Supreme Court will hear Arguments: Gay Marriage= Sep. of Church N State

[GayatfootofCross]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will hear arguments next week in a landmark case on gay marriage, but most Americans already have made up their minds: There’s no turning back.

In a nationwide USA Today/Suffolk University Poll, those surveyed say by 51 percent-35 percent that it’s no longer practical for the Supreme Court to ban same-sex marriages because so many states have legalized them.

One reason for a transformation in public views on the issue: Close to half say they have a gay or lesbian family member or close friend who is married to someone of the same sex.

 

Kraig Ziegler, 58, of Flagstaff, Ariz., acknowledged being a bit uncomfortable when he attended a wedding reception for two men, friends of his wife, who had married. “I still believe what the Bible says, ‘one man, one woman,’ ” the mechanic, who was among those polled, said in a follow-up interview.

On the other hand, he said, “I got to know the guys, and they’re all right. They don’t make passes or anything at me.”

Now he calls himself undecided on the issue.

In the survey, a majority, 51 percent-35 percent, favor allowing gay men and lesbians to marry, and those who support the idea feel more strongly about it than those who oppose it: 28 percent “strongly favor” same-sex marriage, 18 percent “strongly oppose” it. Fourteen percent are undecided.

“Everybody has a right to get married and be unhappy,” joked Joann Fleming, 65, of Los Angeles. She’s divorced.

The poll of 1,000 people, taken by landline and cellphone April 8-13, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

There have been tidal changes in public opinion toward same-sex marriage — more than a third say they have changed their views on gays and lesbians during their lifetimes — but there also is a huge generation gap. Six in 10 of those 18 to 34 support the idea, compared with fewer than four in 10 of those 65 and older.

And there continue to be conflicted views and some bitter divisions.

While nearly six in 10 Americans oppose a law that would allow people to refuse to provide business services to a same-sex wedding, those on both sides of that debate are concerned about the potential consequences of balancing respect for religious freedom with support for civil rights.

Next Tuesday (April 28), the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear 21/2 hours of oral arguments on cases from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee that turn on whether gay and lesbian partners have a constitutional right to marry, or whether states have the right to ban the practice. A ruling is expected before the high court’s term ends in late June.

Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia now allow same-sex marriages, most of them as the result of a court decision.

CLASH OF RIGHTS

As more states allow same-sex marriage, disputes have grown over whether individuals and businesses should have the right to refuse to provide services for a gay wedding if they have religious objections.

By almost 2-1, 58 percent-31 percent, those surveyed say they shouldn’t. Indeed, more than a third of those who oppose gay marriage also oppose a law that would allow people to cite religious reasons for refusing, say, to provide flowers or catering for a same-sex couple.

A political firestorm erupted last month when Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which said the government could not “substantially burden” a person’s ability to follow their religious beliefs. Amid protests the law would open the door to discrimination against gays, the state hurriedly enacted a follow-up provision that banned use of the law to defend discrimination based on sexual orientation.

“It’s nobody’s right to say, ‘This is right or this is wrong’ or exclude a certain group of people,” said Ashley Williams, 25, an elementary school teacher from Durham, N.C. “Just because they’re gay doesn’t mean they’re any less human.”

If a local business refused to provide services to a same-sex wedding – say, the rental of a reception hall – she says she’d be inclined to refuse to patronize the business herself.

But others disagree. “It’s in the eyes of God,” said Robert Robilliad, 61, a postal worker from Sagamore, Mass., who opposes gay marriage on religious grounds.

“A business, they should be allowed to do whatever they want to do without being tormented by higher-ups,” said Virginia Roberts, 85, of Holland, Ohio, who has retired from her job as the secretary at a spark-plug company. She doesn’t think gay marriages should be permitted, but she worries that the die on that already has been cast.

“All somebody has to do is start it, anything,” she said. “Once it’s done, from then on, it trickles right down just like a leaf in a pond — right down and everybody does it.”

Most Americans don’t see the issue as being black-and-white:

* •Nearly two-thirds, 63 percent, are concerned that a law requiring businesses to provide services to same-sex weddings would force those involved to go against their religious beliefs or pay a penalty. Even among those who support gay marriage, 17 percent also support a law giving people the right to refuse.
* About the same number, 64 percent, are concerned that a law allowing people to refuse such services on religious grounds would discriminate against gay men and lesbians. Even among those who oppose gay marriage, 37 percent also oppose a law giving people the right to refuse.

In all, four in 10 are worried about the consequences of choosing either course.

BITTER DIVISIONS

On two questions, there is a broad consensus.

Americans believe discrimination against gay men and lesbians continues to be widespread: 28 percent say there is “a great deal” of discrimination; another 44 percent say there is “some.” Fifteen percent say there is “only a little,” and 9 percent see none at all.

And an overwhelming 76 percent oppose revoking a church’s tax-exempt status if it doesn’t recognize same-sex marriages. Even among those who favor gay marriage, only one in five would support such a move.

But some bitter divisions remain as those on opposite sides of the issue view one another. In the poll, 35 percent of those opposed to same-sex marriage say they wouldn’t respect someone who supported it. And 25 percent of those who favor same-sex marriage say they wouldn’t respect someone who opposed it.

The issue is sure to flare during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Democrat Hillary Clinton last week said for the first time that she hopes the Supreme Court rules in favor of a constitutional right to marry, a stance at odds with the Republican field.

GOP hopeful Rick Santorum said he would refuse even to attend the gay wedding of a family member or close friend. But Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, also a prospective 2016 Republican contender, told reporters in New Hampshire Saturday that he already had attended a reception for the same-sex wedding of a family member. “That’s certainly a personal issue,” he said.

[GayatfootofCross]

I hope I am in the right forum for this.

[Gregory Matthews]

You are in the right forum for this.  Some would probably prefer for you to give citations when you quote such long passages.

[aka]

That was real nice of you Gregory to help the gay-guy feel welcome in posting his agenda in the right forum.

 

Gay-guy, you must have gone through lots of discrimination from all sides. I am sorry for those times of mobbing.

 

Have you been with SDA's for a long time? Did you come to ClubA to teach us here to believe that practicing Homosexuals are not sinning and will be automaticly given the righteousness of Christ for eternal life after death?

[Gregory Matthews]

^{Yentyl:  He comes across to me as simply wanting to participate and talk.  We welcome him here for that.}

[GayatfootofCross]

That was real nice of you Gregory to help the gay-guy feel welcome in posting his agenda in the right forum.

 

Gay-guy, you must have gone through lots of discrimination from all sides. I am sorry for those times of mobbing.

 

Have you been with SDA's for a long time? Did you come to ClubA to teach us here to believe that practicing Homosexuals are not sinning and will be automaticly given the righteousness of Christ for eternal life after death?

Yes thank you  Gregory Matthews for helping me.

I'm still new at this it seems like.

This good forum is perfect for my thread here.

though I don't understand the citations reference and long quotes.

I put the article up

Is not it not how it's done?

So everyone can read it here?

I am a slow learner so I ask the Moderators here to give alot of grace.

Like closer to the grace God has given you.

..and yes yes to Participate and Talk

 

well anyhoo

I'm glad i haven't been kicked off yet with all the mistakes I've  made.

....

 

Yentyl

GBU

and yes I get it all from all sides

God has given me grace and forgiveness for it

"for they know not what they do"

 

yes been with SDA a long time, but not raised SDA

 

teach us here to believe that practicing homosexuals are not sinning?

oh heavens no

everyone is sinning including practicing homosexuals ? 1 John 1:8

so u wont see me say anything like that

i would be a liar

and automatically given the righteousness of Christ for eternal death?

well two things are involved and I will share the simple quick answer for now

1. Does the individual accept JESUS- straight or LGBTIQIAA

2.JESUS gives the Rightouseness not the church

.

heterosexuality is not sainthood

purity of heart is

 

but what on earth can I

 possibly teach fine SDAs like yourself?

and what possibly can good straight SDA's teach me

I have heard it since i was 12.. yet most people  think they are the first ones to share scriptures with me on this topic

hmmm...

 

#btw im still working on quoting people posts and i see it didn't work well

 

[JoeMo]

Hi GAY,

When Greg asks for citations, I think he is asking for the source material of the article - like "April 22, 2015  NY Times" or something like that.

 

You are a brave person; and show a lot of grace yourself.  I agree that people have a right to happiness and fulfillment regardless of their sexual orientation.  I am, however, undecided about gay marriage.  Many of my other gay friends are actually opposed to it because they are concerned about the potential backlash against gays by those who would violently oppose it.  Some of them live together as unmarried (but committed) couples who have forged alternative legal docs and papers to lend legal legitimacy to their relationship.

 

I have also heard of some employers who will pull their spousal benefits for heterosexual couples rather than extend them to gay couples.  Bad move IMO, but their choice I guess.

 

Golden Rule - "He who has the gold rules".

[GayatfootofCross]

Hi GAY,

When Greg asks for citations, I think he is asking for the source material of the article - like "April 22, 2015  NY Times" or something like that.

 

You are a brave person; and show a lot of grace yourself.  I agree that people have a right to happiness and fulfillment regardless of their sexual orientation.  I am, however, undecided about gay marriage.  Many of my other gay friends are actually opposed to it because they are concerned about the potential backlash against gays by those who would violently oppose it.  Some of them live together as unmarried (but committed) couples who have forged alternative legal docs and papers to lend legal legitimacy to their relationship.

 

I have also heard of some employers who will pull their spousal benefits for heterosexual couples rather than extend them to gay couples.  Bad move IMO, but their choice I guess.

 

Golden Rule - "He who has the gold rules".

 

hi JoeMo

GBU

 

 

I feel like I have to put your quote up so you would know I responded.

I don't know.

I didn't know anyone here responded to me here and I forgot where I put this darn thread

I thought it went the way socks go in the dryer

one is  always missing

 

Well for me this gay marriage is about Sep. of Church n State, in America anyways.

We SDAs  don't want a Sunday keeping church brand of theology forced on us

just like gays don't want the Christian/Judeo form  of theology about God and marriage (albeit since antiquity) forced on them.

 

its OK if the mainline Christianity comes a huntin for the others as long as they dont come a huntin for us (Sabbath Keepers) is not reflecting Jesus

[Gail]

"its OK if the mainline Christianity comes a huntin for the others as long as they dont come a huntin for us (Sabbath Keepers) is not reflecting Jesus"

Yes, we need to be aware of that

[GayatfootofCross]

the heart for JESUS automatically flows unto others esp our enemies.. you see yourself as 'them'

[8thdaypriest]

Where I live in East Texas, folks use the expression "gay-married" instead of just "married".  They'll say something like, "He is gay married to Robert." 

 

That - to me - explains the "problem" of gay marriage.  To legalize it is to change our language. 

Since creation, "marriage" has MEANT at least one man and one woman.  It was a legal - recognized - relationship for the care of children, and sharing of property. 

It was the structure of society. 

[8thdaypriest]

The REASON WHY the gay movement has fought so hard for legal recognition of gay marriage, is because it is a SYMBOL of societal recognition and normality. 

 

Gay couples COULD make legal contracts sharing property, and providing for inheritance.  They don't NEED marriage for that.  They can even sign documents giving

power of attorney for medical or legal decisions, or for hospital visitations and information sharing.  They don't need marriage for that either.  

They NEED "marriage" to signify acceptance and normality. 

 

The big barrier for gay marriage is the informed Judeo/Christian religious community.  Most Bible students KNOW that the LORD has forbidden homosexual acts - just as he forbade any sex outside of a man/woman marriage.  It was a DEATH PENALTY offense during the theocracy.  

 

We believers always say that we must condemn the sin, while loving the sinner.  The gays say that to condemn their behavior IS NOT LOVING THEM.  They equate love with overt acceptance of their behavior. 

 

I personally have known several homosexual co-workers.  I can totally believe that they have an inherited trait for homosexuality.  To fight against such an inherited trait is VERY difficult - but not impossible.  For them, celibacy is the only option.  But that option leaves them lonely for a companion.  We ALL have our crosses to bear.  Many live with chronic physical pain.  Others with chronic emotional pain. 

 

We ALL have a strong tendency to sins of various sorts.  Has any one of us perfectly overcome? Very doubtful.... 

Does that mean we should declare those sins acceptable now, so as not feel like sinners any longer??????   

[Gregory Matthews]

[i will copy in this space Rachel's post and I will make comments which I will enclose in [xxxx]'s.  I will also put a number by her comments, which she did not use.

 

 

1) The REASON WHY the gay movement has fought so hard for legal recognition of gay marriage, is because it is a SYMBOL of societal recognition and normality. 

 

[That may be a partial answer.  But, I do not believe that it is a total answer.  An additional reason, I believe, is that gay couples want the same legal rights that married people have--GM.]

 

2) Gay couples COULD make legal contracts sharing property, and providing for inheritance.  They don't NEED marriage for that.  They can even sign documents giving

power of attorney for medical or legal decisions, or for hospital visitations and information sharing. 

 

[Again, I believe you are partially correct.  It is true, as you said, that such documents can be prepared,  But, that is a more complicated and expensive process than what is needed for married couple.  In addition,  Marriage bestows upon those married  rights that are not available, in any forum or manner to people who are not married--GM.]

 

3)  They NEED "marriage" to signify acceptance and normality.  [Gay couples need marriage for much more than just acceptance--GM.] 

 

4) The big barrier for gay marriage is the informed Judeo/Christian religious community.  Most Bible students KNOW that the LORD has forbidden homosexual acts - just as he forbade any sex outside of a man/woman marriage.  It was a DEATH PENALTY offense during the theocracy.  

 

[i do not disagree with you on the above.   Now, the questions becomes:  To what extent should civil government impose religious beliefs upon people who do not accept those beliefs?  I will also suggest that while you and I would agree as to the Biblical standard, there are others who attempt to follow Christ who do not agree as to the Biblical teaching on this point.  It should be for the individual denominations to establish their own standards.   I do not argue that point.  Again, I ask, to what extent should civil government impose Biblical standards on those who do not accept those standards.  My thinking is that civil government should protects the civil rights of its citizens and not impose religious beliefs.  Such teachings should be left to the denominations--GM.]

 

5) We believers always say that we must condemn the sin, while loving the sinner.  The gays say that to condemn their behavior IS NOT LOVING THEM.  They equate love with overt acceptance of their behavior. 

 

[Probably sometimes true.  But, there is another factor:  Many Christians cannot divorce behavior from the person.  In actuality they condemn the person along with the behavior--GM..]

 

6) I personally have known several homosexual co-workers.  I can totally believe that they have an inherited trait for homosexuality.  To fight against such an inherited trait is VERY difficult - but not impossible.  For them, celibacy is the only option.  But that option leaves them lonely for a companion.  We ALL have our crosses to bear.  Many live with chronic physical pain.  Others with chronic emotional pain. 

 

[You and I probably are in substantial agreement on this point, although I would differ from you in my wording.  The jury is still out as to the genetic influences.  I am not ready to say that it has been proven to have a genetic basis.  I am ready to say that such is not a choice.  neither you nor I chose what we are in this matter--GM.]

 

 

7)  We ALL have a strong tendency to sins of various sorts.  Has any one of us perfectly overcome? Very doubtful.... 

Does that mean we should declare those sins acceptable now, so as not feel like sinners any longer??????   

 

[Good point--GM.]

[GayatfootofCross]

Thank you Gregory Matthews

.

and a happy note to 8thdaypriest..

It doesn't matter what you  believe or what I believe

We as a church(SDA) and so far as a Nation believe we cannot force our beliefs on people.

 

And with marriage, LGBTIQAA don't need lawyers and folders of documents (insurance, property,finances and hospital decisions ETC.ETC.ETC!).

just like the Straight marriages.

One document will do that

just fine

 

and one more thing

in Matt 20:25 it calls us all Christians not to lord over people

we cannot win souls by Lording overs others most personal decisions

God Bless You 8thdaypriest! God is so good to you and me

 

 

P.S. the old normal works for you maybe and that isn't Jesus attitude about others

 

 

 

The REASON WHY the gay movement has fought so hard for legal recognition of gay marriage, is because it is a SYMBOL of societal recognition and normality. 

 

Uhhh ..whats the Name of this Thread?

Supreme Court will hear Arguments: Gay Marriage= Sep. of Church N State

[Gregory Matthews]

Just a point of information:  This thread is in the Religious Liberty section which I moderate.  In sections that I moderate, I allow a wide range in discussions.   It would be a rare occasion for me to act on a post on the basis that it had gone outside the boundaries of the thread/section.

 

This is not an invitation for your to test my limits and to see if you can push me to act.        It is just a statement of my approach.

[GayatfootofCross]

Just a point of information:  This thread is in the Religious Liberty section which I moderate.  In sections that I moderate, I allow a wide range in discussions.   It would be a rare occasion for me to act on a post on the basis that it had gone outside the boundaries of the thread/section.

 

This is not an invitation for your to test my limits and to see if you can push me to act.        It is just a statement of my approach.

 

I don't know if you are addressing me  Gregory Matthews.. When you say push you to act?

Do you mean by banning me from Club Adventist?

I will accept what ever is.

I know it is a Club and I may not belong here.

i don't want to aggravate anyone to that point.

 

I know how our Church is

and it breaks God's heart.

[Gregory Matthews]

Sometime, I do not communicate well.  When that happens, I appreciate it when people ask me to clarify.  Thank you.

 

First,  Let me be clear:  You are very welcome here.   I appreciate you and your participation in this forum.  As far as I know, you aggravate no one here.

 

When you asked about the name of this thread, I thought I saw a question of some sort in your post.  I thought you might be asking about any limits that might be put on responses to the subject of a thread.  There are some people here in CA who want posts to adhere strictly to the subject, as stated by the title, of the thread.   I am more liberal on that point than some people.  So, thinking that I saw a question in your post, I made a generalized response in an attempt to tell all that when I moderate a thread, I am fine with people responding as they are thinking, even if it goes beyond a strict definition of the title.

 

As to my comment on acting:  No, I am a long way from ever thinking that you should be banned.  If I were to think so, I do not have that power,  Someone else would have to do that.

 

As the moderator of this section, I can do the following:

1) Delete a post.

2) Hide a post so that most people could not read it--moderators still could.

3) Transfer a post to another part of this forum, where it still could be read by anyone.

4) Transfer a post to a part of this forum where most people could not read it.

5) Edit a post in any manner that I wished.

 

Earlier today I did # 3 to a post that I had made.  By accident I posted it in a place where I did not want it to be as it was out of place there.  I have had second thought about posts of mine a few times and I have completely removed them.  In looking at them I simply decided that they were out of place and needed to be removed.   So, I did so.   But, I usually left a record for all to read saying that I had deleted a post of mine.

 

 

 

As to the others, there are some situations where I might believe that something should be done.  So far, I have not done that to anyone else. 

 

I hope that this clarifies this.  If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.

[GayatfootofCross]

Well thank you for the clarification.

I still don't know what rule I broke.

I broke a few already.

[Gregory Matthews]

You did not break a rule.  I guess that I still was not clear. 

[brotherly love]

The rationale of whether a person is born gay or is a lifestyle choice is irrelevant. Almost every person whether male or female who is straight has the natural desire to have sexual relations, whether that person is single, or is married and finds anther person attractive.

 We all struggle from time to time with our sexuality.

The important question is whether a person wants to follow the teachings of the Master, or do they want to do it their own way. This is no different for those who are straight or gay, into swinging or masochism, pedophiles or into water sports. All these groups can claim they are born this way, and others can say that they are indoctrinated to act this way, or a little of both.

 A person is only fooling themselves if they believe they can marry the bible and same sex sexuality. We all have struggles, but once we validate those struggles with institutionalizing the specific behavior, then it quits being a struggle and is a celebrated deliberate decision to continue in a certain behavior.

A person can struggle to please God and fail, and get back up again and try again, but once a person decides to be married in a same sex relationship, then that person is publically saying that they will continue in their sin and normalize it. This is not repentance.

 We are called to be followers of Christ, and not to be baptized human secularists.

The Greeks and Romans tolerated many sexual deviations in their time behind closed doors, from homosexuality to pedaphilia, but they did not dare go as far as we are willing to go by redefining marriage to fit these behaviors.

We are in uncharted territory

[GayatfootofCross]

The rationale of whether a person is born gay or is a lifestyle choice is irrelevant. Almost every person whether male or female who is straight has the natural desire to have sexual relations, whether that person is single, or is married and finds anther person attractive.

 We all struggle from time to time with our sexuality.

The important question is whether a person wants to follow the teachings of the Master, or do they want to do it their own way. This is no different for those who are straight or gay, into swinging or masochism, pedophiles or into water sports. All these groups can claim they are born this way, and others can say that they are indoctrinated to act this way, or a little of both.

 A person is only fooling themselves if they believe they can marry the bible and same sex sexuality. We all have struggles, but once we validate those struggles with institutionalizing the specific behavior, then it quits being a struggle and is a celebrated deliberate decision to continue in a certain behavior.

A person can struggle to please God and fail, and get back up again and try again, but once a person decides to be married in a same sex relationship, then that person is publically saying that they will continue in their sin and normalize it. This is not repentance.

 We are called to be followers of Christ, and not to be baptized human secularists.

The Greeks and Romans tolerated many sexual deviations in their time behind closed doors, from homosexuality to pedaphilia, but they did not dare go as far as we are willing to go by redefining marriage to fit these behaviors.

We are in uncharted territory

Hello!

You are new here like me (sorta).

GBU!

the bottom line is there are people who don't believe in the Bible's instructions

or at least the way most churches teaches

That is to be Respected and Honored.

by our Society and Nation.

 

If our church studied into the matter more deeply like our Church forefathers/mothers regarding the State of the Dead or The Sabbath ..Many may come a way with a new understanding.

Hey!

like they did after 1844!

[brotherly love]

Hello!

You are new here like me (sorta).

GBU!

the bottom line is there are people who don't believe in the Bible's instructions

or at least the way most churches teaches

That is to be Respected and Honored.

by our Society and Nation.

 

If our church studied into the matter more deeply like our Church forefathers/mothers regarding the State of the Dead or The Sabbath ..Many may come a way with a new understanding.

Hey!

like they did after 1844!

 

I joined a few years ago, but have not posted much!

Nice to meet you!

 

There are people who don't believe the precepts and commandments of the Bible, and we dont live in a theocracy. In the past, the majority of people believed that same sex sexuality was wrong and same sex marriage was not even an issue or thought of.-and this was not limited to countries that were a Christian majority. It was countries that were Buddhist, Hindhu or Muslim  majorities.

The people of God live in every country, and that would include countries with the above religions, and other beliefs like communism.

If non-believers practice same sex sexuality, that is what they are entitled to do, and they are filling their job description. We on the other hand need to fill our job description, and that job description is not to promote or normalize sinful behavior of any sort.

 

 

There is a big difference of the varying opinions of the state of the dead and the sabbath within Christianity, and the main and the plain teaching about same sex sexuality. If you love God, you will wan to follow His precepts and commandments.

[GayatfootofCross]

There is a big difference of the varying opinions of the state of the dead and the sabbath within Christianity, and the main and the plain teaching about same sex sexuality. If you love God, you will wan to follow His precepts and commandments.

We on the other hand need to fill our job description, and that job description is not to promote or normalize sinful behavior of any sort.

 

Hello again,

brotherly love

I love your name and you in it!

I think we see the Great Commission differently. and...

IF JESUS BE LIFTED UP HE WILL DRAW ALL

not repel LGBTIQAA..

and many churches in Christianity is finally looking closer into the matter and coming up with different conclusions finally.

and amen to loving GOD and following HIM wherever He leads ..not others prehistoric lenses.

 

GOD bless you!

this thread is still about Separation of Church N State

not about us being made comfortable

[brotherly love]

Hello again,

brotherly love

I love your name and you in it!

I think we see the Great Commission differently. and...

IF JESUS BE LIFTED UP HE WILL DRAW ALL

not repel LGBTIQAA..

and many churches in Christianity is finally looking closer into the matter and coming up with different conclusions finally.

and amen to loving GOD and following HIM wherever He leads ..not others prehistoric lenses.

 

GOD bless you!

this thread is still about Separation of Church N State

not about us being made comfortable

 

Jesus christ will draw people of many walks of life, including the gay, lesbian,bisexual, transgendered, intersexed and so on and so forth. I hope that you are not justifying practicing your lifestyle openly, deliberately and continuously as a biblically condoned lifestyle. 

I have heard it all, the churches that are coming up with different conclusions are doing it at the expense of peoples destruction. It usually follows the path that same sex sexuality is only condemed by scripture if it is cultic, or not a loving committed relationship.

This has to be read into the text.

You need to control this part of your life and follow your Maker, the one who knit you in your mothers womb. It has nothing to do with me being comfortable, it has to do with you wanting to spend eternity with God, and when we desire this, then that desire will rule over your other desires.

The other route you can take is to shape the Bible to your own desires. This is not you following God, but an attempt at trying to make God follow you.

[GayatfootofCross]

I have heard it all, the churches that are coming up with different conclusions are doing it at the expense of peoples destruction. It usually follows the path that same sex sexuality is only condemed by scripture if it is cultic, or not a loving committed relationship.

This has to be read into the text.

You need to control this part of your life and follow your Maker, the one who knit you in your mothers womb. It has nothing to do with me being comfortable, it has to do with you wanting to spend eternity with God, and when we desire this, then that desire will rule over your other desires.

The other route you can take is to shape the Bible to your own desires. This is not you following God, but an attempt at trying to make God follow you.

. I hope that you are not justifying practicing your lifestyle openly, deliberately and continuously as a biblically condoned lifestyle. 

 

Dearest brotherly love

We don't know each other and..

everything you evil surmise has nothing to do with me.

It is in all your head.

 I don't owe a stranger I meet online an explanation about my life,

esp.on this thread!

 

And it still has nothing to do with the topic..

again its not about forcing  a  belief system on others

its a matter of choice.

God gave that choice and all choices have consequences.

and since we are pleading with one another

(you started it)

Evil surmising is a bad choice.

oh please give up that lifestyle!

 

We are just hoping America can live up to it's promises.

And a Christian side note ..GOD does live up to all His promises.

Amen!  I know!

 

God Bless You brotherly love

I see such kindness from you in your posts

God is relational and bids us to be that to each other

to reflect HIM.

And we are not in relationship therefore, you don't know what I do or don't do.

and I am not saying

I learned it does no good here.

a hard grieving lesson I had to learn with most Adventists

 

^{BTW I desire Christians to love and love}on LGBTIQAA

That is one of God's desires too

 

now ...