I think the issue is that people don’t seem to like the idea that they’re being told they’re going to hell. They tend to hold those sorts of comments against the people who SAY those sorts of things. Even if you believe it to be true, and it’s not YOUR ideas, but part of your beliefs, most people don’t like to hear that sort of thing.
It may be just a statement of your beliefs, but to others it’s considered offensive and even rude.
Your reaction here is quite interesting, Curtis- You do not like being harassed about your beliefs, you don’t like it when others mock or deride you, just because of something that you’ve chosen to believe. You may not feel you’ve had a choice- that just makes the parallels more interesting. Do you see though how you’re reacting to the other posters?
I hope you realize that Assholes are a universal concept- it’s not just conservatives/liberals; religious/nonreligious; gay/straight. People are people, and no one really enjoys having their beliefs or way of life mocked or taunted. It’s not fun, and you certainly didn’t deserve to have this happen to you- but I hope you can see how others may feel- it’s a good chance to see that some of the people who are attacking you right now feel the VERY same way YOU do, just about their own personal beliefs and ways of life.
It’s not fun, Curtis, and it’s something that never really quite goes away as we get older- no one enjoys it (nor does anyone really deserve) to have their beliefs mocked if they’re not harming anyone and just trying to live their lives the way they believe (God or Science) has created them.
Good luck, Curtis, and I hope you find your way in this world- I really do. And that doesn’t mean I hope you change your religion, your views, or your beliefs. Just a simple good luck- it’s certainly not an easy journey.
Because if you’re married in one state but another state doesn’t recognize your marriage, that’s not equality. To go back to that old standby, Miscegenation, if we’d let the states decide you know there are some states who still probably wouldn’t be onboard. You think it would be fair if an interracial couple married in one state, but moved to another where their marriage wasn’t recognized? Would it be fair if a white couple were treated that way? Why is it fair when a gay couple is treated that way?
As it’s going now, states are deciding, but the time will come, very soon I’d guess, where the federal government will have to step in and do what’s right.
I do understand. You had said
If God “obviously” doesn’t hate “homosexuals nor any other type of sinner” then how do you know it’s a sin? You’re presuming to know the mind of God. That’s pretty cheeky.
I don’t really care that much though. Your way of thinking is swiftly vanishing, like dirty water in a storm drain. We will win, and you will not, so just go right on ahead being frustrated and bigoty. As I said earlier, maybe you’ll grow out of it.
Oh of course he’s reading. I agree though that he is very bright and could grow up to be a fine, thoughtful, caring, humanistic person, if only he can get rid of the sin crap that’s clogging his brain. I’m not saying he should shed his belief in the supernatural, but to think that a god gives a good goddamn whether someone masterbates or falls in love with someone of the same sex, is just ridiculous. If there’s a god, wouldn’t he be worrying about more important things, like making sure some team in Bumblefuck, TX will win the regional championships?
For the record, you’ve just defined virtually every gay person in America as an extremist. Because there’s almost no gay person in this country who is willing to settle for domestic partnerships.
And if you want the issue to die, stop voting against gay marriage.* It’s not the queers who politicized the marriage debate.
[sub]*Okay, first age another five years so you can vote, and then stop voting against gay marriage. But you get my point.[/sub]
Neither is it recognized by the Federal government, which becomes especially important when one partner dies.
Here’s a weird scenario but not a rhetorical question:
Paul said for all slaves to do their master’s bidding and to be good slaves.
Many slaves, male and female, were used for sex.
A slave who has sex with his master- about which he has no choice- but who also enjoys it- it’s not rape but a long term relationship- is he sinning? And such things happened. The Centurion who came to Jesus to heal his male slave could well have been enjoying him in that way; centurions were forbidden to marry without special permission and it was far more the exception than the rule, and they were forbidden to carry women with them on campaign, and a full-on-sexual relationship with another soldier would have been unthinkable (this wasn’t Thebes), thus quite often they had sex with their male slaves. There was no great stigma as long as the centurion was topping the slave.
This centurion, who is a pagan and dwelling in a land filled with troublesome monotheists who hated Romans, cares so much about this male slave that he prevails upon one of these crazy Israelite’s holy men to please come heal him. (He then says “Don’t come in the house Lord, just do it from there”, the official reason being “I’m not worthy” but the fact that it wouldn’t really be a great thing for either Jesus or the Centurion to be seen together in his home probably also a bit of a consideration.) It’s not that far-fetched an assumption he was doing more for the centurion than cleaning the windows, yet Jesus healed him.
Hey, Curtis, I just wanted to point out to you that I’m a Christian and I don’t share any of your views on homosexuality (I also disagree with you on other doctrinal points discussed in this thread). If you think that atheists and gay rights advocates are the only ones disagreeing with you here, then you are mistaken. Other Christians have already discussed several doctrinal issues with you in this thread, and I’m not going to open those discussions again, especially because you’ve indicated you won’t reply again in this thread.
If you had taken a different, more inclusive tack from the beginning (instead of making such an effort to distance yourself from radical liberal Christians, e.g., Presbyterians), then you might have found an audience willing to at least entertain a discussion of the Amazing Grace Baptist Church. But, instead, your own pontificating on various topics has obscured your OP.
Good reason to smile, of course there are no men that are 2,000+ years still living and Jesus hasn’t yet come with his angels in his glory! Until I meet one I will conclude non exist!
That’s exactly what the “gay rights extremists” (:rolleyes:) have been asking for. Unfortunately, some of the states and the Bush Administration did an end run around that by refusing to recognize gay marriages performed legally in other states. I hope you see why that’s an issue for gay people.
Curtis, I have something I’d like you to think about, 'cause you’re clearly a pretty smart kid.
1.) Historically, the Bible has included condemnations of some things that were probably cultural, rather than hard-and-fast rules.
2.) Jesus ostensibly came, among other reasons, to help get rid of the old laws and write new ones.
3.) He didn’t specifically call out each and every rule he wanted to change: mostly he summed it up as “love God” and “love your neighbor.”
4.) So, how is a Christian to tell which old laws are important and which aren’t? I’d say, hold them up against the new laws Jesus gave you.
5.) So, things like shellfish and cotton-poly blends are just fine, even though older parts of the Bible say that you’re prohibited from using eating or using them, because they don’t violate the new rules.
6.) Where does homosexuality fit in?
7.) Current evidence shows that same-sex attraction isn’t something people choose; it’s something they’re born with. Humans also aren’t the only animals who have some percentage of their population that is homosexual instead of heterosexual. It is, by definition, natural. Not as prevalent as heterosexuality, certainly, but natural.
8.) What is the purpose of marriage? It can’t just be about procreation: it’s also about love. Marriage is also a celebration of the love between two people, as well as their love of God and God’s love for them. If marriage were restricted to people who could procreate, there would be fertility tests conducted before anyone was allowed to marry, infertile marriages would be annulled, women past menopause could not marry, etc.
9.) So, two people of the same sex who are in love with each other should have exactly the same right to recognize and celebrate that love as two people of the opposite sex. When two adults love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together, how can that be wrong? How can that be a sin?
States don’t get to decide things that should be considered basic human rights. Oh, and on the subject of “marriage” versus “domestic partnership”–you may recall learning in school that there was once a time where we tried to make “separate but equal” a doctrine in this country. You may also recall that it didn’t work out too well. What you should really be arguing for, if you want to keep your religion and your politics separate, is the abolition of all “marriage” by the government. That way, everybody gets domestic partnerships, with the same benefits and responsibilities, and “marriage” is reserved as a term for religions institutions, which can then put any restrictions on it they like.
[QUOTE=Curtis LeMay;11697784 These types of Christians have probably turned away more people from Christ and are even more extreme than the parody Landover Baptists Church.[/QUOTE]
Because they can’t wear pants?!? Seriously, I was brought up a Christian but the thing that turned me off religion the most was the intolerance you people show to each other. There are 10,000+ religions in the world, and Christianity is but 1 (one) of those. And Christians sit around arguing about whether they should wear pants.
Get over it. How anyone take you guys seriously when you can’t even get along amongst yourselves?
