Bon pour vous, France! France legalizes gay marriage.

binz

Platinum Member
#21
If labeling people and refusing to give them a fair hearing makes someone a bigot, your statement now make you an anti-religous bigot, which i believe is actually the next form that popular bigotry will take. Congrats Binz, you're ahead of the curve!
Nice try, but you can't be a bigot for calling out bigotry. Hating bigots is NOT bigotry. You must know this. Do tell me how hard you have it here in frisco being a Christian. And compare that to homophobia. And remind me if you were born to go to hell because of what sex you love.

Religion indoctrinates people to view another person as sick/perverted/sinful because they are born to LOVE their own sex. Only religion could twist a person's mind to not accept loving, consensual relationships.
 

lucas mccain

Triple Platinum
#22
Nice try, but you can't be a bigot for calling out bigotry. Hating bigots is NOT bigotry. You must know this. Do tell me how hard you have it here in frisco being a Christian. And compare that to homophobia. And remind me if you were born to go to hell because of what sex you love.

Religion indoctrinates people to view another person as sick/perverted/sinful because they are born to LOVE their own sex. Only religion could twist a person's mind to not accept loving, consensual relationships.
You are condemned for not believing and unrepented sin. Just because one may have been "born gay" doesn't excuse their actions. That is still a choice just like for you, me and everyone else.

Religion has been and can be abused even by well intentioned people. However, to solely blame it on the cause of certain perceptions is not accurate. I didn't need religion to form or influence my opinion. Homosexual acts are perverted and anyone who isn't homosexual that denies it is lying.
 

binz

Platinum Member
#23
You are condemned for not believing and unrepented sin. Just because one may have been "born gay" doesn't excuse their actions. That is still a choice just like for you, me and everyone else.
So you think it would be reasonable for you to have to ask forgiveness anytime you had any sexual encounter with your wife? You do choose to have sexual relations with your wife, right?

You were born to love the opposite sex and to want to have sexual relations with your significant other. Others were born to love the same sex and to want to have sexual relations with their significant other. *** is the difference?
 

lucas mccain

Triple Platinum
#24
So you think it would be reasonable for you to have to ask forgiveness anytime you had any sexual encounter with your wife? You do choose to have sexual relations with your wife, right?

You were born to love the opposite sex and to want to have sexual relations with your significant other. Others were born to love the same sex and to want to have sexual relations with their significant other. *** is the difference?
If you have to repetitively "ask forgiveness" for no other reason other than to wipe a slate clean then you would be missing the point of repenting. You don't repent out of some kind of check list of things to do. That is what distorted religion is all about. Rather, you ask forgiveness and willingly repent because you realize exactly what sin is. To repent is to turn away from sin.

We were all born to want and desire things and relationships. The difference is knowing what is right and what is wrong. If you don't perceive it as wrong, then do what you feel compelled to do. But don't expect everyone else to quietly stand by and pretend otherwise.

We all have certain sinful proclivities that we struggle with binz. The difference is I'm not celebrating it, nor am I trying to persuade anyone to accept it.
 

binz

Platinum Member
#25
:deadhorse:
If you have to repetitively "ask forgiveness" for no other reason other than to wipe a slate clean then you would be missing the point of repenting. You don't repent out of some kind of check list of things to do. That is what distorted religion is all about. Rather, you ask forgiveness and willingly repent because you realize exactly what sin is. To repent is to turn away from sin.
Feels like you're dodging.

Are you required to ask forgiveness for having sexual relations with your significant other with the penalty for not doing so eternal damnation? Yes or no??
 

lucas mccain

Triple Platinum
#26
:deadhorse:

Feels like you're dodging.

Are you required to ask forgiveness for having sexual relations with your significant other with the penalty for not doing so eternal damnation? Yes or no??
Not dodging, just didn't believe you needed an answer in order to get to your point. So if you absolutely need an answer: No, as long as that significant other is my wife.

Now what?
 

binz

Platinum Member
#27
Not dodging, just didn't believe you needed an answer in order to get to your point. So if you absolutely need an answer: No, as long as that significant other is my wife.

Now what?
So as long as the significant other you're having sexual relations with is a "husband" or "wife", then you're good...no sin as occurred?

Thx for clarifying.

Guess this means that more gay marriage means less sin and eternal damnation.
 

lucas mccain

Triple Platinum
#28
So as long as the significant other you're having sexual relations with is a "husband" or "wife", then you're good...no sin as occurred?

Thx for clarifying.

Guess this means that more gay marriage means less sin and eternal damnation.
No, not really. What is sounds like is that you may need clarification on what defines a husband and a wife. A male cannot be a wife - a woman cannot be a husband.

What was the original point you were going to make?
 

binz

Platinum Member
#29
No, not really. What is sounds like is that you may need clarification on what defines a husband and a wife. A male cannot be a wife - a woman cannot be a husband.
What it sounds like is that as long as the sexual relations are occurring inside of marriage between two consenting adults in a committed relationship, sin is not occurring.

That's great news and all the more reason for Christians to push for gay marriage.
 
#30
...

We were all born to want and desire things and relationships. The difference is knowing what is right and what is wrong. If you don't perceive it as wrong, then do what you feel compelled to do. But don't expect everyone else to quietly stand by and pretend otherwise.

....

If we're born that way, then it seems reasonable to state that those things are 'natural.' Which I would completely agree with. But then religion steps in and tries to mold people a certain way. Depending on what country or even which part of a country one is born in, that mold can look vastly different. Which one is better or worse it subjective. But what is clear is that they are all unnatural. Homosexual behavior is observed across the animal kingdom, us primates not excluded.

But that last statement is one of the reasons I loathe the religious. Not truly content with live and let live, they must subject others to their beliefs in mysticism and boogey man stuff. Religion presents itself as so humble yet knows all the answers to the most profound questions and even portends to know what the sky daddy wants us to eat on certain days, sleep with and in what positions we should do it, understands profoundly what is right and wrong, and so on... the pinnacle of arrogance. Religion is evil.
 

lucas mccain

Triple Platinum
#31
What it sounds like is that as long as the sexual relations are occurring inside of marriage between two consenting adults in a committed relationship, sin is not occurring.

That's great news and all the more reason for Christians to push for gay marriage.
Nice try, but... no. Marriage was designed between a man and a woman. There are biblical examples (Christ and the church) and there are secular examples -pro-creation and morality.

If we're born that way, then it seems reasonable to state that those things are 'natural.' Which I would completely agree with. But then religion steps in and tries to mold people a certain way. Depending on what country or even which part of a country one is born in, that mold can look vastly different. Which one is better or worse it subjective. But what is clear is that they are all unnatural. Homosexual behavior is observed across the animal kingdom, us primates not excluded.

But that last statement is one of the reasons I loathe the religious. Not truly content with live and let live, they must subject others to their beliefs in mysticism and boogey man stuff. Religion presents itself as so humble yet knows all the answers to the most profound questions and even portends to know what the sky daddy wants us to eat on certain days, sleep with and in what positions we should do it, understands profoundly what is right and wrong, and so on... the pinnacle of arrogance. Religion is evil.
As I've said before, religion has been and can be distorted and twisted by man. There are however, absolute truths that God has provided us with. If this makes you loathe the religious, then you should really track and observe your own morals.

I find it hard to believe that you would sit idly by while a pedophile fights for their right to choose a mate. Live and let live is always a great concept... as long as it agrees with your personal morals.
 
#32
Nice try, but... no. Marriage was designed between a man and a woman. There are biblical examples (Christ and the church) and there are secular examples -pro-creation and morality.



As I've said before, religion has been and can be distorted and twisted by man. There are however, absolute truths that God has provided us with. If this makes you loathe the religious, then you should really track and observe your own morals.

I find it hard to believe that you would sit idly by while a pedophile fights for their right to choose a mate. Live and let live is always a great concept... as long as it agrees with your personal morals.
Is the ped choosing a child? If that's the case, comparing the decision of two consenting adults to that of a ped/child relationship is not something worth further explanation.

In Iran, the legal age is 9. That's their deal and it's all based in religion. Mormons under Jeffs were marrying children and sought protection under their belief system. I personally disagree with both and I object to providing cover for old men's fetishes under the blanket of religion. Apparently, God provided some truths around pedophilia being fine so long as it's through marriage? At least to some he did. And those groups will look at others who identify with the same god and label them as not really true believers. Sometimes infidels worth killing. People can be good and bad on their own merit. They don't require religion to do either.

But as to marriage design, the complete statement is "Marriage was designed between a man and a woman to convey property." That was the original intent and had nothing to do with procreation, morals, etc. I don't know any informed person who would argue against that being the case. Certainly, marriage has been incorporated into religions and even cultures who are not religious, or at least not monotheistic. Would you at least agree on that point - the origins of marriage to convey property?

(As always LM, I appreciate that you'll participate in debate over topics where most will not)
 
#33
Skeeter where (i believe) you went off track is assuming that what is "natural" is in the end the best form of , and that religion distorts this.

is that what you believe, or am i misreading that?
 

GoodAg

Double Platinum
#34
Curious where people stand on this then: Healthcare costs will never be contained. Again, it seems to me that people are wanting to manipulate the system in order to support their chosen lifestyle...and they want me to pay for it.

Quite frankly, I'm already going to have to pay into a system that goes against my religious beliefs, and I just keep seeing this country sliding down a slippery slope more and more...

Many applaud the removal of prayer in schools, the Ten Commandments from judicial courts, etc., but can people really not see how removing God incrementally from our country has eroded those fundamental rights that made our country strong and great in the first place?
 
#35
Skeeter where (i believe) you went off track is assuming that what is "natural" is in the end the best form of , and that religion distorts this.

is that what you believe, or am i misreading that?
What is "natural" supports the continuation of and next generation of that species for which there is no need for religion of any sort to make that happen, as demonstrated by history. The term "best," to me means making sure there is a next generation of a species. Whether there actually is a subsequent generation is observable and undeniable. If "best" is supposed to be synonymous with a morally subjective way to behave, then people will continue to debate that all day long all the while still doing what comes naturally in order to survive.
 

lucas mccain

Triple Platinum
#36
Is the ped choosing a child? If that's the case, comparing the decision of two consenting adults to that of a ped/child relationship is not something worth further explanation.
In order for you to come to that solid conclusion you have to have apply some sort of judgment regarding morals, that in turn, prevents a certain segment of society from pursuing their personal desire. That is all religion is doing. It doesn't matter where a group claims it comes from. The point is, you are chastising religion while doing the exact same thing they are.

In Iran, the legal age is 9. That's their deal and it's all based in religion. Mormons under Jeffs were marrying children and sought protection under their belief system. I personally disagree with both and I object to providing cover for old men's fetishes under the blanket of religion. Apparently, God provided some truths around pedophilia being fine so long as it's through marriage? At least to some he did. And those groups will look at others who identify with the same god and label them as not really true believers. Sometimes infidels worth killing. People can be good and bad on their own merit. They don't require religion to do either.
Not sure about God being fine with pedophilia. Just because something is mentioned in the Bible (such as polygamy for instance) doesn't necessarily mean God endorsed it or sanctioned it.

But as to marriage design, the complete statement is "Marriage was designed between a man and a woman to convey property." That was the original intent and had nothing to do with procreation, morals, etc. I don't know any informed person who would argue against that being the case. Certainly, marriage has been incorporated into religions and even cultures who are not religious, or at least not monotheistic. Would you at least agree on that point - the origins of marriage to convey property?

(As always LM, I appreciate that you'll participate in debate over topics where most will not)
From a secular view I agree with your statement regarding marriage as it relates to property. However, I believe the Bible is God's word. That first union defined His ideal plan and later reiterated by an example of Christ's relationship with His Church. Actually the Bible has many examples of God's blueprint for marriage.

I disagree with your complete statement of marriage if you are implying that it was solely to convey property. The issue of same-sex marriage was not even a consideration at the time secular laws were made. And it had everything to do with morals and to encourage a healthy family based society which in turn supports procreation.
 
#37
What is "natural" supports the continuation of and next generation of that species for which there is no need for religion of any sort to make that happen, as demonstrated by history. The term "best," to me means making sure there is a next generation of a species. Whether there actually is a subsequent generation is observable and undeniable. If "best" is supposed to be synonymous with a morally subjective way to behave, then people will continue to debate that all day long all the while still doing what comes naturally in order to survive.

How does history demonstrate that there is no need for religion of any sort for the continuation (or even advancement) of our species?

i'd argue that on a macro level, we see just the opposite. It is only recently (in the past few hundred years) that humanity has even conceived of trying to make decisions without regard to religious beliefs, but our species certainly advanced for the first 40-100,000 years of its existence.
 
#38
How does history demonstrate that there is no need for religion of any sort for the continuation (or even advancement) of our species?

i'd argue that on a macro level, we see just the opposite. It is only recently (in the past few hundred years) that humanity has even conceived of trying to make decisions without regard to religious beliefs, but our species certainly advanced for the first 40-100,000 years of its existence.
Does anyone really think the jews were killing, raping, stealing, etc, from each other all the way to mount sinai and only when moses came down with some stone tablets and said Hey, don't do that!, that they then stopped? They would have never made it to mount sinai if that was the case. lol
 
#39
Does anyone really think the jews were killing, raping, stealing, etc, from each other all the way to mount sinai and only when moses came down with some stone tablets and said Hey, don't do that!, that they then stopped? They would have never made it to mount sinai if that was the case. lol

Maybe, but then again Moses' law represented a large enough leap over previous moral codes that even Greco-Roman observers centuries later who were anti-Semitic begrudgingly acknowledged its quality.

I’m not saying that outside of Christianity (or Judaism or any other religion for that matter) there is no morality, but it’s also not accurate to say that Religion has provided nothing positive to the development of morality.

With all of that said, coming back to the OT of this thread, the nature of morality within any specific religion, Christianity included is certainly an evolving process. The issue of Homosexuality and specifically gay marriage is not a clean-cut issue, at least as far as what our response as Christians should be.
 
#40
What is "natural" supports the continuation of and next generation of that species for which there is no need for religion of any sort to make that happen, as demonstrated by history.
So by your definition homosexual behavior cannot be "natural" since it doesn't support the continuation of the species, correct?