faith to oppose Roe. All one has to do is look at the intent of the writers of the constitution and amendments.

Jon

 

[Rau]

Really, PR? They had to dig into unknown portions of the 14th amendment, and infer into the thinking of its authors to find, 1) the soon to be born have no rights, 2) a woman’s right to end a pregnancy.
One doesn’t need religious faith to oppose Roe. All one has to do is look at the intent of the writers of the constitution and amendments.

Jon

I agree, and take the view also that one does not need religious faith to recognise that SSM is off-beam.

Perhaps PR can elaborate on what conclusions she draws from her observation about the make-up of the bench that arrived at the Roe vs. Wade decision?

 

[PRmerger]

Really, PR? They had to dig into unknown portions of the 14th amendment, and infer into the thinking of its authors to find, 1) the soon to be born have no rights, 2) a woman’s right to end a pregnancy.
One doesn’t need religious faith to oppose Roe. All one has to do is look at the intent of the writers of the constitution and amendments.

Jon

Of course.

Point being made: judges who were already on the bench (conservative judges. Judges appointed by Republicans) are responsible for Roe.

 

[JonNC]

I agree, and take the view also that one does not need religious faith to recognise that SSM is off-beam.

Perhaps PR can elaborate on what conclusions she draws from her observation about the make-up of the bench that arrived at the Roe vs. Wade decision?

I look forward to her response, as well.
From a constitutional standpoint, one has to search hard to find embedded in the document a government power to establish and define, much less redefine marriage. Even defense of minors in this regard is a state issue (tenth amendment).

Jon

 

[PRmerger]

Perhaps PR can elaborate on what conclusions she draws from her observation about the make-up of the bench that arrived at the Roe vs. Wade decision?

I don’t think that having conservative judges in the future will necessarily influence the direction that the Court will take vis a vis SSM.

If we look at the Court’s demographics in the past, and the decisions that were made by Republican-appointed judges, we can see that they are the ones who made such horrific decisions for our country.

 

[utah_rose]

You think that most conservatives actually “accept” gay relationships? They don’t, of course. At most they might tolerate them.

tolerate (verb): allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference.

accept (verb): believe or come to recognize (an opinion, explanation, etc.) as valid or correct.

They should love the person whether they’re gay or not. As far as approving of gay relationships, no, because of the sin involved. Does not mean that you can’t be friends with them but it does mean not attending or celebrating their marriage if it comes to that. As Catholics we also wouldn’t be celebrating a marriage outside of the Church if both people were Cathollic or celebrating a marriage of a divorced couple remarrying. I wonder too why your using the word “conservative” in relation to this. Too bad, because I do have some liberal friends who also relate to these teachings.

Not sure what the Lutheran stance is to this, but I’ve found labeling people conservative or liberal can be destructive.

For example, I’m sure that St,Francis if Assisi would have been labeled as a liberal I his times and maybe Martin Luther, due to some if the excesses in our Church at the time, may have been considered a radical. Just saying.

 

[Thorolfr]

Not sure what the Lutheran stance is to this, but I’ve found labeling people conservative or liberal can be destructive.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America allows non-celibate gay men and women to serve as clergy and allows pastors with the backing of their congregation to perform same-sex marriages. Some congregations and pastors are more conservative and some are more liberal and some are mixed. But I doubt that there are any people who describe themselves as “conservative” who would support calling a gay person as their pastor or would want their pastor to perform gay marriages. I suspect that everyone who would support these things would tend to consider themselves “liberal”. So I still think that the conservative/liberal continuum is a somewhat useful concept to describe churches and the people in them.

Too bad, because I do have some liberal friends who also relate to these teachings.

But do you have any conservative friends who think that homosexuality is not a sin and support gay marriage?

 

[JonNC]

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America allows non-celibate gay men and women to serve as clergy and allows pastors with the backing of their congregation to perform same-sex marriages. Some congregations and pastors are more conservative and some are more liberal and some are mixed. But I doubt that there are any people who describe themselves as “conservative” who would support calling a gay person as their pastor or would want their pastor to perform gay marriages. I suspect that everyone who would support these things would tend to consider themselves “liberal”. So I still think that the conservative/liberal continuum is a somewhat useful concept to describe churches and the people in them.

But do you have any conservative friends who think that homosexuality is not a sin and support gay marriage?

When I was Lutheran, and now as an Anglican, I wouldn’t consider performing a SSM, or allowing for an unmarried non-celebrated pastor a conservative/liberal difference, but an orthodox/heterodox difference.

Jon

 

[Thorolfr]

When I was Lutheran, and now as an Anglican, I wouldn’t consider performing a SSM, or allowing for an unmarried non-celebrated pastor a conservative/liberal difference, but an orthodox/heterodox difference.

Jon

Who decides what is orthodox or heterodox? There is no infallible Magisterium among Lutherans to make pronouncement on orthodoxy and heresy, and so the decision on how to treat gay clergy and same-sex marriage was decided for the ELCA by the clergy and lay delegates to its churchwide assembly. That is how decisions are made in that denomination.

 

[PRmerger]

Who decides what is orthodox or heterodox? There is no infallible Magisterium among Lutherans to make pronouncement on orthodoxy and heresy,

Indeed.

And, in fact, when someone, a Lutheran, does not submit to the ecclesial authority, he is doing nothing more and nothing less than what Fr. Luther did to his ecclesial authority.

 

[PRmerger]

When I was Lutheran, and now as an Anglican,

What the what??

JonNC is no longer Luthern? (That’s my favorite nod to the midwestern pronunciation of Lutherans.)

Best wishes on your journey.

What prompted this move?

 

[JonNC]

Who decides what is orthodox or heterodox? There is no infallible Magisterium among Lutherans to make pronouncement on orthodoxy and heresy, and so the decision on how to treat gay clergy and same-sex marriage was decided for the ELCA by the clergy and lay delegates to its churchwide assembly. That is how decisions are made in that denomination.

Scripture. The confessions. The early councils. Where in scripture is sexual activity outside of wedlock approved. Where does one find SSM in scripture, contrary to Mark 10?

 

[Rau]

Scripture. The confessions. The early councils. Where in scripture is sexual activity outside of wedlock approved. Where does one find SSM in scripture, contrary to Mark 10?

To my knowledge, there is not a single instance of same sex sexual relations in Scripture presented in a favourable light. If one fervently believes that such relationships are good and contemplated by God, I don’t understand how one can resolve the absence of any positive mention in Scripture. Jesus was not unwilling to foment disquiet.

 

[JonNC]

Who decides what is orthodox or heterodox? There is no infallible Magisterium among Lutherans to make pronouncement on orthodoxy and heresy, and so the decision on how to treat gay clergy and same-sex marriage was decided for the ELCA by the clergy and lay delegates to its churchwide assembly. That is how decisions are made in that denomination.

Make sure, then, that you (ELCA) don’t claim sola scriptura, but instead only the eisegetics that allows for this conclusion. The idea that the synod can vote whatever it wants because they are no longer under the pope would make Luther spin in his grave.

Jon

 

[o_mlly]

I came across this May 2016 opinion piece predicting the demise of the LGBT movement… Here is an excerpt and a link to the article:

“…Lacking the wherewithal to create a healthy culture, the LGBT movement will dwindle and die. . . . ”

Gamaliel, using the same logic as Ms. Lu, instructed his Jewish leaders on how to handle this new Christian movement in ~ 35 AD:
So now I tell you, have nothing to do with these men, and let them go. For if this endeavor or this activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself (Acts 5:38).
Two thousand years and counting for Christianity. As for the LGBT movement in the USA – how long can less than 4% of the population maintain a re-writing of the social norms of the entire community? I suppose until our Supreme Court is repopulated with 5 non-creative judges and one of the states says enough. NC is likely to be that state.