Comments on 12FV: We must not fear the judgement of the majority

Byrantosaurus gets it..
I'd take heed of his wo...

2008-11-16T21:17:00.000-08:00

Byrantosaurus gets it..
I'd take heed of his words.

Timbo's goin off on a tangent.. stick to things actually encouraged by the Bible.
If you're not sure, refer to Byrant's post and delve deeper into the word for clarity

Bryant makes a valid point; just because there are...

2008-11-09T09:46:00.000-08:00

Bryant makes a valid point; just because there aren't laws in place to punish all the sins listed in the bible doesn't mean that there can't be laws to punish at least some.

Having said that, I'm not entirely sure if it's the role of a religiously neutral society (as the Constitution is now interpreted to guarantee) to punish sins at all. Sure, we have laws to punish sins like murder, and theft, but that's because those sins directly affect society-- "victim-ful sins."

But homosexual marriage is a "victim-less sin." No one's life is taken, no material possession denied from another-- if ANYTHING, the two "souls" of the two homosexuals getting married condemn their afterlife.

But that's God's job. Humans don't determine post-mortem fate. God does. So as a society, it is our responsibility to make things run smoothly so that each individual can worship as they see fit so they may pursue an afterlife they want. Murdering and stealing one another stifles that freedom. That's why we have laws to punish those actions.

If you want to go on TV and condemn homosexuality, that's fine. But this great nation should not be allowed to prevent two willing adults from performing an action that doesn't seem to have any negative impact towards another.

one man and one woman? really? I seem to remember ...

2008-11-08T10:10:00.000-08:00

one man and one woman? really? I seem to remember hewbrew royal marriages being one man and several women. Were two women who were married to the same man also considered married to each other?

there is no doubt the bible says homosexuality is wrong, but there is nothing that says christians need to fight it and impose that on non-believers. In fact, the Bible says exactly otherwise. I won't repost my argument here, but any christians who think they know what the bible says can go check my site.

Jeff 小弟, you're the kind of christian who made me glad to be called christian while I was still christian

Bored. Thought I'd chime in.

Religion can ...

2008-11-05T20:19:00.000-08:00

Bored. Thought I'd chime in.

Religion can be a great thing. On the other hand it can also be a great thing that causes people to do terrible things. E.g. The Crusades, the actions of the Conquistadors, etc.

I think Prop. 8 is interesting because it's being battled on a legal front. With that said, although there are heavy undertones of religious belief against Prop. 8, I'm pretty sure they are not fighting on purely religious grounds (on the face of things); the Constitution's separation of church and state concept almost ensures it.

I thought I'd share (what I think) is one of the major cornerstones of the arguments in favor of Prop. 8. So here it goes. Prop. 8 is opposed to gay marriage because giving homosexuals the right to marry would necessarily invoke the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment - this is the same clause used to grant equal rights to people of different races and sex. The two main standards of the application are race and sex. Race and sex are biologically determined (you are, what you are born as). People in favor of Prop. 8 argue that homosexuals are so by choice. To many that seems absurd but there is some justification to the claim. Twin studies (subjects with identical DNA) have been done to determine whether homosexuals are born homosexual or are homosexual by choice. The results show a 60-70% rate of "biologically based" homosexuality (both twins gay) and a 40-30% rate of "choice" (one gay, one not - despite identical DNA). Because the results do not match up 100% (as race and sex do [hermaphrodites are not excluded either; they are hermaphrodites upon birth]), the argument is that homosexuality should not be on par with race and sex.

I just thought I'd let you know the angle of the other side (you need to know where the mountain is before you start to climb it, right?). The 40-60/30-70 argument will only be able to hold up for so long. There's a number of arguments that can be made against it (See: 14th Amendment protection of disabled persons = one exception to the race/sex standard that is already in play, as one example). So I think the gay community will eventually prevail in taking down the ban.

As a non-religious person, I have no problem with what gay people do with their lives (to a reasonable extent, of course) so I don't think it's necessary to limit what they can or can't do based on sexual orientation. I can see where religious persons might object to homosexuality, especially in the context of marriage, but my advice to you to deal with those persons is to: (1) remind them that we live in the US, (2) remind them that the US was founded on the basic principles/laws set out in the Consitution, (3) remind them that Prop. 8 is a matter of law, and (4) direct them to the First Amendment (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1).

- Doug

*disclaimer: I know I sound like an asshole all the time so my bad if this comment ruins the feel of the post*

I like the direction you're taking
with your bl...

2008-11-05T17:19:00.000-08:00

I like the direction you're taking
with your blog. great stuff

you cant just let the lesser of two evils be accep...

2008-11-05T17:16:00.000-08:00

you cant just let the lesser of two evils be acceptable. just cause we dont chop off the hands of a robber doesnt mean we are allowed to allow gay rights.

biblical times are way different from modern times.
in the biblical times, God did not allow pork. not because it was sin to eat pork but because, back then, they didnt have the ability to cleanse the pork of disease. some laws in the bible do not apply to our generation.

when Christ said be perfect, he didnt literally mean be sinless. he commands us to be mature. we are sinners, yes, no argument there. we are to reflect the image of christ in the way we live, and we arent going to if we do not speak truth.

you're right though, we are in no place to judge others. thats why God judges. and God condemns homosexuality in the bible. maybe you should read it.

in regards to marriage being between a man and a woman, i completely believe that is and only should be between a man and a woman. Yes, it is a symbol of unity. but the bible says that it should be between a man and a woman. there is a reason for that.

God says that the man is the head of his house and the woman is the helper. if its between a man and a man or a woman and woman. wheres that relationship?

the other reason is that the marriage of a man and a woman paints the symbol of christ and the church. the church will always be below christ because christ is God, he is the greatest. the man symbolizes christ and the woman the church.

when a man and man marry, it breaks down. even if they settle who would head the house. we can never be on the same level as christ is and therefore breaks this analogy. as for a woman couple, the church cant stand up with another church for long. it will break down without christ's redemption and guidance.

i really suggest to deeply look into God's word. skimming the surface isnt going to help. Words in the american versions of bible doesnt have the same meaning as the hebrew words. the bible tells us to dig deep into God's word. you cant just bite the meat and let it stay in your mouth, you have to chew on it and digest it.

blessings,
bryant

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
2008-11-04T17:02:00.000-08:00
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Religious or not, we all need to abandon the easy and perhaps even natural path of hypocrisy and self righteousness.

Glad you've put thought into it and have figured some stuff out.

You bring up a lot of good questions that are on a...

2008-11-04T16:52:00.000-08:00

You bring up a lot of good questions that are on a lot of people's minds. I was hoping to address them along with my thoughts on what the Bible has to say about this very sensitive topic, but given the many directions response to my post (and/or this issue) has gone, I haven't been able to in time for the election. Nonetheless the questions you bring up deserve answers. I appreciate you not holding back your thoughts because when we lay it out for each other uninhibited but respectful that prevents us from brewing uneducated conclusions.

I'm working on this next post to hopefully tackle the questions you bring up, among many, many of the others. Definitely has to be the most carefully approached of all the posts, but I hope you can join me when it's done.