Perry backs Ohio anti-abortion ‘heartbeat bill’

Come on folks… the poll was conducted by the ADF for crying out loud… who do you think they’re going to call?

An impartial polling agent they are not.

This is a joke…even Fox News won’t report on it.

Surprised the number isn’t higher. Especially when the only people you call are the ones listed on the Conservative Southern Baptist Convention List. Get real. 

For some reason, this is being sparsely picked up by news sources (rather than not being picked up AT ALL, which is what should be happening).  THANK YOU to those I see commenting on this story in source after source:  No one’s buying it.  As one poster says, for god’s sake it was commissioned by hate groups.  All they do is lie.  WHY DO YOU THINK they’re classified as hate groups?  Good lord.

POS polling. How appropriate.

Learn math!! Love this “Importantly, a majority (53%) of Americans strongly agreed with the statement.” Change less than 2% of minds (or just wait for the next generation) and your “majority” is gone.
PS The margin of error is 2.53%.

From the Article: “The poll’s sponsors did not release methodology or crosstabs…”

English Translation: “The poll’s sponsors are lying sacks of excrement.”

This was done by a “Republican” polling firm, which was paid for by anti-gay “family values” organizations, and the poll said that gay marriage is very, very bad. Shocking, I tells ya! That result is utterly shocking! Who in their right mind would have expect that? Oh yeah, everyone on the entire planet.

Perhaps of these “appointed messengers of God” can explain to us ignorant morons how preventing gay couples from marrying each other creates “responsible procreation” for straight couples? So according to them, just the knowledge that the gay couple down the street can’t get married will make straight couples want to get married before they have sex? That is what they’re talking about, right? “Responsible procreation”, meaning marriage. It’s a stupid argument. Coming from stupid bigoted ignorant homophobes, that are using their “chosen” religious beliefs to turn our country into their own personal theocracy.

The poll’s sponsors did not release methodology or crosstabs, but did release basic information (PDF).

Why couldn’t they release the methodology? Something to hide? Like hide the truth – like the methodology might be flawed? Truth don’t like to hide in closets. Gay people got tired of hiding in closets long time ago.

These hate groups are the biggest bunch of whiny chicken little sky is falling people I’ve ever seen.

Gay marriage has been around already in the United States and other countries for years.  Grow up and get over it.  

People are people and there’s nothing scary about gays and lesbians besides whatever fantasies exist in your head.  Maybe it’s time to actually get to know some of them on a personal level instead of insulating yourself inside a bubble of stereotyping and fear. Come on, you’re making yourself look really uneducated.

You might as well have had hitler run a poll in Germany in the 1930s on support fpr the Nazi Party.

BTW, hitler was born and baptised catholic in very catholic Austria. He has yet, dead or alive, to be EXcommunicated by his church, which claims to support life.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

So if the poll (even the real poll) said 90% of people were against gay marriage, does that then make discrimination and bigotry right?

I’m sure the polling was done from membership lists of right wing churches.

How many people realize that Hoover was predicted to win the 1932 presidential election.  the polls list came from the car registration lists.  I remember my Dad telling me how for 2 years he had his car up on blocks because he couldn’t afford to pay the $5 for registration.

actually, about 53% of Americans support gay marriage.  And re the catholic church, while the vatican is so against giving gays equality, about 50% of catholics support marriage and 74% support marriage or civil unions.

its jsut another piece of poop with which they can rile up their people and make them beleive they are winning.

FRC, NOM,  AFA.  All hate groups  The catholic hierarchy paid NOM several million $$$ re fighting marriage equality for gays.

Isn’t it about time that all catholics simply stopped supporting their church till RATZINGEr is sent to a nursing home and all his appointed cardinals are given their walking papers.

Soutehrn BAtpists – a church that came to power in the 1830s to be the bullwark of slavvery and then gave us segregation and the KKK.

And so many people who believe in their ideals that are setting themselves up to go str8 to hell or what ever they call it.    at least  they will have lots of company there- their pastors

ADF – defending bigotry and hatred.  bTW, re the German born and brought up pope….

In 2008 he said that gays and trans people would lead to the end of the human race.

Exactly what hitler said re the Jews.   Benedict has not forgotten the lessons of his youth, includign his past as  a member of the Nazi youth corp.

Of course the “religious” right would find a poll that supports their agenda.  The fact is when you talk to actual people you rarely run into anyone who is opposed to marriage for same sex couples.  All I ever hear are those for it or those that just don’t care.  We need to realize that the “right” uses religion as a mask for bigotry and they always have back to the days of segregation, women’s suffrage and slavery. There is nothing religious about this. It is a civil matter and as such all American should be treated equally.

It says volumes by not releasing the methodology and crosstabs.

I wonder what Nate Silver would say about this poll?

Nate Silver needs to tackle this poll. It does not meet the smell test.

Their “survey results summary” lists one question.  But interestingly, it also notes that “The survey was part of a broad and comprehensive effort examining American attitudes toward marriage.”

Hmmm… sounds to me like they asked maybe more than just the one question.  And, as we all know, it’s pretty easy to set up a string of questions in a way so as to piss off the people you want to hang up, and only get the results you want.

NEVER EVER trust a “survey” that doesn’t inform you of the lead up questions.  It is always a fraud.

Sorry poor kids, can’t do what Jesus asked today. We’ve got a gay wedding to prevent!

Timothy Kincaid wrote:

“Hmmm… sounds to me like they asked maybe more than just the one question.  And, as we all know, it’s pretty easy to set up a string of questions in a way so as to piss off the people you want to hang up, and only get the results you want.NEVER EVER trust a “survey” that doesn’t inform you of the lead up questions.  It is always a fraud.”

Here you go:

http://www.telladf.org/userdocs/ADFMethodologyMemo.pdf

Not too much to “piss off the people.”  First question after basic demos.

Nature freak — have you demanded that Gallup and WaPo release their cross tabs or do you only make those demands when you don’t like the results?

What is it with the right wing and it’s constant lying?

If the facts don’t back them up, they just invent a new
set of “facts”.

Explain, MNY.

So that does that say something about the Catholic church?

These SO-CALLED Christian bigots are so DESPERATE, they would rather sell their souls to the devil before allowing people their FREEDOM to love. I seriously think these people are to be arrested for Public Mischief!!! You cannot conjure up an idea in your head about a group of people, and begin to attack and persecute them WITHOUT any proof of what you are accusing them of. Several countries and US States have instituted gay marriage, where is the ‘Anarchy’ or the devastation of heterosexual marriages?

It is a good thing God created gay people with high level of civility and forgiveness, because some others would not be so diplomat. Well those anti-gay bigots can spew all they want, JUSTICE shall always PREVAIL!

Someone please help me understand.  I am new to this debate. When the government elects to give married people who procreate special benefits, is that being hateful to everyone else? 
    And why would anyone want two different kinds of relationships to carry the same definition?  That seems confusing.  If the homosexual relationship is good, why should it not proudly carry its own definition? Why try to mimic what it is not?  

Civil marriage (once again, this is NOT religious marriage) carries with it 1,138 federal rights. It seems hateful to deny an entire group of people the rights that you enjoy. And if not hateful, at the very least it’s uninformed. Once you are informed, if you still choose to deny people the same rights that you enjoy, you might not be hateful, but you certainly appear petty, and stingy. What you’re basically saying is “My relationship is better than yours, so I deserve 1,138 rights that you shouldn’t get”. Is that hateful? Not sure. You be the judge. Better yet, look up Luke 6:31, and ask yourself, “What would Jesus do?”

Lost:  mythical couple who blames gay marriage for their divorce.  

If found, please return to National Organization for Marriage so they will have at least ONE piece of evidence to back up their (heretofore) lies and fear-mongering.

Actually, the next generation to come into voting/political power (Generation Y) is the *most* supportive of gay marriage. Data shows that every new generation of Americans is more supportive than the last.

Not to mention the fact that the older generations are slowly but surely changing their minds. The 53% support is only going to go up, up, up. :-)

Homosexuality is dangerous. It entails activities that are not only dangerous to personal health, they cannot be made safe. Some of the unsafe elements can be minimized, or lessened somewhat, but the danger cannot be removed.

The unhealthy element and its consequences influence people who are not involved in the behavior itself. There’s a minimalist ethic that says I can do what I want as long as it doesn’t hurt someone else. Homosexual practices do hurt other people. They spread AIDS to non-homosexuals, for one.

All laws force someone’s moral view on another. This isn’t about forcing Judeo-Christian views on someone else. It’s about the legitimacy for us to even hold our point of view. We’re being faulted for even making a moral distinction.

Gay rights is not about equal rights. It’s about a small group of people working to force the majority to approve of behavior that the rank and file believes is morally objectionable.

I have the right to marry any woman of my choice who is not already married and who is distant from me in terms of kinship. Homosexuals have the same right, yet they want more than these same legal freedoms. They want a special right and society has no obligation to grant it.

As Americans, homosexuals should have the very same rights that every other American has, but as homosexuals, they shouldn’t have any special standing by law.

So, you say that “I have the right to marry any woman of my choice who is not already
married and who is distant from me in terms of kinship. Homosexuals have
the same right”. The point that you’re so clumsily missing is that heterosexuals get to marry the person that they love. As a gay man, I can never fall in love with a woman. An appropriate comparison would be to ban all Christian churches. After all, Christians can just go to a mosque or a synagogue to worship. Why do they get the special rights to pray where they WANT to pray? You see, here in America, we all have the religious and person freedoms to worship where we want, and to marry the person we love. Blacks can marry whites, Christians can marry atheists, and so on and so on.

And you’re comments about homosexuality being dangerous are so ludicrous that they barely deserve a response. If you don’t want AIDS, don’t have unprotected sex with someone who’s HIV positive. Straight people are HIV positive, young people are HIV positive, old people are HIV positive, black people are HIV positive, Christians are HIV positive, and so are people from every different ethnic and religious minority. Your logic is so upside-down it’s crazy. How about this, if you truly believe that gay people are the only ones spreading HIV, let’s allow them to enter monogamous relationships, sanctioned by the state. Makes sense, huh? And, by the way, they call that marriage!

the headline is: delusional christian taliban lies(again)

Homosexuals have every right any other American has. I don’t have the right to live anywhere I want. I don’t have the right to be employed by anyone I want. I don’t have the right to marry anyone I want. There are laws and rules and moral restrictions that govern all of those things.

“But, I can’t marry the person I love.” Neither can heterosexuals marry any person they love.

But homosexuals say, “I don’t want to marry a person of the same sex.” Well, what homosexuals want is a different issue. The fact is homosexuals have the same freedoms heterosexuals have, they just don’t want to exercise them. They want more than the same legal freedoms we have. They want an additional freedom, a special right.

What homsexuals really want is government endorsement for their relationships. They know that such endorsement will make homosexuality and their behavior appear just as normal as heterosexuality.

Gay activists want same-sex marriage because they understand that government-backed same-sex marriage will validate and normalize homosexuality throughout society.

The key point here is “government-backed.” Homosexuals already can “marry” one another privately. There is just no government version of it. Nothing is stopping homosexuals from pledging themselves to one another in private same-sex marriage ceremonies. In fact, it is done all the time—there is an entire cottage industry for “gay” weddings.

But that’s not enough because they know that government endorsement will make homosexuality and their behavior appear just as normal as heterosexuality. That’s why the same-sex marriage movement has more to do with respect than rights.

Once they get that legal and social approval, no one disagreeing with them will be safe. Schools, businesses, churches, and charities will be bludgeoned with threats and lawsuits until they abandon their convictions and agree to promote what is pleasantly called “diversity.”  Ironically, the only view allowed by the coming diversity police is the narrow view that you must celebrate homosexuality.  No other view will be tolerated.

Some dangers of homosexuality:

While Americans who are homosexual compose only 4 percent of the population, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control estimates that 60 percent of HIV cases are caused by homosexual behavior. Of the 16,000 AIDS deaths per year in America, at least 144,000 people were killed because of homosexual relations in the same 15 year period.

43% of white male homosexuals have had sex with 500 or more partners and 28% have had 1000 or more sex partners.  Consequently, the rate of infection from various sexually transmitted diseases is huge, such as gonorrhea, syphilis, chlamydia, herpes, and HPV.
 
The average person diagnosed with HIV will accumulate $618,000 in additional hospital bills before death.  Most homosexuals do not have that much cash on hand, so innocent Americans are paying that either through higher taxes because of payment default or higher health insurance premiums because of this homosexual lifestyle.

Homosexual relationships break down the traditional family unit of a father and mother at home which is proven to be the best for raising healthy children.  Median age of death for homosexuals is 20 years younger than the general population, leaving children without their parents at a much younger age.  And wide-spread homosexual behavior would eventually bring the human species to extinction through lack of procreation.  So it would be dangerous to the culture to promote homosexuality.

This poll of theirs says that 62% of Americans believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. What’s all this supposed to prove? The bigots at NOM wouldn’t drop their opposition to gay marriage if 100% of Americans supported GAY marriage!

 500 partners!! ROFL this is what fundies actually believe

God hates the sin of homosexual perversions. Enough said. Why do we allow these sex freaks rights at all!?!? They are sick and twisted and out to destroy our country. They are wanting special rights for perverted sex acts and diseas. E. They do not love orr fo ANYTHING beneficial in society.

No such thing as a gay Christian!

My dad said the same thing and here we are me a happy gay son and he a proud father. is any of your descendants gay?
What will you do when one of your blod comes out to you?

Rhj…
Try this argument in a Court of Law. See how far it gets ya.

We teach kids, we have gay students,they are out and they are having their dates  in the open and all is seing normal. The changes to society iare happening and no way is going back to closets. Those lucky souls bourn  and accepted by their friends is a beautiful thing to see. They are the future vote.

Here is a gay Christian. 

Of course they wouldn’t support it if 100% of Americans supported it. Why would that make a difference? Should people involve themselves with what they personally believe to be wrong behavior just because everyone else approves of it?

Would you disapprove of gay marriage if 100% of the population disapproved of it (which was certainly the case in decades past)? You probably would not in your current state of mind. Rather you would think that everyone else was wrong and you were right.

Also, consider that many who oppose it are conservative Christians. Think about what conservative Christians believe. They worship Jesus who has declared that sin is so awful that there is only one punishment fitting for it, namely eternal separation from God in torment. This is why they believe that Jesus died on the cross – in order to take the punishment for the sins of all who would have faith in Him as Lord and Savior. Since sin is so ugly to these Christians, they are simply being consistent with their beliefs in shunning it no matter who approves of it. What authority do they have to change their source of faith and the teachings of their Master?

Besides, gays should be glad that conservative Christians attempt to be consistent with the teachings of the New Testament. It teaches genuine followers of Jesus to love all people and do good to them as long as this does not compromise the holiness of their God. Unlike many Muslims, it teaches them to not use violence against those who are their enemies, but rather to love them and pray for them. I personally would be glad to pray for you, Marcus. I pray that you will prosper in life and have true peace with God, our one and only source of lasting joy!

You asked what the poll is supposed to prove. From my perspective, it proves that from this polls’ point of view there is a majority that still opposes gay marriage, although 62% is still low when compared with history. The recent trend will likely continue due to social pressures. It proves that a significant portion of the country is in rebellion against their maker and they demonstrate that rebellion through the acceptance and promotion of this particular sexual deviance.

Margaret

You do not have to celebrate Homosexuality as you call it.  You have that freedom and you have expressed yourself in many statements exactly where you stand.  What you simply are saying is that you are in the majority.  You do not like the minority (gays) and therefore, your vision of normality and government sanction relationships is the vision that we should all accept.  I got it. 
If I understand your argument, you are normal and you deserve that government sanctioned recognition of your marriage.  The rest of us “homosexuals” well — how dare you.   How nice of you to tell all us “homosexuals” to pledge in “private” our same-sex ceremonies.  You are very “liberal” in your thoughts.  I truly appreciate your willingness to keep us in the closet.  Sorry, those days of us being in closet and having our “private” ceremonies are over.  I married my husband in a state sanctioned marriage.  You do not like it.  You want it to go away.  But I truly do not care.   My husband and I are married and the day is coming that this great nation will recognize that marriage. 

Why would sexual deviance be something to be proud of if my son turned out to be a sexual deviant? If a person’s son became sexually promiscuous, an adulterer, a fornicator, a prostitute, a pedophile, an objectum sexual, should I then be obligated to say that I’m proud of him? If I did that, then I would simply be deceived. I would be exalting my son over truth and morality.

No, if my son became a homosexual, I would attempt to lovingly show him through reason and biblical revelation how he should fight the temptation to act in accordance with his dangerous desires. I would pray for him so that he might experience the deliverance from that harmful lifestyle. I would hope for an experience like that recorded in the recent book, Out of a Far Country: A Gay Son’s Journey to God. A Broken Mother’s Search for Hope by Christopher and Angela Yuan. Many have fought the temptations to homosexuality and have gained victory over that behavior.

Homosexuality is a sin that is spoken against multiple times in the New Testament. If you are a Christian, then you should fight all sexually deviant temptations. God’s plan for sexuality according to the Bible is that it is exclusively for husbands and wives who are joined within marriage. In the New Testament marriage is an institution that reflects the relationship between Christ and the church, male and female respectively (Eph 5:22-33). This sort of relationship isn’t possible among same sex couples.

You should seek the Lord on this matter. He Himself speaks plainly against sexual deviance when he condemns “fornication.” In the original language, “fornication” is a catchword for all forms of unbiblical sexual activity in Matthew 15:19 and Mark 7:21. He will give you deliverance, victory, and joy if you will seek Him! No more guilt and fear – it’s great!

You said that we should ask ourselves “What would Jesus do?” Fortunately Jesus explains exactly what he will do in Matthew 13:41-42. He says that at the end of the age “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” If we wish to know some examples of the “sin” that he is talking about, He gives a list of sins a couple of chapters later which includes “fornication” (Matthew 15:19). The Greek word for “fornication” here is defined by the standard New Testament Greek Lexicon as “unlawful sexual intercourse, prostitution, unchastity, fornication.” Any student of the Bible knows that homosexual intercourse was considered “unlawful sexual intercourse” by a culture and a people who believed in the Old Testament as Jesus and His disciples did.

If we continue to ask “What will Jesus do?” biblically speaking we may arrive at another answer, Jesus will deliver all who believe in Him and His work on the cross and in the resurrection. He will deliver all who turn from seeking sin to fighting sin, all who repent of their sins and make Him their Lord. Turn to Him for forgiveness. Check out ChristianityExplored dot org. Very helpful and encouraging stuff!

Luke 6:31 seemed to point to those righteous poor people who were oppressed and neglected by rich wicked people. Luke records an illustrative parable of this in the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19ff.

When I read your post, I got your message loud and clear.  “If my son became a homosexual….”   What a telling statement.   “Became”.  I would have been impressed if you had said…”If my son had chosen to become a homosexual….”  But you didn’t.  I am not sure what you meant, but I looked up the word “become” in the dictionary.  Become means “to come into being”.  So, I am assuming, you see this as something that was not with your “if” son from the beginning.  Then of course, you went down the path of temptation.  So, I began to understand.  You would love your ”if” son, who clearly made the wrong choice, and you would make sure he understood “through reason and bibilical revelation” the need to fight this “temptation.”  In otherwords, since you feel this way all your “if” son has to do is just fight it because he “became” this way.  Then of course you ended the statement this was simply a “behavior”.

I got it.  Do you?  I am assuming your son is not a “homosexual” since you said, “if”.  I am assuming that you are giving yourself a lot of credit that your pretend gay son would change his “behavior” due to your diligent arguments of reason and bibilical revelations.  I would assume this “if” son is already a Christian since you are.  I would assume this “if” son already know the scriptures as you do.  I would assume that your “if” son did not change his “behavior” then your son would never know that you are proud of him. 

Being that you are heterosexual and Christian means this is the only behavior allowed.  Right?  Nothing else is allowed.  The scriptures (and I can list them all for you, can you?) are the only statements that we need to understand.  Please forget that God has created each of us.  Please forget that God created you to be heterosexually attracted to someone else and quite possibly God created your “if” son to be gay and attracted to someone of the same sex.  You are the norm.  You are sanctioned by God.  Nothing else will do. 

I am not your son and I am sure you are glad of this.  Because “if” you were my parent, I would attempt to lovingly show you through reason and bibilical revelation how you should fight the tempetation to act in accordance of your dangerous desires to “trash” what God has created.  I would pray for you so that you might experience the deliverance from that harmful belief that you understand to be the Gospel.  I would hope for an experice like that recorded in the book : The Church and the Homosexual by John McNeill.  I have fought the temptation to deny what Christ has called me to be and I praice Christ that I have victory to be gay. 

My friend.  Thansk for letting me know what is in the New Testament.    Then read it again, again, and again.  You speak as if you have authority.  We both know only one person has authority of what Scripture says. 

You stated that I should see the Lord on this matter.  I encourage you to do the same.  I am impressed with your knowledge of the few scriptures verses you shared.  We both can get into the scripture battles.  You probably have trapped unsuspecting people into this battle.  I will not get into the battle with you.  Not because you have won the argument by throwing out a scripture or two but because even Jesus Christ understood that such an argument never completes the work that God has called all of us to do. 

There is no need to seek the Lord on this matter.  The Lord and I are constantly in communication.  You simply do not like the message the Lord has given me.  I get it.  And there is absolutely nothing I will say to you that will convince you otherwise.  However, for those reading this, here is what the Lord has said to me.  I love you.  You are my child.  I have created you to be who you are.  Do not listen to those who use my scriptures for their own purpose.  They do not know me.  You were created in my image.  Not the image of those around you.  Never fear.  For I am always with you. 

My deliverance, victor and joy has already come from God.  I have no guilt.  I have no fear.  I am a child of the most gracious being in the world.  And to quote scirpture  “For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neigther angles nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate “us” from the love of God that is in Chrsit Jesus our Lord.”  (Romans 8:38′-39).  This may be of some suprised to you, but that includes me – The Gay Christian. 

Jonathan, I’m sorry if I mis-communicated my understanding of what it is to be a homosexual. From my perspective, whether a person “becomes” a homosexual at a later time in life or whether they’ve always had homosexual desires from their youngest recollections is irrelevant. Biblically speaking all people are sinners and naturally desire to rebel even from their earliest years. In the Bible God Himself says “the intention of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen 7:21). Consider also Jesus when he was speaking to an audience of religious folks, he addresses his audience as “evil” (Matthew 7:11). The apostle Paul who was commissioned by Jesus Himself to preach Jesus and establish churches said this of unregenerate humanity: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes. Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God” (Romans 3:11-19). Not very optimistic concerning humanity’s natural state.

Now, I apologize for the extended quotation, but I’m wanted to show some of the primary sources of Bible-affirming Christian thinking on this matter. It should naturally follow that just because we are a certain way by our nature and our choice, it doesn’t mean that it’s acceptable in God’s sight. If we used this sort of thinking with other forms of illicit behavior, imagine how much worse we’d be. For example, imagine if a heterosexual man discovers early in his life that his heart desires to engage in sexually promiscuous behavior and this results in a life of broken relationships, failed marriages, and STDs. Should I be proud of Him because he’s always desired to have many sexual partners? If I located some natural propensity or genetic cause for this behavior, should I affirm him and tell him that it’s okay? Should I not try to lovingly help him get ahold of himself and seek God’s ways? If I personally hold a firm conviction that the Bible is divine revelation, wouldn’t I attempt to get direction from that in guiding my son?

I don’t believe that heterosexuality is the right way because it’s what I am, I believe it because the Bible, the Christian’s source of divine revelation, teaches it. I feel many things in my own heart that don’t agree with God’s word, but it doesn’t mean that they’re right. I remind myself of the timeless wisdom of Proverbs 28:26 “He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, But he who walks wisely will be delivered.” I pray that you will consider this truth and seek Christ and His ways. You may think that it’s right to trust your own heart now, but “There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death” (Proverbs 14:12). Seek God and salvation through faith in His Son, you will experience a true liberating eternal happiness!

Why bother quoting Scriptures back to me? You only seem to mock rather than engage. We wouldn’t need to have “Scripture battles.” Only normal conversation.

You must admit that if a person says that they’re a Christian, it would be assumed that they use the Bible as a source of theology. The New Testament explains that God is greatly concerned with the right use of human sexuality. Homosexual behavior between men is specifically spoken against plainly in three places.

You may mock me, but you know that those scriptures are there and if you know the New Testament, it nowhere says that he “created you to be who you are.” He’s created us to become conformed to the image of His Son, Jesus Christ. This demands difficult change from all of us. I too have unbiblical desires in my heart, but I take up the fight against them with the armor of God. I hope that you do the same!

I’m not trying to discourage you, but rather trying to encourage you to fight the good fight, to not follow a multitude to do evil and to abstain from sexual immorality as the apostle Paul taught, that staying away from unbiblical sexual immorality is your sanctification. I see from your post that you believe some of the things that he wrote, how about the rest?

Seek to wake up from your slumber, hell is the blackness of darkness forever. I hope to meet you in heaven so that we can worship the Lamb who was slain for our sins together!

Interesting.. FRC is happy to cite an activist judge in the NY Court of Appeals when it suits their purpose, but they have a record of stating that activist judges are opposed to what is right, good, and american.  That judges don’t get to make the law, the legislature does.  Now the legislature is doing something the FRC doesn’t like, so the judges should be listened to about making law..

You know, if you wear your hypocrisy on your sleeve it doesn’t make me ignore your bigotry.  It just makes me wonder when you are going to collapse under that bubble created by your own hot air.

Oh I had no idea that you were on a talking bases with god? How lucky for you. Too bad there is zero proof that is is a good… Your statement = 00 to me because beleif in a magical being does not give you the right to discriminate against anyone. You may as well have written the tooth fairy hates sin.. Lol both are fairy tales stupid people believe! Oh look their is a red moon!!! God must be telling me its time ton panic! End of the world is coming!! Lol you all crack me up so much! Your stupidity and comment made my day ! Can wait to go home and tell my housemate some weirdo thinks he knows what god wants lol lol

What would the tooth fairy do??? Or santa? How about big foot?
What would Harry potter do? Lol your referance to Jesus as if he is real is very entertaining to me. Until Jesus comes Down from magic cloud land ( lol made me think of monkey magic… Wonder what he would think now too) and tells me personally otherwise.. He can kiss my cholo!

Lol lol I’m laughing soo much at your comment ! The only thing that is dangerous is your stupidity. Won’t matter soon enough cos equal Rights will be here soon and hopefully with this win … Starts the end of religion forever. A peaceful would without and stupidity … Sounds like a heaven I want to be part of.

I think I would rather “fight” with the tooth fairy… Least she can fly!! My children’s fairybook tells me she is real! Lol

Lol.. Sounds like your son might commit suicide .. I would if I was him. Poor bugger.. Having a father that is brain dead must just kill him inside

Go fuck yourself, moron.

I think u need to study more? Ha!

They’ve called our house twice. Everytime my mom would answer “No” to their asinine question, the pollster would mumble something and hang up on HER. Yeah, I don’t believe these results are accurate at all.

Thanks my friend for your consistency in the message.  I truly appreciate.  Let me be clear and consistent with you in my message.  I am with God.   I am saved through faith with God’s Son and I will experience a true liberating eternal happiness.  And I am a Gay Christian. 

Do you think that His eyewitnesses were fictional too? Many of His original disciples gave their lives for Him. Do you think that they were all willing to give their lives for a fictional figure that they invented? Do you also think that the Roman Historians, Suetonius and Tacitus who reference Jesus as a first century Jewish figure were helping them to invent Jesus? Do you think that the first century Jewish historian, Josephus was contributing to the conspiracy because he refers to Jesus and His forerunner John the Baptist? Do you think that later Jews who referenced Jesus in the Talmud were making up a fictional person to write against? Do you think that Jesus’ brother James became a believer after Jesus’ “made up” resurrection just for kicks? You can read about Jesus’ brother in Jospheus. Check it out.

I know of no historians of that period who confidently take the view that Jesus was not “real.” The debate is not whether or not He was real, but whether or not He was who He claimed to be – whether or not He was truly the Son of God Your problem is this: since Jesus will not submit to your modern conception of the scientific method, you will not believe in him. You feel that you need empirical evidence in order to believe that He existed. However, Jesus is not interested in giving you empirical evidence. He has only left you with persuasive proofs of his genuineness which you should consider and investigate before you mock Him and treat Him as you would treat the tooth fairy. The tooth fairy never entered into recorded history and gathered a group of devoted disciples which grew into a worldwide movement.

The reason that Jesus does not come down from “magic cloud land” and tell you who He is personally is because He has wisely ordained to enter into history at the beginning of the first century, to identify with us as a regular human being, yet without sin, to be put to death as an innocent man and to do something historically unique, namely rise from the dead. He chose to do this in order that His disciples could see that He was who He claimed to be. Responding to momentous event, those witnesses traveled throughout the world proclaiming Christ’s teachings, atoning death, and resurrection. Their message speaks to people of every time and place. It has even endured to the 21st century when hundreds of millions of people like myself continue to find meaning and hope in this historic figure who has given us fantastic, life-changing teachings and promises.

Finally, consider what it will mean if you are wrong and if you will have to give an account for your mocking of Jesus. Meditate on what it would mean if you stand at the heavenly Tribunal and wonder why you gave historic validity to other figures such as Socrates with no empirical evidence, yet you refused to recognize the distinct possibility that Jesus really really did exist in history. He really did gather a worldwide following as He claimed He would. You will contemplate these things because at that time it will have eternal consequences.

I hope that you look into the claims of Jesus and find and forgiveness for your mocking. I hope that you find rejoicing in God’s means of forgiveness, faith in His Son, Jesus Christ.
__________________________
“He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.” (Acts 17:31)

Jesus said “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him, may have eternal life; and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40)

JJ
No mocking of you have taken place at all.  And I agree we should not have a Scripture battle.  However, it is exactly Scripture that you use to have convince yourself that individuals like me must change.  You are clear that this is the foundation for your desire to encourage me to fight the good fight.  I fought the good fight.  I struggle for a large portion of my Christian life to conform to what you believe I should be.  Not to what God has created.  You stated that God created us to conformed to the image of Jesus Christ.  And I agree with you, however, there may be something in Scripture that I missed in the teachings of Christ.  So I read the Gospels again just to make sure.  I did not find in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John any indication that Jesus had any sexual relationships with anyone.  So, I have no proof of what image that means I should conform to.  From the mouth of Jesus, this is what I know.  He did not say a word about same-sex relations. 

I know that most biblical scholars who write about homosexuality – whether they are conservatives imploring that I repent or radicals who are “queering” Nehemiah – write explicitly as believers, usually of the Christian variety.  This is where our conflict lies.  You have affirm that Paul and every jot and tittle of Scripture deplore all forms of homsexuality.  And I insist that the Bible, God, Christ, and so on, love gay men and women.  We both are in the trap that the function of an appeal of Scripture is to reinforce the postion one finds convincing before making the appeal. 

The dialog with you have been constructive and most engaging.  I know without a doubt you are believer, a sinner as you have said but saved by Christ.  And I have no doub that I am a believer and sinful as well and saved by Christ.  Where we will disagree as children of God is my sin is not my same-sex love for my husband.  My sin is my indifference to my fellow humans.  My desire to center the world on me and go about my daily activities without praying unceaslingly to my Christ.  Those are a small examples of my sins.  Loving my husband is not one of them.     

Jonathan,

Thanks for your response. I appreciate your thoughtfulness. I’ll just briefly respond to a few things:

(1) You’ve said that I have used Scripture to “convince” myself and you’re right. I believe that all who claim to be Christians should use the Christian Scriptures as a source of belief. Consider the alternative sources: (A) my own opinion, (B) the opinion of this present world, (C) other religious sources that are not related to Jesus. None of these sources are adequate or trustworthy for one who identifies as a Christian.

Although I’ve convinced myself of this from the Scriptures, it was not a difficult thing to do. The Scriptures are not ambiguous on the matter of human sexuality. They seem to be quite plain. This fact is evidenced by a global and historical tradition of interpretation from Christianity’s earliest days until just a few decades ago. The New Testament simply used the available vocabulary for same-sex intercourse as it existed in the ancient world and condemned it as sinful.

(2) Being conformed to the imagine of Christ doesn’t mean that we physically look like Jesus, wear sandals, don’t get married, etc. We know this because although Jesus wasn’t married, many of his disciples had wives and they were not condemned for it nor did they leave their wives to live a life of singlehood to be like Jesus. Being conformed to Christ doesn’t mean having the same marital status as Jesus, but rather being conformed to His heart for the institution of marriage.

According to Romans chapters 8 and 12, being conformed to the image of Christ happens through a renewal of our mind – through not being conformed to this present age.

So then if I desire to be conformed to the image of Christ in the area of marriage, I will ask myself “What did Jesus teach us about marriage? How can my mind become in agreement with Jesus’ mind on this matter? When I ask that question, I will find an answer in Matthew 19. There Jesus explains that from the beginning God created Male and Female so that they could be united as one in matrimony in a complementary relationship. I will also find that His disciple, Paul teaches that marriage is a uniting of Male and Female so that they may reflect the beautiful gospel picture of Christ and the Church in Ephesians 5.

So I look at Jesus’ teaching and I look at the teaching of this present age I see a difference. And it’s not up to me to  decide which one I like best, but I must evaluate my position based on the plain propositional teaching of the Bible. I admit that it would be much easier for me to go with the flow and promote same-sex behavior and gay marriage, but I could not do so and believe that I am in agreement with the plain teachings on the New Testament. If 1 Corinthians 6, 1 Timothy 1 and Romans 1 aren’t teaching that homosexual behavior is wrong, then what could the Apostles have said differently to communicate this sentiment? Is there a different word or phrase that he should have used but didn’t? I personally can’t imagine a clearer statement.

That’s a question to ask yourself as you meditate on those passages: “If the Bible did want to restrict same sex behavior, what would it have said differently?”

(3) To say that Jesus didn’t speak directly against same-sex relations is certainly correct. But consider the time and the place that Jesus was teaching. It was first century Israel. Same-sex relations were not exactly an issue that was being promoted or expressed by anyone in that society. It was a religious culture that had believed in the death penalty for sodomy. This would have been great motivation for many to stifle these same sex attraction. So rather than singling out that particular sin, Jesus chose to speak out against all forms of sexual immorality as I noted above with the term “fornication.” There is no dispute that this word in the original language referred to all forms of “unlawful sexual intercourse.” And if we were to argue that homosexual relations were not included as “unlawful sexual intercourse,” then what would have been included? He’s certainly not singling out adultery alone. The term for adultery was a different word which he uses in other places (e.g. Matt 5:27-28). “Adultery” was a subcategory of “Fornication.” Therefore, it seems reasonable to include all forms of sexual immorality outside of the biblical model of husband and wife.

Consider also that it wasn’t until Jesus’ apostles left the pious culture of Israel and came in contact with the sexually liberated Greco-Roman world that they began to be more specific in their warnings about sexual sins. Once the apostles began to travel throughout the Roman Empire, then Jesus’ apostles began to speak in particular against homosexuality/pederasty, prostitution, incest, unchastity, and all forms of fornication. As effective and relevant preachers, they spoke against those sins which were a part of their audience’s life experience.

(4) You also noted that your sin is your indifference towards your fellow person. Me too! How true for all of us! To fight against our selfishness is a noble and holy battle. I pray that God will help both of us to overcome self-centeredness. I myself will be teaching on this tomorrow morning – I hope that my preparation for teaching will have had a great impact on my heart to do good for more people.

However, I will say, that although we may identify apathy towards others as a sin, it doesn’t give us license too say that other areas of life are not up for scrutiny. We must not only ask “What is God’s will in the area of interpersonal relations?” We must also ask “What is God’s will in the area of my sexuality? Am I following the things that He has taught me? Or am I simply following my own deceitful heart and the pattern of this current age?” (Jeremiah 17:9; Proverbs 28:26; Mark 7:21-22; Galatians 1:4).

You should seek to read the testimonies of those Christians who took up the battle against this form of unbiblical behavior. I don’t only encourage those who have homosexual desires to take up the battle, but all forms of sexual deviancy should be battled: promiscuity, pornography, adutery, pre-marital sex, etc. I have to fight the natural desire to lust after women who are not my wife and God gives many victories – praise His Name! We should all fight these natural sinful desires in our heart to the glory of God. Check out Exodus International or something. It would certainly be worth it!

5th paragraph: Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, which is also listed as a hate group by the SPLC, praised the poll.

What branch of the Federal Government conferred upon the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) the legal right to define a “hate group”? Well, here is an inconvenient truth: Using it’s own definitions, the SPLC is itself a hate group, the target of their hate being predominately Christians.

The SPLC works closely with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to monitor hate and extremism. Any group that persistently uses known falsehoods to demonize an entire class of people for their innate characteristics is a hate group. That is why the SPLC is not a hate group.

Jonathan,

Thanks for your response. I appreciate your thoughtfulness. I’ll just briefly respond to a few things:

(1) You’ve said that I have used Scripture to “convince” myself and you’re right. I believe that all who claim to be Christians should use the Christian Scriptures as a source of belief. Consider the alternative sources: (1) my own opinion, (2) the opinion of this present world, (3) other religious sources that are not connected with Jesus. None of these sources are adequate or trustworthy for one who identifies as a Christian.

Although I’ve convinced myself of this from the Scriptures, it was not a difficult thing to do. I don’t believe that the Scriptures are ambiguous on the matter of human sexuality. They seem to be quite plain. This is evidenced by a universal tradition of interpretation from Christianity’s earliest days until just a few decades ago. The New Testament directly used the available vocabulary for same-sex intercourse as it existed in the ancient world and condemned it as sinful.

(2) Being conformed to the imagine of Christ doesn’t mean that we physically look like Jesus, wear sandals, don’t get married, etc. We know this because although Jesus wasn’t married, many of his disciples were and they were not condemned nor did they leave their wives to live a life of singlehood. Also it was suggested that the male overseers of churches have a wife rather than be single. Being conformed to Christ doesn’t mean having the same marital status as Jesus, but rather being conformed to his beliefs about marriage.

According to Romans chapters 8 and 12, being conformed to the image of Christ happens through a renewal of our mind – through not being conformed to this present age.

So then if I desire to be conformed to the image of Christ in the area of marriage, I will ask myself “What did Jesus teach us about marriage? How can my mind become in agreement with Jesus’ mind on this matter? When I ask that question, I will find in Matthew 19 that he explains that from the beginning God created Male and Female so that they could be united as one in matrimony in a complimentary relationship. I will also find that His disciple, Paul teaches that marriage is a uniting of Male and Female so that they may reflect the beautiful gospel picture of Christ and the Church in Ephesians 5.

So then I look at Jesus’ teaching and I look at the teaching of this present age I see a difference. And it’s not up to me to  decide which one I like best, but I must evaluate my position based on the plain propositional teaching of the Bible. I admit that it would be much easier for me to go with the flow and promote same-sex behavior and marriage, but I could not do so and believe that I am in line with the teachings on the New Testament. If 1 Corinthians 6, 1 Timothy 1 and Romans 1 aren’t teaching that homosexual behavior is wrong, then what could the Apostles have said differently to communicate this sentiment? Is there a different word or phrase that he should have used but didn’t? I personally can’t imagine a clearer statement.

That’s a question to ask yourself as you meditate on those passages: “If the Bible did want to restrict same sex behavior, what would it have said differently?”

(3) To say that Jesus didn’t speak directly against same-sex relations is certainly correct. But consider the time and the place that Jesus was teaching, first century Israel. Same-sex relations were not exactly an issue that was being promoted or expressed by anyone in that society. It was a religious culture that believed in the death penalty for sodomy. This would have been great motivation for many to stifle these tempatations. So rather than singling out that particular sin, Jesus chose to speak out against all forms of sexual immorality as I noted above with the term “fornication.” There is no dispute that this word in the original language referred to all forms of “unlawful sexual intercourse.” And if we were to argue that homosexual relations were not included as “unlawful sexual intercourse,” then what would have been included? He’s not singling out adultery. That was a different word which he uses in other places (e.g. Matt 5:27-28). It seems reasonable to include all forms of sexual immorality outside of the biblical model of husband and wife.

Consider also that it wasn’t until Jesus’ apostles left the pious culture of Israel and came in contact with the sexually liberated Greco-Roman world that they began to be more specific in their warnings about sexual sins. Once they began to travel thoughout the Roman Empire, then Jesus’ apostles began to speak in particular against homosexuality/pederasty, prostitution, incest, unchastity, and all forms of fornication. They spoke against those sins which were a part of their audience’s life experience.

(4) You also noted that your sin is your indifference towards your fellow person. Me too! How true for all of us! To fight against our selfishness is a noble and holy battle. I myself will be teaching on this tommorrow morning – I hope that my preparation for teaching will have had a great impact on my heart to do good for more people.

However, I will say, that although we may identify apathy towards others as a sin, it doesn’t give us license too say that other areas of life are not relevant. We must not only ask “What is God’s will in the area of interpersonal relations?” We should also ask “What is God’s will in the area of my sexuality? Am I following those things that He has taught me? Or am I simply following my own deceitful heart and the pattern of this current age?” (Jeremiah 17:9; Proverbs 28:26; Mark 7:21-22; Galatians 1:4).

You should read the testimonies of those Christians who took up the battle against this form of unbiblical behavior. I don’t only encourage those who have homosexual desires to take up the battle, but all forms of sexual deviancy should be battled: promiscuity, pornography, adutery, pre-marital sex, etc. Check out Exodus International. It would certainly be worth it!

ROFLOL!!! FRC?

And no random sample?

Wow… Wingnuts are getting desperate!

Your religion is not civil law.

LOL!

Procreation is not a requirement for marriage.

Fail…

Mythology is not civil law.

Actually, it involves nothing that straight couples don’t do.

Non-homosexuals spread AIDS every day.

This was anything BUT an honest random poll. Ultra-right-wing pollers were told by their ultra-right-wing paymasters what result they wanted, and so proceeded to return numbers that were pre-ordered. A result that was about as honest as the campaign for Prop 8 in California.

Gee, you must not be a very good Christian if you can post that “homosexuality is a sin that is spoken against multiple times in the New Testament.” There are exactly TWO – count ‘em, 2 – denunciations of homosexuality in the entire bible: one in the Old Testament, one in the New. And the statement in the New Testament comes from Paul, who not only never met Jesus, but never met a person not exactly like himself that he liked. When you compare those whole two references against the hundred-and-two references against adultery – which “Christians” seem to have absolutely no difficulty ignoring totally – simple logic would say stamp out the sin the Bible inveighs against 102 times before you even THINK about putting down the sin the Bible mentions twice. Homosexuals never swore to God they wouldn’t act homosexually; adulterers DID swear to God they would “forsake all others..as long as ye both shall live.” Who’s the greater sinner here??? The biblical word “fornication” is only a “catchword” for homosexuality in your tiny non-Aramaic-speaking mind.

Any attempt to write religious dogma into civil law (that will apply to ALL citizens, including those not of your faith) is a direct violation of the Constitution. The Framers established separation of Church and State for a very good reason: they had the bad example of England, where there was no separation. So why are you trying to establish Evangelical Protestantism as America’s State Religion?

The moment you involve jesus in your talk, that’s when I end my argument and close up shop. There is no way to have a logical exchange with a sheep. End of discussion.  

Kimberly, you’re right. Adultery is a terrible sin. I agree that in many instances it may indeed be a greater sin than the sin of homosexuality because it impacts so many other lives. I pray that all so-called Christians who break their marriage covenants will repent and find restoration through the power of God.

You mentioned that adultery is spoken against far more than homosexuality in the Scriptures. I haven’t counted those passages – I commend you for doing so. Based on your data, I’d argue that adultery is more frequently addressed in the Scriptures because from a historical perspective it was the more common sin.

If the above article was about adultery, perhaps we’d be discussing that topic in more detail. However, the article is about homosexuality and the discussion in this section of the comments is regarding whether or not biblical Christianity is compatible with homosexual behavior.

If we ignore the Old Testament passages, we have three apparent references to homosexual behavior of various sorts: (1) Romans 1:26-29; (2) 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; and (3) 1 Timothy 1:10. There has been debate about the vocabulary in the second two references, but they certainly are referring to same sex behavior as it existed in the Greco-Roman world. The Greek language of the day had no exact conceptual match with our modern English word “homosexual” but Paul used the only existing terms available to him. And they did all describe sexual behavior between people of the same gender. That is how they’ve been interpreted by all Bible students globally and historically until recent decades.

Anyhow, whether a sin is spoken against three times or nine hundred times is non sequitur. From the Christian perspective the Bible is an autoritative book for faith and practice so speaking against a sin one time should technically be enough for a genuine believer.

Also the biblical word for “fornication” is defined as “unlawful sexual intercourse” by the third edition of the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. This implies that the original authorial intent of the New Testament authors was to communicate the idea that all general sexual immorality was forbidden by their teaching and by Jesus Himself. I would be hesitant to disagree with the lexicographers unless I had very good reason to do so, but to the best of my knowledge I don’t believe that anyone has ever attempted to persuasively argue against this definition.

To speculate whether or not Jesus was speaking Aramaic when he spoke against “fornication” could be an interesting exercise, but ultimately it would provide no answers. There would be no way to definitively know whether you’re right or wrong in your conclusion. It would only be speculation. If Jesus was speaking Aramaic, then all we have is the Gospel writers’ translation of that Aramaic teaching into Koine Greek. I trust that it is a faithful translation.

No. It is a benefit.  And the government should logically have an interest in that benefit to society–enough to encourage it and protect it legally. 
     Again, what hatred is involved in simply protecting a good thing for society. You still have your freedoms and should receive equal respect as a person.  I am sorry if people (especially in the name of Christ) have not treated you with love and respect.  That is a misrepresentation of Christianity and I fear it is quite common today.

Your argument would require the annulment of all childless marriages.

There is no procreation requirement under any law.

I am not coming at this from a religious standpoint. Marriage (male-female) is marriage, whether you term it civil or religious.  To give the same benefits to any other relationship that cannot duplicate its benefits to society would be to miss the point of the benefit.  We should all appreciate the benefit of the husband/wife/children pattern because it produces stable, reproducible societies.  Why give the same benefit to couples who CANNOT reproduce anything?  Society would vanish if everyone followed that pattern. (Would you be satisfied if no relationships had ANY benefits?)

AKA out of touch proper gander machine. Does god really want them to out right lie?

You need a nonpartisan organization to conduct the survey. Obviously, when a polling firm has ties to Christian Right, it ceases to maintain its nonpartisan status.  Having said that, Alliance Defense Fund is merely an extension of the AFA, Focus on the Family and Campus Crusade for Christ.  The results are tainted.

http://wp.me/p1qDpl-4k

The article seems to indicate that the ADF survey was only conducted in the states with laws banning marriage equality, 31 of them.  Eveyone else’s pols covered the whole country!

I agree 100% Kimberly!  If people were just thinking straight, they would realize that there are enough good reasons for protecting the marriage institution without appealing to ANY religious convictions!   The possibility of procreation and stable family life with balanced male and female role models are sufficient reasons for the state to not only protect the institution but give it special benefits. Giving certain groups with certain responsibilities special benefits is certainly not being unfair to others who would choose a more carefree and less burdened lifestyle.  What do you think?

What would Jesus say? He might include gays in a modern sermon on the mount: “Blessed are the gay, for they accept the hand of God.”

PLUS, a biblical quote by King David about his gay lover, Jonathan: “very pleasant hast thou been unto me; wonderful was thy love to me, passing the love of women” (2 Samuel, 1:26)

In a Free & Democratic society, the state has no interest in promoting pro-creation, that is a right that is left to individuals.  The state does have an interest in seeing that children that are born are well taken care of, and are raised well.

Without the stigma of religion, marriage has nothing to do with procreation.  Procreation is the act of having a child, which can occur regardless of legal status of marriage.  Without shoving religion down my throat, I challenge anyone to present a reason that the state has an interest in my being a bigot.There are multiple, scientific-based, studies that show that same-sex partners offer the same loving, caring, and nurturing upbringing as opposite-sex partners.  There is also ZERO correlation between same-sex parents having children that prefer same-sex relationships.  There is a very-high correlation to those children being tolerant and accepting of others no matter their differences, which a Free Democracy has a very high state value in.

Your statement “Giving certain groups with certain responsibilities special benefits is certainly not being unfair to others who would choose a more carefree and less burdened lifestyle,” is bigotted and misleading.  You are saying that those that you are permitting to marry have more responsibility (a permit you deny to those that you don’t like), and then you insinuate that same-sex partners “choose” (a patently religious belief), calling it “carefree and less burdened” is an outright lie.  In what way would you support any of that statement without bringin religion into the mix?

I think that Cellophane is a very appropriate name for you when commenting because your arguments are transparent when you shine the light of truth against them.

What is the concrete evidence that you would present that same-sex marriage poses any detriment to either opposite-sex married couples or the state? Keep in mind this is legal in many countries, as well as a number of U.S. States, so you should be able to present hundreds of examples, and show us how these countries and states are on the verge of total collapse of their social systems.

(Edit: Oh, I forgot to mention that I’m married to someone of the opposite-sex and have a child)

http://cheapsoakleysunglasses.com/

Irrelevant.  God’s best says that the union of a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife, is the template — that is, WHAT, not who.

However, your religion is not enforced as civil law.

In fact, it’s not even a viable defense for your views in federal court.

It doesn’t matter.

________________________________

State of mind is ALWAYS admissible.

Christians don’t have “religion” anyway.  WE have relationship. We understand that you don’t know the difference.

The love between them, however, is brotherly love in the Lord.

It takes one who claims to be homosexual maliciously to misrepresent what the Word of God says.

Nobody knows what He WOULD say.  We know what He has said, and it is not favorable to those who claim to be homosexual.

You’re ignorant.

Read Lawrence v. Texas

You really, really need an education…

And: yes, it is just another religion. It’s outrageously arrogant for you to feel that you’re better than any other religious followers.

A poll conducted by a partisan organization and whose methodology remains secret?

LOL, give me a break. I could produce a poll showing that 63% of Americans are gay if I wanted to.

So the only reason folks want gay marriage is to “legitimize” homosexuality. News to me. The legal benefits of marriage are something which have grown over time. Not needing a will, simplifying probate, is one which helps the state. The automatic power of attorney is another which vastly  simplifies medical, legal, and financial problems. The responsibility of one spouse to support the other, the presumption in a married couple that the kids have 2 parents responsible for them… tax breaks to assist in raising a family. All worthy supports. None are available from that “private ceremony” you suggest. It would be nice if the state recognized my kids as mine…. if their 
birth mother, dies, legally I am a stranger. I’ve been there for everything but their conception, but without state recognition, I have zilch claim. If it is in their interest of the state to aid in stable families for children, what about mine? Why are my children less deserving of legal protection? 

I really have no reason to care if you agree with my marriage or not. I won’t say lifestyle, because my lifestyle is no different than any other person raising a couple grade school kids. I do want to know why sharing a bed with my wife makes me less worthy of government recognition? Why hate my family? My church, as many others, has no problem with my family.

Paul, the ‘authority” on all things sexual in the NT, was giving advice to specific churches in specific circumstances, not giving general rules for all Christians to follow. He specifically wrote abut ‘unnatural acts”, using a word which indicates temple prostitutes….yeah, I don’t think drugged orgies where folks have sex with anybody or anything are good either. 

I find nothing in the Bible condemning natural acts, such as a man wanting to lie with a man as a man,or a woman wanting to make love-not have bizzarre sex- to another woman. Paul actually is considered to practice a form of perversion- Denying yourself sex is a perversion just as much as having too much. He said,grudgingly, that if you burn with desire, better you marry. So you deny the sanctity of marriage to one who “burns”? Even Paul had more empathy. Or political acumen, since his call for celibacy met with few converts. Taking quotes from Paul without examining political and social context is why he is so often used to deny rights to women and gays. 

Being bi-sexual,I’ve been in both kinds of marriage. There is no difference at all in the relationship except the plumbing of your bed partner. There is a huge difference in the legal rights I have. Considering it is a great cause of stress to be in a same-sex unrecognized, and unlike my non-bi brothers and sisters I choose this hassle,how do you dare say my relationship deserves less recognition than some two day marriage by a celebrity?

You seem absolutely terrified that gays won’t know their place and, shockingly, you might have to treat them with the same respect you give to blacks.muslims and atheists.Really,i assure you it isn’t something you can catch, and you may think all the perverted thoughts you like about what we may do in private. But just as someone who hates kids has no right to make me not go to the store with my kids, you have no right to use your fears/distaste to dictate my life. 

The religious fanatics who paid to conduct this poll paid to have their gay hating viewpoint supported.  Tony Perkins of Focus on the Family is a confirmed gay hating bigot and his money bought the results he wanted………..worse than Fox News………….gagggggggggggggh

Such a great article,
keep going.backpack