[cheerdad]

Beetle you amaze me sometimes. Grant it, some of your posts make a little bit of sense, but I think the last one is your personal best!!! I honestly believe that if there was ANYTHING at all to your accusation about Obama, the Republican Party would have been all over this like white on rice.

[cheerdad]

These Genesis, Leviticus and Deuteronomy quotes are from the Old Testmament and were meant to try and keep the Jewish people pure. Of course the New Testament changed all of that with the Gentiles being brought into the fold. As for the quotes from Jeremiah and Acts, I don't take them to mean that inter-racial marriage is a sin. Sorry but I don't see the connection. And yes you did have some old line churches and even some modern day churches that use the Bible and quote out of context to make their beliefs appear to be factual when they may not be. You just have to read the Bible in the context of the quote and make your own determination.

As for homosexuality, the government can do whatever it likes. It is only a civil union under our laws anyway. But it is wrong and also unnatural IMO. Homosexuals cannot even reproduce the last time I checked. What sort of family units are we wanting to create? Of course with the way people treat marriage now I guess it doesn't matter anyway. The majority of kids come from broken families and single parent households. No wonder people are like they are now and the morals of our society are in decline. We could even go further and allow people to marry their pets. What do you think about that idea? Seriously, I know there are people that would and if you allow homosexual relationships to be recognized, then these people would have an argument to make as well.

EKYSportster, I couldn't agree with you more ... in your first paragraph!!! But, you're missing the point!!! POINT=Christians and churches and even our government using certain verses of the Bible to support their beliefs on the hot topic of the time. Example being in my last post about interracial marriage and now, this discussion thread! People were just as adamant about interracial marriage back then as people are today about gay marriage. I remember it well...and it wasn't just a few churches either. It was every main stream religious organization that had their doors open. I can't remember which TV evangelist it was, Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, but one of them even was on their show and even apologized to the people and admitted he was wrong in being against interracial marriage and for using the Bible as the pillar of their beliefs. Another thing that happened when the New Testament was written is that what is known as the Holiness Code was no longer applicable to the modern day Christian...would you agree with that?

You may say "it's only a civil union anyway" but it means the same thing. I agree, I don't want same sex couples calling it marriage, I don't...but because the words are different, don't make the meaning any different. In Vermont, the Civil Union allows state tax benefits, and many more things, in Massachusetts, they call it marriage and it equates to the same benefits.

You have to do MORE than "... just have to read the Bible in the context of the quote and make your own determination". While reading and studying, you have to pray and ask God for understanding. You need to know and understand the context the ORIGINAL text! Personally, I think that is where many of our misinterpretations originate. We are so keen upon taking whatever beliefs our church has, whatever our pastors say as being gospel, instead of getting into the Word ourselves and letting God speak to us.

[EKY Sportster]

EKYSportster, I couldn't agree with you more ... in your first paragraph!!! But, you're missing the point!!! POINT=Christians and churches and even our government using certain verses of the Bible to support their beliefs on the hot topic of the time. Example being in my last post about interracial marriage and now, this discussion thread! People were just as adamant about interracial marriage back then as people are today about gay marriage. I remember it well...and it wasn't just a few churches either. It was every main stream religious organization that had their doors open. I can't remember which TV evangelist it was, Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, but one of them even was on their show and even apologized to the people and admitted he was wrong in being against interracial marriage and for using the Bible as the pillar of their beliefs. Another thing that happened when the New Testament was written is that what is known as the Holiness Code was no longer applicable to the modern day Christian...would you agree with that?

You may say "it's only a civil union anyway" but it means the same thing. I agree, I don't want same sex couples calling it marriage, I don't...but because the words are different, don't make the meaning any different. In Vermont, the Civil Union allows state tax benefits, and many more things, in Massachusetts, they call it marriage and it equates to the same benefits.

You have to do MORE than "... just have to read the Bible in the context of the quote and make your own determination". While reading and studying, you have to pray and ask God for understanding. You need to know and understand the context the ORIGINAL text! Personally, I think that is where many of our misinterpretations originate. We are so keen upon taking whatever beliefs our church has, whatever our pastors say as being gospel, instead of getting into the Word ourselves and letting God speak to us.

There you go Cheerdad!! That is exactly the point that needs to be made. The Bible hasn't changed, it is the way the church or churches want to interpret it! You can take anything out of context and use it anyway you want. But that doesn't mean that is what is being said in the actual document. Same applies to the Bible! That is what I meant by read it! Don't just go by your pastor's view, your church's view, or take a snippit or verse and use it the wrong way.

[cheerdad]

There you go Cheerdad!! That is exactly the point that needs to be made. The Bible hasn't changed, it is the way the church or churches want to interpret it! You can take anything out of context and use it anyway you want. But that doesn't mean that is what is being said in the actual document. Same applies to the Bible! That is what I meant by read it! Don't just go by your pastor's view, your church's view, or take a snippit or verse and use it the wrong way.

WOW.....we agree....to a certain extent!!! Did you think this would ever happen?? lol

Well, with your point being made, which is a very good point, you still missed my point.

[EKY Sportster]

WOW.....we agree....to a certain extent!!! Did you think this would ever happen?? lol

Well, with your point being made, which is a very good point, you still missed my point.

Just goes to show that almost anyone can agree on some common ground. lol No I haven't missed your points, but just choose to respond to what I feel the need to.

One thing I will state about all of this is that the Constitution is still the same as it originally was when first written and so is the Bible. It is the interpretations of these documents that has changed over the decades and centuries as the case may be. Aside from how man chooses to interpret either historic document, it doesn't change what was meant by them when they were first written. Would you agree with that?

[crazytaxidriver]

In my opinion being gay is wrong. There has been a lot of different views on this subject and a lot of people want to bring in the bible, and others don't. Now one thing I have learned growing up is, anyone can read the bible. But it takes a person with complete faith to actually understand what the bible is for. Sure you can break it down and study it in different languages but the main thing you have to have is faith in the word. Sodom and Gemorrah was destroyed due to it being a completely sinful city, and the only people worth saving was Lot and his family. His wife couldn't give it up though and she turned into a pillar of salt.

So if you guys want to keep arguing what's right and wrong go ahead. But what we have to remember when using the bible as a reference is that the Old Testament was written for the Jews as a set of laws for gaining entrance into Heaven. The New Testament was written for everyone. Jesus came to earth so that we as non Jews could also enter into the kingdom of heaven. But we have to accept Christ as our saviour. Now does this make the old Testament obsolete? No. What it means is when we break the laws of the old Testament we don't have to make a sacrifice of a goat or something. All we have to do is pray and ask God for forgiveness.

Is being gay wrong?? Yes.. So is premarital sex, being jealous of your neighbor, masturbation, adultery, and many many more human acts.. That's something we all have to keep in mind.

[warrior3]

AMEN crazytaxidriver. I couldn't have said it better myself. I wish more people in this country shared your views.

Ever wonder why our great country seems to be going downhill. Maybe it is because more of its citizens are not abiding by the Word of God and no acting in the manner that Jesus Christ expects from his children.

[thecavemaster]

In my opinion being gay is wrong. There has been a lot of different views on this subject and a lot of people want to bring in the bible, and others don't. Now one thing I have learned growing up is, anyone can read the bible. But it takes a person with complete faith to actually understand what the bible is for. Sure you can break it down and study it in different languages but the main thing you have to have is faith in the word. Sodom and Gemorrah was destroyed due to it being a completely sinful city, and the only people worth saving was Lot and his family. His wife couldn't give it up though and she turned into a pillar of salt.

So if you guys want to keep arguing what's right and wrong go ahead. But what we have to remember when using the bible as a reference is that the Old Testament was written for the Jews as a set of laws for gaining entrance into Heaven. The New Testament was written for everyone. Jesus came to earth so that we as non Jews could also enter into the kingdom of heaven. But we have to accept Christ as our saviour. Now does this make the old Testament obsolete? No. What it means is when we break the laws of the old Testament we don't have to make a sacrifice of a goat or something. All we have to do is pray and ask God for forgiveness.

Is being gay wrong?? Yes.. So is premarital sex, being jealous of your neighbor, masturbation, adultery, and many many more human acts.. That's something we all have to keep in mind.

The rightness or wrongness of homosexuality is not necessarily up for debate in many of these posts. Also, the theology of homosexuality is not of interest to many. The granting of same sex couples the rights extended to "married" heterosexual couples as an extension of the Equal Protection Clause. "god" grants equal protection to the just and unjust, the good and the evil (according to "jesus"). I can't see as we would be destroyed as a nation for doing the same.

[Mr.Kimball]

The rightness or wrongness of homosexuality is not necessarily up for debate in many of these posts. Also, the theology of homosexuality is not of interest to many. The granting of same sex couples the rights extended to "married" heterosexual couples as an extension of the Equal Protection Clause. "god" grants equal protection to the just and unjust, the good and the evil (according to "jesus"). I can't see as we would be destroyed as a nation for doing the same.

Oh really?:confused: I guess what you really meant to say is that it's of no interest to you, personally.

Seems to appear that it is the overwhelming basis for justification of what ever post that has been made by most individual posters in this thread.

[thecavemaster]

Oh really?:confused: I guess what you really meant to say is that it's of no interest to you, personally.

Seems to appear that it is the overwhelming basis for justification of what ever post that has been made by most individual posters in this thread.

Personally, I am interested. However, as a social issue, an issue of equal protection, I don't think it is of interest, nor is it of interest to many people who would like to be equally protected in same sex unions.

[cheerdad]

AMEN crazytaxidriver. I couldn't have said it better myself. I wish more people in this country shared your views.

Ever wonder why our great country seems to be going downhill. Maybe it is because more of its citizens are not abiding by the Word of God and no acting in the manner that Jesus Christ expects from his children.

Ever wonder why our great country seems to be going downhill....maybe it's because more of its CHURCHES and church MEMBERS are not not abiding by the Word of God and NOT acting in the manner that Jesus Christ expects from HIS children.

[cheerdad]

In my opinion being gay is wrong. There has been a lot of different views on this subject and a lot of people want to bring in the bible, and others don't. Now one thing I have learned growing up is, anyone can read the bible. But it takes a person with complete faith to actually understand what the bible is for. Sure you can break it down and study it in different languages but the main thing you have to have is faith in the word. Sodom and Gemorrah was destroyed due to it being a completely sinful city, and the only people worth saving was Lot and his family. His wife couldn't give it up though and she turned into a pillar of salt.

So if you guys want to keep arguing what's right and wrong go ahead. But what we have to remember when using the bible as a reference is that the Old Testament was written for the Jews as a set of laws for gaining entrance into Heaven. The New Testament was written for everyone. Jesus came to earth so that we as non Jews could also enter into the kingdom of heaven. But we have to accept Christ as our saviour. Now does this make the old Testament obsolete? No. What it means is when we break the laws of the old Testament we don't have to make a sacrifice of a goat or something. All we have to do is pray and ask God for forgiveness.

Is being gay wrong?? Yes.. So is premarital sex, being jealous of your neighbor, masturbation, adultery, and many many more human acts.. That's something we all have to keep in mind.

Good Post! I can agree with, ehhh, 96% of it!!! Still pondering the other
4%

[cheerdad]

Just goes to show that almost anyone can agree on some common ground. lol No I haven't missed your points, but just choose to respond to what I feel the need to.

One thing I will state about all of this is that the Constitution is still the same as it originally was when first written and so is the Bible. It is the interpretations of these documents that has changed over the decades and centuries as the case may be. Aside from how man chooses to interpret either historic document, it doesn't change what was meant by them when they were first written. Would you agree with that?

Yes and No...and here's why I say that...yes, the Constitution is still the same as it originally was....but the Bible is not. How many written translations are there of the Bible? How many written translations of the Constitution are there?

And, speaking of interpretation, who is right and who is wrong? The different interpretaions is my guess as to the reason why there are so many different denominations today. Is only one of these denominations (beliefs) going to make it to heaven? I guess that's my hang up over organized religion. Each believe that they are right, as so do all of us in this discussion. I honestly believe that what is in your heart, what's between you and God Almighty, that a person has asked God to come into their lives and have asked God to forgive them of their sins...that is what is important. Now, with that being said, only God and God himself knows who's name is in the book of life and for other people to say that they are right and someone who disagrees with them is wrong....well, is irrelevant. I use to be the person who honestly thought that because he believed what his denomination/church believed that I was right and everyone else was wrong. I am where I am today, who I am today, because of God's Grace and thank Him and praise Him daily for giving me an open heart and mind to better understand His word...I thank God I am not the man I use to be.

The translation of the Bible, ordered by King James, was not completely translated by "Christian" men. There were several "worldly" men involved in this translation and they were scattered all over the area and their own personal "beliefs" were involved in the translation based upon their stature in their community and locale.

"...but just choose to respond to what I feel the need to." This quote strikes me as interesting. This is the "typical" response by most Christians when it comes to this discussion. Do you not see how scripture is used by many to backup their personal belief about what ever the hot topic is of the time? Or do you choose not to see that??? Just asking a question....no offense intended!!!

[thecavemaster]

The Constitution stated broad principles of freedom that, for the most part, were not followed by its writers (slaves, women's rights, etc.) Thus, the document must be interpreted in the direction of expanding rights, as it has been in the South. For you business types, a corporation was found to have similar rights as a person, in one of least wise decisions ever made by a judicial body.

[crazytaxidriver]

The rightness or wrongness of homosexuality is not necessarily up for debate in many of these posts. Also, the theology of homosexuality is not of interest to many. The granting of same sex couples the rights extended to "married" heterosexual couples as an extension of the Equal Protection Clause. "god" grants equal protection to the just and unjust, the good and the evil (according to "jesus"). I can't see as we would be destroyed as a nation for doing the same.

I'm up for a debate on it I guess. That was my view on homosexuality, and whether i think they should be married. I think not, and I would vote no.

[NEWARKCATHOLICFAN]

As long as two-people are happy I do not give it much thought.

I do not think gay couples should be allowed to adopt.

[Stardust]

As long as two-people are happy I do not give it much thought.

I do not think gay couples should be allowed to adopt.

Maybe I don't understand your reasoning. Do you think they should "legally" be able to be a couple. Share the same privelages as Married couples for insurance, taxes, etc...?

[thecavemaster]

I'm up for a debate on it I guess. That was my view on homosexuality, and whether i think they should be married. I think not, and I would vote no.

I am suggesting that your personal view on homosexuality, your particular religion's view of homosexuality is irrelevant to the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. I would not attempt to legislate that your church have to accept homosexuals as members, on the other hand, your church or religion should not be able to prevent gays from being able to marry and get the benefits of that marriage in terms of joint filed returns, tax breaks, etc.

[NEWARKCATHOLICFAN]

Maybe I don't understand your reasoning. Do you think they should "legally" be able to be a couple. Share the same privelages as Married couples for insurance, taxes, etc...?

They can be a couple and yes it can be legal.I have no problem with that but I can not see a child be raised by then being they are what the have chossen to be. If God wanted gay couples to be parents he woulde have made it so they could have kids together. I'm not saying I am right on this I am saying this is my thoughts on it.

[DevilsWin]

I am suggesting that your personal view on homosexuality, your particular religion's view of homosexuality is irrelevant to the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. I would not attempt to legislate that your church have to accept homosexuals as members, on the other hand, your church or religion should not be able to prevent gays from being able to marry and get the benefits of that marriage in terms of joint filed returns, tax breaks, etc.

This is apparently too simple for any of them to understand CM.

[thecavemaster]

They can be a couple and yes it can be legal.I have no problem with that but I can not see a child be raised by then being they are what the have chossen to be. If God wanted gay couples to be parents he woulde have made it so they could have kids together. I'm not saying I am right on this I am saying this is my thoughts on it.

I would rather a child be raised in a supportive and loving gay couple's home than an abusive "christian" home where guilt and hatred and intolerance are standard operating procedure.

[Mr.Kimball]

I would rather a child be raised in a supportive and loving gay couple's home than an abusive "christian" home where guilt and hatred and intolerance are standard operating procedure.

That would probably not be a real christian home, then would it?

[outdoorsman43]

That would probably not be a real christian home, then would it?

Exactly what I was thinking.

[thecavemaster]

That would probably not be a real christian home, then would it?

Real or not, in name only or not, the point applies. I can't debate who is in the drag net and who is not. A loving, supportive environment where boundaries are set and consistently enforced, guidance given... heterosexual or homosexual kids are nurtured into mature adults here. Make your judgments as you wish as to who is and who is not. It is irrelevant to this issue.

[Stardust]

They can be a couple and yes it can be legal.I have no problem with that but I can not see a child be raised by then being they are what the have chossen to be. If God wanted gay couples to be parents he woulde have made it so they could have kids together. I'm not saying I am right on this I am saying this is my thoughts on it.

I'm against it being legal, but if it can be legal, then there would be no basis to not allow based on moral.

[Mr.Kimball]

[quote=thecavemaster]Real or not, in name only or not, the point applies. I can't debate who is in the drag net and who is not. A loving, supportive environment where boundaries are set and consistently enforced, guidance given... heterosexual or homosexual kids are nurtured into mature adults here. Make your judgments as you wish as to who is and who is not. It is irrelevant to this issue.[/OTE]
QU

That's exactly the point I was trying to make to you. That is exactly what you were doing.

[NEWARKCATHOLICFAN]

I'm against it being legal, but if it can be legal, then there would be no basis to not allow based on moral.

We all have our thoughts on this and I respect anyone willing to share theirs on any topic. Unlike others I will not waste my time nor anyone else’s time on arguing my point to be the right one. I am glad you and I can discuss this without taking shots at one another.

[Stardust]

We all have our thoughts on this and I respect anyone willing to share theirs on any topic. Unlike others I will not waste my time nor anyone else’s time on arguing my point to be the right one. I am glad you and I can discuss this without taking shots at one another.

No, you shouldn't take it that way. I think it's interesting and healthy for all of us to discuss and challenge ourselves as individuals to talk about our beliefs. So, don't shy away, no one is right or wrong on here, but to debate is perfectly fine.

[thecavemaster]

[quote=thecavemaster]Real or not, in name only or not, the point applies. I can't debate who is in the drag net and who is not. A loving, supportive environment where boundaries are set and consistently enforced, guidance given... heterosexual or homosexual kids are nurtured into mature adults here. Make your judgments as you wish as to who is and who is not. It is irrelevant to this issue.[/OTE]
QU

That's exactly the point I was trying to make to you. That is exactly what you were doing.

I took you to mean that a "real" christian home does not include any kind of abuse. I am suggesting that "christian" home or secular home makes no difference in the issue. The single fact of a same sex preference is NOT a sufficient reason to negate adoption.

[crazytaxidriver]

[quote=Mr.Kimball]

I took you to mean that a "real" christian home does not include any kind of abuse. I am suggesting that "christian" home or secular home makes no difference in the issue. The single fact of a same sex preference is NOT a sufficient reason to negate adoption.

I would have to disagree with you on your last sentence. But not because of abuse or lack of discipline or something like that. But due to the fact that the world is still mixed up on the subject on it being right or wrong. Now you are suggesting that you take a child out of foster care and let him be adopted by two people who are fighting for the right to be able to walk down the street without being ridiculed? That doesn't make any sense. I'm not saying they couldn't be good parents but taking a child out of a bad situation and putting it into one that isn't exactly great isn't a good idea