Same Sex Marriages

[Doc Dutch]

I'm sorry but we're not allowed to reveal the content of private messages.

....except in PM.

[Doc Dutch]

I agree that most people try to self interpret and as a result have it go however they might prefer. Others of see the purpose and necessity of the Holy Spirit and go that way with it.
The nature of the Trinity has confused people from the start and continues.

Agreed. Why do you think that is? IMO, it's because people have an inalienable, God-given right to choose for themselves. Not the Pope, not Jerry Falwell (much less his pervert son), not a church, not a government, not anyone.

[Celticguy]

That's your interpretation, not the interpretation of all Christians.

Again, is it moral and in keeping with Christ's two commandments to laugh and enjoy the hanging of a homosexual while eating a ham sandwich, bitching about one's parents and sitting with a third wife after cheating on the first two? Too many people cherry-pick from the Bible about which rules they'll follow and which they won't. It explains why less people are finding spiritual fulfillment in strict, authoritarian and hypocritical Christian denominations.

It's my belief that those hypocritical "Christians" are doing more harm than good.

https://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/...ous-landscape/

Dietary restrictions were a good idea in OT times. God has shown us better ways through science.
I dont approve of sins of hedonism so we agree that they are bad but one CAN be penetant about them and thats the bar for forgiveness.
I coached youth sports for many years and it was always painful seeing the cost of adultry and divorce. But while all too prevalent, many avoid it or at least learn from it.

[Bill]

Always a good opening question.

More to the point, if Irish was the only one that could read, how would he interpret the entire Bible to his flock? Would he focus upon certain sections over others? It's a big book, so skipping over certain sections could easily be done since no one else could read.....OR would he teach everyone to read using the Bible and pass no judgement upon the contents? Something in between??

IMO, it's impossible for someone to teach something as large as the Bible without forming biases resulting in focusing on one part over another. This is might explain why there are over 2000 denominations of Christianity in the world with a shitload of them being in the USA.

It also explains the controversies over schools. Politically-motivated people want to teach a specific bias to public students, others want to teach without bias. A neutral approach to all public education. I favor the latter approach.

Yea, I think it is almost impossible for ppl to take in info & not form opinions/concepts etc

[Celticguy]

Agreed. Why do you think that is? IMO, it's because people have an inalienable, God-given right to choose for themselves. Not the Pope, not Jerry Falwell (much less his pervert son), not a church, not a government, not anyone.

We certainly have free will and all too often choose poorly be it just because we want it or are drawn to it for more diabolical reasons. And sometimes we just f*ck up.
While religious leaders can be of great help understanding the nature of God, they too can fail and have quite the opposite effect.
For this reason i dont pay any attention to ones telling me what to do if favor of those who can tell me more about my faith. And in all cases i will rely on scripture as the source.

[Doc Dutch]

We certainly have free will and all too often choose poorly be it just because we want it or are drawn to it for more diabolical reasons. And sometimes we just f*ck up.
While religious leaders can be of great help understanding the nature of God, they too can fail and have quite the opposite effect.
For this reason i dont pay any attention to ones telling me what to do if favor of those who can tell me more about my faith. And in all cases i will rely on scripture as the source.

Agreed and which goes to my entire point: It's not the government's place to judge or decide what consenting adults do as long as the nonconsensual are not harmed.

[Doc Dutch]

Yea, I think it is almost impossible for ppl to take in info & not form opinions/concepts etc

Agreed. It's a natural thing for people to do. IMO, the whole point of Matthew 7:1 is to point out certain things are up to God's judgement such as judging a person's heart or thoughts. It also points out the problem of a rush to judgement, unequal applications of justice and hypocrisy.

I'm free to judge you for being a "Lefty", an American or anything else, but it would be hypocritical of me to deny that works both ways or from all sides.

[Nordberg]

The constitutional right of privacy is how sex between people is defended. The government has no business in the citizen's bedrooms. They still do not.

[Celticguy]

Agreed and which goes to my entire point: It's not the government's place to judge or decide what consenting adults do as long as the nonconsensual are not harmed.

And it doesnt.
The govt got out of the business of who is zooming who long ago (caveat regarding protecting children).
But where marriage is a government function (and it is inextricably so) with the spiratual, its a whole other matter.

While i personally view same sex marriage as being wrong, my real objection is cedeing legal rights where they do not belong.
These legal matters are very much bound to opposite sex unions and make no sense outside that construct.
Marriage is not about love in the legal sense, its about ownership.
And homosexuals did finally admit that the only reason they wanted same sex marriage was for "the benefits". And that only got to be a hot button when aids entered the picture.

[Doc Dutch]

And it doesnt.
The govt got out of the business of who is zooming who long ago (caveat regarding protecting children).
But where marriage is a government function (and it is inextricably so) with the spiratual, its a whole other matter.

While i personally view same sex marriage as being wrong, my real objection is cedeing legal rights where they do not belong.
These legal matters are very much bound to opposite sex unions and make no sense outside that construct.
Marriage is not about love in the legal sense, its about ownership.
And homosexuals did finally admit that the only reason they wanted same sex marriage was for "the benefits". And that only got to be a hot button when aids entered the picture.

Sorry, but disagreed on your logic. You admit government has no place in religious belief then assert that religious belief must be adhered to by government. Sorry, man, but that doesn't make sense.

All laws must comply with the Constitution. In this case the Equal Protection Clause. Why give a Federal tax break to one couple, be they straight, white, Christian or Republican, then refuse that same tax break because another couple are gay, non-white, non-Christian or Democrat? You can't without violating the Constitution.

IIRC, there are over 1100 different Federal laws granting rights and tax breaks to married couples. How can that be legal if they only apply to white, Christian straights?

[Celticguy]

Sorry, but disagreed on your logic. You admit government has no place in religious belief then assert that religious belief must be adhered to by government. Sorry, man, but that doesn't make sense.

All laws must comply with the Constitution. In this case the Equal Protection Clause. Why give a Federal tax break to one couple, be they straight, white, Christian or Republican, then refuse that same tax break because another couple are gay, non-white, non-Christian or Democrat? You can't without violating the Constitution.

IIRC, there are over 1100 different Federal laws granting rights and tax breaks to married couples. How can that be legal if they only apply to white, Christian straights?

I didnt say that at all.

The religious aspect is moot except to the churches.

But marriage is also a secular agreement not unlike real estate. Govt spends a lot of money registering and tracking marriages so it can be an informed arbitor in disputes which the people demanded it be.
Same sex couples simply do not qualify for the contract.

[Doc Dutch]

I didnt say that at all.

The religious aspect is moot except to the churches.

But marriage is also a secular agreement not unlike real estate. Govt spends a lot of money registering and tracking marriages so it can be an informed arbitor in disputes which the people demanded it be.
Same sex couples simply do not qualify for the contract.

Thanks for the clarification. Agreed about churches.

Why do you believe "same sex couples" are not American citizens who fall under the Constitution? Specifically the Equal Protection Clause. Is there something in the Constitution that specifies Same Sex couples which I missed?

[ThatOwlWoman]

Yea, I think it is almost impossible for ppl to take in info & not form opinions/concepts etc

I think it's also difficult to impart knowledge and not put your own personal spin on it too.

[ThatOwlWoman]

I didnt say that at all.

The religious aspect is moot except to the churches.

But marriage is also a secular agreement not unlike real estate. Govt spends a lot of money registering and tracking marriages so it can be an informed arbitor in disputes which the people demanded it be.
Same sex couples simply do not qualify for the contract.

Of course they do, as long as they are American citizens living under our laws. Why shouldn't they be, just because you find SSM "icky"? If a couple has made vows to each other to stay together, remain faithful, pool their resources, adopt children, build equity in their property, put themselves out to others as a team, etc. -- why then should they be denied the legal benefits of marriage under our laws?

[Cypress]

Render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasars...
Which is to say God is not interested in tax law but there is a purpose to union of man and woman that pleases him.

You are really reaching by linking the Caesar quote to civil unions

The bible says nothing about civil unions. Civil unions are a secular legal framework to give legal rights to same sex couples.

We are all sinners. The Bible does not even consider homosexuality a top tier sin. It is not even mentioned in the ten commandments. Adulterers and dudes who lust for the wives of others are greater sinners than homosexuals by the framework of the Commandments.

That means Donald Trump and every rightwing poster here who ever expressed lust for Melania Trump is a more egregious sinner than same-sex couples. But no one is actively working to deny Trump or rightwing forum posters equal protection under the law.