Jump to content

christian forums

Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Forums

Welcome to Worthy Christian Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Court Rulings correct?

* * * * * 1 votes same sex marriage

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
35 replies to this topic

#1
Remnantrob

Remnantrob

    Veteran Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts

Hello Friends,

 

For the most part Christianity stands firm on the bible with regards to whether or not homosexuality is a sin.  If you have been paying attention to the news media you might have noticed that slowly state by state is making same sex marriage legal.  Now I am an American and believe in the constitution  just as much as the next guy.  I want to know do you agree with the courts rulings that same sex marriage is constitutional.  Before anyone asks I will tell you that my stance is yes based on the constitution,  not morality.  Do you agree or disagree with me and please state why the courts are wrong if you believe they are.  Thanks and God bless.



#2
AlanLamb0986

AlanLamb0986
  • Members
  • 60 posts

All that matters is God's opinion. I think it's wrong from a Christian perspective. I don't think we need to say why, unless you're a 'pick 'n mix' Christian. They're the ones that pick scripture they like and disregard the stuff that frightens them. You can't say that God is omniscient, but say He's wrong about homosexuality being a sin, therefore homosexual marriage being wrong. Homosexuality is a sin, so how does marriage help cast away that sin? It doesn't. 

Romans 13 says we must respect the Laws of the land. But ultimately, we need to stop thinking that God cares about our opinion. No matter who you are, God doesn't care about your opinion. Just because man adapts Law, and bypasses God's word, doesn't mean God suddenly thinks homosexuality is ok. Homosexuality isn't just wrong because God said so:

 

Homosexuals more likely to suffer from depression: "A new study in the United Kingdom has revealed that homosexuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population, reports Health24.com....the risk of suicide jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homosexual lifestyle...the lifespan of a homosexual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heterosexual...While the Health 24 article suggested that homosexuals may be pushed to substance abuse and suicide because of anti-homosexual cultural and family pressures, empirical tests have shown that there is no difference in homosexual health risk depending on the level of tolerance in a particular environment. Homosexuals in the United States and Denmark - the latter of which is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homosexuality - both die on average in their early 50's, or in their 40's if AIDS is the cause of death

 

In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. 

 

2% of U.S. population is gay yet it accounts for 61% of HIV infection:  "Men who have sex with men remain the group most heavily affected by new HIV infections. While CDC estimates that MSM represent only 2 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for the majority (61 percent; 29,300) of all new HIV infections in 2009. Young MSM (ages 13 to 29) were most severely affected, representing more than one quarter of all new HIV infections nationally (27 percent; 12,900 in 2009)."  (Center for Disease Control) 

 

It's clear from secular statistics that homosexuality is 'bad'. While we shouldn't judge the sinner, it doesn't help anyone to ignore the sin.



#3
Remnantrob

Remnantrob

    Veteran Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts

Ok Alan, I get what you're saying and I agree with you in that morally it is wrong.  But again we are talking about in regards to the constitution.  The founders of this country were some pretty smart guys in that they knew what it was to have both the state and church have a union of power and dictate what a person should or should not do.  Hence the declaration of Independence(first part)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness

 

Now the problem is that marriage became a state issued license and although Christians say marriage is a christian institution, you can't impose a religious activity on a person so we're back to square one.  What say you?



#4
OakWood

OakWood

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,637 posts

The answer to satisfy the constitution is to allow civil partnership agreements, that way a homosexual couple will have some sort of 'legal protection' in the way that married couples have. Of course any two people will be able to have a civil partnership agreement whether they are homosexual or not, so it won't necessarily have to refer to a sexual relationship of any kind,it could just be a friendship or a business arrangement..

By doing this equality under the constitution is achieved but nobody is condoning 'gay' marriage.



#5
Remnantrob

Remnantrob

    Veteran Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts

The answer to satisfy the constitution is to allow civil partnership agreements, that way a homosexual couple will have some sort of 'legal protection' in the way that married couples have. Of course any two people will be able to have a civil partnership agreement whether they are homosexual or not, so it won't necessarily have to refer to a sexual relationship of any kind,it could just be a friendship or a business arrangement..

By doing this equality under the constitution is achieved but nobody is condoning 'gay' marriage.

 

Thanks Willowwood,

 

Sounds great but the problem with that suggestion is that you're making a state mandate descriminatory and biased because the law would be based on the Judeo Christian interpretation of marriage.

 

I guess my next question is why should the state allow the definitions of a marriage to be the union of a man and a woman?



#6
Parker1

Parker1

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,112 posts

The US Constitution does not, as far as I know, address marriage - gay or otherwise. And any powers not specifically given to the federal government revert to the States. It is a States rights issue, not a constitutional/federal issue. Aside from that fact, as followers of Christ, we are to follow GOD's laws, even if they run contrary to todays societal norms.



#7
WebFisher

WebFisher
  • Members
  • 57 posts

The US Constitution does not, as far as I know, address marriage - gay or otherwise. And any powers not specifically given to the federal government revert to the States. It is a States rights issue, not a constitutional/federal issue. Aside from that fact, as followers of Christ, we are to follow GOD's laws, even if they run contrary to todays societal norms.

 ^ This... it is a States rights issue, and not a constitution issue. The part of the constitution that was quoted earlier... "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"... what part of that is being violate by opposing or supporting gay marriage? The fact is the homosexuals still have life, they still have the same liberty a heterosexual married person or a single heterosexual or gay person has, and they still have the ability to PURSUE happiness... Homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of GOD, and that's all I am concerned with.

 

Note: even the Constitution doesn't say we have the right to ACHIEVE happiness... only pursue it....


Edited by WebFisher, 22 January 2014 - 08:08 PM.


#8
Remnantrob

Remnantrob

    Veteran Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts

Great answers guys.  Now the states are required to uphold the constitution as well correct?  The marriage licenses are issued by state laws.  So why should we try to influence laws that promote our religious beliefs?  Where in the bible is a marriage license required for a marriage to be acknowledged by God? 



#9
Parker1

Parker1

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,112 posts

Yes, States have to uphold the Constitution. But, although some states have allowed gay marriage by popular vote, many have defined marriage as between one man and one woman. The FEDERAL COURTS have ruled that such laws, again passed by popular vote, are un-Constitutional. They are making law. The Federal branches of government have no right to tell the States that their laws are un-Constitutional when the issue is clearly a States rights issue that in neither discrimantory, a violation of civil rights, nor immoral. Gay marriage is not a civil right, or an inalienable right.

 

Why should we try to influence laws that promote our religious beliefs? Because we are in Christ and He is in us. We are supposed to try and influence people to follow Christ. Christ, who is GOD in the flesh, considers homosexuality an abomination, therefore so should we. I will not judge them for their sexual desires, but I will do everything in my power to oppose their agenda, which is to impose acceptance of their "lifestyle" upon me behavior and forced social participation.

 

Marriage has always been acknowledged and sanctioned by society, even throughout the illustrations given in Scripture. Maybe no "license" was required, but GOD judges the intent of the heart, within the bounds of His decretive will. And He had decreed that homosexuality is an abomination and a sin, and in 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 said "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."(AKJV) They way to inherit the kingdom of GOD is to believe in Christ and repent (change one's mind) of sin.



#10
AlanLamb0986

AlanLamb0986
  • Members
  • 60 posts

Ok Alan, I get what you're saying and I agree with you in that morally it is wrong.  But again we are talking about in regards to the constitution.  The founders of this country were some pretty smart guys in that they knew what it was to have both the state and church have a union of power and dictate what a person should or should not do.  Hence the declaration of Independence(first part)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness

 

Now the problem is that marriage became a state issued license and although Christians say marriage is a christian institution, you can't impose a religious activity on a person so we're back to square one.  What say you?

"Why should we try to influence the laws to promote our religious beliefs?" Because our belief in God should cause us to abide by the Law, but the Spirit should guide us to what is good and pleasing to the Lord. I must respect a homosexual couples right to marriage, but I don't, and should not agree to it. Jesus called us to follow the Law and be subject to the governments. I am subject, but I can still verbally disagree with strong disdain. 

You get that homosexuality is wrong, BUT we're talking about the Constitution? I hate to tell you Americans, but God doesn't care about the U.S Constitution. You speak of the Constitution as if it were divinely inspired. You can't say to God 'Homosexuality was legal in our nation.' God decides what is legal, what is wrong. You can't possibly defend that statement from a Christian perspective, only as an American. God doesn't care about your citizenship. The word 'God' doesn't appear in the Constitution. While governments exist under God, that doesn't mean they are for God. The U.S was not founded as a Christian nation.The 1706 Treaty with Tripoli says that 'the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.' Most of the Founding Fathers were deists, not Christian,

God isn't pro-America, pro-Britain etc. That's not what John 3:16 means. It means that God loves each individual that makes up the world. God doesn't care about a mass of people, He loves the individuals that make the collective. God won't judge man on whether He abides by man-made Laws.

You can't impose God's word on man, damn straight. But that still doesn't change the fact that when man wanders from God's word, it's called 'sin.' Whether the U.S allows that sin is utterly mute, God still hates that sin, and absolutely doesn't care about mankind's laws. He orders us to follow the law of the land, but He isn't bound by it.



#11
Remnantrob

Remnantrob

    Veteran Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts

 

Ok Alan, I get what you're saying and I agree with you in that morally it is wrong.  But again we are talking about in regards to the constitution.  The founders of this country were some pretty smart guys in that they knew what it was to have both the state and church have a union of power and dictate what a person should or should not do.  Hence the declaration of Independence(first part)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness

 

Now the problem is that marriage became a state issued license and although Christians say marriage is a christian institution, you can't impose a religious activity on a person so we're back to square one.  What say you?

"Why should we try to influence the laws to promote our religious beliefs?" Because our belief in God should cause us to abide by the Law, but the Spirit should guide us to what is good and pleasing to the Lord. I must respect a homosexual couples right to marriage, but I don't, and should not agree to it. Jesus called us to follow the Law and be subject to the governments. I am subject, but I can still verbally disagree with strong disdain. 

You get that homosexuality is wrong, BUT we're talking about the Constitution? I hate to tell you Americans, but God doesn't care about the U.S Constitution. You speak of the Constitution as if it were divinely inspired. You can't say to God 'Homosexuality was legal in our nation.' God decides what is legal, what is wrong. You can't possibly defend that statement from a Christian perspective, only as an American. God doesn't care about your citizenship. The word 'God' doesn't appear in the Constitution. While governments exist under God, that doesn't mean they are for God. The U.S was not founded as a Christian nation.The 1706 Treaty with Tripoli says that 'the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.' Most of the Founding Fathers were deists, not Christian,

God isn't pro-America, pro-Britain etc. That's not what John 3:16 means. It means that God loves each individual that makes up the world. God doesn't care about a mass of people, He loves the individuals that make the collective. God won't judge man on whether He abides by man-made Laws.

You can't impose God's word on man, damn straight. But that still doesn't change the fact that when man wanders from God's word, it's called 'sin.' Whether the U.S allows that sin is utterly mute, God still hates that sin, and absolutely doesn't care about mankind's laws. He orders us to follow the law of the land, but He isn't bound by it.

 

 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?



#12
AlanLamb0986

AlanLamb0986
  • Members
  • 60 posts

 

 

Ok Alan, I get what you're saying and I agree with you in that morally it is wrong.  But again we are talking about in regards to the constitution.  The founders of this country were some pretty smart guys in that they knew what it was to have both the state and church have a union of power and dictate what a person should or should not do.  Hence the declaration of Independence(first part)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness

 

Now the problem is that marriage became a state issued license and although Christians say marriage is a christian institution, you can't impose a religious activity on a person so we're back to square one.  What say you?

"Why should we try to influence the laws to promote our religious beliefs?" Because our belief in God should cause us to abide by the Law, but the Spirit should guide us to what is good and pleasing to the Lord. I must respect a homosexual couples right to marriage, but I don't, and should not agree to it. Jesus called us to follow the Law and be subject to the governments. I am subject, but I can still verbally disagree with strong disdain. 

You get that homosexuality is wrong, BUT we're talking about the Constitution? I hate to tell you Americans, but God doesn't care about the U.S Constitution. You speak of the Constitution as if it were divinely inspired. You can't say to God 'Homosexuality was legal in our nation.' God decides what is legal, what is wrong. You can't possibly defend that statement from a Christian perspective, only as an American. God doesn't care about your citizenship. The word 'God' doesn't appear in the Constitution. While governments exist under God, that doesn't mean they are for God. The U.S was not founded as a Christian nation.The 1706 Treaty with Tripoli says that 'the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.' Most of the Founding Fathers were deists, not Christian,

God isn't pro-America, pro-Britain etc. That's not what John 3:16 means. It means that God loves each individual that makes up the world. God doesn't care about a mass of people, He loves the individuals that make the collective. God won't judge man on whether He abides by man-made Laws.

You can't impose God's word on man, damn straight. But that still doesn't change the fact that when man wanders from God's word, it's called 'sin.' Whether the U.S allows that sin is utterly mute, God still hates that sin, and absolutely doesn't care about mankind's laws. He orders us to follow the law of the land, but He isn't bound by it.

 

 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?

 

The argument from your perspective is secular, you're subtracting God. But homosexual marriage is an abomination to God, that's my issue. God doesn't consider flying, driving, or the practicing of medicine to be sin. They are amoral points, they neither righteous, nor sinful. A sin is measured against righteousness. It's wrong to kill, so it's moral to not. It's wrong to steal, therefore it's moral to not. Practicing medicine is not 'moral', because otherwise it would be immoral not to. Your logic is a bit flawed. If a gay person was qualified to practice medicine, it wouldn't be due to his sexuality. Homosexual marriage has everything to do with sexuality.  God made man, and has every right to define the characteristics of man- homosexuality is a flaw to God, not a characteristic. 

One has nothing to do with the other. The issue of gay marriage is only to do with sexuality, that's why I can say that God views it as a sin. If God says it's wrong, it's wrong, and I agree. My point seems to have been overlooked. Of course gay's have rights according to the law, and rightfully so. The issue is with gay marriage. Man's opinion doesn't matter, God says its wrong.



#13
Remnantrob

Remnantrob

    Veteran Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts

 

 

 

Ok Alan, I get what you're saying and I agree with you in that morally it is wrong.  But again we are talking about in regards to the constitution.  The founders of this country were some pretty smart guys in that they knew what it was to have both the state and church have a union of power and dictate what a person should or should not do.  Hence the declaration of Independence(first part)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness

 

Now the problem is that marriage became a state issued license and although Christians say marriage is a christian institution, you can't impose a religious activity on a person so we're back to square one.  What say you?

"Why should we try to influence the laws to promote our religious beliefs?" Because our belief in God should cause us to abide by the Law, but the Spirit should guide us to what is good and pleasing to the Lord. I must respect a homosexual couples right to marriage, but I don't, and should not agree to it. Jesus called us to follow the Law and be subject to the governments. I am subject, but I can still verbally disagree with strong disdain. 

You get that homosexuality is wrong, BUT we're talking about the Constitution? I hate to tell you Americans, but God doesn't care about the U.S Constitution. You speak of the Constitution as if it were divinely inspired. You can't say to God 'Homosexuality was legal in our nation.' God decides what is legal, what is wrong. You can't possibly defend that statement from a Christian perspective, only as an American. God doesn't care about your citizenship. The word 'God' doesn't appear in the Constitution. While governments exist under God, that doesn't mean they are for God. The U.S was not founded as a Christian nation.The 1706 Treaty with Tripoli says that 'the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.' Most of the Founding Fathers were deists, not Christian,

God isn't pro-America, pro-Britain etc. That's not what John 3:16 means. It means that God loves each individual that makes up the world. God doesn't care about a mass of people, He loves the individuals that make the collective. God won't judge man on whether He abides by man-made Laws.

You can't impose God's word on man, damn straight. But that still doesn't change the fact that when man wanders from God's word, it's called 'sin.' Whether the U.S allows that sin is utterly mute, God still hates that sin, and absolutely doesn't care about mankind's laws. He orders us to follow the law of the land, but He isn't bound by it.

 

 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?

 

The argument from your perspective is secular, you're subtracting God. But homosexual marriage is an abomination to God, that's my issue. God doesn't consider flying, driving, or the practicing of medicine to be sin. They are amoral points, they neither righteous, nor sinful. A sin is measured against righteousness. It's wrong to kill, so it's moral to not. It's wrong to steal, therefore it's moral to not. Practicing medicine is not 'moral', because otherwise it would be immoral not to. Your logic is a bit flawed. If a gay person was qualified to practice medicine, it wouldn't be due to his sexuality. Homosexual marriage has everything to do with sexuality.  God made man, and has every right to define the characteristics of man- homosexuality is a flaw to God, not a characteristic. 

One has nothing to do with the other. The issue of gay marriage is only to do with sexuality, that's why I can say that God views it as a sin. If God says it's wrong, it's wrong, and I agree. My point seems to have been overlooked. Of course gay's have rights according to the law, and rightfully so. The issue is with gay marriage. Man's opinion doesn't matter, God says its wrong.

 

 

Alan,

 

I am not overlooking your point.  I agree that it is sin in capital letters written in red.  But, the issue is not morality, it's legality.  Anytime the state uses laws to coerce a person to do something because it goes along the lines of what a religion thinks is correct, you don't get a great outcome.  For references research the dark ages and those holy wars.  It's the reason the pilgrims came to the shores of America...religious freedom.  A country without a king and a church without a pope.  The homosexuals have a right to a civil mandated law as much as anyone else and they have that same right to (pardon the expression) go to hell.  God doesn't force people to do what is right.  Our job as Christians is to continue to call sin by its right name, but realize that you could be labelled a terrorist because you believe that God does not agree with homosexuality.  Keep standing up for what's right but not at the expense of getting the law to side with you because something is morally right.



#14
AlanLamb0986

AlanLamb0986
  • Members
  • 60 posts

Your question was out of place on the forum then. Not being funny, but you asked a question about a sin on a Christian forum, then ask us to subtract God from our decision on whether it's right or not:

"Do you agree or disagree with me and please state why the courts are wrong if you believe they are- by the way I will call you wrong if you do." You didn't say that we should only take the Constitution into account when we replied. If we're allowed to take other things into consideration (such as God *gasp*), how is my reply incorrect? Tell me, what's the point of this topic again? If the Law doesn't stand with that which is morally right, what's the point of the Law? Now, I don't care about anyone's opinion but God. God says homosexuality is immoral, therefore so is gay marriage. If a law supports that immoral act, it doesn't make it a moral act, it's still wrong. Therefore, in the eyes of God, this Law is immoral, wrong, a sin. Whose opinion counts? Are you one of these people that actually believe that homosexual marriage doesn't harm anyone?

 

How does a murder in another state between two people living in a trailer park in the middle of nowhere, among people whom we have never known and who don't know anyone we know, affect us personally?  It doesn't, but because it has no effect on us personally this doesn't mean that we should ignore the moral issues associated with murder and not condemn such actions.  Murder is morally wrong, and when any moral law is broken we are all ultimately affected and we know that if such actions were to increase, society would be affected...no matter where you are.

Am I comparing homosexual marriage to murder and saying they are related or somehow equal?  Not at all.  I'm momentarily shifting the focus to something that we all agree is morally wrong in order to demonstrate that even though there can be an action somewhere that doesn't specifically affect us (i.e., murder), we should rightfully condemn it because it is wrong.  It is a moral concern.  Likewise, homosexual marriage is a moral issue and we must be concerned with its moral implications -- whether or not we are personally affected at the moment.

However, someone might say that homosexual marriage is not a moral issue, but is instead a civil rights issue.  Though some pro-homosexual marriage proponents wave the flag of "civil rights" in support of their cause, which I believe is inappropriate, homosexual marriage is wrought with moral issues:  faithfulness, promise, love, support, commitment, sex, etc.  Besides, civil rights are based on moral rights.  It is morally wrong to prevent someone from holding a job, eating at a restaurant, or using public bathrooms based on skin color.  Likewise, the union of two people in a public ceremony where emotional, sexual, and faithful commitment to each other is recognized by the rest of society is also moral.  If you disagree, then it is up to you to demonstrate that such public commitment is somehow a non-moral issue.

When we look at the question again, we can see an implied moral standard; namely, that morality is determined by how people are personally affected.  But something is not right or wrong merely because of the effect an action might have on someone.  Something is right or wrong because there is an inherent nature to moral truths.  For example, it is wrong to murder.  It is wrong to torture babies for your personal pleasure.  It is wrong to divide society based on skin color.  It is wrong to promise fidelity, commitment, and love to your marriage "partner" and then break that promise.  It is wrong to hate someone without a cause.  It is wrong to desire the death of someone just because you don't like his skin color.  If morality were determined by how a person is affected, then all of morality would be based on effects, circumstances, and personal likes -- but only when they are acted on, not when they are felt.  But this is problematic because if I believe that homosexual marriage is morally wrong, am I morally wrong for simply believing it?  Am I morally right?  Or is there no moral value to the belief?  If you say there is no moral value to a mere belief, then hating someone based on skin color or "sexual orientation" isn't wrong, is it?  See how morality based "only" on how someone is affected is wrought with problems?  It ignores the underlying motives and says that evil motives aren't wrong until they are acted upon.

If you deny that there are intrinsic moral truths, then there is nothing wrong with hatred, anger, lust, coveting, prejudice, etc., as long as they aren't manifested.  Again, if there are no intrinsic moral truths, then please find an exception to the statement that it is always wrong to torture babies merely for your person pleasure.  If you can't, then aren't you admitting there are moral absolutes -- to which we must ultimately answer since it implies a moral Truth Giver?  But, I digress.

Homosexual marriage is really about two things:  love and sex.  Sure, homosexuals profess love for one another.  But, they also have sex with each other and it is the latter issue that, in my opinion, is the driving force behind their marriage redefinition.  Think about it:  homoSEXuality.  Yeah, I know, its just a word.  However, it leads us to the practical concerns as they are related to sex, the very thing that the homosexual community has brought out of the closet/bedroom into the public eye.

If a single homosexual couple is married on the other side of the world, it has no effect on me -- but that doesn't mean it isn't a moral issue.  However, if a homosexual couple is legally married in the country in which I live, I am affected.  First of all, writing this article is the result of the question raised by pro-homosexual marriage supporters.  I was affected, and I'm writing this as the result.  Second, the redefinition of marriage away from the public promissory bond of a man and woman affects society as a whole, since society is based on the family unit in which marriage is the legal contract of fidelity and commitment through which children are brought into the world. Third, by redefining marriage away from a man and a woman, where normal physical sexual intercourse can occur, the absolutes of male female marriage relationships are broken down and sexual permissiveness is encouraged.  This opens the door to further redefinitions of familial and sexual relationships.  Take, for example, the 2011 symposium "Living in Truth and Dignity" in Baltimore, Maryland on August 17.  In it, pedophilia was redefined as "minor attracted persons," and the symposium sought to raise concerns about how the DSM1considers it a mental disorder.

At the symposium, one of the lectures was titled "Decriminalizing Mental Disorder Concepts - Pedophilia as an Example."  It was presented by John Z. Sadler, M.D., Prof. of medical ethics and psychiatry, UT Southwestern Medical Ctr., Dallas, TX.2

Is this a precursor of more sexual "reconsiderations" in a changing world where sexual permissiveness in the form of homosexual behavior now seeks acceptability by redefining marriage so it can hide within its sacred halls and gain acceptability?  We have to ask if such a symposium would have gained traction if the fidelity of traditional marriage had remained intact, and along with it the sanctity of sexuality that marriage provides.  I can't see how.  With the redefining of sexual roles and marriage partners, the dike that holds back the immoral deluge is cracking.

When the door to marriage redefinition is opened, a host of sexual moral obscenities can slip in.  When and how do we close the door again?  After pedophilia is accepted by society?  What about polygamy, polyandry, and polyamory?  Without a definite statement that marriage is between a man and a woman, and with it the natural biologically designed sexual union that is guarded within marriage, then anything goes -- pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, gender identity, and more.  Philosophically, this can have profound moral ramifications for society, and when morals change society changes and everyone within it is affected.

As history too often demonstrates, when a society's morality frays the wicked prosper and they soon turn their attention to the morally conservative and persecute them.  This is already occurring here in America where people who dare express contrary opinions to the politically correct view of homosexual marriage are fired from jobs, ridiculed, and/or called bigots.  This causes others, myself included, to be wary about saying anything, lest the brown-shirts3 of the homosexual agenda turn us in and we be punished for simply believing that homosexual marriage is wrong.  Think it won't happen?  It already is! Harm is a relative term.  What might be considered harmful to one person might not to another.  There are different kinds of harm:  physical, emotional, spiritual, financial, etc.  Therefore, harm is a personal thing that is experienced and is a bit subjective.  So, when we ask how gay marriage harms anyone, we have to look at more than just one aspect.

Marriage has been universally acknowledged throughout history as a legal contract between a man and a woman in which there is emotional and sexual fidelity, along with childrearing.  But homosexual marriage would change this.  Since marriage is also a moral issue, redefining marriage is redefining morals.  Furthermore, marriage is an extremely wide-spread practice within any society and has many legal and moral issues attached to it.  So, when marriage is redefined, the society is dramatically affected.  Legalizing gay marriage means changing the laws of the land.  The ramifications are vast and we are seeing the effects of homosexual legal "rights" affecting housing, education, the work place, medicine, the armed forces, adoption, religion, etc.  Are all the changes good?  That is hotly debated.  But we have to ask, is it morally right to force all of society to adopt the morals of a minority?  (See Statistics on the percentage of the population that are homosexual and lesbian)

So, how would gay marriage harm anyone?  First, let's define harm.  Harm is damage to a person physically, emotionally, mentally, spiritually, financially, morally, etc.  The definition is obviously broad and subjective, and this is problematic.  People experience harm in different ways.   

Here is a list of ways in which gay marriage can bring harm.

  1. It can bring huge financial and emotional stress.
    • Homosexuals can sue people who are exercising their religious beliefs. For example, a heterosexual married couple with children who do not want to rent a room in their own family household to homosexuals could be sued for discrimination based on "sexual orientation." This can incur significant financial and emotional stress upon the family, not to mention the "prior restraint" effect of the fear of being sued which results in a family not renting out a room.
  2. The health risks are enormous to themselves and others.
    • The fact is that homosexuals do not live as long as heterosexuals due to the health risks associated with the lifestyle, and billions of dollars are spent annually in health care for them. See Statistics on HIV/AIDS and health related issues
    • But the HIV/AIDS epidemic is not only in the homosexual community. It has crossed over to the heterosexual community. 
    • Whether or not you want to say that HIV/AIDS is a homosexual disease, the fact is that it is highly prevalent among the gay and lesbian community due to their great number of sex partners. The collateral damage to the rest of society, as far as health risks, cannot be denied.
  3. Gay Marriage means having the morals of the minority forced upon the majority.
    • This can also be said in the reverse. Either way, there is a problem. Normally, morals should not be forced on anyone, though there are exceptions. We force morals on others by preventing them from stealing, raping, murdering, etc. So, it is not automatically wrong to force morals on someone. But the issue then becomes what is morally right and wrong in the first place, and altering morals in a society definitely causes stress.
    • The percentage of homosexuals in society is less than 5%, yet it is being forced upon the other 95% of society in movies, TV, literature, and political periods. See Statistics on the percentage of the population that are homosexual and lesbian.
  4. Gay Marriage means a redefinition of sexual morality, and with it other sexually related practices will be affected and this can be harmful.
    • See the article Collateral damage effect as a result the change in sexual morals for a discussion on the increase in pedophilia, pornography, child pornography, prostitution, and sex trafficking that are occurring in the world. These increases are not due to an increase in conservative sexual morals, but a reduction of conservative sexual morals.
  5. Gay Marriage reduces the number of children born in society and we need a stable population base to operate properly. Therefore, society can be harmed.
  6. Gay Marriage affects people spiritually.
    • Don't assume that people's spiritual beliefs are irrelevant. People consider spiritual issues to be extremely important, and the stress imposed on religious people by forcing them to "accept" and/or support homosexual practice and/or intimidate them into silence harms a person's spiritual and emotional health.
  7. It forces government to get involved in changing laws which automatically affect everyone in society.
    • Homosexuality is being force fed to our youth via the education system.
    • Civil unions are being recognized by employers which effect co-workers, money payouts, work time, etc.
  8. It exposes adopted children within potential homosexual unions to ridicule from others.


#15
Parker1

Parker1

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,112 posts

 

 



 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?

 

Dr's don't say, I'm gay, give me a license to practice medicine. They take years of classes, years of internships, take a very difficult exam and if they are successful, they are granted a license to practice medicine.
Being a Dr. is a privilege, granted by a State, not a right.

Pilots don't say, I am gay, give me a license to fly an airplane. They take classes, most spend years perfecting their flying through experience and flying hours, must pass a test and demonstrate that they can safely fly (and land) a plane safely. Then they are awarded a license to fly. Being a pilot is a privilege, not a right.

Drivers don't say I'm gay, give me a license to drive. They take classes, spend hours behind the wheel learning how to drive, must pass two tests and then they are awarded a driver's license by the State. Having a driver's license is a privilege, not a right.

Gays don't have the right, just because they are gay, to demand a marriage license by the State. If the people of that State vote to allow gay marriage, then they are equally entitled to apply for and get one. But, if the people have voted to amend their State's Constitution to ban gay marriage, then they are not entitled to apply for and get one. The issue still remains that it is not in the Fed's purview to decide if what the people have chosen is right or wrong, as long as it is not prohibited by the US Constitution. Getting married is not a right, it is a privilege that is regulated by the States. Not the Feds. The State is not required to issue anyone a marriage license, even to heterosexuals.

We are Christians, we follow the will of the Father if we follow Christ. We are not told to compromise our values because it is expedient or what society wants. We are instructed to "stand firm" in our convictions. We are to obey GOD's laws whenever they conflict with man's laws, even though GOD had placed leaders above us. Forget what people want; this is not your home. Do what GOD would have you to do, and let man do what he wants. And GOD does not want you to be silent, either. We are to be His witnesses. Don't place gays under your judgment, but be true to GOD. Don't aid and abet sin by being silent, but be a visual witness of your faith. Saying that people have the right to sin is sin in itself. Feeling that one is attracted to a person of the same sex in not a sin, but performing homosexual acts is. And giving them a license to wed is giving them a license to sin. After all, they don't give you a license to commit adultery or to cohabitate with a person of the opposite sex do they? Yet, they are sins. Do you think we should give licences to these people?



#16
AlanLamb0986

AlanLamb0986
  • Members
  • 60 posts

 

 

 



 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?

 

Dr's don't say, I'm gay, give me a license to practice medicine. They take years of classes, years of internships, take a very difficult exam and if they are successful, they are granted a license to practice medicine.
Being a Dr. is a privilege, granted by a State, not a right.

Pilots don't say, I am gay, give me a license to fly an airplane. They take classes, most spend years perfecting their flying through experience and flying hours, must pass a test and demonstrate that they can safely fly (and land) a plane safely. Then they are awarded a license to fly. Being a pilot is a privilege, not a right.

Drivers don't say I'm gay, give me a license to drive. They take classes, spend hours behind the wheel learning how to drive, must pass two tests and then they are awarded a driver's license by the State. Having a driver's license is a privilege, not a right.

Gays don't have the right, just because they are gay, to demand a marriage license by the State. If the people of that State vote to allow gay marriage, then they are equally entitled to apply for and get one. But, if the people have voted to amend their State's Constitution to ban gay marriage, then they are not entitled to apply for and get one. The issue still remains that it is not in the Fed's purview to decide if what the people have chosen is right or wrong, as long as it is not prohibited by the US Constitution. Getting married is not a right, it is a privilege that is regulated by the States. Not the Feds. The State is not required to issue anyone a marriage license, even to heterosexuals.

We are Christians, we follow the will of the Father if we follow Christ. We are not told to compromise our values because it is expedient or what society wants. We are instructed to "stand firm" in our convictions. We are to obey GOD's laws whenever they conflict with man's laws, even though GOD had placed leaders above us. Forget what people what; this is not your home. Do what GOD would have you to do, and let man do what he wants. And GOD does not want you to be silent, either. We are to be His witnesses. Don't place gays under your judgment, but be true to GOD. Don't aid and abet sin by being silent, but be a visual witness of your faith. Saying that people have the right to sin is sin in itself. Feeling that one is attracted to a person of the same sex in not a sin, but performing homosexual acts is. And giving them a license to wed is giving them a license to sin. After all, they don't give you a license to commit adultery or to cohabitate with a person of the opposite sex do they? Yet, they are sins. Do you think we should give licences to these people?

 

Finally, some Christian logic.



#17
Remnantrob

Remnantrob

    Veteran Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts

 

 

 



 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?

 

Dr's don't say, I'm gay, give me a license to practice medicine. They take years of classes, years of internships, take a very difficult exam and if they are successful, they are granted a license to practice medicine.
Being a Dr. is a privilege, granted by a State, not a right.

Pilots don't say, I am gay, give me a license to fly an airplane. They take classes, most spend years perfecting their flying through experience and flying hours, must pass a test and demonstrate that they can safely fly (and land) a plane safely. Then they are awarded a license to fly. Being a pilot is a privilege, not a right.

Drivers don't say I'm gay, give me a license to drive. They take classes, spend hours behind the wheel learning how to drive, must pass two tests and then they are awarded a driver's license by the State. Having a driver's license is a privilege, not a right.

Gays don't have the right, just because they are gay, to demand a marriage license by the State. If the people of that State vote to allow gay marriage, then they are equally entitled to apply for and get one. But, if the people have voted to amend their State's Constitution to ban gay marriage, then they are not entitled to apply for and get one. The issue still remains that it is not in the Fed's purview to decide if what the people have chosen is right or wrong, as long as it is not prohibited by the US Constitution. Getting married is not a right, it is a privilege that is regulated by the States. Not the Feds. The State is not required to issue anyone a marriage license, even to heterosexuals.

We are Christians, we follow the will of the Father if we follow Christ. We are not told to compromise our values because it is expedient or what society wants. We are instructed to "stand firm" in our convictions. We are to obey GOD's laws whenever they conflict with man's laws, even though GOD had placed leaders above us. Forget what people want; this is not your home. Do what GOD would have you to do, and let man do what he wants. And GOD does not want you to be silent, either. We are to be His witnesses. Don't place gays under your judgment, but be true to GOD. Don't aid and abet sin by being silent, but be a visual witness of your faith. Saying that people have the right to sin is sin in itself. Feeling that one is attracted to a person of the same sex in not a sin, but performing homosexual acts is. And giving them a license to wed is giving them a license to sin. After all, they don't give you a license to commit adultery or to cohabitate with a person of the opposite sex do they? Yet, they are sins. Do you think we should give licences to these people?

 

 

The point of my asking those questions are the reasoning behind why each state is slowly allowing gay marriage laws to pass. 

Christian groups brought up tradition as a reason why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed.  It's always been a man and a woman.  But tradition used to say a black man could not marry a white woman. Therefore that argument couldn't stand.  The religious reasoning I have already mentioned why it doesn't stand.  So the Christian says that marriage is for procreation.  But then you'd have to take away marriage licenses from people who can't have kids or 70 year old people who want to get married late in life.  There is no reason under united states law why a gay person can not be allow to be issued a marriage license solely because they are gay.  This does not change the fact that Christians are to call a spade a spade and sin sin, but knowing that you will be in trouble with the law for "promoting hate" is a part of prophecy.  Jesus says you will be hated for my name sake.  I just wanted to show that you don't change the mind of a homosexual by changing the law.  You lift up Christ and let the Holy spirit do the changing of their mind.  That's all I wanted to get across. God bless.



#18
AlanLamb0986

AlanLamb0986
  • Members
  • 60 posts

 

 

 

 



 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?

 

Dr's don't say, I'm gay, give me a license to practice medicine. They take years of classes, years of internships, take a very difficult exam and if they are successful, they are granted a license to practice medicine.
Being a Dr. is a privilege, granted by a State, not a right.

Pilots don't say, I am gay, give me a license to fly an airplane. They take classes, most spend years perfecting their flying through experience and flying hours, must pass a test and demonstrate that they can safely fly (and land) a plane safely. Then they are awarded a license to fly. Being a pilot is a privilege, not a right.

Drivers don't say I'm gay, give me a license to drive. They take classes, spend hours behind the wheel learning how to drive, must pass two tests and then they are awarded a driver's license by the State. Having a driver's license is a privilege, not a right.

Gays don't have the right, just because they are gay, to demand a marriage license by the State. If the people of that State vote to allow gay marriage, then they are equally entitled to apply for and get one. But, if the people have voted to amend their State's Constitution to ban gay marriage, then they are not entitled to apply for and get one. The issue still remains that it is not in the Fed's purview to decide if what the people have chosen is right or wrong, as long as it is not prohibited by the US Constitution. Getting married is not a right, it is a privilege that is regulated by the States. Not the Feds. The State is not required to issue anyone a marriage license, even to heterosexuals.

We are Christians, we follow the will of the Father if we follow Christ. We are not told to compromise our values because it is expedient or what society wants. We are instructed to "stand firm" in our convictions. We are to obey GOD's laws whenever they conflict with man's laws, even though GOD had placed leaders above us. Forget what people want; this is not your home. Do what GOD would have you to do, and let man do what he wants. And GOD does not want you to be silent, either. We are to be His witnesses. Don't place gays under your judgment, but be true to GOD. Don't aid and abet sin by being silent, but be a visual witness of your faith. Saying that people have the right to sin is sin in itself. Feeling that one is attracted to a person of the same sex in not a sin, but performing homosexual acts is. And giving them a license to wed is giving them a license to sin. After all, they don't give you a license to commit adultery or to cohabitate with a person of the opposite sex do they? Yet, they are sins. Do you think we should give licences to these people?

 

 

The point of my asking those questions are the reasoning behind why each state is slowly allowing gay marriage laws to pass. 

Christian groups brought up tradition as a reason why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed.  It's always been a man and a woman.  But tradition used to say a black man could not marry a white woman. Therefore that argument couldn't stand.  The religious reasoning I have already mentioned why it doesn't stand.  So the Christian says that marriage is for procreation.  But then you'd have to take away marriage licenses from people who can't have kids or 70 year old people who want to get married late in life.  There is no reason under united states law why a gay person can not be allow to be issued a marriage license solely because they are gay.  This does not change the fact that Christians are to call a spade a spade and sin sin, but knowing that you will be in trouble with the law for "promoting hate" is a part of prophecy.  Jesus says you will be hated for my name sake.  I just wanted to show that you don't change the mind of a homosexual by changing the law.  You lift up Christ and let the Holy spirit do the changing of their mind.  That's all I wanted to get across. God bless.

 

No Christian says that same sex marriage is immoral because of tradition. We call it a sin, because it is. We go back to the belief in God, and His word. We're not calling it a sin because we hate homosexuals, we just don't disagree with God. Your arguments about what used to be is mute- we used to consider interracial marriage wrong, not a sin- it has no scripture to condemn it. Of course it's not wrong, we were just ignorant.Why do people only disagree with the morality/immorality of gay marriage? No one disagrees with God's view of rape, murder, and so on. But hey, you're not disagreeing with God, you're just agreeing with the laws that disagree with God, right? Christians are to call a sin a sin, but support a persons right to gay marriage? 'Hey this is a sin, you can do it, but I'll correct you after.' Good logic. ;) Answer me these questions:

Do you believe in God?

Is homosexuality a sin?

Does God view homosexual marriage as a sin?

Is God wrong?

 

Homosexual is harmful to both the society, and to the person. Putting a ring on it doesn't mean all is well. Just in case you say homosexuality doesn't hurt people:

  • Homosexuals more likely to suffer from depression: "A new study in the United Kingdom has revealed thathomosexuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population, reports Health24.com....the risk of suicide jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homosexual lifestyle...the lifespan of a homosexual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heterosexual...While the Health 24 article suggested that homosexuals may be pushed to substance abuse and suicide because of anti-homosexual cultural and family pressures, empirical tests have shown that there is no difference in homosexual health risk depending on the level of tolerance in a particular environment.Homosexuals in the United States and Denmark - the latter of which is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homosexuality - both die on average in their early 50's, or in their 40's if AIDS is the cause of death. The average age for all residents in either country ranges from the mid-to-upper-70s."(onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=255614)
  • Breast Cancer higher among Lesbians: "Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed among women and is the leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, following cancers of the skin and lung. Recent research has identified risk factors for breast cancer that may differentially affect lesbian and bisexual women, including nulliparity and higher rates of alcohol consumption and overweight, that may place this population at geater [sic] risk than heterosexual women of developing breast cancer." 
  •  2% of U.S. population is gay yet it accounts for 61% of HIV infection:  "Men who have sex with men remain the group most heavily affected by new HIV infections. While CDC estimates that MSM represent only 2 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for the majority (61 percent; 29,300) of all new HIV infections in 2009. Young MSM (ages 13 to 29) were most severely affected, representing more than one quarter of all new HIV infections nationally (27 percent; 12,900 in 2009)."  (Center for Disease Control, cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/HIVIncidencePressRelease.html)
  • "Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s….” (Center for Disease Control,  http://www.cdc.gov/h.../msm/index.htm)
 
  1. Gay men lifespan shorter than non gay men: "The life expectancy for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for men in general. Robert S. Hogg et al., "Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men," International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657." (Exodus Global Alliance, exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)
  2. "In 2007, MSM [Men Sex with Men] were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women." (Center for Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/h.../msm/index.htm)
  3. Domestic Violence higher among homosexuals: "'the incidence of domestic violence among gay men is nearly double that in the heterosexual population.'(Gwat Yong Lie and Sabrina Gentlewarrier, "Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications," Journal of Social Service Research 15 (1991): 41–59." (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)
  4. Sex of women with women at greater health risk than women with men: "For women, a history of sex with women may be a marker for increased risk of adverse sexual, reproductive, and general health outcomes compared with women who reported sex exclusively with men." (American Journal of Public Health,  ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/97/6/1126


#19
Parker1

Parker1

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,112 posts

I just wanted to show that you don't change the mind of a homosexual by changing the law.

 

 

 

But you see, we are not trying to change any laws. Homosexuals are the one's with the agenda. They are the ones trying to change laws. They are the ones fighting the majority of the peoples' will in those States that have marriage laws. All we, as Christians are doing, is standing up for what we believe in. Those of us who are not willing to compromise our convictions because of what a small minority is trying to force upon society under the guise of tolerance and justice. They are the ones who are intolerant, that changes justice into injustice, wrong into right and right into wrong. Just as prophecy has said, as you have so aptly pointed out. This is how a large segment of the population feels, Christian or not, and we are not in anybody's face about it. Gays are in our faces. Surely you see that? And it's not just about marriage, but the fundamental changing of society.



#20
LuftWaffle

LuftWaffle

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 726 posts

 

 

Ok Alan, I get what you're saying and I agree with you in that morally it is wrong.  But again we are talking about in regards to the constitution.  The founders of this country were some pretty smart guys in that they knew what it was to have both the state and church have a union of power and dictate what a person should or should not do.  Hence the declaration of Independence(first part)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness

 

Now the problem is that marriage became a state issued license and although Christians say marriage is a christian institution, you can't impose a religious activity on a person so we're back to square one.  What say you?

"Why should we try to influence the laws to promote our religious beliefs?" Because our belief in God should cause us to abide by the Law, but the Spirit should guide us to what is good and pleasing to the Lord. I must respect a homosexual couples right to marriage, but I don't, and should not agree to it. Jesus called us to follow the Law and be subject to the governments. I am subject, but I can still verbally disagree with strong disdain. 

You get that homosexuality is wrong, BUT we're talking about the Constitution? I hate to tell you Americans, but God doesn't care about the U.S Constitution. You speak of the Constitution as if it were divinely inspired. You can't say to God 'Homosexuality was legal in our nation.' God decides what is legal, what is wrong. You can't possibly defend that statement from a Christian perspective, only as an American. God doesn't care about your citizenship. The word 'God' doesn't appear in the Constitution. While governments exist under God, that doesn't mean they are for God. The U.S was not founded as a Christian nation.The 1706 Treaty with Tripoli says that 'the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.' Most of the Founding Fathers were deists, not Christian,

God isn't pro-America, pro-Britain etc. That's not what John 3:16 means. It means that God loves each individual that makes up the world. God doesn't care about a mass of people, He loves the individuals that make the collective. God won't judge man on whether He abides by man-made Laws.

You can't impose God's word on man, damn straight. But that still doesn't change the fact that when man wanders from God's word, it's called 'sin.' Whether the U.S allows that sin is utterly mute, God still hates that sin, and absolutely doesn't care about mankind's laws. He orders us to follow the law of the land, but He isn't bound by it.

 

 

 

Alan, Take a breather.....I'm not promoting that gay marriage is moral. I'm saying gays have the right according to the laws of the land. 

 

Answer me this.

 

Would it be right for a Christian group to petition their law makers to deny a person to get a license to practice medicine because they're gay?

How about a license to fly a plane?

How about a license to drive a car?

 

If not then why a marriage license?  Remember, the argument is not morality...it is as a human being, do they have a right to get a license issued by the state? If not then why not?

 

 

Sexual behaviour has nothing to do with medicine or flying a plane or driving a car. However it has everything to do with marriage.

I don't believe that marriage is simply a thing that one can define any way one chooses. Marriage is a description of the natural union between a man and a woman.

 

In terms of same sex marriage being the law of the land though immoral. All legislation is moral. You can't legislate anything but morality, so if homosexual behaviour is immoral then at the very least government shouldn't be promoting it by making no distinction between it and a natural marriage.






Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Message Boards - 1999-2014 part of the Worthy Network