Why the Same-Sex Marriage Experiment Will Not Work

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

Viole you can't always seen and measure the impact.

The church of Sweden needs to repent. This is so clearly spelled out in scripture that it boggles my mind to quibble about it .

If you refer to the part that says that homosexuality is an abomination, then you have to consider that there are other parts in scriptures which are not endorsed anymore by any church in the world. So, either you apply all the laws of scripture or you make exceptions, but then why not making an exception with homosexuality?

We do not see any impact or difference in our daily life since homosexuals can marry in the church. I mean, why should it? Even if they could not marry, they would live together anyway, so an additional bit of legal paper does not make much of a difference. On the contrary, it enforces the same legal duties and rights to all couples, independently of their sexual orientation.

I like your posts Viole.. Probably because I think we have very similiar points of view..

I would like to add that while the bible mentions many sins, and each is important to look into and consider prayerfully for Christians on how these sins or abominations may exist in our own activities, we should really look to the sin as being lust here... and what Paul says about lust:

"To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion." (1 Corinthians 7:8-9 RSV)

To govern our lustful passions, Paul recommends marriage... Ideally, of course, he is saying we should remain single and devote our lives to God only... BUT if we know we can't do that, we should marry. We cannot do this except by marrying someone to whom we can engage in as a monogamous sexual partnership.. By limiting homosexuals to marrying only those they are not sexually attracted to, we are preventing them from governing their passion as Paul recoomends. Furthermore, by doing so, we are encouraging non-monogamous sexual relationships.

My friend, welcome to worthy!

I'm afraid I must heartly disagree with you.

You're taking what the scripoture doesn't say, inserting something you figure it should say, and believing that over what it actually does say.

What scripture says about homosexuality is "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error" (Romans 1:26-27).

So to encourage people to engage in such a union is a grave error for which the Bible says they will receive due penalty.

Your reasoning is merely a deduction that based on an unbiblical (and therefore faulty) premise of simply what seems right to you, but again what scripture says seems right to a person is not what we should do, "There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death" (Proverbs 14:12). This sentiment is repeated in the epistle we saw above condemning homosexual activity "What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death (Romans 6:21).

viole does not believe the Bible, so you're agreeing with someone who disagrees with scripture and the extention to that is that you're demostrably disagreeing with scripture.

I submit, you can not justify homosexuality using the Bible and be consistent with the Bible. While we're not to judge those outside the assembly of believers because their judge is God, we cannot whitewash unbiblical actions on their behalf, nor can we justify what the Bible forbids of those who've been born again in Christ.

I further submit that the error you support is a grave one and will only make things much more confused and difficult for anyone who truely seeks to please God.

[lemminglord]

My friend, welcome to worthy!

I'm afraid I must heartly disagree with you.

...

I further submit that the error you support is a grave one and will only make things much more confused and difficult for anyone who truely seeks to please God.

My premise is this: Paul gives Christians two ways to deal with our lustful sin.. We can abstain from acting on our lust (ideal) or we can get married so that our lust is confined by civil law (more common). Now with that in mind, and knowing that homosexuals are subject to the same level of lust in their hearts as heterosexuals, it is clear that many homosexuals too are unable to abstain from engaging in lustful acts. With that in mind, we should encourage our government to provide for civil advantages for monogamous homosexuals, and civil disadvantages for failling to meet a monogamous life style.

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

My friend, welcome to worthy!

I'm afraid I must heartly disagree with you.

...

I further submit that the error you support is a grave one and will only make things much more confused and difficult for anyone who truely seeks to please God.

My premise is this: Paul gives Christians two ways to deal with our lustful sin.. We can abstain from acting on our lust (ideal) or we can get married so that our lust is confined by civil law (more common). Now with that in mind, and knowing that homosexuals are subject to the same level of lust in their hearts as heterosexuals, it is clear that many homosexuals too are unable to abstain from engaging in lustful acts. With that in mind, we should encourage our government to provide for civil advantages for monogamous homosexuals, and civil disadvantages for failling to meet a monogamous life style.

Hello again, and thank you for the response!

I know what your premise was as you articulated it well in the first place, but your premise assumes that homosexuality is not in itself the sin of lust.

You're saying since we either avoid lust by abstainance or marriage then the homosexuals should marry to avoid the sin of lust based on the Biblical criteria of how to avoid lust.

However, to try to make the point you're excluding the background information that homosexuality itself is the sin of lust, as we saw from Romans (and I might add that you're literally excluding this information as you deleted the passage when you quoted my post - which doesn't wipe it out of the Bible I have to point out), so you can't avoid the sin of lust according to Biblical criteria by commiting the sin of lust according to Biblical criteria.

That was the unspoken part of your premise which is flawed.

We're told it is lust, we're told it is error, and we're told the error will be punished, so it's simply contradictory to propose that it could be a solution to the error it commits, "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error" (Romans 1: 26-27).

Chirst died for all of us regardless of our inclinations, but that simply does not justify certain behavours and actions. I too had to give up what I loved to do, and die to many things to be Christ-like. I know several people who were practicing such behaviours and have stopped entirely and joyfully just as I've stopped living in/for my sins.

[~candice~]

Paul never gives homosexuals the option of getting married and having sex as a way of dealing with their sinful lusts. Paul points to a better way...

1Co 10:12 So that he that thinks to stand, let him be careful that he not fall.

1Co 10:13 No temptation has taken you except what is human; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above what you are able. But with the temptation, He will also make the way out, so that you may be able to bear it.

1Co 10:14 On account of this, flee from idolatry, my beloved.

Eph 6:10 For the rest, my brothers, be made powerful in the Lord and in the might of His strength.

Eph 6:11 Put on all the armor of God, for you to be able to stand against the wiles of the Devil,

Eph 6:12 because wrestling against flesh and blood is not to us, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the world's rulers, of the darkness of this age, against the spiritual powers of evil in the heavenlies.

Eph 6:13 Because of this, take up all of the armor of God that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having worked out all things, to stand.

Eph 6:14 Then stand firm, "having girded your loins about with truth" and having put "on the breastplate of righteousness," Isa. 11:5; 59:17

Eph 6:15 and having shod the feet with the preparation of the "gospel of peace." Isa. 52:7

Eph 6:16 Above all, taking up the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the darts of the evil one being kindled.

Eph 6:17 Also, take "the helmet of salvation," and the sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God; Isa. 59:17 LXX-Isa. 11:4; MT-Isa. 49:2; LXX and MT-Hos. 6:5

Eph 6:18 through all prayer and petition, praying at all times in the Spirit, and watching to this same thing with all perseverance and petition concerning all the saints.

Rom 12:1 Therefore, brothers, I call on you through the compassions of God to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing to God, which is your reasonable service.

Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, in order to prove by you what is the good and pleasing and perfect will of God.

1Th 4:1 For the rest, then brothers, we beg you and we exhort in the Lord Jesus, even as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, that you abound more.

1Th 4:2 For you know what injunctions we gave you through the Lord Jesus.

1Th 4:3 For this is God's will, your sanctification, for you to abstain from fornication,

1Th 4:4 each one of you to know to possess his vessel in sanctification and honor,

1Th 4:5 not in passion of lust, even as also the nations do, not knowing God;

1Th 4:6 not to go beyond and to overreach his brother in the matter, because the avenger concerning all these is the Lord, even as we told you before, and solemnly testified.

1Th 4:7 For God did not call us to impurity, but in purity.

1Th 4:8 Therefore, the one that despises does not despise man, but God, even He giving His Holy Spirit to us.

etc etc

[lemminglord]

Hello again, and thank you for the response!

I know what your premise was as you articulated it well in the first place, but your premise assumes that homosexuality is not in itself the sin of lust.

You're saying since we either avoid lust by abstainance or marriage then the homosexuals should marry to avoid the sin of lust based on the Biblical criteria of how to avoid lust.

Sorry I may have been unclear. I am saying that heterosexual lust and homosexual lust are both sins; and just as Paul is wise to ask Christians who can't control their sin of heterosexual lust to get married so as to minimize the damage caused by their sin; so too is it wise to ask anybody who can't control their sin of lust to get married so as to minimize the damage caused by their sin.

[lemminglord]

Sorry I may have been unclear. I am saying that heterosexual lust and homosexual lust are both sins; and just as Paul is wise to ask Christians who can't control their sin of heterosexual lust to get married so as to minimize the damage caused by their sin; so too is it wise to ask anybody who can't control their sin of lust to get married so as to minimize the damage caused by their sin.

Homosexuals marrying does not minimize the damage caused by the sin. It is, in fact, another sin stacked up on top of the original one. Paul reinforces the OT statements, and states even more clearly that homosexuality is wrong, that it is a sin. There is nothing one can do to make that sin acceptable or lessen the severity of it. Marriage does not alleviate the sin because the only marriage God recognizes is one between a man and a woman. A marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman does nothing to lessen the sin because God does not see that marriage. It is not recognized by God and does not exist as a covenant spiritually. Nothing can make homosexual sin acceptable in any way, shape or form.

Paul does this. Yes.

There is a practical side of Paul's advice that is still very important to society... regardless of the sinful nature... there is damage caused to society by non-monagmous sexual relationships.. the spread of disease being the most impactful in the short term; while having a partner who is partially responsible for actions may be even more important in the long term.. When a human being has a tie to the community (such as marriage) they live longer, driver safer, and live cheaper. Clearly monogamy is preferable to society.

I also need to disagree about the idea that to allow same sex marriage would somehow encourage sinful activity. A homosexual interested in same sex marriage is going to have sex whether the government gives him the option to do so in a civilly protected monagamous relationship or not. The amonut of sin is the same; but the damage to society from lust-related consequences is mitigated.

[lemminglord]

No. Everything you said is based on a worldly and secular viewpoint which doesn't even get you a cup of coffee spiritually. Paul does not condone homosexuality or homosexual marriage in any way, and if he were a poster here on this forum, he would tell you so. Your reasoning that homosexuality is somehow acceptable if the relationship is monagamous or the two homosexuals get married is very skewed logic and it is entirely secular-based. It is the same as saying that if a person is pre-disposed to rape that they should just rape the same woman over and over again, or if they are pre-disposed to molest a child, to just molest the same one. Your logic does not work, even on a secular level. Nature itself displays that homosexuality is wrong without even bringing religion or morals into the discussion. Plain common sense and the way humans are designed tells you it is wrong. There is no way to justify it, even in a secular way, beyond the fact that there is a group of people bound and determined to practice and promote their aberant life style no matter what. And people in support of them have abandoned all common sense.

I accept that Paul wouldn't condone homoesxuality.

However, as this is the "universal moral law" section of the outer court of the forums, I am using the logic Paul uses to show a more universal law that his logic clearly points to: if you are going to sin, do so that it does the least damage to least people. From a utiliitarian and yes secular point of view, homosexualality causes no more or less damage than heterosexuality. To curb the spread of disease, it is in society's best interests to provide for state supported monogamy. Moreover, to assure health benefits for the most people, all human beings should have the power of the state behind them making monogamous connections to life partners if not for any other reason but to share the burden of health care costs.

I don't care how aberant a life style is - I care about what benefit it is to our society. Homosexuals face the same concerns as heterosexuals and bisexuals with regards to needing secure companionship. We are improving our society by letting the strength and security of the state support mongamous relationships for any adults, regardless of their sexual orientation.

[Arthur Durnan]

God never meant for two men to procreate. What else is worthy of recall?

[enoob57]

It just doesn't spell out...

What do you get with two males or females???? EXTINCTION

[lemminglord]

God never meant for two men to procreate. What else is worthy of recall?

God never meant for us to sin at all, yet we still need laws to bring order to the sin nature of our society. The way society deals with heterosexual lust's negative side is: encouraging monogamy. The way society deals with homosexual lust's negative consequence? Put our fingers in our ears and sing la la la, they're an aberation... la la la. We need to start treating homosexuals like any other kind of sexual human being and give them opportunities to become part of a secure relationship with the rights and responsibilities accorded to different-sex married coupled.

It just doens't spell out...

What do you get with two males or females???? EXTINCTION

Do you really think everyone is going to turn gay and marry someone of the same sex if same sex marriage becomes the norm? That would be a slippery slope fallacy.