A Question About Same Sex Marriage

[Leg End]

Because while the church shall have no say in matters of state, the followers of said church, will.
In a sane world, the simple solution would just be for gays to marry but it being up to the church to marry them, but things just have to be complicated. :L

 

[Bruenin]

Also, people like to pick bits they like out of the bible and ignore the bits they don't like.

What most blind subscribers to "damn gays" mentality don't realize is, the strongest argument in the bible against homosexuality comes from Leviticus, which is full of weird shit like this;



"You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."

"You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard."

"Whoever utters the name of the Lord must be put to death. The whole community must stone him, whether alien or native. If he utters the name, he must be put to death."


also, you



can't go anywhere near ladies during their time of the month,

CAN sell your daughter into slavery,

CAN'T go to church if you NEED GLASSES to see

OH OH and if someone is of another belief you have to drag them to the city gates and stone them to death and if there is an entire town of people who commit the crime of believing in another god, murder all of them and their animals and then burn all of their possessions in the middle of the street and never look back at the area again. But yeah... all that in the same chapter, lets start with the homosexuals first <.<

realized I was thinking of the book of Deuteronomy, but here is the quote anyways

Spoiler

Deuteronomy 17:3-5... That person may have served other gods and bowed down to them or to the sun or moon or stars of the sky, which I have commanded should not be done. If someone has told you about it, you must look into the matter carefully. If it is true that such a hateful thing has happened in Israel, take the man or woman who has done the evil thing to the city gates and throw stones at that person until he dies.

Spoiler

Deuteronomy 12:12-16... The LORD your God is giving you cities in which to live, and you might hear something about one of them. Someone might say that evil people have moved in among you. And they might lead the people of that city away from God, saying,"Let's go and worship other gods." Then you must ask about it, looking into the matter and checking carefully whether it is true. If it is proved that a hateful thing has happened among you, you must kill with a sword everyone who lives in that city. Destroy the city completely and kill everyone in it, as well as the animals, with a sword. Gather up everything those people owned, and put it in the middle of the city square. Then completely burn the city and everything they owned as a burn offering to the LORD your God. That city should never be rebuild; let it be ruined forever.

Not as good of a point as yours since it is in a different book within the old testament but it's still part of the first 5 books of the old testament, so both the Jewish faith and the Christian faith follow it.

 

[madster11]

It's all about the population. The majority of the US population are retarded and pick and choose what aspects of the bible they like instead of using it how it's meant to be used (learn from the messages, not the specifics - ie, don't be a dick).

Australia has a bit of this problem as well, but we have a simple solution:
Don't give a shit.

Seriously, we have an unmarried athiest female leader.
Can you imagine that in the US? The double digit IQs would raise a fuck-off amount of noise and hate her because of what she is, instead of who she is.
The 'don't give a shit' method seems to be working for gays as well. Australia doesn't have gay marriage, and it's been shot down a bunch of times when people have pushed for it. Most gay people WANT it to be legalized, but because Australia isn't a backwards shithole it's not important enough to have huge fights about. For example, that story WarHamster40K posted about a partner not being allowed to visit a hospital because they're not family wouldn't fly here in Aus. While legally the hospital would be in the right, the staff at the hospital would either not care or back the fuck down at the first mention of 'today tonight'.

Now, i'm not particularly christian although i know a decent amount of the bible and my parents are. But as far as i'm aware, there's nothing in the newer parts of the bible telling people to hate gays. Hell, the entire point of the new testament was Jesus being all 'don't be dicks'. A lot of churches and people seem to fail that part.

 

[The Tibballs]

*snip* I have a lot of conservative Christian fanatics as friends on FB since I knew them in HS

Off topic: friends don't let friends be conservative christian fanatics, just saying.

On topic: most likely because 80% of US citizens follow that belief system, so it makes it ok to discriminate against "The Others" even if it means they ignore the founding ideas of the country. :/
It also doesn't help that the education system has slipped from world leading to pretty much the laughing stock of the developed world, were people in some 3rd world countries have a higher standard when it comes to education and that tends to lead people to more stupid people, which leads to fear of "The Others" because people fear what they don't know/understand and stupid people tend to be very afraid most of the time.

 

[Mikeyfell]

but in America there's supposed to be separation of church and state...

Supposed to.
Supposed to.
Supposed to.

You answered your question right there.
There is SUPPOSED TO be a separation of Church and State. But there's not.

so why are Christian beliefs forced onto those who obliviously don't believe in the same religion. I asked a teacher at my school this and he kind of skirted around the question, it's doubtless I'd a lot of flak for posting this on FB so I decided to ask people who are a bit more sensible... like the escapists. So what do you guys think? Am I just friends with the wrong people or is there some side to this that I'm just not seeing?

I think the reason (I THINK) is because there are so many conservative Christian voters that an easy way to get a huge demographic in any state or county is to enact legislation that makes those people happy. and they'll vote for you every time.

And yes I do think you're friends with the wrong people. But the important thing is that you get along with them, even if they're all judgmental bigots.
Just for the record the Escapist isn't "more sensible" we're just sensible in the opposite direction.
Even if that means we think humans deserve to be treated like people even if they like other people with the same parts as them...

 

[Froggy Slayer]

Because people are dicks who believe that they should have an absolute say in all matters and will try and justify their bigoted reliefs through any means necessary.

 

[Random Numbers]

Also, people like to pick bits they like out of the bible and ignore the bits they don't like.

What most blind subscribers to "damn gays" mentality don't realize is, the strongest argument in the bible against homosexuality comes from Leviticus, which is full of weird shit like this;



"You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."

"You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard."

"Whoever utters the name of the Lord must be put to death. The whole community must stone him, whether alien or native. If he utters the name, he must be put to death."


also, you



can't go anywhere near ladies during their time of the month,

CAN sell your daughter into slavery,

CAN'T go to church if you NEED GLASSES to see

Well from what I was taught when Jesus was born that's like a new era, and a lot of the things in the old testament don't apply anymore, you can do them unless it cause your brother to sin, but homosexuality is wrong because Paul said it was in some later book, never mind that Jesus never mentioned it, his disciple hates it so you have to as well! They get around that loop-hole by saying that "Jesus also didn't say anything about rape" Basically it's all completely ridiculous and a really weak excuse when you consider that the real reason homosexuality was outlawed in the ancient world was because large families were needed so that there were children to work the fields, Men to fight, and women to cook and clean and make more kids. It was essential to the survival of a people group and so since homosexuality does not allow for re-production it was banned. However nowadays when most people only have 1 or 2 kids this is not necessary so people are just being dicks. Hehehe the captcha is pork pies

 

[Adon Cabre]

[HEADING=2]It's an Easy Answer[/HEADING]

When Christians swerve from scripture nothing makes sense. The problem is that there is no context anymore, Christians don't let the bible explain the bible.

Christians got into legislation over a series of verses that they believe gave them permission. Verses like Philippians 1:7, where Paul thanks the church of Philippi for helping him Defend the Truth and Spread the Gospel. In other letters (Ephesians 5:11-12), Paul tells us to Expose sin so that the world will realize just how dark it is. But all of these have been taken out of context.

[ul][li]Defending the Truth: Paul not only spread the Gospel to Greeks and other ethnics, but as an ex-pharisee, he used the Torah to explain to Jews that Christ was indeed the Messiah that they had been waiting for. In fact, the Book of Hebrews is written to Jews showing them how Christ fulfilled the Laws of Moses and is Greater than Moses.[/li][/ul]

[ul][li]Exposing the Light: Paul's words make more sense when we understand what Christ said in Matthew (5:14-16), "You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven."[/li][/ul]

Yeshua, meaning God Saves

So being a light to the world simply means to live in a way that glorifies God. Christ came down to rid the world of dogmatic teaching. We're not supposed to afflict the masses with laws through legislation. Our prayers, the way we live our lives, and the words of Christ will transform this violent culture.

Christ did not care about politics. "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and give to God's what belongs to God" tells us that he is not concerned with Government as much as bringing Kingdom of Heaven down on to earth; and this would require a great act of love -- his own sacrifice. And this is why he is King of heaven and earth.

[HEADING=3]Note[/HEADING] Any teaching that goes against what I have just written is fundamentally wrong. That person doesn't understand the scripture, or Paul, or Christ's message of grace and truth. I could have easily listed dozens of other scriptures and made this three Word pages long; and it would all say the exact same message: faith in Christ alone will change this culture.

 

[Arcane Azmadi]

Basically you're friends with the wrong people. They're bigots and quite frankly they're assholes. No-one has the right to dictate to another how they should live their life as long as it's not hurting anyone else.

Also, people like to pick bits they like out of the bible and ignore the bits they don't like.

What most blind subscribers to "damn gays" mentality don't realize is, the strongest argument in the bible against homosexuality comes from Leviticus, which is full of weird shit like this;



"You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."

"You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard."

"Whoever utters the name of the Lord must be put to death. The whole community must stone him, whether alien or native. If he utters the name, he must be put to death."


also, you



can't go anywhere near ladies during their time of the month,

CAN sell your daughter into slavery,

CAN'T go to church if you NEED GLASSES to see

Yeah, do you remember this bit from The West Wing?

 

[Cecilo]

Marriage is last I checked a religious thing. The State can issue a civil union but Marriage is what the church defines it as. Provided I am correct in that first bit, we cannot make the Church accept gay marriage as acceptable because that would be the state imposing rules upon the church right?

We could allow Gay Civil Union because that is state controlled. But Marriage is.. well not something the state has any legitimate control over.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

The problem is that you're thinking of marriage in only the religious context and not in the legal one. Here's the thing that a lot of people don't get: if you can find a priest to perform the ceremony for you, you can technically "marry" anyone you want to. You can marry someone of the same sex, or two people, or a whole family, or a goat, whatever you want. The thing is, that doesn't necessarily mean that the Government will legally recognize that marriage for legal purposes (dividing up of estate, taxes, etc.). So you've already got your separation of church and state. This is why if you want, you can get legally married in a courthouse with absolutely no religious aspect at all.

The reason Governments encourage marriage is because, statistically speaking, marriage is basically good for society. Children raised in two-parent households where the parents are married have lower rates of criminality, higher grades, etc., so the Government wants to encourage people to get married and be the "typical nuclear family". This is why married couples are given tax breaks. The argument that a lot of people make against same-sex marriage (and which I personally disagree with) is that gay marriage is so new that we don't really have a lot of evidence on whether it benefits society or not, and thus the state-recongnized marriage (again, different from a Religious marriage) and the legal aspects that go with it shouldn't be allowed.

Like I said, I don't agree with that argument, but I'm hoping this clears up some aspects regarding the "Separation of church and state" idea.

 

[Psykoma]

Marriage is last I checked a religious thing. The State can issue a civil union but Marriage is what the church defines it as. Provided I am correct in that first bit, we cannot make the Church accept gay marriage as acceptable because that would be the state imposing rules upon the church right?

We could allow Gay Civil Union because that is state controlled. But Marriage is.. well not something the state has any legitimate control over.

A marriage license and the right to issue a marriage license is state controlled.

None of this discussion is regarding religious marriages, this is regarding state recognized marriages. Most gay couples I know wouldn't give a damn if a religion recognized their marriages, just that the state does.

Your comment is worthless, and just trying to misdirect the conversation.

 

[Ryotknife]

honestly, you should not recieve any rights/privledges for getting married (as in the specific event). Back then, they probably thought tying marriage to the government was harmless, and for a long time it was. Now with the benefit of hindsight....

We should probably keep marriage as a strictly religious event that the government has no say in, but it no longer grants benefits/rights (like for a Christian example, communion or baptism. Strictly a religious event that has no bearing whatsoever on the government). If you want the benefits of being a "couple" you have to jump through some standardized hoops like living in a shared household, shared bank account, and being together for X years regardless of the makeup of said couple.

Then the government can wash its hands with the whole marriage thing. People will have the exact same rights regardless of makeup, and traditionalists get to keep...well their traditions. Everyone wins.

As it stands right now, either the government will have to impose its will upon religion, which is wrong, or vice versa which is also wrong. The only real moral solution in my eyes is to remove religion and state from the same race (which is what we are supposed to do)

 

[Hagi]

i think gays would have an easier time getting equal rights if they didn't try for marriage. all you need to do is add another option. lets call it gayrriage, basically it's exactly the same as marriage but has a different name so churches can't complain

They tried that a few decades ago when black people didn't have equal rights. They gave them all the same things: housing, medical care, education, employment, transportation and everything else. It was exactly the same but just called differently, with a big "colored" sign on it.

It didn't end all that well.

 

[micahrp]

Why do you think it is a biblical issue and not a sanitation/social peace issue as the levitical laws are?

In their day pork could not be cooked properly often enough and caused a lot of illness, therefore make it taboo so people stuck to eating things that don't cause illness and death. Two different types of fiber could not be woven into good cloth, but people did it to cheat people in the market place with shoddy goods, therefore make it illegal. View each of these laws and the situations that arose which disrupted tiny simpler communities, then do they make sense?

Plenty of other far flung societies came to the same conclusions due to observation that these acts disrupted their society and socially responsible people tried to enact laws to help and preserve those tribal groups.

Kant codified this in the idea of universalism. No member of a society should perform acts which when repeated by the whole of society will disrupt the continuity of that society. This simple statement should explain all sensible laws, although the one way out of this is if you don't feel any sense of responsibility to the continuation of society (hmmm.. wants society to die? sound like the best definition for sociopath). Simple examples: We can't all commit murder. We can't all be non-productive or thieves. Granted our society is large and stable enough that we can forego punishment of many acts that do not help the collective society, but that only suggests a governmental stance of neutrality to acts that do not directly openly work against public interest. We can also go the opposite direction and see why government rewards actions that help societal continuity.

 

[Lonewolfm16]

Religious dogma? That's what it has usually boiled down to whenever I've encountered anyone with a negative view on homosexuality. Or bisexuality. Or any kind of sexuality or sexual activity beyond good ol' missionary under the covers with the opposite sex!

Just kidding about the last one, though I really can't remember meeting many (if any) people who have disapproved of same sex relations without proudly referring to either religion or the norms of some kind of pocket society. Really makes it hard to see things from their point of view when it's a view they're sticking to because it's a rigid part of something else.

Missionary under the covers with someone of the opposite gender? Outside of wedlock? How dare you suggest such a thing, you godless communist!

 

[Folji]

Religious dogma? That's what it has usually boiled down to whenever I've encountered anyone with a negative view on homosexuality. Or bisexuality. Or any kind of sexuality or sexual activity beyond good ol' missionary under the covers with the opposite sex!

Just kidding about the last one, though I really can't remember meeting many (if any) people who have disapproved of same sex relations without proudly referring to either religion or the norms of some kind of pocket society. Really makes it hard to see things from their point of view when it's a view they're sticking to because it's a rigid part of something else.

Missionary under the covers with someone of the opposite gender? Outside of wedlock? How dare you suggest such a thing, you godless communist!

Yes, behold my heathen audacity as I perform this most sacred act in a severely inebriated state with a person with whom I only recently became acquainted!

 

[Lonewolfm16]

Also, people like to pick bits they like out of the bible and ignore the bits they don't like.

This is completely right for example if they wanted to follow the Bible's teachings exactly, they would follow the old testament as well as the new. For example they would all be circumcised, make sacrifices, and not allow women to even talk in Church. There is some crazy shit in the old testament, and the stuff that is popular is referenced and used to attack people (e.g thou shalt not be gay), but the genital mutilation is quick to be ignored, with the excuse of the 'new covenant'. Seriously if you don't like the old testament, don't cherry pick the bits you like just stick to the teachings of big J.

I cant really bring myself to get worked up about Gay marriage, as I am not gay and no one close to me is either. If presented with an online petition I would sign it and say yeah why not? It dosent affect me if they get married and it makes them happy if they do so lets just let them.
It should be up to the individual church no one should be forced to allow it, but everyone should be allowed to do it if they are ok with it.

You skipped over all the craziest stuff, like rape victims being either executed (it counts as adultry if you are married) or have the rapist pay your father some money then marry you (can't have non-virgins who aren't married can we?) Plus all the passages about how to conduct war against non-believers including give them the option to surrender, and if they do enslave them all and if they don't invade, gather all the people, kill all the men and non-virgin women, then take the women as slaves, and possibly wives, then loot the city, then burn it to the hround.