Coming Out In Support Of Gay Marriage On Facebook

[Weetie]

I'd like to point out that nowhere in the new testament does it say it's acceptable to kill another human being, yet I've never heard the Religious Right say we should defund the military or impose gun control. They cherry-pick what issues they apply scripture to. After 9/11 I didn't hear any of them saying we should forgive Osama and pursue a compassionate, disinterested foreign policy. I can think of a lot of other issues where they're similarly hypocritical. Until they're at least consistent in their political/social attitudes, I don't see how they can expect anyone else to respect them or their beliefs.

[FeelHappy]

Couldn't it be argued that paul speaks against homosexuality in the new testament, specifically in Romans and Corinthians, or am I wrong? Oddly when Cor. lists homosexuality as a sin right next to it is "greed" but it seems that the ultra greedy christians have found ways to ignore that passage, later Paul also says that Women should be silent in church yet I've never been to a church service where the men walked around telling any talking woman to be silent. They pick and choose what they want to listen to.

[Exevolt]

alright here is my full response:

 

This would be a valid argument if the entire nation was a christian nation believing in the bible as divinely inspired, but it is not. I'm fact the nation was founded on freedom of religious choice: even if that means no religion. By denying marriage to those people willing to commit to each other for life, the government is oppressing THEM. You are not required to attend or approve of homosexual weddings, just as homosexuals are not required to attend or approve of heterosexuals getting married. As for the flaunting in the face of homosexuality, I think it's a far more accurate statement that heterosexual Christians are flaunting their religion and ability to legally marry, support their loved ones, etc, in the face of homosexuals. The gay community simply wants rights equal with those who are not gay. Just a few short decades ago it was illegal for interracial couples to get married, and black people were denied many of their rights with many arguments ALSO BASED ON SCRIPTURE. Jesus says nothing about homosexuals, though the old testament, and the Apostle Paul do, but as Jesus was reviled for being friends with prostitutes and tax collectors, and other such unsavory people, i have a feeling he would be spending time with them and telling them to love others as they wish to be loved. Some other things the bible lists as abominations are: Eating shrimp or lobster , eating pork , mating two kinds of animals, planting two different crops in the same field and wearing fabrics of two different materials. This would mean Red Lobster, Pork chops, Mules, most farms, and pretty much anyone on the planet who wears clothes are committing abominations according to the bible. Why should our country ignore all these other instructions from the same bronze-aged book of the bible where homosexuality is defamed, but still enjoy eating our lobster dinners while wearing our poly-blend jackets and our cotton underpants? Homosexuality is VERY different from adultery and stealing. Adulterers hurt those they cheat on. Thieves hurt those they steal from. Same-sex couples only injure the sensitivities of those who choose to be offended by something different from them. They are born homosexual. Homosexuality is well documented in the animal kingdom. Some animals that engage in homosexual behaviors? Black swans, penguins , pigeons, dolphins, American Bison, Bonobo (and other great apes), Elephants, Giraffes, Monkeys, Lions, Sheep, Spotted hyena, Lizards, Dragonflies, Fruit Flies, and Bed Bugs. In conclusion: homosexuals are people, and people have rights in this country, and deserve to be SEEN as people and not just a deviant minority.

Agreed 100% and I myself have had to make this arguement before.

[London]

Couldn't it be argued that paul speaks against homosexuality in the new testament, specifically in Romans and Corinthians, or am I wrong? Oddly when Cor. lists homosexuality as a sin right next to it is "greed" but it seems that the ultra greedy christians have found ways to ignore that passage, later Paul also says that Women should be silent in church yet I've never been to a church service where the men walked around telling any talking woman to be silent. They pick and choose what they want to listen to.

 

Here is one on Romans that is... interesting... if nothing else. I'm not 100% in agreement with it but then again it is speculating what Paul was meaning and I find speculating on Paul's mind to be fruitless. I think he was a nut job.

 

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/romans_1_21.html

[ConureDelSol]

AAAAaaaaand her rebuttal

But, the Christians can become that deviant minority if we don't stand for God's standards! There are principles in this life weather you stand for righteousness and holiness or condone the sin Jesus died to free us from. Jesus never condoned sin! Period! He loved people where they were at to show his love for them, but he said go and sin no more. He changed their lives and called them out of the sinful lifestyle they each were in. We are all born into a sinful nature but that doesn't mean God wants us to stay in those sins...otherwise, what was Jesus' sacrifice on the cross for? There are many ways to try to justify the sin we want to continue to practice, whatever lifestyle we are in. The arguments can go on and on until we find that place where Jesus' sacrifice was for us to find freedom in repentance, not freedom to sin. I don't want to come across harsh, but I do want to stand for the Truth of God. Last I heard, our country was founded on freedom of religion so that the British government could not impose laws against Christianity. Our Constitution has been trampled into the ground by all the twisting and taking out of context to fit with what people want to enforce. I pray God will reach your heart so that you can truly understand what an awesome and loving God we have access to through the sacrifice His Son gave! I do care deeply about your heart Sarah. Take care and seek Jesus! ♥

 

and:

John 8:1-11 But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

 

And:

Jesus did not come into this world to condemn the world, but he came to rescue the world from the power of sin! ♥

:

 

 

and mine:

The treaty of Tripoly: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

this document was written, ratified, and approved by several founding fathers of this nation.

 

The government was not founded on christianity but on the freedom from governmental involvement. The bill of rights is full of this: rights to the civilian population and restrictions to the government.

 

Continuing to keep same-sex marriage illegal is DENYING rights to CITIZENS of this country. In example: there is a long term, committed lesbian couple, raising children together, having lived together for more than many married heterosexual couples are married. One of the partners gets sick with a life threatening disease needing hospitalization and intensive treatments. The other partner has a health insurance that would cover this but the sick one does not. In a heterosexual couple, the partner with insurance would be allowed to provide that insurance to their spouse. But because they are homosexual, they are denied that right, and so must suffer,and perhaps even die.

 

Where is the love, compassion, or justice in that?

 

In a heterosexual couple, even if they are NOT legally married, if they are together long enough it is considered "common-law" and they get some of the rights of marriage. In MANY state same-sex couples are denied this right as well.

 

this is not an issue of the sins defined by a bronze aged book written for a nomadic people living in the middle east and propagated across the world, or the proponents of the religions inspired by that book.

 

It is a question of the rights allowed to citizens of our country who want to be accepted as FULL CITIZENS and not half-rate. Citizens who love, live, work, pay taxes, vote.

 

VERY nice handling of the "Christian nation" bullshit. Same with your initial response to her. People like her make me RAGE!

[Kurari]

Your response was made of all kinds of win.

 

"Slip away into eternity without the truth," yeesh. Stupid Christians are too busy wallowing in their self-absorbed persecution twattery that they just can't see that it's impossible to live in this country without hearing their "truth." I grew up as an atheist, and I can't even get away from that shit simply by virtue of living in America.

 

They can't accept that there are some of us who have heard it and aren't interested because then they'd have to face facts that their god isn't all-powerful or remotely interesting to those of us with working brains.

[Positivist]

...too busy wallowing in their self-absorbed persecution twattery...

Nice!

[owen652]

In reply to that NT quote of hers about jesus saving the adulterous woman from stoning and not condemning her, I would point her to Revelations 2, where jesus not only sentences an adulterous woman to a sickbed, he kills her children.

[♦ ficino ♦]

Duckie Girl, you wrote really good and insightful responses. Excellent! I hope this other person spends some time thinking about what you wrote and not merely spouting more verses in her own mind.

[sarahinprogress]

And another person butts in:

Hey, I hate to but in, and I don't wanna go back and forth on this, cause this could just go on and on and on. @ [duckie], I am glad u have a heart for justice. That's a really important thing that all Christians should have. And I think Jesus would minister to the homosexuals. And I think that Christians could do a much better job at reaching out to them. However, at the end of the day, Jesus would say, 'go and sin no more.' At the end of the day, Jesus did not die to liberate us for whatever lifestyle we gravitate towards. He died to liberate us from our old man and into a likeness to Christ. At the end of the day, God has still called it sin-- something not to be sanctioned. He never called interracial marriage sin. And I'm not talking about the Old Testament either. Romans 1 may have been written by Paul, but it is no less inspired by the Holy Ghost than the rest of the Bible-- the same Holy Ghost that is one with Jesus Christ. As far as religious domination and all of that, separation of church and state does NOT mean No religious values guide our country's moral spinal cord. This country's moral spinal cord is guided by the voice of the people. And if the PEOPLE have a religious moral ideal, it is our country's duty to honor that religious moral ideal. And there is no way that the average Joe showing up at the ballot with his personal religious convictions is "religious domination" OR congress "respecting an establishment of religion". @ [another pro-gay-er], I appreciate ur integration of the Constitution. I think we should never lose sight of what it says. But please educate me, what establishment of religion is the government respecting?? Or do u mean the religious VALUES of the PEOPLE should not be respected? It sounds to me like ur actually going against the Constitution by "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"-- part of which is voting according to ur personal and, yes, religious values. And on another note, Secularism can be treated as a religion too. It's a set of moral beliefs. And I think the Supreme Court's decision to move against the people's vote on prop 8 is a far better example of "respecting an establishment of religion" than any Christian value that pervades this country. As a matter of fact, I would never want to step on anyone's God-given rights. Speech, religion, holding a good job-- all God-given rights. But reinstitutionalizing marriage? That will never be a "God-given right" in my book. Love is not the only defining feature of marriage. And if it is, then what's next? A 40 year old woman wants to marry her 18 year old son? And their both down to get equal benefits from the government because they both "love each other." How could you deny them their "rights"? U really don't think ppl will try taking advantage of the system? We'll be paying money out of our ears for everyone who says they "love eachother!!" @ [duckie], I mean no disrespect. U made some valid points. I don't have the time to address all of them. I just thought I'd make some valid points as well. :] I hope u will find the best way to reconcile ur love for the downtrodden and ur respect for the Word. Despite what Leftists like to say, holding Christian values and voting by them is not oppressive. God's morals have the general good for the general public in mind. @ [original Fundie poster], idk who u r, but u sound RIGHT ON!! Keep reading ur bible, girl. :]

 

I wish i had edited this to make it look like she types like this: but this is how she actually types.

I haven't gone back and made an actual response yet, because i cant even handle reading through this again >_<

i told her i wasnt a christian and we didnt live in a theocracy. >_<

[sarahinprogress]

Duckie Girl, you wrote really good and insightful responses. Excellent! I hope this other person spends some time thinking about what you wrote and not merely spouting more verses in her own mind.

 

 

is that possible?

I suppose so....i was never the kind of christian to pour bible verses all over someone. I had grown up seeing my father do that and always avoided it because it just seemed so OBNOXIOUS. it really is.

[♦ ficino ♦]

i am elated that the US President said he personally favors GL marriage. I have to say I am a little worried by how fast things seem to be moving all of a sudden. If the "average Joe" as your fundy commentator puts it feels that the issue has become framed as "gay rights" VERSUS "religion" I am afraid how the votes will pan out. And with Romney saying that he opposes civil unions AND supports a constitutional amendment against gay marriage, I am a little scared even that my own civil union may be threatened. There just are so many religious people out there whose religion is of convenience, and when it's convenient to have scapegoats, GLBT people are easy scapegoats to demonize.

[Exevolt]

i am elated that the US President said he personally favors GL marriage. I have to say I am a little worried by how fast things seem to be moving all of a sudden. If the "average Joe" as your fundy commentator puts it feels that the issue has become framed as "gay rights" VERSUS "religion" I am afraid how the votes will pan out. And with Romney saying that he opposes civil unions AND supports a constitutional amendment against gay marriage, I am a little scared even that my own civil union may be threatened. There just are so many religious people out there whose religion is of convenience, and when it's convenient to have scapegoats, GLBT people are easy scapegoats to demonize.

Sad but true.

[FeelHappy]

There just are so many religious people out there whose religion is of convenience, and when it's convenient to have scapegoats, GLBT people are easy scapegoats to demonize.

 

I've long thought this, there are so many things Christians ignore about the new testament, they find ways to be hateful, vengeful, greedy, lustful and so many other things the NT is clearly against, yet they get in arms to attack the basic human rights of two consenting adults, no doubt part of it's because unlike many of the other problems (such as greed), attacking the GLBT doesn't directly affect most of them. Its sad.

[SusanStoHeli]

Despite what Leftists like to say, holding Christian values and voting by them is not oppressive.

 

Holding Christian values - not oppressive. Voting to force those of all religions living in our nation founded based in freedom of religion, to have to live by your perception of Christian values - how can that be anything but oppression? You're telling someone that they have fewer rights than others because your religion opposes something they do with another freely consenting adult, hurting no one. How can that not be oppression?

[SusanStoHeli]

Oh - and since I can't update - if it was about holding Christian values, they'd be criminalizing adultery, and divorce would be what they were trying to prohibit, especially since Jesus actually spoke about that, shouldn't they be a lot more concerned about things that Jesus condemned, than things Jesus never mentioned?

[SoftIce]

I have yet to hear any decent reason against gay marriage that doesn't fall back on either some religious text or the 'traditional' marriage card (ironically, both have also been used against interracial marriage in the past.)