Context of "Homosexuality is an abomination"

[Jack_Dubious]

Well its pretty clear in the bible....God Hates Homosexuals.. Heres a good Christian site that tells you more. Westboro Baptist Church

found some pics of these Christians protesting the DNC...




JDub

[Head knight of Ni]

^ just when you thought we were safe from the Nazi regime. ....







..... doomed

[Lohman446]

All you guys are saying that you don't care what other people do, blah blah blah... Shouldn't we care? I mean I don't wish hell on anyone. That's right, ANYONE (except maybe Judas, but that's another talk). Don't care how bad you treat me or anyone else, like Hitler, Stalin, or even Saddam or Bin Laden. I dunno about you guys, but I do care. "Love thy neighbor as thyself"- can you love someone you wish to go to Hell?

I am going to look at this, I am not endorsing a religion here, nor am I attempting to tell you its wrong.

Because in too many places the bible tells me that the radical right trying to force there will on everyone is against its own teachings - forgive me the paraphrasing

Judge not, unless you be judged.
Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.

Noone on this earth, by biblical prophesy deserves heaven -
Noone can come to the father accept through Me (Christ). So, let me ask this, if a gay couple chooses to accept Christ as their savior, are they banned from heaven for there union?

What of the lessens of David - it is more holy to pray to god, to practice your religion in your closet than it is to proclaim it on the streets.

Let your lifestyle be that beacon to others of what is good and holy, lead by example. Teach those that would come to you. Somehow I just can't picture Christ, who the bible teaches us to emulate, holding a big sign telling someone they are EVIL. With the exception of what happens in the temple (church, whatever), I don't think the ideals allow you this. Shall this invade the church - as the money changers did, then you have the right to this as I read the bible.

[taylor492]

[Person]

Christians most certainly aren't to judge people outside of the church. How could someone be expected to follow moral codes from a book they dont believe in. This is somewhere in one of pauls letters il find it if anyone cares at all.

A homosexual couple isnt banned from heavan from their union, but if they want to follow God they cant continue living in something he so clearly condemns.

[bornl33t]

Ya know if homo's were OK with themselves there would be no need for acceptance. I do what I do if someone else doesn't like it that's fine, because I'm ok with my actions. I don't need ppl to accept me or anything I do. Which means one of two things, either homo's are so high strung they act like high school girls and have a popularity disorder or they aren't ok with themselves so they are looking for acceptance to justify their inadiquacies.
Bottom line is, if they were doing this in their home and leving the rest of the world along then I doubt they would be half as much arguing about it. For all I care they can answer to their maker when they all die of aids, but that's obvisouly not the case. I mean I've never heard of a gay pride parade in your home... or have you?
I for one refuse to ever accept a *** as anything more then mentally ill person. And so be it will treat ***s however I choise as long as I choise. Period, I'm all about acceptance, but wrong is wrong.

There is no civil argument here because there is no argument.

[SCpoloRicker]

gays p>w3>n evangelicals

Also, as to "seperation of church and state"

""Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...""

Now, commonly, people advance the theory that this does not explicity state "seperation" and is more about "non-establishment of national." Also, quote is from a conservative/Christian source.

So, no $1, because "seperation of church and state" is not implicitly in the Const. However, the intent is to ensure that the state does not impose a state-sanctioned religion.

Wasn't this country founded on religious freedom?

Oh, and NJPaint and Rooster: that may be one of the most narrow-minded, fat-headed American sentiments ever expressed. Thanks for reminding me why I am afraid.

/to "Oh Canada"

Oh, Canada! I may have to mo-ove.
Oh, Canada, where people just aren't rude.

There are no wacko, or religous nuts, just lots and lots of trees
Not to mention, lighter laws for that good ol BC *trees*

Oh, Canada!

P.S. I was just talking to Jesus, and he says he's tired of the whole thing. Me and him are gonna try and swing a two week trip to Thailand for some R&R. He's gotta run it by his boss, first, though. I hear he's a real tightass sometimes...

[MayAMonkeyBeYourPinata]

Ya know if homo's were OK with themselves there would be no need for acceptance. I do what I do if someone else doesn't like it that's fine, because I'm ok with my actions. I don't need ppl to accept me or anything I do. Which means one of two things, either homo's are so high strung they act like high school girls and have a popularity disorder or they aren't ok with themselves so they are looking for acceptance to justify their inadiquacies.

First off there is no need for vulgarity.

Second, how is wanting equal rights regarding marriage, a "popularity disorder", and you say that if Homosexuals were ok with themselves there would be no need for acceptance. Then just look at Matthew Sheppard, he was savagely murdered because of his sexual orientation, which his murders did not accept.

Bottom line is, if they were doing this in their home and leving the rest of the world along then I doubt they would be half as much arguing about it. For all I care they can answer to their maker when they all die of aids, but that's obvisouly not the case. I mean I've never heard of a gay pride parade in your home... or have you?

So you are saying that Homosexuals should just live their entire life in "the closet", and not be their trueselves. They should just go throughout life as someone else. Thats like saying you can't laugh at anything you find funny.

And Homosexuals are the sole reason for the spread of AIDS. I should have that every single Homosexual person is HIV positive. And look all the heterosexual people are STD free funny how these things work

There is no civil argument here because there is no argument.

Where ever there are opposing viewpoints there will be an arguement

[Konigballer]

Hey, the uber scary website JDub linked taught me a new word! Look and learn:


"The only lawful sexual connection is the marriage bed. All other sex activity is WHOREMONGERY and blah, blah, blah....."

"Whoremongery", I've never heard of that word, I cant wait to wip that one out in Scrabble

[Jack_Dubious]

"The only lawful sexual connection is the marriage bed. All other sex activity is WHOREMONGERY and blah, blah, blah....."

hmm...but what about the marriage couch? marriage floor? or the marriage bathroom counter?



JDub

[ScatterPlot]

Because in too many places the bible tells me that the radical right trying to force there will on everyone is against its own teachings - forgive me the paraphrasing

I never said to force religion on anyone. Caring about someone's soul enough to try to convert them is not forcing.

Judge not, unless you be judged.
Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.

Judging by the Bible is not wrong; many people misinterpret that quote to mean accept everyone. Not so; there are many examples in the Bible of people telling others they're wrong. In the stone example, Jesus said, but a few minutes later, "Go, and sin no more." Did he not just judge? When Paul rebuked Peter for not dining with and being around the Gentiles, did he not judge? Telling people what they are doing is wrong is not a sin if you have evidence to support your claim.

Noone on this earth, by biblical prophesy deserves heaven -
Noone can come to the father accept through Me (Christ). So, let me ask this, if a gay couple chooses to accept Christ as their savior, are they banned from heaven for there union?

You cannot accept Christ and be homosexual. You might claim to, but if you are gay then you truly have not accepted what Christ tought.

What of the lessens of David - it is more holy to pray to god, to practice your religion in your closet than it is to proclaim it on the streets.

You are taking this out of context. I'm pretty sure that's talking about how some people would pray in the streets to be seen of others. That is wrong. Like it says somewhere I can't remember at this time, "Let not your right hand know what your left hand is doing." That's talking about not doing something to be seen of others, but doing it sincerely.

Let your lifestyle be that beacon to others of what is good and holy, lead by example. Teach those that would come to you. Somehow I just can't picture Christ, who the bible teaches us to emulate, holding a big sign telling someone they are EVIL. With the exception of what happens in the temple (church, whatever), I don't think the ideals allow you this. Shall this invade the church - as the money changers did, then you have the right to this as I read the bible.

Those people holding up big signs saying "youre evil" are not doing things the way Christ teaches us to do. Remember, not everyone is the same, it's the same way with the Church. There are liberals and conservatives and people who believe one thing rather than another. Some think everyone is right, I am of the opinion that no, not everyone is right. Like those people with the signs. They are not teaching out of love, like Jesus did, but from hate. They are clearly doing it wrong.

[Kellen_p8nt]

http://godhatesfigs.com/

that site you gave us is freaking scary.

serperation of church and state or not. The fact remains that democracies tragic flaw allows for this worthlessness. The very nature of democracy allows the fanatical, such as those of God Hates ***s.com or Rooster, to impose their beliefs upon the rest of the country.

But if the majority supports it we should do it! Uh how bout no? THe majority is simply one thing...the majority. Its is intirerly possible and often enough not correct. I will concede that most politics is opinion, however it is clear that there are right and wrongs when you sit down at the table with logic and sort through it all.

Logically speaking HOmosexuals marrying in no way harm my rights. Giving Homosexuals the right to marriage in no way infringes upon any of my current rights, in fact it gives me new ones.

think this way.

All people have a marriage right. That right currently is "You have the right to marry one person of the opposite sex" (plus a few other stipulation

Now legalizing homosexual marriage will rewrite said right as this "You have the right to marry a person of any sex"


so now you can
Marry opposite sex
marry same-sex
MOre than likely the people of GODHates***s will choose not to use this new right, instead marrying only opposite sex. That is their decision. If they do not wish to use this right they dont have to but there is no reason to prevent the use of it for others.

Also I believe polygamy aughta be allowed. Why not the same logic applies. Also i think past cousin is ok. LOgically speaking closer is ok also, because legaly marriage does not include reproduction. Reproduction with close kin is a definite no-no...i guess. I dont like it but i dont think i have the right to tell people no.

also on the tax problem of polygamy, i think i have your answer. Say 4 wives 1 husband. All five work. All five file file under one household tax form, one of the women files as head of household(yay feminism) the other 4 file as dependents.

Really thats no diffrent than a regular family. kids make incomes wives and husbands make incomes but files as dependents under head of household on one form.


I can't speak on the religiosity cus well im not religious

[Kellen_p8nt]

I never said to force religion on anyone. Caring about someone's soul enough to try to convert them is not forcing.


Judging by the Bible is not wrong; many people misinterpret that quote to mean accept everyone. Not so; there are many examples in the Bible of people telling others they're wrong. In the stone example, Jesus said, but a few minutes later, "Go, and sin no more." Did he not just judge? When Paul rebuked Peter for not dining with and being around the Gentiles, did he not judge? Telling people what they are doing is wrong is not a sin if you have evidence to support your claim.

You cannot accept Christ and be homosexual. You might claim to, but if you are gay then you truly have not accepted what Christ tought.

SOrry gotta correct you. "You cannot accept my interpretation of christ and be homosexual. You might claim to, but if you are gay then you truly have not accepted what i think christ thought"

sorry hate to do it to ya. But that little book is full of contradictions leaving every statemnt from it intirerly open to contradictions.

[ScatterPlot]

Contradictions are usually misunderstandings. What contradictions are you talking about? And don't just say 'theres a ton of them, I cant think of any though'. That's what many would do, so gimme some hard evidence.

[spantol]

sorry hate to do it to ya. But that little book is full of contradictions leaving every statemnt from it intirerly open to contradictions.

[simpsons]
And talk about a preachy book! Everyone in it's a sinner! Ooh, except that guy.
[/simpsons]