What do you think of homosexuality?

[Shining Star]

all old testament.

nothing to do with what Christianity is. You're looking to crucify the Jews.

still pretty hillarious

Not exactly true. It still has everything to do with Christianity, you read the entire bible. The only thing you can argue is that Jesus repealed Levitican law when he talked about eating pork. But that is debatable, especially when Leviticus is still quoted by many of the radicals.

you make me lol

Says you. But seeing as it's not strange to see me inside a church on sunday, and that I'm moderately well versed in theology, then I would say my opinion is valid.

^agreed

[SASSZAIN]

I agree, your opinion is valid.

[Revy the two hands]

We gave wemon and blacks rights, so why not homsexuals? They are people just the same as you an I they just choose to live and love diffrent.

I hate it when people compare the homosexual debate to a race situation. GAY PEOPLE AREN'T A RACE .

Because of my beliefs I don't agree with homosexuality, but I don't hate anyone who is homosexual either. Men are for women and women are for men. That is all.

[Pennyroyal Tea]

We gave wemon and blacks rights, so why not homsexuals? They are people just the same as you an I they just choose to live and love diffrent.

I hate it when people compare the homosexual debate to a race situation. GAY PEOPLE AREN'T A RACE .

Because of my beliefs I don't agree with homosexuality, but I don't hate anyone who is homosexual either. Men are for women and women are for men. That is all.

I see the comparison as a right one. Sure they're different, but the struggles are the same. The people who disagree with homosexual marriage disagreed with interracial marriage. They used the same excuses. People don't choose the way they're wired. I couldn't force myself to be gay any more than they could force themselves to be straight. It's not what you agree or disagree with. They deserve the right to love, and we do not have the right to stop them from marrying.

[Revy the two hands]

We gave wemon and blacks rights, so why not homsexuals? They are people just the same as you an I they just choose to live and love diffrent.

I hate it when people compare the homosexual debate to a race situation. GAY PEOPLE AREN'T A RACE .

Because of my beliefs I don't agree with homosexuality, but I don't hate anyone who is homosexual either. Men are for women and women are for men. That is all.

I see the comparison as a right one. Sure they're different, but the struggles are the same. The people who disagree with homosexual marriage disagreed with interracial marriage. They used the same excuses. People don't choose the way they're wired. I couldn't force myself to be gay any more than they could force themselves to be straight. It's not what you agree or disagree with. They deserve the right to love, and we do not have the right to stop them from marrying.

Well I disagree with homosexual marriage but I never disagreed with interracial marriage, so you really shouldn't generalize. And I see no comparisons whatsoever with racism, to the extent of such events like the Holocaust, where people were exterminated just because they looked different. But yes, it is their business what they do, but in a religious perspective marriage is between a man and woman, homosexuals should make their own ceremonies if they want to be joined like marriage allows

[Pennyroyal Tea]

We gave wemon and blacks rights, so why not homsexuals? They are people just the same as you an I they just choose to live and love diffrent.

I hate it when people compare the homosexual debate to a race situation. GAY PEOPLE AREN'T A RACE .

Because of my beliefs I don't agree with homosexuality, but I don't hate anyone who is homosexual either. Men are for women and women are for men. That is all.

I see the comparison as a right one. Sure they're different, but the struggles are the same. The people who disagree with homosexual marriage disagreed with interracial marriage. They used the same excuses. People don't choose the way they're wired. I couldn't force myself to be gay any more than they could force themselves to be straight. It's not what you agree or disagree with. They deserve the right to love, and we do not have the right to stop them from marrying.

Well I disagree with homosexual marriage but I never disagreed with interracial marriage, so you really shouldn't generalize. And I see no comparisons whatsoever with racism, to the extent of such events like the Holocaust, where people were exterminated just because they looked different. But yes, it is their business what they do, but in a religious perspective marriage is between a man and woman, homosexuals should make their own ceremonies if they want to be joined like marriage allows

Protip: gays were executed during the holocaust as well. Also, in the United States there is a separation of church and state. Two marriage is not a christian institution. The Christians adopted it from the Jews who adopted it from the Pagans.

Secondly, I wasn't generalizing, I was speaking generally. Learn the difference.

[Father Fintan Stack]

We're all goin' to Heaven lads, whaaaaahhhheeeeyyyyy.

[Revy the two hands]

I hate it when people compare the homosexual debate to a race situation. GAY PEOPLE AREN'T A RACE .

Because of my beliefs I don't agree with homosexuality, but I don't hate anyone who is homosexual either. Men are for women and women are for men. That is all.

I see the comparison as a right one. Sure they're different, but the struggles are the same. The people who disagree with homosexual marriage disagreed with interracial marriage. They used the same excuses. People don't choose the way they're wired. I couldn't force myself to be gay any more than they could force themselves to be straight. It's not what you agree or disagree with. They deserve the right to love, and we do not have the right to stop them from marrying.

Well I disagree with homosexual marriage but I never disagreed with interracial marriage, so you really shouldn't generalize. And I see no comparisons whatsoever with racism, to the extent of such events like the Holocaust, where people were exterminated just because they looked different. But yes, it is their business what they do, but in a religious perspective marriage is between a man and woman, homosexuals should make their own ceremonies if they want to be joined like marriage allows

Protip: gays were executed during the holocaust as well. Also, in the United States there is a separation of church and state. Two marriage is not a christian institution. The Christians adopted it from the Jews who adopted it from the Pagans.

Secondly, I wasn't generalizing, I was speaking generally. Learn the difference.

Regardless of separation of church and state, as I said there is still a religious connotation to marriage. You said in another post somewhere that you are christian right? Then wouldn't you agree that marriage first and foremost actually came from God? And did not God create eve for adam?

And uh there is no difference, you still decided to make those people inclusive to your argument. Perhaps you should have stated that and made yourself clear

[Pennyroyal Tea]

I see the comparison as a right one. Sure they're different, but the struggles are the same. The people who disagree with homosexual marriage disagreed with interracial marriage. They used the same excuses. People don't choose the way they're wired. I couldn't force myself to be gay any more than they could force themselves to be straight. It's not what you agree or disagree with. They deserve the right to love, and we do not have the right to stop them from marrying.

Well I disagree with homosexual marriage but I never disagreed with interracial marriage, so you really shouldn't generalize. And I see no comparisons whatsoever with racism, to the extent of such events like the Holocaust, where people were exterminated just because they looked different. But yes, it is their business what they do, but in a religious perspective marriage is between a man and woman, homosexuals should make their own ceremonies if they want to be joined like marriage allows

Protip: gays were executed during the holocaust as well. Also, in the United States there is a separation of church and state. Two marriage is not a christian institution. The Christians adopted it from the Jews who adopted it from the Pagans.

Secondly, I wasn't generalizing, I was speaking generally. Learn the difference.

Regardless of separation of church and state, as I said there is still a religious connotation to marriage. You said in another post somewhere that you are christian right? Then wouldn't you agree that marriage first and foremost actually came from God? And did not God create eve for adam?

And uh there is no difference, you still decided to make those people inclusive to your argument. Perhaps you should have stated that and made yourself clear

Jesus preached that we should be accepting of all love first of all. Secondly being christian has nothing to do with blindly following every edict of the church. And secondly like I said. Marriage is not a christian institution. It's a pagan one.

[Revy the two hands]

Well I disagree with homosexual marriage but I never disagreed with interracial marriage, so you really shouldn't generalize. And I see no comparisons whatsoever with racism, to the extent of such events like the Holocaust, where people were exterminated just because they looked different. But yes, it is their business what they do, but in a religious perspective marriage is between a man and woman, homosexuals should make their own ceremonies if they want to be joined like marriage allows

Protip: gays were executed during the holocaust as well. Also, in the United States there is a separation of church and state. Two marriage is not a christian institution. The Christians adopted it from the Jews who adopted it from the Pagans.

Secondly, I wasn't generalizing, I was speaking generally. Learn the difference.

Regardless of separation of church and state, as I said there is still a religious connotation to marriage. You said in another post somewhere that you are christian right? Then wouldn't you agree that marriage first and foremost actually came from God? And did not God create eve for adam?

And uh there is no difference, you still decided to make those people inclusive to your argument. Perhaps you should have stated that and made yourself clear

Jesus preached that we should be accepting of all love first of all. Secondly being christian has nothing to do with blindly following every edict of the church. And secondly like I said. Marriage is not a christian institution. It's a pagan one.

God says in Genesis 2:18 "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him " and also 2:24 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh". So how is that blindly following the church when God himself said that? Seems to me that you accept what Christianity teaches when it suits you.

[Athos]

Protip: gays were executed during the holocaust as well. Also, in the United States there is a separation of church and state. Two marriage is not a christian institution. The Christians adopted it from the Jews who adopted it from the Pagans.

Secondly, I wasn't generalizing, I was speaking generally. Learn the difference.

Perhaps there may be a separation of "church and state" however, as Jefferson wrote, he never said how high or low the "wall of separation between Church & State" should be, and it is still something we are fighting with today.

See:
Reynolds v. U.S (98 U.S. 145): the Court carved out right to believe, but not right to practice.

Salazar v. Buono (S. Docket 08-472): the Court left a "religious symbol" on a public landmark.

Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing (330 U.S. 1): Court decided Churches unable to use public-school facilities for religious instruction of school children.

Illinois ex rel McCollum v. Board of Education (333 U.S. 203): Churches unable to use public-school facilities for religious instruction of school children.

Zorach v. Clauson (343 U.S. 306): the Court held that releasing students from school for religious instruction is allowed if religious instruction takes place away from the school campus, for 1 hour per week, and with no public funding.

Engle v. Vitale (370 U.S. 421): the Court struck down public prayers in school.

School Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp (374 U.S. 203): the Court stuck down sanctioned bible reading in public schools.

Epperson v.Arkansas (393 US 97): States may not require curricula to align with the views of any particular religion.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (403 U.S. 602): Court created a test to see if public-funding of certain programs for religion violates the Establishment Clause.

Those are just some to use as an example. But there are at least 21 other cases used to explore this "wall." Perhaps while one may not control the other, we cannot deny that there is a nexus between the two. Until a balance is struck, the two will continue to clash.

[Dretlin]

Jesus preached that we should be accepting of all love first of all. Secondly being christian has nothing to do with blindly following every edict of the church. And secondly like I said. Marriage is not a christian institution. It's a pagan one.

You need to define Pagan much more clearly. As it is all too often used as a term to suggest non-abrahamic faiths.

[Pennyroyal Tea]

Protip: gays were executed during the holocaust as well. Also, in the United States there is a separation of church and state. Two marriage is not a christian institution. The Christians adopted it from the Jews who adopted it from the Pagans.

Secondly, I wasn't generalizing, I was speaking generally. Learn the difference.

Perhaps there may be a separation of "church and state" however, as Jefferson wrote, he never said how high or low the "wall of separation between Church & State" should be, and it is still something we are fighting with today.

See:
Reynolds v. U.S (98 U.S. 145): the Court carved out right to believe, but not right to practice.

Salazar v. Buono (S. Docket 08-472): the Court left a "religious symbol" on a public landmark.

Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing (330 U.S. 1): Court decided Churches unable to use public-school facilities for religious instruction of school children.

Illinois ex rel McCollum v. Board of Education (333 U.S. 203): Churches unable to use public-school facilities for religious instruction of school children.

Zorach v. Clauson (343 U.S. 306): the Court held that releasing students from school for religious instruction is allowed if religious instruction takes place away from the school campus, for 1 hour per week, and with no public funding.

Engle v. Vitale (370 U.S. 421): the Court struck down public prayers in school.

School Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp (374 U.S. 203): the Court stuck down sanctioned bible reading in public schools.

Epperson v.Arkansas (393 US 97): States may not require curricula to align with the views of any particular religion.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (403 U.S. 602): Court created a test to see if public-funding of certain programs for religion violates the Establishment Clause.

Those are just some to use as an example. But there are at least 21 other cases used to explore this "wall." Perhaps while one may not control the other, we cannot deny that there is a nexus between the two. Until a balance is struck, the two will continue to clash.

*sigh* You see I was speaking on the principles on which this country was founded. Thomas Jefferson himself said that in more or less words as I can not recall the exact quote that the notion that we were founded on religious principles is absolutely false. If you look at the founding fathers there weren't many, if any, that were overtly religious, you can argue that some, like Thomas Jefferson was hostile towards the idea of religion.



Secondly, you can spout court cases till you're blue in the face. I don't really care, I respect the decisions of the court like I trust the moral fiber of every single politician. Most of the time they make the wrong decision, and lag far behind the times. And the fact that any debate that a combination either fundamentally exists, or must exist is simply a failure upon the very principles this nation was founded. Ironic if you think about it.

I am 100% for the separation, when you find these things combined, they ultimately end up with regimes like the Ayatollah.

[Kamri]

We gave wemon and blacks rights, so why not homsexuals? They are people just the same as you an I they just choose to live and love diffrent.

I hate it when people compare the homosexual debate to a race situation. GAY PEOPLE AREN'T A RACE .

Because of my beliefs I don't agree with homosexuality, but I don't hate anyone who is homosexual either. Men are for women and women are for men. That is all.

But they are still people and deserve the same rights as everyone else.
Its the same issue as racial issues.
If homosexuals can't have rights how bout lets just take the rights of colored people, and wemon away.
It. Is. The. Same. Thing.


And no offence to anyone. But I beleive the bible to just be a history book that some old men got together and wrote.
I think its just there veiws of what happened during their time and what they beleived.
And Jesus was just a man everyone looked up to and was their "Hero".
He is not gods son, and god is not real. In my veiw.

Following the bible I think is like following some book like Twilight.

[Revy the two hands]

We gave wemon and blacks rights, so why not homsexuals? They are people just the same as you an I they just choose to live and love diffrent.

I hate it when people compare the homosexual debate to a race situation. GAY PEOPLE AREN'T A RACE .

Because of my beliefs I don't agree with homosexuality, but I don't hate anyone who is homosexual either. Men are for women and women are for men. That is all.

But they are still people and deserve the same rights as everyone else.
Its the same issue as racial issues.
If homosexuals can't have rights how bout lets just take the rights of colored people, and wemon away.
It. Is. The. Same. Thing.


And no offence to anyone. But I beleive the bible to just be a history book that some old men got together and wrote.
I think its just there veiws of what happened during their time and what they beleived.
And Jesus was just a man everyone looked up to and was their "Hero".
He is not gods son, and god is not real. In my veiw.

Following the bible I think is like following some book like Twilight.

Yes they are people. But I've put my arguments out there so I'm not going to repeat myself.

And that is sad, I don't know how people can not believe in something higher than themselves. What are you living life for then? What's your purpose? Life becomes pointless otherwise. But that's just me.

[SASSZAIN]

you and a lot of people.


For the sake of American freedom, it is the rights of the homosexuals to be instituted in binds of marriage if they so choose it. Whether or not it is against God's rule means jack $#!+ honestly. Its not about what God wants. Its about freedom.

at least that is what America is SUPPOSED to stand for. The land of the free and the home of the brave.

I don't support gay marriage. However, I cannot oppose it.

As PT said, we cannot help how we are wired. by the age of 7 we have a 'love map' burned into our subconscious that shapes the way we see the people around us for the rest of our lives. That's not something we can control when we are only 7. Therefore, it is not something that should be held against someone when in regards to FREEDOM.

You as a Christan, or a believe of any faith, have only YOURSELF to think about when obeying the rules of your faith. You cannot control anyone Else's actions but your own, and it is wrong for you to attempt to limit the actions of another.




Last thing I will say to those of you who claim to be Christians.

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

this is what you should be living your life around. This is what you should be basing every decision you make around. These are the only two laws you ever need abide by.
In order to abide by them, you must first understand them. PM me if you care to learn more. It is only relevant here because you are claiming to be Christians here, and you are not following the second law, spoken by Jesus himself.


Have fun debating this one.