The 'gay vs the Bible' debate......

I guess it all comes down to 'does a friend have to have the same religious beliefs as you to be a friend?'

And if you feel gay relationships are wrong, don't get involved in one! It's really pretty simple. Why should someone else be held to your religious 'standards'?

 

No they do not have to have the same religious beliefs I do for them to be my friend. Like I said earlier, I have friends that are gay and don't believe what I do.

And nobody has to be held to the standards of what my religion beliefs are if they don't want. There are tons of beliefs out there that conflict with eachother, the one I have chosen very well could be wrong, although for me personally it's not. One of my closet friends doesn't believe in God, so is he not allowed to be my friend?

I guess in a sense a lot of beliefs can coexist, but there are many that cannot. So somewhere, somehow, at least a few of us are going to be wrong whether we like it or not.

As for my beliefs there are things that we can/or do wrong all the time. It boils down to whether or not you accept Christ as your Savior in a majority of the christian based beliefs. I don't know of a single person who lives the perfect sinless life according to christian beliefs.

Does it make me judgemental if according to my beliefs that what another person does is wrong and I think what it is they do is wrong?

 

Does someone have to be a Christian to get married? ... to not get fired for putting their lesbian wedding announcement in the paper?


As long as it doesn't interfere with you personally, why should it matter to you what 2 men or 2 women do or share?

Should you make it your business just because you have different beliefs than they do?

 

well Fred...I don't believe in a single, Christian god. I believe the bible was written to control people by people who wanted to control them. And I don't feel that there is anything wrong with me or what I am or do. So essentially, the world does revolve around me. That's why I'm otherwise staying out of this arguement. It just doesnt affect me.

but if you want me to interject something.

www.charlotterighteous.org is a great place to see the extreme version of "christianity". Hate instead of love.

 

I know this one was not addressed to me but I want to try and answer it. First off a christian has a duty to try and spread the gospel to those who are lost. Part of the gospel message involves repentance from sin. Therefore a christian has the responsibility to say when a certain behaviour is a sin. Granted many go over board and find sins that are never mentioned nor can be inferred from the bible. But when something is clearly mentioned as a sin in the bible then it is not being judgemental it is merely passing along the message.

As far as controlling what others do, christianity has no role in that. Christians may want to see laws that follow their morality but so does everyone else. I do not see christians who try to make laws fit their morals as acting as christians in that role but as citizens who are playing their rightful role in a free society. People who see nothing wrong with doing drugs want them to be legal for example. When you talk about marriage it has a dual meaning both religous and political. I think it would be very wrong to force churches to marry those they chose not to, because they are gay or for any other reason. Many churches will not marry someone who has been married and divorced. I think the best way to get what you seem to want is to pursue civil unions. Marriage by its very nature has a religous element. Civil unions would not get caught up in all of the emotions surrounding that.

I am surprised to hear that about someone getting fired for being gay. I did not realize that was legal and I would be surprised if that person could not sue his or her employer successfully.

 

NC is what is called a Right to Work state. That means that most employers can fire you for any reason or no reason at all. Most Southern states are this way.

 

I guess I do not know the laws that well but it still sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

 

I fully understand the biblical call to evangelism. I also fully understand the ideas of what are biblically considered sins.

Consider, however, the ingrained/doctrinaire arrogance that the above bolded line can be viewed as having to those who believe differently. It is a clear statement of superiority/inferiority and many Christians who have an evangelical bent do nothing but drive that point home.

 

What you are describing is a failing that many christians sometimes have. It is caused by the fact that even those who are saved still have a sin nature and pride and arrogance are still things they must condend with.

A christian should not look down on those who are lost. You do not save yourself and therefore can not be proud or boastful of it. If you happened to get on a life boat before the Titanic sank you have no reason to look down on those who froze in the water.

 

Homosexuality falls under Title VII of the U.S. Code. That is, it's a federal law, that happens to trump state laws.

Here's some interesting reading Builder (it deals primarily with transgender person, but the "contra-gender" behavior is a bridge to "homosexuality"). This concept is of course new/evolving, and there may be even more current commentary - I dont keep up with those types of cases.

Back on point though - I am one that is highly skeptical of the Biblical condemnations on homosexuality, based on the reading I have done about the context of those mentions, and the very translations. I am not going to repost that discussion though. It is way too long. Suffice to say, I believe that the Biblical interpretation, translation and application of its laws/ethics have been handled by flawed men with agendas (controlling people, as builder put it), throughout time. It seems that Hasbeen and I disagree on the possibility of the pure delivery of God's message over the human timeline.

I'm also completely convinced that the conviction that many Christians have that homosexuality is a) a sin, and b) the worst or one of the worst sins, is fueled more by their repulsion by it, and less by their faith. I find that perplexing. I admit that I am repulsed by the idea of ME being homosexual, and to a lesser extent, my immediate brothers, sisters, wife etc (yeah I am being honest - but Ive also not had to deal with that yet, either, acceptance would probably come with experience), but beyond that, why do I care what another man or woman does or feels when no one is harmed by it? Where is the Golden Rule in that behavior of judgment? I do not see or understand the aggressive use of the Bible or any religious basis to control people. What I do understand is the acceptance basis that hasbeen seems to believe in - that he believes in what he finds to be truth and will guide others who ask him about it, but will not go so far as to berate others - christianity as a shield/as solace and not a sword.

As for the people who use the historical populism of fundamentalist christianity as verification of its truth and accuracy - a lot of people felt that communism, the holocaust, the salem witch trials, and numerous other events and philosophies in human history were right and had their unimpeachable sources too.