Prop. 8 judge to religious believers: "It's not about you"

[Bravus]

Post 100. That is all.

[doug yowell]

[Thank you. I'm probably going to get flamed by my fellow believers, but I'm with you on this one.

If a same-sex couple wants to live together in a stable relationship and label it with the name "marriage", how does that harm my marriage? How is that in any way relevant to how I live my life with my husband? What am I supposed to be afraid of?

Should I perhaps be afraid that they might live up to the ideals of mutual love and fidelity better than we Christians do?

Would they put us to shame, in a society where the divorce rate is equal between Christian couples and non-believers?

...in a society where hardly a week goes by without some famous figure known for their Christianity and their loud proclamation of "family values" is discovered to have a pregnant mistress or a habit of soliciting extra-marital sex in public toilets?

...in a society where celebrities marry with great fanfare and millions of dollars' worth of waste, only to divorce a few months or a year later?

...in a society where half of the "lonely hearts" ads in the local newspaper start with the word "married"?

...in a society where people who vowed to love and honor one another for life treat each other with disrespect and violence?

.

I am constantly meeting same-sex couples whose devotion to one another, and the stability of their relationship, would put many Christian marriages to shame. And there is a complete lack of the "headship/ domination" power play that is seen so often in Christian marriages ("I'm the head here, you have to be submissive, but we have to role-play it carefully so it looks like all smiles and roses.")

I have tried very hard to get my head around how on earth their existence is supposed to undermine my own marriage in some way. I'm just not getting it.

AJ

Of course, any Christian that affirms homosexual behaviour because they can't see any inherent danger to society,has their real beef with God. Since God condemns such behaviour and forbids it's activity under His leadership one would assume that a Christian would think that maybe God either knew something about the human condition that they didn't,or, like Rich, conclude that He was thoroughly wacked.If homosexual BEHAVIOUR was forbidden both in His church and His theocracy,shouldn't one ask why? If the sexual deviancy itself was condemned why would any Christian think that it's acceptance in the institution of marriage would be suddenly welcomed by the One Who created man and woman in the first place?

[doug yowell]

[should I perhaps be afraid that they might live up to the ideals of mutual love and fidelity better than we Christians do?

Would they put us to shame, in a society where the divorce rate is equal between Christian couples and non-believers?

...in a society where hardly a week goes by without some famous figure known for their Christianity and their loud proclamation of "family values" is discovered to have a pregnant mistress or a habit of soliciting extra-marital sex in public toilets?

...in a society where celebrities marry with great fanfare and millions of dollars' worth of waste, only to divorce a few months or a year later?

...in a society where half of the "lonely hearts" ads in the local newspaper start with the word "married"?

...in a society where people who vowed to love and honor one another for life treat each other with disrespect and violence?

These problems are more widespread and more common than gay people wanting to get married, and if Christians really cared about protecting the sanctity of marriage, they would get at least the same amount of air time that gay marriage rights do. Instead...not a word.

In my work I get to know a large variety of people from all walks of life, sometimes getting to know the details of their private life in quite a lot of detail.

I am constantly meeting same-sex couples whose devotion to one another, and the stability of their relationship, would put many Christian marriages to shame. And there is a complete lack of the "headship/ domination" power play that is seen so often in Christian marriages ("I'm the head here, you have to be submissive, but we have to role-play it carefully so it looks like all smiles and roses.")

I have tried very hard to get my head around how on earth their existence is supposed to undermine my own marriage in some way. I'm just not getting it.

AJ

Your argument here is stunningly naive and sounds like it was scripted by Barbara Boxer. Portraying homosexual couples as epitimizing marital ideals assumes that they are more dedicated, more faithful,less prone to the things that cause the problems in marriages. In other words they are generally more stable,better people than heterosexuals. Given the real history of most homosexual relationships, what makes you think that opening marriage to them will result in a more stable institution?You post as if THEY are the real Christians who will demonstrate for us how marriage SHOULD be. But given your critique of marriage today, why do you think that any of them would want to get married? First you lament the condition of marriage and then you encourage same sex marriages. What gives?Why would you want to get an otherwise wondeful relationship negatively affected by marriage?

[SivartM]

I thought this story was interesting: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/01/MNG9HLGA6Q1.DTL

How dare those people infringe upon my religious liberty?

[Dr. Shane]

I have no problem with gay couples, that have been together for at least two or three years, adopting children - especially foster children. However I do have a problem forcing religious adoption agencies to place children with gay couples. Do you have a problem with that, Travis?

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. . . . If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them" (Lev. 18:22, 20:13).

Originally Posted By: John3:17

I do believe that sex acts of the kind described in that passage are sinful and morally wrong, but when we take the context into account, we realize that God is not telling modern societies to kill homosexuals any more than it's saying society should kill disrespectful, rebellious children. Those laws comes out of a period of time when Israel was a theocracy emerging from generations of slavery.

Originally Posted By: cardw

There is no rationale in this statement. You make no sense.

I find the Bible evidence overwhelming that God views homosexuality as wrong-- contrary to His will and His character. I believe the Bible is God's self-revelation to us about what He is like.

Originally Posted By: cardw

Just because something happened a long time ago doesn't justify it.

This is true. I'm not saying condemning homosexual practices is right simply because it happened a long time ago.

Originally Posted By: cardw

Just because Israel is emerging from slavery has nothing to do with the justice of instituting a death penalty for all kinds of crazy stuff.

Do you think it was crazy of God to command the people to keep His commandments, including the Sabbath?

Since you don't evidently even believe in God's existence, and that the Bible is a fiction, it is rather difficult for us to communicate with each other about this subject.

No, it's difficult to communicate because you ignore any evidence I put forth and proceed to make triumphal announcements.

Pointing out the reasonable aspects of this god of the Bible doesn't negate the crazy ones. You ignore the crazy, so of course any being can be made to look good with that approach.

The evidence doesn't point to a loving god. It points to a multiple personality god that is sometimes extremely violent for no rational basis and then spouts transcendence.

Since I don't believe any all knowing intelligent being could possible act this poorly it is quite evident that this being does not exist and is a product of men writing from ignorance and held together by centuries of syncretic apologetics.

[John317]

Pointing out the reasonable aspects of this god of the Bible doesn't negate the crazy ones. You ignore the crazy, so of course any being can be made to look good with that approach.

Tell and give the references for the three craziest things the God of the Bible did, in your judgment.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

Pointing out the reasonable aspects of this god of the Bible doesn't negate the crazy ones. You ignore the crazy, so of course any being can be made to look good with that approach.

Tell and give the references for the three craziest things the God of the Bible did, in your judgment.