as~i~lay~dying
09-26-2006, 05:56 PM
So, I am writing a paper on why gays should have rights. I have always enjoyed reading all your opinions and was wondering what your opinions are on gay rights? gracias!

terrasin
09-26-2006, 06:28 PM
This will be stirring a hornets nest...

First, I think you need to discuss what "rights" we are talking about. Obviously they have the right to be gay, no problem there. They have the same rights as any strait person. So is the discussion about marriage rights? Insurance & Benefit rights? etc.

CJ

somasoul
09-26-2006, 07:03 PM
This will be stirring a hornets nest...

First, I think you need to discuss what "rights" we are talking about. Obviously they have the right to be gay, no problem there. They have the same rights as any strait person. So is the discussion about marriage rights? Insurance & Benefit rights? etc.

CJ


Agreed. The term "rights" is simply too broad.

In the legal scope of things gays have the same rights as straight folk. The freedom of the press, the right to bear arms, etc.

terrasin
09-26-2006, 07:45 PM
Obligitory...
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/o/jonfoote/dali/other/Beararms.jpg

CJ

dawn of light
09-26-2006, 07:46 PM
Ha Ha. Cute!

as~i~lay~dying
09-26-2006, 08:19 PM
I apologize, my weird concpet that people know what I am asking for (or thinkg) without my actually asking has plauged me agian *sigh*

anyways ...

what DOES Jessica mean by rights exactly?

the right to marry

join the military

adopt children .... and any other views you believe strongly about ...

terrasin
09-26-2006, 10:15 PM
To marry? No. I am totally against it. Here are the reasons why: Since, what, the late 60's(?), the morality across the world has been going down hill. Sex is no longer a sacred thing between married people. It's a common thing with teens and it's hitting generations younger and younger. By allowing them to legally marry, not only will things continue to get worse morally as it becomes more widely taught in school (which is a place these teaching don't belong to begin with) and more commonplace among teenagers who should be taught to abstain rather than to experiment, but they would also see it as a huge victory and push for worldwide acceptance to the lifestyle in all aspects.

Moving along to the religious part, it's already an issue within the church where they are trying to decide whether they should allow gays to be pastors, bishops, and other heads of religious sects. Not only does this contradict blatantly clear scriptures in the bible, but it causes arguments and controversy within the church. For example: the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) has brought the issue into debate. The simple fact that they have been discussing and considering allowing gay pastors in the church has caused my church to consider breaking all ties with the organization.

As for adopting children, that also recieves a big no from me. Not only will it cause the child to have obvious confusing growing up with two mommies or daddies, but it also goes back to the issue on morality I was talking about.

CJ

somasoul
09-27-2006, 03:52 AM
the right to marry

I'm opposed to government being involved in marriage. While I think gay marriage is disturbing I think passing laws about marriage is really not the job of government.

join the military

In essence? Yes. In practice? No. There's a reason why men and women aren't paired together. Why they get seperate bedrooms and seperate shower stalls.

Could you have homosexual-only brigades? Sure. But then again I can only imagine the problems that would cause.

I think a more pressing issue is women in the military.

adopt children

I think this all depends on the woman who is giving the child up for adoption.

somasoul
09-27-2006, 04:00 AM
Should gay men have the right to be weather announcers (http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2006/weather-cockroach-p1.php)?

dawn of light
09-27-2006, 06:38 AM
I tend to have mixed feelings about gay marriage. On one hand I agree with CJ about protecting the sanctity of marriage. The relationship between a husband and wife is supposed to mirror the relationship of Christ with the church, not just two random people who love each other and happen to want to have sex also.

On the other hand, I don't think trying the force their (gay people's) hand about what they can and cannot do is going to show them the love of God. It'll just breed more comtempt between gay people and the church, which we definitely don't need. Also, what they're doing is wrong, but does it make it more or less wrong if they're married or not? I don't think so. My parents (my mom and step-dad) are not Christians and they also are not married. They're common law husband and wife and have been together for 17 years. I could care less if they got married or not. They're living a life of sin regardless of whether they're married! If they were to become Christians that would be a different story. I kinda feel the same about gay marriages.

cinnamonxspider
09-27-2006, 09:24 AM
Moving along to the religious part, it's already an issue within the church where they are trying to decide whether they should allow gays to be pastors, bishops, and other heads of religious sects. Not only does this contradict blatantly clear scriptures in the bible, but it causes arguments and controversy within the church.

just out of curiosity, where in the Bible does it say that? i'm not arguing, i honestly just am curious about it.


as for me, i don't even know where i stand on this type of thing. i need to think about it more before i can actually form an opinion.

ChildOfChrist
09-27-2006, 10:24 AM
I think Dawn of Light said it best. Yes, homosexuality is a sin. But we’re not going to get anywhere by bashing and attacking them. Jesus didn’t come to condemn. He showed love and mercy. We should do the same.

And as for Bible references, I'll try to find a few on Biblegatway.com

1Corinthians 6:9-10
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

ugh...I know there's more. I read one just the other day. I can't find it now though. I'll keep hunting.

skynes
09-27-2006, 10:57 AM
Hmm... *votes for Mars Hill to be renamed Fishing Bait... due to large Cans of Worms that keep getting opened*

Firstly (and most importantly) I believe that homosexuality is a sin, no more sinful than any other, but sin none the less.

I suppose this is rather confusing... I do not agree at all with gay marriage or anything like that, but on the other hand.

The society is allowed to do whatever they want, they have free will given by God and if they choose to use to give gays the same rights as everyone else, they're allowed to do that. They're using Free Will for what they want.

That doesn't make it less sinful or more sinful, it's still sin, society has just legalised it under their own laws, which are not God's laws nor does He endorse them.


Does that make sense?

terrasin
09-27-2006, 06:31 PM
I don't have too much time tonight to post because I have to be up early for a show. This is a fairly educational read though.

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1302

CJ

DustinRocks
09-27-2006, 09:51 PM
On the other hand, I don't think trying the force their (gay people's) hand about what they can and cannot do is going to show them the love of God. It'll just breed more comtempt between gay people and the church, which we definitely don't need. Also, what they're doing is wrong, but does it make it more or less wrong if they're married or not? I don't think so. My parents (my mom and step-dad) are not Christians and they also are not married. They're common law husband and wife and have been together for 17 years. I could care less if they got married or not. They're living a life of sin regardless of whether they're married! If they were to become Christians that would be a different story. I kinda feel the same about gay marriages.

So the Church (Christians) should compromise our morality set by the word of GOd and tolerate gay marriage to show love? I think thats whatyour saying.

skynes
09-28-2006, 12:44 AM
So the Church (Christians) should compromise our morality set by the word of GOd and tolerate gay marriage to show love? I think thats whatyour saying.

It sounds more like she's saying:

Attacking them and verbally abusing them about it isn't going to do anyone any good. It's only going to make Christians look even more arrogant and obnoxious.
If society wishes to let them marry, then let them. That doesn't stop us being against it, but in the scheme of things it makes no difference to God, they will face the same judgement married or not.

lamb_servant72
09-28-2006, 01:36 AM
I see what you are saying. But, would giving those rights make it easier for someone to be fall into the temptation of homosexuality? A teen who is being tempted by it, realizing society has given "rights", may be more likely to fall into it.

Why not just make marrying your dog legal (beastiality). Would that be the next "right" humans "fight" for?

somasoul
09-28-2006, 03:55 AM
It sounds more like she's saying:

Attacking them and verbally abusing them about it isn't going to do anyone any good. It's only going to make Christians look even more arrogant and obnoxious.
If society wishes to let them marry, then let them. That doesn't stop us being against it, but in the scheme of things it makes no difference to God, they will face the same judgement married or not.

Exactly. The illegality of gay marriage doesn't stop the formation of homosexual relationships. Just like drug laws don't stop the use of drugs.

Christians need to worry about the bigger picture, not these minor "human" legalities.

dawn of light
09-28-2006, 06:04 PM
It sounds more like she's saying:

Attacking them and verbally abusing them about it isn't going to do anyone any good. It's only going to make Christians look even more arrogant and obnoxious.
If society wishes to let them marry, then let them. That doesn't stop us being against it, but in the scheme of things it makes no difference to God, they will face the same judgement married or not.
Thank you. That's what I was trying to say.

NightCrawler
09-28-2006, 06:58 PM
I am in favor of locking this thread, paper or not. I am sorry.

somasoul
09-28-2006, 07:12 PM
I am in favor of locking this thread, paper or not. I am sorry.

This thread is awesome!

SkFan1983
09-28-2006, 07:41 PM
Well to me I use to view gays as Parasites but now I dont I everything that happen from the old testament like when the city of Sodom got Destroyed but Jesus sacerfice was ment for every sin just as long as they surrender there lives to him.

DustinRocks
09-28-2006, 10:52 PM
It sounds more like she's saying:

Attacking them and verbally abusing them about it isn't going to do anyone any good. It's only going to make Christians look even more arrogant and obnoxious.
If society wishes to let them marry, then let them. That doesn't stop us being against it, but in the scheme of things it makes no difference to God, they will face the same judgement married or not.


Rad I honestly was confused.

As long as the law seperation of Church and State is followed I say let homosexuals marry.

terrasin
09-28-2006, 11:49 PM
Except then you run into the problem of gays demanding to be married in churches.

CJ

john316
09-29-2006, 02:58 AM
I am in favor of locking this thread, paper or not. I am sorry.


As long as you ladies and gentlemen discuss this subject in a civil manner i see no need to lock this thread.

dawn of light
09-29-2006, 05:32 AM
Except then you run into the problem of gays demanding to be married in churches.

CJ

Yes, that could present a problem. But is there anything wrong with the churches saying no to that? Lot's of churches won't let people marry in the church if they're not that particular denomination, you'd think they could do the same for homosexuals.

cinnamonxspider
09-29-2006, 07:35 AM
I don't have too much time tonight to post because I have to be up early for a show. This is a fairly educational read though.

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1302

CJ

thanks, that was a good read. pretty much exactly what i was looking for.

skynes
09-29-2006, 09:49 AM
I know churches which refuse to marry you if you're not a member of THAT church never mind denomination.

Of course you need to be a member for over a year and pay something like £500 (almost $1000) to be married there...

terrasin
09-29-2006, 05:32 PM
Yes, that could present a problem. But is there anything wrong with the churches saying no to that?
Then they would be sued for discrimination.

CJ

Tromos
09-30-2006, 06:12 AM
Then they would be sued for discrimination.


Which is already starting. There was a church this year that got sued for letting an employee go who had publicly proclaimed their homosexulity. Would the same rules apply to a known drunk working for AA or for a worker standing outside smoking a cigarette at the American Cancer Society HQ? I dunno.

But I do know that when Jesus was here he concentrated on the social pariahs. The outcasts. The people that the "religious" folk had rejected. Unfortuantely, many of us Christians have now become the religious folk Jesus so harshly bashed.

</opinion alert> Like those morons in Kansas </end opinion alert>

The life of Jesus reminds us to love the sinner. And I, for one, have enough issues with sexual sin that this big plank in my eye is keeping me busy right now.

But back to the original topic, I'd like to expand it beyond the normal to the exceptional, which is where it is going. Many states are now trying to pass laws that would give gays more rights than straights. Laws that would make it illegal to quote anti-homosexual Scripture, even in church. Laws that would classify any anti-homosexual speech, actions, or intentions (as determined by the court) to be a hate crime. This, I believe, has gone too far. The laws should be structured so that people are treated equally.

somasoul
09-30-2006, 07:58 AM
Laws that would make it illegal to quote anti-homosexual Scripture, even in church. Laws that would classify any anti-homosexual speech, actions, or intentions (as determined by the court) to be a hate crime. This, I believe, has gone too far. The laws should be structured so that people are treated equally.

A good reason why I don't believe in laws.

Tromos
09-30-2006, 09:38 AM
A good reason why I don't believe in laws.

Not to be critical, but a society without laws is nothing more than a tribe of barbarians. One of the reasons why God created the 10 Laws that formed the backbone of the society of His people.


For example: the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) has brought the issue into debate. The simple fact that they have been discussing and considering allowing gay pastors in the church has caused my church to consider breaking all ties with the organization.


Your friends over in the LCMS would love to have you ;D

terrasin
09-30-2006, 01:00 PM
Your friends over in the LCMS would love to have you ;D

Yes, it's one of the groups we've been looking at getting involved with. I think the main issue is that we don't have a local branch in our area.

CJ

skilletosis
09-30-2006, 03:11 PM
At this point I would just echo what CJ has said.

somasoul
09-30-2006, 05:10 PM
Not to be critical, but a society without laws is nothing more than a tribe of barbarians. One of the reasons why God created the 10 Laws that formed the backbone of the society of His people.

AH.......10 laws not so bad. Millions of laws=bad.

I've had enough of laws. All they represent is other people trying to tell me what to do. Jesus even took the Father's 10 laws and lowered 'em to 2.

terrasin
09-30-2006, 06:09 PM
I actually read an interesting thing the other day that listed some 800 laws within the OT/NT. Things that scripture demanded of us as Christians. The whole "Jesus came and made the OT obsolite" comment is complete hogwash.

CJ

Tromos
09-30-2006, 06:10 PM
Jesus even took the Father's 10 laws and lowered 'em to 2.

Actually, he was quoting Deuteronomy. And the Jews had 525 little laws which made up THE LAW. And you think our laws are confusing!

somasoul
10-01-2006, 01:25 PM
I actually read an interesting thing the other day that listed some 800 laws within the OT/NT. Things that scripture demanded of us as Christians. The whole "Jesus came and made the OT obsolite" comment is complete hogwash.

CJ

What's the deal with Peter eating unclean animals then? Or Jesus not permitting the stoning of the woman caught in adultery?

Obviously Jesus did something to the law of Moses.

terrasin
10-01-2006, 02:18 PM
So by your theroy, the 10 commandments are pointless. :)

He didn't permit it because he called one person without sin to be the one to do it, in which no one could, which proves that it was a sin, but there is redemption for it. As for the Unclean animals, I'd have to reread that part. What book/chapter is it in?

CJ

somasoul
10-01-2006, 02:38 PM
So by your theroy, the 10 commandments are pointless. :)

He didn't permit it because he called one person without sin to be the one to do it, in which no one could, which proves that it was a sin, but there is redemption for it. As for the Unclean animals, I'd have to reread that part. What book/chapter is it in?

CJ

There's all these laws about eating pork and what-not. Later, in Acts, Peter is sitting on the roof chillin' out and this big blanket of animals comes down and the Lord tells Peter to eat. And Peter says he wouldn't because he's never eaten any unclean animal. Then God says to not call "unclean" what he has made "clean".

Those Jewish laws, me thinks, are dead and gone. Righteous is now obtained through other means.

Oh, and in Acts, I think, it says Gentiles don't have to obey the law.

lamb_servant72
10-01-2006, 02:38 PM
In Acts 10 God tells Peter to eat unclean animals and He says, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy." This was in preparation for Peter to preach the Word to the Gentiles.

riz
10-02-2006, 03:36 PM
Many states are now trying to pass laws that would give gays more rights than straights.

Many states have also attempted to put forth gay marriage issues on ballots, and just about every single one in 2004 did not go through in those particular states, so everyone who is cringing at the idea of homosexual marriages needn't worry, unless there is a sudden movement for the passage of new laws I hadn't noticed in the past months.

NightCrawler
10-03-2006, 05:40 AM
</opinion alert> Like those morons in Kansas </end opinion alert>
As a webmaster and a perfectionist... I'd like you to know that HTML tags usually have the <tag></tag> format. So if you were to insert a warning that it is purely opinion, it would come out more like this:
<opinionalert>Like those morons in Kansas</opinionalert>

The backslash is to mean negation, or rather the CLOSING of an HTML tag. Thus you don't need the slash in the first one, nor the 'end' in the second. The backslash serves that purpose.

And for the sake of internet speak, you can OMIT some tags, for poetic style. I will use the example myself.

</PSA>

Tromos
10-03-2006, 06:50 AM
Thank you for the correction. I am heartily ashamed. :-[

I'm fully aware of correct HTML tag usage and consider my blunder along the lines of a monumental misspelling.

Consider me chastized.


;)

NightCrawler
10-03-2006, 07:12 AM
Seom poepel cnta sellp aynyaw.

amodman
10-13-2006, 09:18 PM
I made this post on another board -

"It is not, never has been, never will be, and never should be our GOVERNMENT's place to DICTATE who can and cannot legally bind themselves to another in the institution we have set up called marriage. As long as both parties are willing and able, the government should have absolutely and utterly NO say in this matter. If a man wants to legally marry another man, well...he should very well be able to do that. Personally, I think that's disgusting and wouldn't consider such a thing, but it's their choice. HOWEVER, both the government and those wishing to have a homosexual marriage should neither expect nor demand that religious organizations endorse the marriage.

Marriage, historically, is in fact a religious idea. As in -Holy- Matrimony. However, the idea has been incorporated into pretty much every society in existence that I can think of, and thus has been set up as a secular binding as well. A legal and secular marriage received direct from the court house should have absolutely no bars whatsoever excepting willing and able (those including the idea of being old enough to be able to make the decision for yourself). However, that same government allowing those marriages there has absolutely NO right to demand that churches, temples, or what have you have to allow homosexual marriages within their organizations. That's a debate for the organizations themselves. Conversely, though, those in religious organizations, or even not, morally opposed to homosexual marriage have absolutely NO right to attempt to legally bar it outside of their organization. Both parties on either side of this debate, IMO, need to get it through their heads that they are demanding unreasonable allowances/hindrances which they have no right to dicatate."

dawn of light
10-13-2006, 09:51 PM
Good post amodman.

NightCrawler
10-14-2006, 12:02 PM
Good post amodman.
Ditto. ...

Vuren
11-01-2006, 09:43 PM
Gay rights...Honestly i do not feel it is my right to judge weather or not they should be allowed to be married, if they are in love, aren't they deserving to be happy? Yes it is not popular but then again, neather was the chistian church when it first began. Army of course they should be in the military if they want are not a convicted felon. Adoption, if they can prove they are a stable couple and that they can raise the child with morals(ie don't kill, steal, cheat, lie) then yes of course they should be allowed!

Tromos
11-02-2006, 05:05 PM
If Bill and his dog Rover deeply love each other and have a stable relationship, should they also be allowed to marry and raise children together?

Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

somasoul
11-02-2006, 06:52 PM
If Bill and his dog Rover deeply love each other and have a stable relationship, should they also be allowed to marry and raise children together?

What is "allowed"? Like, do I think government should make laws regarding such things? I don't really know........I don't think they should. I don't need my life dictated to me by "kings" and "queens" and authorities outside of God.

Tromos
11-03-2006, 04:58 AM
Even Jesus acknowledged the authority of Caesar.

somasoul
11-04-2006, 04:25 AM
Even Jesus acknowledged the authority of Caesar.

Caesar is dead.

Tromos
11-04-2006, 06:26 AM
Which is relevant how?

Earthly authority of governments and rulers is recognized multiple times in Scripture. Jesus recognized the authority of the earthly government of his time. If you're looking for Scriptural backing or moral reasoning to fuel your anarchical tendencies, I don't think you're gonna find them unless the government in question has specifically ordered you (not the same as tolerating) to violate God's law.

somasoul
11-04-2006, 08:24 AM
Which is relevant how?

Earthly authority of governments and rulers is recognized multiple times in Scripture. Jesus recognized the authority of the earthly government of his time. If you're looking for Scriptural backing or moral reasoning to fuel your anarchical tendencies, I don't think you're gonna find them unless the government in question has specifically ordered you (not the same as tolerating) to violate God's law.

This reasoning could be used against you just as much as it could be used for you. If the government passed a law saying gay marriage is legal then you would.........???? Praise gay marriage? Or if a law was passed that said churches must wed gays........?

The obeying government argument has nothing to do with if gay marriage should be legalized.

terrasin
11-04-2006, 11:53 AM
I find the irony of the situation... well... ironic.

Over 52% of people who live together in the US are unwed. Getting married is starting to become a thing of the past for these people (I guess it makes life easier when they break up?), and yet, the gays are just waiting in line to get married now?

My worry is that people will always be pushing the envelope. So they can marry, what next? Will they want the laws to change so they can legally have sex in public places? Activists try to take a mile each time they get an inch.

CJ

somasoul
11-04-2006, 03:38 PM
I find the irony of the situation... well... ironic.

Over 52% of people who live together in the US are unwed. Getting married is starting to become a thing of the past for these people (I guess it makes life easier when they break up?), and yet, the gays are just waiting in line to get married now?

My worry is that people will always be pushing the envelope. So they can marry, what next? Will they want the laws to change so they can legally have sex in public places? Activists try to take a mile each time they get an inch.

CJ


I agree. People used to believe in much the same things. Even theists attended chuch and believed in a similar moral structure. Today there is no unification. Society is falling apart, division is rampant.

Laws won't stabilize it. Laws create further division.

Only the dismantling of the federal gubmint and the creation of newer, smaller, societies can preserve civilitiy, me thinks.

But what do I know?

Tromos
11-04-2006, 06:19 PM
...and yet, the gays are just waiting in line to get married now?

I think the reasons are probably more practical than romantic. If the government acknowledges their unions as marriages, then their employers will be forced to allow them to be included for health insurance and other benefits. It would also allow spousal privileges in other legal matters that they do not get now.



The obeying government argument has nothing to do with if gay marriage should be legalized.

You're right. I apologize. I got sidetracked by the "laws are stupid" tangent. I'll try to stay better focused ;D

terrasin
11-04-2006, 08:35 PM
I think the reasons are probably more practical than romantic. If the government acknowledges their unions as marriages, then their employers will be forced to allow them to be included for health insurance and other benefits. It would also allow spousal privileges in other legal matters that they do not get now.
I'm aware, I just find the situation ironic because it seems that strait people just don't care abotu things like that anymore. :\ I guess they figure they will just be divorced sooner or later anyway.

CJ

dawn of light
11-05-2006, 07:26 AM
Being raised by two common-law parents (but not agreeing with it myself) I think that they just don't want to bother with the whole wedding deal. It's also seen as a religious thing to a lot of people and they don't really care if the church recognizes them as married or not. (like my mom and step dad). In Canada if you've lived with someone for three years you're considered common law and pretty much get all the same benefits as legally married.

TheFireBreathes
11-05-2006, 02:10 PM
If Bill and his dog Rover deeply love each other and have a stable relationship, should they also be allowed to marry and raise children together?

Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

your comparing man marrying man to man marrying dog. 2 different species, that's irrelevant and can almost be offending.

Tromos
11-06-2006, 09:52 AM
Then be offended. I don't necessarily find it irrelevant.

TheFireBreathes
11-06-2006, 06:07 PM
not to me. but because you're implying that gay men are dogs...

somasoul
11-07-2006, 03:26 AM
not to me. but because you're implying that gay men are dogs...

I don't think he's implying gay men are dogs.

I think us Christians, if we spent half our time devoted to the gay marriage topic perhaps helping the poor or showering the homosexual community with Christ's love, then we'd be less defensive. We'd have more direct control over the situation.

Tromos
11-07-2006, 05:29 AM
not to me. but because you're implying that gay men are dogs...

No, that was your inference, not my implication. Please do not attribute your interpretations to my statements. I believe that a homosexual union is an unnatural union. I also believe that a bestial union is an unnatural union. I was drawing a parallel between actions. I made no statements about the people involved.



I think us Christians, if we spent half our time devoted to the gay marriage topic perhaps helping the poor or showering the homosexual community with Christ's love, then we'd be less defensive. We'd have more direct control over the situation.


I could not agree more. We get so very caught up in the sin that our distaste bleeds over to the sinner. And yet, in the end, homosexual sex is just another sexual sin. Like fornication and masturbation and adultery. I truly believe that if Jesus came back for another ministry now like His first one, He would spend quite a bit of time eating, talking, and socializing with the homosexual communities. And we Christians would fall right back to the Pharisitic condemnation "He eats with those people! How could He do that?!?"

As Christians, we are called to hate the sin. To hate all sin. Including our own. But we must never never never hate the sinner. I have gay friends. Heck, my supervisor here at work is gay and his partner is one of the greatest guys I've ever met. And I love my friends. But I don't approve of their living situation. Just as I don't approve of my nephew living with his girlfriend. I admit that I find the idea of coupling with another guy personally repugnant, and sometimes I let my disgust slip. That's a problem I need to address.

But to get back to the original topic, I don't think that homosexual couples should have the same benefits afforded to married heterosexual couples. In the same manner, I don't think unmarried heterosexual couples should have those benefits either. Marriage, as an institution, makes the society stronger and should have rewards to promote it.

TheFireBreathes
11-08-2006, 06:02 AM
No, that was your inference, not my implication. Please do not attribute your interpretations to my statements. I believe that a homosexual union is an unnatural union. I also believe that a bestial union is an unnatural union. I was drawing a parallel between actions. I made no statements about the people involved.




Sorry. If I cant make interpretations then how am I supposed to understand what you're talking about? obviously you didn't explain it well enough.

Tromos
11-08-2006, 07:06 AM
*bow*
My apologies. Hopefully I've done so now.

TheFireBreathes
11-08-2006, 02:38 PM
Yeah. Now I understand what you were saying.

somasoul
11-08-2006, 07:29 PM
Interesting note. In today's Newsweek it mentions that while 43% of evangelicals oppose gay marriage a full 40% say government legalization is a non-concern for them.

That's merely a 3% difference. I was really startled.

Geneva
04-28-2007, 04:51 PM
So I've got a question for you all reagarding homosexuals.

Let's just say a person is homosexal. Their whole life they're devoted to God. They go to church every sunday, they pray before every meal, they help others and give a lot back to the community.

Will they go to hell just because they have an attraction to the same sex?

DarkestRose
04-28-2007, 05:01 PM
I don’t know. I think there would be a difference between being attracted to the same gender and actually engaging in homosexual acts.

Now works do not save Christians. We are justified only through grace by faith in Jesus Christ. Our Bible study, the length of our prayers, amount of church attendance, etc do nothing to add on to Christ did for us and do nothing to earn it for us.

I think a Christian could struggle with homosexual attraction in the same way that Christians can struggle with any other sin. But I would question the idea of someone who is claiming to be Christian but engaging in homosexual activity without repentance. But I think attraction is much different than actually engaging in homosexual acts. And in either case, I'm not one to decide who's saved and who is not. And I don't want to.

Geneva
04-28-2007, 05:07 PM
Very true. It is different.

But one thing that I hear a lot is "Why would God create a homosexual person?"

And so I get really lost. I myself am for gay rights, but I'm also a devoted Christian.

Is that even possible? Or am I sinning just by beleiving that homosexuals should have the same rights?

I get really confused on this topic.

DarkestRose
04-28-2007, 05:14 PM
I don’t know what causes homosexuality. I’ve heard some Christians state that they think it’s this psychological dysfunction with the parent of the opposite gender. I’ve heard Christians say that they think homosexuality is biologically based, but still a sin. I’ve heard a lot of different theories. The biologically based theory is confusing because it feels like God saying blue eyes are sin but then some people are born that way. So, I’m really not quite sure at all.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by gay rights. Like to be married? I’m not totally sure where I stand on all gay rights advocacy issues, but I don’t think there is anything wrong with loving people in the homosexual community or showing them compassion or being their friend. Those are things that Christians should do.

Geneva
04-28-2007, 05:21 PM
I agree.

I know a lot of Christians who are completely against homosexuals, and refuse to speak to them.

I myself don't really know what causes a person to be gay, but my friend did some research on it, and there are actually scientific studies that show that being gay is in a person's DNA.

But then there's the issue that it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin.

But, then again, God didn't write the bible...

And I don't beleive God discriminates.

But that's just me.

JenniferAnn
04-28-2007, 06:05 PM
Now works do not save Christians. We are justified only through grace by faith in Jesus Christ. Our Bible study, the length of our prayers, amount of church attendance, etc do nothing to add on to Christ did for us and do nothing to earn it for us.

Now, just to be clear, that depends on your faith. I'm a devoted Catholic Christian and my faith states that we're saved through grace, faith, and good works. Sorry, i just wanted to be technical.

unshakeable15
04-28-2007, 09:47 PM
Now, just to be clear, that depends on your faith. I'm a devoted Catholic Christian and my faith states that we're saved through grace, faith, and good works. Sorry, i just wanted to be technical.
Again, just to be clear, but the Bible says differently:
But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. (Ephesians 2:4-9)

Not to drag this off topic or anything. ::]

But, to get back on things, if people are homosexual by nurture (their environment, how they were raised) then they can conceivably change. However, if they are homosexual by nature (built into the DNA), then it's like trying to change how tall you are or how many fingers are on your left hand.

If nurture,i would argue that it's due to sin's reign in the world that your environment was so horrid to build this deviation into your system. Yet, every learned action can be unlearned. (It would highly interesting to find out if any homosexuals have every gotten amnesia or brain damage to where they need to relearn things.) Again, the only sin would be in acting up your desires.

If nature, i would argue that it's due to sin's reign in this world, messing up with how children are formed in the womb. Yet, God is not outside of this either. Just being attracted to someone of the opposite sex is not a sin; acting on it is. How great a testimony would that be to say you, as a female, find guys resoundingly unattractive and women astonishingly so, yet, choose not to act upon that. In some ways, it would be like those heterosexuals who choose to be celibate.

I have not seen enough info one way or another to be able to say exclusively that it is nature/nurture that causes homosexuality. It could even be both. Identical twins separated at birth have grown up to be very similar, despite their different environments. Yet, we all know that childrearing takes training, otherwise we could let them loose as soon as they can walk and talk on their own. There is learning taking place every day until you die, even if it's not from a book.

on_a_mission
04-29-2007, 11:41 AM
Just being attracted to someone of the opposite sex is not a sin; acting on it is. How great a testimony would that be to say you, as a female, find guys resoundingly unattractive and women astonishingly so, yet, choose not to act upon that. In some ways, it would be like those heterosexuals who choose to be celibate.

Sorry, but there is sin in thought as well as deed. The act of homosexuality is a sin, the desire of homosexuality is a sin.

"But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matthew 5:28 ).


Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires (Romans 8:5).

Tromos
04-29-2007, 12:06 PM
Careful Derek. I think that self-righteous side is starting to peek out.

Attraction is not a sin. God built men to be attracted to women and women to be attracted to men. Feeding your lust is a sin.

To say that attraction by a man for a man or by a woman for a woman is a sin has crossed the line. If a man or woman indulges that attraction, either through fantasy or action, then it's a different story. You might as well say that temptation is a sin, which it isn't. For many men and women in the Bible have been tempted and have remained in their faith and it was counted to them as righteousness.

As to the brief side conversation between Michael and JenniferAnn, I don't think we want to go down that path, at least not here. To Michael's point, JenniferAnn's denomination (Roman Catholic) is the only one that holds that works are the relevant factor. To JenniferAnn's point, there are twice as many Roman Catholics in the world than all of the other Christian denominations. Combined. Let's call it a point of contention between Catholics and Protestants for the last 500 years, recognize that faith without works is dead and works without faith are pointless, and drop it or discuss it elsewhere.

I'm firmly convinced that if Jesus were here, He would spend a lot of time with the larger homosexual communities, preaching the love and forgiveness of God to them. Just like He did to all the other outcast sinners.

on_a_mission
04-29-2007, 01:41 PM
Sorry if I sounded self-righteous, that was not my intent.

You seem to make a distinction between an attraction to a same sex partner and lust. I have always had lust defined as "Lusts are unlawful desires. Lust is wanting that which you have no right to." And since homosexuality is an unlawful desire, it would fall into the category as lustful.

But, be that at as it may.

I have always had issues with the whole sinful thoughts vs sinful actions deal. You would think that one would be judged by their actions, not their thoughts. But over and over in the bible, they say this isn't so. In addition to the two passages quoted above, there is:


Mark 7:18-23
20 He went on: "What comes out of a man is what makes him 'unclean.'
21 For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery,
22 greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly.
23 All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.' "

2 Timothy 2:22
22 Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

James 1:13-15
13 When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone;
14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed.
15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

JenniferAnn
04-29-2007, 03:15 PM
Careful Derek. I think that self-righteous side is starting to peek out.

Attraction is not a sin. God built men to be attracted to women and women to be attracted to men. Feeding your lust is a sin.

To say that attraction by a man for a man or by a woman for a woman is a sin has crossed the line. If a man or woman indulges that attraction, either through fantasy or action, then it's a different story. You might as well say that temptation is a sin, which it isn't. For many men and women in the Bible have been tempted and have remained in their faith and it was counted to them as righteousness.

As to the brief side conversation between Michael and JenniferAnn, I don't think we want to go down that path, at least not here. To Michael's point, JenniferAnn's denomination (Roman Catholic) is the only one that holds that works are the relevant factor. To JenniferAnn's point, there are twice as many Roman Catholics in the world than all of the other Christian denominations. Combined. Let's call it a point of contention between Catholics and Protestants for the last 500 years, recognize that faith without works is dead and works without faith are pointless, and drop it or discuss it elsewhere.

I'm firmly convinced that if Jesus were here, He would spend a lot of time with the larger homosexual communities, preaching the love and forgiveness of God to them. Just like He did to all the other outcast sinners.

Well put in all said.

alienyouth9292
04-29-2007, 03:26 PM
if Jesus was here, he would be preaching to gay people - the outcasts, the broken. But that doesn't make homosexuality right by any means. i don't think that gays should have the right to adopt a child. adopted children need to have one mom and one day. period.

Geneva
04-29-2007, 03:33 PM
I don't think that's entirely true.

I mean, single parents are allowed to adopt.

bob
04-29-2007, 08:46 PM
I don't think homosexuality is something that is caused by nature. Scientists have yet to find a gene that determine sexual preferences and they never will. If homosexuality was a gene, how would it be passed on to an offspring? I mean, homosexuality doesn't produce children. :P

riz
04-30-2007, 01:59 PM
I don't think that's entirely true.

I mean, single parents are allowed to adopt.

Agreed. It's folly to state that the only 'normal' family is one where there's one mother and one father. I know people who have been able to live normal lives having only one parent; it's not as if it's a curse and those living under the wing of a sole mother, or just a dad, are destined to be completely screwed up. Plus, I'm sure there are other normal individuals who have come from a homosexual couple who has adopted.

alienyouth9292
04-30-2007, 03:05 PM
but u gotta feel sorry for the kids who get mocked at school because they have two moms and no dad. i believe that it is just best for adoption to occur when there is a mom and a dad....

DarkestRose
04-30-2007, 03:49 PM
Well, I’ve used to be really into reading John Eldredge books. One book, Wild at Heart: Discovering the Secret of a Man's Soul focuses a lot on the nature God designed into males. And another, Captivating: Unveiling the Mystery of a Woman's Soul does the same for women. (Neither of these books is about homosexuality, by the way.) While I believe that no gender is superior to another, I do believe that each gender has a specially sketched uniqueness in the soul. Because of this, I do think that it is best for children to have the influences of both genders in their life because each gender is made to complement each other.

I’m also not quite sure what psychological factors come from living with a homosexual parental unit. I think it might make it harder to learn how to relate to people of whichever gender is underrepresented. It might cause feelings of “differentness” in knowing that ones family is markedly unlike everyone else’s. Also, I think it would be harder for them to deal with the concept of their parent’s relationship being a sinful one. In that, I can say, it could make it more difficult for them to come to Christ.

But, stemming from adamant pro-life beliefs, I have always hoped that if a girl doesn’t think she can support her child, she choose adoption over abortion. I feel that, if homosexuals want to adopt children, it does help in saving them from a) being killed and, b) becoming wards of the state through foster care.

So I am very ambivalent on which way to go.

fire-inside
04-30-2007, 10:23 PM
While I agree that many good points have been made regarding adoption, I must state that I believe gay couples should certainly be allowed to adopt.

What are the three Constitutional rights? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I simply don't understand why it is "not allowed" for homosexuals to have full access to those pursuits. Be it a legal marriage or a full family of children. Regardless of sexual orientation, the gay community are human beings - Americans - and should therefore be afforded all that heterosexual couples are.

bob
04-30-2007, 10:25 PM
While I agree that many good points have been made regarding adoption, I must state that I believe gay couples should certainly be allowed to adopt.

What are the three Constitutional rights? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

But then aren't you denying the child those rights? What's to say the child would be happy with homosexual parents?

DarkestRose
04-30-2007, 10:27 PM
I agree that homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals. But I wasn't under the impression that the state let just anybody, heterosexual or not, adopt a kid. Aren't there factors they look into about how it would affect the child?

By the way, I'm not meaning to argue against homosexual adoption, just asking questions to get a clearer viewpoint. I don't want to write-off the idea of homosexual adoptions yet because there's so many factors and I want to really consider them first.

fire-inside
04-30-2007, 10:46 PM
But then aren't you denying the child those rights? What's to say the child would be happy with homosexual parents?
Who's to say a child is going to be happy with their heterosexual parents? There's worse things, I'm sure, than having two moms. ie: Drug addicts, abusives, alcoholics, etc.


And yes, I'm sure there are many factors that agencies investigate before adopting children to parents. Financial stability, etc. I doubt for some establishments sexual orientation is even a factor. It's the other things that are more important. Are they able to sufficiently care for the child. And such.

DarkestRose
04-30-2007, 11:41 PM
Do kids get a choice? Because maybe it depends on the child. I would think highly conservative child might hold an aversion that another might not. Just like kids all react differently to other more traditional families.

But I still wonder about the spiritual affects. How would this affect how kids come to Christ? I mean, they could be at the emotional level where, because their parents are gay, they don't want anything to with Christianity because Christianity calls homosexual couples sinful. Or they could end up accepting only bits and pieces of the Gospel as it works for them which is not how God should be taken. This could put children in a situation where the way they grow up conditions them to have more trouble accepting the Gospel.

Or what if they do become Christian? Or already are Christian? This could put them in an awkward position and, possibly, the adoptive couple in an awkward position.

Tromos
05-01-2007, 02:53 AM
What are the three Constitutional rights? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence is not Holy Scripture. Never has been and never will be. If there's a conflict, it's the Word of God vs. the word of man. I'd go with the former.

alienyouth9292
05-01-2007, 03:49 AM
they're would be more of a chance that the kid would not become a christian, mostly beause his or her moms would PROBABLY not go to church....



not meaning to offend anyone:-\

DarkestRose
05-01-2007, 03:07 PM
Well, I've heard of lots of different churches that have homosexual members and some that ordain clergy from the homosexual community. Goodness, I've even heard of a gay couple trying to put their kids in a Christian school. I don't see why there isn't at least an off-chance that a homosexual couple and their adoptive children would attend church.

Geneva
05-01-2007, 03:59 PM
Actually, I know quite a few gay people who go to my church. And, not everyone views homosexuality as a sin. In fact, my pastor took us to a Christain speaker who told us that homosexuality is no more of a sin than touching a dead pig skin (aka, a football. Apparently both are stated as sins in the bible in the same passage or something like that).

I'm sure that a family can function happily in a household where there are two moms or two dads, just as it can with one of each, or just one.

But that's just my opinion.

DarkestRose
05-01-2007, 05:06 PM
There are other passages though in the New Testament that state that homosexual actions are sinful, like in 1 Corinthians 4:9.

Geneva
05-01-2007, 05:09 PM
Very fair point.

But when you think about it, there were no laws or anything against men having mulitple wives and such back then, but there are now.

Times change, you know?

And I don't believe people would go to hell for being homosexual.

Love is love, and I don't think love is a sin.

bob
05-01-2007, 06:48 PM
Love is love, and I don't think love is a sin.

God says when a man lies with another man it is an abomination to the Lord. How many other actions have you heard of God calling an abomination? Read Leviticus 18 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2018;&version=50;) for me please. Are you seriously telling me those laws are irrelevant and it is okay if we do those as long as it is out of "love"?

NightCrawler
05-01-2007, 06:52 PM
Very fair point.

But when you think about it, there were no laws or anything against men having mulitple wives and such back then, but there are now.
Actually, the Jews were permitted only one wife. Many of the patriarchs and kings were sinning.

Times change, you know?
Law != morality

Laws change, morality does not.

And I don't believe people would go to hell for being homosexual.
People go to Hell for sinning without it being atoned for.

Love is love, and I don't think love is a sin.
Homosexuality is an "abomination", "detestable". To equate homosexuality to love is to like equating adultery to love. It is burning passions of sinful lust. Plain and simple.

theelectric3
05-01-2007, 07:43 PM
Actually, I know quite a few gay people who go to my church. And, not everyone views homosexuality as a sin. In fact, my pastor took us to a Christain speaker who told us that homosexuality is no more of a sin than touching a dead pig skin (aka, a football. Apparently both are stated as sins in the bible in the same passage or something like that).

I'm sure that a family can function happily in a household where there are two moms or two dads, just as it can with one of each, or just one.

But that's just my opinion.

personally, i believe it is better to see what the Bible has to say about this and stick to that. yes people have a right to their own opinions but opinions do not sway the truth.

the truth = God.

He is truth and His word is truth.

so be careful at being so quick to accept what a speaker says... compare their words to Christ and make sure it is backed by scripture.

DarkestRose
05-01-2007, 10:17 PM
On a new note, is there an actual difference between gay marriage and the civil unions some politicians promote?

on_a_mission
05-01-2007, 10:54 PM
On a new note, is there an actual difference between gay marriage and the civil unions some politicians promote?

Some of the differences I know of include:

Civil Unions are only recognized in three states right now. Marriage is recognized in all states.

Civil Unions are not recognized by the IRS and so you can't file jointly

Civil Unions have some issues for dissolution, whereas you can get a divorce in any state.

Civil Unios don't get the Social Security death benefits since it is not recognized by the feds.

A married spouse can sponsor a non-usa citizen spouse for citizenship, a civil union partnership can not do this.

DarkestRose
05-01-2007, 10:55 PM
So it really just has more to do with legal benefits then?

on_a_mission
05-01-2007, 11:03 PM
Yes and no. There are two schools of thought. There is the school of thought that says they are only looking for the same legal protection and rights that a married couple has.

Then there is the school of thought where they want their "bond" acknolwedged, sanctioned, and/or accepted by society.

From a christian standpoint, I don't personally see why they can't have the same legal protection as married couples. However, I don't feel that the christian community should be expected to sanction or accept the union.

For example, we may not accept another religion's pastor/priest/leader into our church to preach, but we certianly would not deny them the right to the tax free status as a relgion.

DarkestRose
05-01-2007, 11:30 PM
I can see that point of view, Derek.

Thanks for explaining it all too. I was a little confused since they both sounded the same to me.

fire-inside
05-01-2007, 11:33 PM
To equate homosexuality to love is to like equating adultery to love. It is burning passions of sinful lust. Plain and simple.
So do you mean to say that the relationship I've been in for sixteen months is not love? That the feelings I have are nothing more than lust, and hateful on a par with adultery. I'm sorry my friend, but you are mistaken.

fire-inside
05-01-2007, 11:36 PM
*deletes double post stuff*
It didn't show up so I reposted. And now it's there. Bizarre.

Moving on.

DarkestRose
05-01-2007, 11:41 PM
It didn't show up to me either, but it said you were the last poster. But your post wasn't there, it was mine. And I re-checked, like five times. It was so crazy. I was glad to finally see your post.

cookie
05-02-2007, 09:54 AM
i believe that telling gay people that they cant get married is just messed up people should be able to marry who ever their heart desires wether boy or girl

timmyrotter
05-02-2007, 11:04 AM
So do you mean to say that the relationship I've been in for sixteen months is not love? That the feelings I have are nothing more than lust, and hateful on a par with adultery. I'm sorry my friend, but you are mistaken.

well each to his/her own on that. different people, different perspectives.

I agree with Rachel to some extent, people are perfectly capable of having a same-sex relationships, they can be emotionally close, as well as physically. but here are some things that ive come up with, things that arent biblical, but they work. because non-believers are not going to look to the bible for truth.
if you consider the anatomy of male's and female's, without going into too much detail, they are obviously meant for each other. so i guess you could say that it was nature's intention that male is for female.
Gay people do not deserve help via affirmative action, or any governmental organization anymore than i do. they are people, their lifestyle should not make them a minority, whether i agree with it or not.
and of course it will, and should not, ever be proven that people are born gay, it is impossible to prove either way i suppose.
As for marriage, it should be reserved for Heterosexuals, marriage was originally for that, and if something new comes along, they can have their own separate ceremonies. the line has to be drawn somewhere, or else we would have to allow polygamy as well as bestiality practicer's to marry their respective ways.

JenniferAnn
05-02-2007, 12:17 PM
Legally, i believe that they should have every right that heterosexuals have. And i agree with what Gen said that love is love.

However, i'm still torn on the marriage issue. Yes, they should be allowed legal unions, but, seperation of Church and State allows legal issues and religious issues to be solved seperately. I'm really not sure where i stand on the issue.

Geneva
05-02-2007, 05:21 PM
Unfortunatly, seperation of Church and State isn't actually in the consitution, so it's easy to get around that...

JenniferAnn
05-02-2007, 05:23 PM
Even if it's not in the Constitution, both the US and the Church abide by it, right? I mean, have you heard the arguements against any semi-religious symbol in public spots near holidays?

Geneva
05-02-2007, 05:33 PM
Yeah. Unless whatever they have represents all the relgions and such.

But when it comes to marriage, seems like the US follows the bible on that one.

However, in other religions, it fine to be in a homosexual relationship.

alienyouth9292
05-02-2007, 06:27 PM
So do you mean to say that the relationship I've been in for sixteen months is not love? That the feelings I have are nothing more than lust, and hateful on a par with adultery. I'm sorry my friend, but you are mistaken.


wait...are u saying that u are well.....gay?

cause if you are you should have said so in the beginning.

riz
05-02-2007, 08:41 PM
Or bisexual.

It's interesting. This might be a generalization on my part, but it pales in comparison to what I've seen. This might not be the right forum for this, but I think it's really annoying when people automatically assume someone is 'gay' for dating someone of the same sex. They could very well be bisexual (I don't personally know Rachel's preferences, so this is an assumption on my part). The whole coining of a term throughout the years has always galled me to some extent. Because I know other people who are attracted to the same sex, but not to the opposite... and I also know others who find both mutually attractive.

Just stepping in and trying to be the anti-generalizer here.

timmyrotter
05-02-2007, 08:51 PM
Or bisexual.

It's interesting. This might be a generalization on my part, but it pales in comparison to what I've seen. This might not be the right forum for this, but I think it's really annoying when people automatically assume someone is 'gay' for dating someone of the same sex. They could very well be bisexual (I don't personally know Rachel's preferences, so this is an assumption on my part). The whole coining of a term throughout the years has always galled me to some extent. Because I know other people who are attracted to the same sex, but not to the opposite... and I also know others who find both mutually attractive.

Just stepping in and trying to be the anti-generalizer here.

Back in the day, Gay meant Happy. this is a Christian dominant board, many sheltered and have not been around much homosexuality. the word itself can obviously mean different things, so what he meant, and what you perceive it as are probably different. so cut him some slack.

riz
05-02-2007, 08:56 PM
She wouldn't stir the pot with something like that.

I do know what you're getting at though. I just think that the Kinsey model of sexual orientation is more accurate than the clear-cut universal definitions we currently have.

Continuums are beautiful things.

DarkestRose
05-02-2007, 09:21 PM
wait...are u saying that u are well.....gay?

cause if you are you should have said so in the beginning.

I'm not sure if Rachel's preference is even really relevant to the conversation. Whether homosexuality is right or wrong doesn't really depend on that knowledge at all. It gives understanding to her viewpoint, perhaps, but I don't see why Rachel should have felt obligated to tell anyone from the beginning.

alienyouth9292
05-03-2007, 04:12 AM
Or bisexual.

It's interesting. This might be a generalization on my part, but it pales in comparison to what I've seen. This might not be the right forum for this, but I think it's really annoying when people automatically assume someone is 'gay' for dating someone of the same sex. They could very well be bisexual (I don't personally know Rachel's preferences, so this is an assumption on my part). The whole coining of a term throughout the years has always galled me to some extent. Because I know other people who are attracted to the same sex, but not to the opposite... and I also know others who find both mutually attractive.

Just stepping in and trying to be the anti-generalizer here.



your right, gay means "homosexual' and "bisexual". i just said gay because i use that term as the default preference. also, notice the title of the thread.....is that offensive to you also?

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:19 AM
Does gay actually mean bisexual?

Becase gay is liking people of the same sex.

And bisexual is liking people of both.

That's why on myspace there are places to choose bi and gay for the orientation..

NightCrawler
05-03-2007, 06:30 AM
So do you mean to say that the relationship I've been in for sixteen months is not love?
I am sorry if you felt like I attacked you. That was not my intent. This is my intent: to declare God's word.

I'm sorry my friend, but you are mistaken.
God clearly states that He intended man and females to bond sexually.

Matthew 19:
[4] "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' [5] and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? [6] So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

And that homosexuality is detestable and lust.

Leviticus 18:
[22] " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.'"

Romans 1:
[26] Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. [27] In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

That the feelings I have are nothing more than lust, and hateful on a par with adultery.

To be fair, do you think two people in an affair would say it is "nothing more than lust"? Or that it is "not love"? Of course they wouldn't. When deep emotions are involved, subjectivity is much harder to get away from. Those who are in neither an affair nor a homosexual relationship can see the error easier. Adultery is a wrongful use of God's gifts under the guise of love, similarly with homosexuality.

That being said, I think that the laws should be congruent with the behaviour we are willing to accept. Therefore, since I do not accept homosexual relationships, I should not support the legalization of unions or marriages.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 10:32 AM
Those who are in neither an affair nor a homosexual relationship can see the error easier.

I am not in an affair or a homosexual relationship, but I don't see an error in two people being in a relationship...

bob
05-03-2007, 10:37 AM
I am not in an affair or a homosexual relationship, but I don't see an error in two people being in a relationship...

Then you're saying God is a liar?

JenniferAnn
05-03-2007, 10:53 AM
Did she say that? No.
Are we talking about legal rights in governement or rights in Christian society? Because what happens in the state stays in the state. Not everything the government does is right, but it's the government, not the Church making those decisions, right? So can we make a distinction and maybe ease up on the er.. fighting? I mean, passionate debating is cool and all, but when we get into personalizing, offending, or accusing people i think we should tone it down a bit. It's perfectly cool to share opinions and all, but the negativity is rising a bit.

Sorry if i'm out of line to say that, i just dont want to see a fight, or any hurt feelings, for that matter... =\

riz
05-03-2007, 01:01 PM
I don't either. I think it's best to leave it back to the normal topic of the rights people of differing orientations have and don't have... and if there should be more or less, depending on the situation. Or if this should even be an issue.

theelectric3
05-03-2007, 02:27 PM
the thread is not to sit here and try to figure out rachel's sexual orientation. so let's please keep to the topic without getting to involved in someone's personal life.

thanks.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 03:10 PM
Then you're saying God is a liar?


Of course not.

But think about this:

God did not write the bible, and if the bible were written today instead of back when it was written, a lot of things would be different.

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 03:17 PM
Of course not.

But think about this:

God did not write the bible, and if the bible were written today instead of back when it was written, a lot of things would be different.

oh i get it. since the morality of the US is getting more and more evil, we should accept sin, and move on with the times... it all makes sense now, the bible as it is only applied to back then.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 03:41 PM
oh i get it. since the morality of the US is getting more and more evil, we should accept sin, and move on with the times... it all makes sense now, the bible as it is only applied to back then.


No, what I'm saying is, times change.

Blacks are no longer slaves, women have the right to vote.

People are more accepting now (well, most anyway).

Now, maybe I am very wrong (very possible), but I don't think God views love as a sin, and if two men love eachother, they're not hurting anyone. They're loving eachother, and I don't think that's a wrong thing.

JenniferAnn
05-03-2007, 04:00 PM
So, question, if the Bible isn't used symbolically and not litterally to adapt to modern times, are those with diseases still sinners being punished by God? Those with lepracy were considered sinners in the times of the Bible, but Jesus spent his time helping and curing them and other people considered lesser in society. Do you mean to suggest that we should reject homosexuals? Because i really dont think that that's what God would do. All people deserve the same right to life and respect. The Bible is open to interpretation. I'm not saying that modern days aren't full of sin- go to any highschool to witness it- but not everything that is in the Bible can be translated directly to modern times. Adjustments due to the changes in time have to be made to make sense of it all.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 04:01 PM
Of course not.

But think about this:

God did not write the bible, and if the bible were written today instead of back when it was written, a lot of things would be different.

Both the Old and New Testaments are the verbally inspired Word of God. They are the final authority on faith and life, God-breathed and infallible. (II Tim 3:16, 17; II Peter 1:20,21; Matt 5:18; John 16:12,13)

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:06 PM
Ahh, see, this is where relgions differ I suppose.

I'm taught at my church about accepting and loving, despite who you're loving or accepting.

So I don't know where I stand.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 04:06 PM
Lepers were actually considered unclean, not sinners. This was because their disease was highly contagious. They were exiled by people because nobody else wanted to get the disease. But it was lonely to be exiled like that-couldn't see your friends or family anymore-Jesus knew that. So He healed them and He touched them.

This is different than saying that, because modern society has a large gay community, we shall no longer call homosexuality a sin because God's just behind on the times.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 04:09 PM
Ahh, see, this is where relgions differ I suppose.

I'm taught at my church about accepting and loving, despite who you're loving or accepting.

So I don't know where I stand.

You can accept somebody without agreeing with them on everything or approving of everything they do. Jesus hung out with sinners all the time and he LOVED them but he never told them that sin was okay because that wouldn't be loving. Sin separates us from God. It would not be loving to support a friend in doing something that would do such a thing.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:10 PM
But how would you feel having to go through life praying everyday because you can't control your attraction to the same sex?

I have many friends like that, and many who took their life because of it.

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 04:17 PM
But how would you feel having to go through life praying everyday because you can't control your attraction to the same sex?

I have many friends like that, and many who took their life because of it.

first off, you have many friends that have taken their lives due to feeling an attraction to the same sex?

second, i believe it is a choice lifestyle, no something that is forced upon you. just because you feel an attraction to the same sex, does that mean you should pursue it? if i feel attracted to my cat, should i act upon those feelings? where do we draw the line? and how can you neglect the part in Revelations when it says, in the end times people will turn from their natural desires (not exact quote, somone who knows back me up)

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:20 PM
I'm sorry, but I don't think it's right to compare homosexuals to animals... that's just me.

And yes, I have a lot of friends who are (were?) homosexual, and because they thought God didn't love them they took their lives.

The didn't want to have to live a lifestyle where they had to pray everyday for forgivness for something they didn't choose.

And another question, why would someone choose to be gay?

Enlighten me here.

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 04:34 PM
I'm sorry, but I don't think it's right to compare homosexuals to animals... that's just me.

And yes, I have a lot of friends who are (were?) homosexual, and because they thought God didn't love them they took their lives.

The didn't want to have to live a lifestyle where they had to pray everyday for forgivness for something they didn't choose.

And another question, why would someone choose to be gay?

Enlighten me here.

well, to answer your question, though you didnt answer all mine. i wouldnt say they woke up one morning and decided to be gay. but that maybe they were abused by someone of the opposite sex, or lacked a father figure in their life, or any other traumatic event leaving them confused and hurt.

i wasnt comparing them to animals at all, you just simply took what i said and spun it to try and make me look bad, but ive got news for you, talking to me, you are in the No Spin Zone. thank you. what i meant was that people who are attracted to animals, that obviously is morally wrong, and unnatural, as was homosexuality back in the 1500's-1800's era ish. so does that mean we should let people marry animals, multiple wives or children? simply because enough people begin to have relations with those others, respectively, and that it becomes not such a far-fetched idea? and because over half of our mairrages in the US fail, should the church simply accept adultry, and divorce (of course some instances excluded) as not sin? (pardon the poor english)
should we allow children to drink excessively and smoke the dank in homes without consequence because so many do?

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 04:38 PM
PS: lets make sure we do not stretch the truth while debating. not to call you a liar, but to say one has lost "lots" or "many" friends to suicide because of their homosexuality, is... well... pretty far-fethed. but again i dont know you, so ill have to believe you. lets just stay honest.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:42 PM
Well, animals don't exactly have legal standing, and can't sign a marriage contract, so obviously we can't marry them.

As for divorce, I don't see why if two people made the mistake in marrying, and don't love each other, why be married?

And no, we shouldn't accept things like smoking and drinking for kids and adults marrying children, but those are obvious things that are hurting someone.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:43 PM
I think that more than 5 is many.

Actually, I think 1 is too many.

(This was directed to your PS post, by the way.. haha. Just realized it didn't really make sense where it was.)

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 04:48 PM
As the product of divorce, I can say that it does hurt people. It's in small stuff, like not always being able to see my grandma for Christmas because it's my mom's turn or not always having a parent there for school events. My family feels less supportive, more divided since the divorce. It affects my concept of relationships and of God. In Scripture, God says that He hates divorce. And it's partly because, it ruins the very fabric of the family. It doesn't just affect the couple.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:50 PM
Good point.

Divorce does affect a lot of people, but it's a livable life, you know?

My parents have been divorced since I was 2, and I'm still alive and pretty content with my life.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 04:51 PM
I remember when we were a real family though. The difference is vast.

Lots of situations are livable. Homosexual attraction is livable.

And if we want to talk about suicides, children with divorced parents have an increased suicide rate.

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 04:52 PM
As the product of divorce, I can say that it does hurt people. It's in small stuff, like not always being able to see my grandma for Christmas because it's my mom's turn or not always having a parent there for school events. My family feels less supportive, more divided since the divorce. It affects my concept of relationships and of God. In Scripture, God says that He hates divorce. And it's partly because, it ruins the very fabric of the family. It doesn't just affect the couple.

small stuff? i can say for real that ive been around plenty of divorce, and trust me, its much more than small stuff. it tears apart familys and can ruin lives. and dont anyone think for a second that dirvorce does not affect the children....

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 04:54 PM
Not that the affects are small. But that the affect go into finer aspects of life than what might be readily noticed. Or it affects everything, even the "smaller aspects."

Geneva
05-03-2007, 04:55 PM
my parents divorce didn't exactly "ruin lives"

I'm glad they chose divorce.

I grew up in two loving familes, rather than one hateful family.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 04:58 PM
My parents didn't hate each other. I knew they were arguing people couples do that. It is a relationship and things like that happen. But you work through it. You don't give up. You forgive. You choose mercy and grace. You choose to love even if you don't "feel loving" because love is a choice, an action not a feeling. And you remember that you promised, "til death do we part."

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 05:20 PM
I think that more than 5 is many.

Actually, I think 1 is too many.

(This was directed to your PS post, by the way.. haha. Just realized it didn't really make sense where it was.)

you didnt answer my question...


so do you think divorce should be accepted as a non-sin? as an okay thing to do, IN ALL CASES? or maybe people should be responsible before they get married and make sure they are making the right decision and never give up.

love is a choice, its a conscious decision you have to make everyday, to love someone and work at it.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 05:24 PM
Geneva, I think Timmy is looking for the exact number of friends you have had who have killed themselves in correlation to homosexuality.

I also find it odd that we've gone from "homosexuality is okay because it doesn't hurt anybody" to "even though divorce hurts people, it's not 'that bad' and therefore okay." You advocate homosexuality because it's "love" but divorce is a lack of love, a lack of perseverence, and it's called "okay" as well. It seems to me that we're just falling into the idea that our feelings, not God, dictate what is right and what is wrong.

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 05:26 PM
many divorces are caused by Adultery, which to a child is oh so very painful. true it can be dealt with, just like depression, or homosexual thoughts, but again there isnt always a positive outcome. you guys are trying to make something good out of a bad thing, which in your cases may be good, but the very aspect of a marriage ending is wrong, something went wrong that shouldnt have, and often times sin is involved. so before you try and justify divorce a good thing, think about fornication, a teenager has a baby, not married, but the baby is beautiful, and turns out to be a blessing eventually. something good coming out of a sin. does it justify the sin? ill leave that up to you.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 05:38 PM
Well, I'm very anti-divorce. And the divorce does affect me. I miss having my mom around every day. I miss seeing my parents talking together, liking each other, being happy together. I miss when they were a united front, a team raising me and my sisters. The divorce hurt my dad too (he didn't want it). I think God can (and has) worked in spite of it, but I don't think it justifies it at all.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 05:59 PM
Exact number?

6.

And I've been getting so confused. I think I'm going to stay away from this topic for awhile just because of the controversy and confusion.

Not to mention, I'm not a fan of arguing or fighting.

timmyrotter
05-03-2007, 06:00 PM
im not fighting you, im debating. there is nothing wrong with that. no hard feelings, i dont hate you because of your personal beliefs.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 06:03 PM
Good to know we're not fighting. =x

It's kind of hard to tell when people are typing, not talking face to face, you know?

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 06:04 PM
Maybe it would help to imagine calm voices? :shrugs:

Geneva
05-03-2007, 06:09 PM
Haha good plan. :)

Oh, and, I think you're actually pretty right about the divorce thing.

I've been thinking about it a little, and I think the only reason I beleived it to be right was because my parents have been divorced as long as I can remember, so I was never really taught that it was wrong.

And I don't know the circumstances behind the divorce, so I can't argue that it wasn't caused by sin.

So, really, I suppose divorce is not the way to go (most of the time).

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 06:14 PM
Anyway, I think we're getting off subject more than just a little bit.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 06:15 PM
Haha yep. We are... I tend to do that.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 06:34 PM
Anyway, as I've said before, I do not think that attraction to the same sex alone is a sin. Just the same as I can be attracted to a guy without lusting after him. Now if I purposely decide to nurse that attraction into lust, then that would be a sin, but I don't think attraction alone is anything to worry about. It could be compared to temptation.

Geneva
05-03-2007, 06:44 PM
So just being attracted isn't a sin?

But as soon as a person acts on it, it is?

I guess I have never been clear on what the sin actually is. =x

JenniferAnn
05-03-2007, 06:49 PM
Well if you think of it (last post for tonight, i swear! =p), one can be attracted to a married person without acting on it and being part of the act of adultery. So i agree that attraction is just temptation, not sin.

DarkestRose
05-03-2007, 06:50 PM
Well if you think of it (last post for tonight, i swear! =p), one can be attracted to a married person without acting on it and being part of the act of adultery. So i agree that attraction is just temptation, not sin.

True, as long as one doesn't give in to lust about the person (e.g. willingly engage in lustful thoughts).

Geneva
05-03-2007, 06:52 PM
That actually makes a whole lot more sense.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. :)

on_a_mission
05-03-2007, 08:56 PM
Well, I'm very anti-divorce. And the divorce does affect me. I miss having my mom around every day. I miss seeing my parents talking together, liking each other, being happy together. I miss when they were a united front, a team raising me and my sisters. The divorce hurt my dad too (he didn't want it). I think God can (and has) worked in spite of it, but I don't think it justifies it at all.

I agree that divorce is something that should NOT be entertained lightly. I would hope that your parents had tried to work it out before deciding to end it. From our perspectives we naturally do not get all the information about the couple's relationship, so it is impossible to judge their actions. Even marriages that look wonderful from the outside can hide some nasty problems.

I think it is important to honor the santicity of marriage and not divorce because things got "hard". I think we should definitely do everything in our power to save the marriage, pray, and follow the path god wants us to take. However, sometimes that path is divorce and it is possible to stay married doing the "right thing" for too long.

For example, the story of God testing Abraham to sacrifice his only son. Abraham was told to take his son Isaac and offer him as a burnt offering (Genesis 22:2) When he was just about to kill him, God told him to stop. If Abraham had stopped listening to god after being told to sacrafice his son, he would have ended up killing his only son.

What I am trying to say here is that it is important to follow the path god lays before you. Just as god told Abraham to stop the sacrifice of his son, God can speak to you to stop being a sacrifical victim in a dead marriage. Sticking to the dead marriage is just another form of legalism and Matthew 12:7 tells us that mercy is much more important than that.

Anyways, sorry for keeping the divorce sub-topic alive. Perhaps this topic would be better as a new thread.

bob
05-04-2007, 06:58 AM
Also, as a side note, Jesus says that the only legitimate reason for divorce is if you're spouse is cheating on you. (Matthew 19:1-10) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2019:1-10;&version=50;).

How can you neglect the part in Revelations when it says, in the end times people will turn from their natural desires (not exact quote, somone who knows back me up)

I didn't find a verse in revelation, but I do know this one:

2 Timothy 4: 3-4

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.

DarkestRose
05-04-2007, 07:24 AM
I actually don't agree with you, Derek.

Malachi 2:16 specifically says that God hates divorce. He hates it when a man breaks faith with his wife or vice versa. Marriage is supposed to be reflective of God and the church. As God will never leave us nor forsake us, we should not forsake our spouse.

And Jesus said not to divorce your spouse except for the case of adultery. He never said that, if your marriage feels dead, it's okay then too.

1 Corinithians 7:27 says, "Are you married? Do not seek a divorce..."

I do not think it would be in God's nature to advise someone to do something that He specifically commands against.

JenniferAnn
05-04-2007, 12:04 PM
I think in cases of abuse divorce is acceptable, dont you? Wouldn't God prefer that each are safe physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually than to have the abusive relationship carry on and place either or both in danger?

Sorry to drag this on and bring up a whole different subject.. my friend witnessed a domestic abuse problem and it shook us all up.

forceflow17
05-04-2007, 12:49 PM
I agree.

But then there's the issue that it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin.

But, then again, God didn't write the bible...

And I don't beleive God discriminates.

But that's just me.


So your saying that if we dont agree with something in the Bible we throw it out under the excuse that it was written by man? Yes the actuall act of writting down was done by man, but they were inspired by God

2 Peter 1:20-21 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation. For prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy spirit.

So, if we throw out that the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, were do we go next? We would have no standard for absolute truth. Let's say my neighbor drives home with a new Porsche, and i want it. So i kill him, and take his car. You then tell me that it is wrong because the Bible says not to covet or murder. I throw back in your face,"
But, then again, God didn't write the bible..."
see my point?

timmyrotter
05-04-2007, 01:22 PM
^ but picking the better of two evils does NOT justify your actions.

Unregistered
05-04-2007, 02:49 PM
I do not think it would be in God's nature to advise someone to do something that He specifically commands against.

The bible has many places where people are commanded to do something that he specifically commands against:

----
EX 20:13 Thou shall not kill

Exodus 32:27 27 Then he said to them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: 'Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.' "

1 Samuel 15:3 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' "

---
Exodus 20:16 16 "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor

1 Samuel 16:2 2 But Samuel said, "How can I go? Saul will hear about it and kill me."
The LORD said, "Take a heifer with you and say, 'I have come to sacrifice to the LORD.'

2 Thessalonians 2:11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie

Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a matter;
to search out a matter is the glory of kings.

---
And the list goes on, I would be happy to provide additional examples where people are commanded to do things that god expressly forbade, like the Abraham story listed by the poster above.

JenniferAnn
05-04-2007, 05:50 PM
So you're implying staying and being beaten is better than divorce? I'm not an advocate for divorce, myself, but if you have to leave for your own safety i dont think God would hold it against you.

shanna
05-04-2007, 05:54 PM
well, i think that they shouldnt be able to marry or adopt, or pastor, but anything else? yes! but they way i see it, God made adam and eve not adam and steve!

shanna

DarkestRose
05-04-2007, 07:32 PM
I would think in the case of domestic abuse that it would be best to at least seperate from the abuser.

riz
05-04-2007, 08:07 PM
but they way i see it, God made adam and eve not adam and steve!

Not to be mean, but this cliché needs to die.

DarkestRose
05-04-2007, 08:26 PM
Not to be mean, but this cliché needs to die.

True dat^ I hate Christian clichés.

bob
05-04-2007, 08:45 PM
I hate clichés.

fire-inside
05-04-2007, 10:30 PM
For starters, I apologise for saying something somewhat open ended and then being gone for a few days. Even though NO, I shouldn't have mentioned it from the begining... I did make my sexual orientation public. I don't think we need to talk about it further and make it the topic of discussion.

And for the record Jonathan, I didn't feel attacked at all. Was just trying to make you see a different perspective.

And yes, I have a lot of friends who are (were?) homosexual, and because they thought God didn't love them they took their lives.

The didn't want to have to live a lifestyle where they had to pray everyday for forgivness for something they didn't choose.
I don't think anyone really ever thinks about how difficult that really is. It's very agonising to have certain feelings, that you've been taught are wrong and not know how to change them. You can't imagine how hopeless it feels to pray and pray, so hard, for God to change your heart, and find that they're the same. It is very painful and depressing and an extreme reality that someone would commit suicide from that.

riz
05-05-2007, 05:18 AM
I don't think anyone really ever thinks about how difficult that really is. It's very agonising to have certain feelings, that you've been taught are wrong and not know how to change them. You can't imagine how hopeless it feels to pray and pray, so hard, for God to change your heart, and find that they're the same. It is very painful and depressing and an extreme reality that someone would commit suicide from that.

I know what you mean. I have two real good friends (and know of others) who have been through the same thing: they've prayed and prayed with all their beings to try and change, to try and find a way to not have those particular feelings, because they have been taught it's wrong, that if they even tell people they know about it, they will be ostracized, even worse. But nothing happens. We're talking about years, mind you, breaching the number of ten even, of continuous praying, craving to find the thing to make you normal. They feel like they've let themselves down, others down, God down.

When they finally tell people after these many years - and to find that there is still the coldness, the distance, and the rebuking, it stings. This has happened with my friends when they vocalized their orientations. To have the aloofness and uneasiness come from some people they thought would act differently. Well, it's a bit painful.

I think it's healthy that people do know that perspective, because it does happen more often than people think.

NightCrawler
05-05-2007, 07:56 AM
And for the record Jonathan, I didn't feel attacked at all. Was just trying to make you see a different perspective.
I had three homosexual coworkers. I see their perspective, I say it is error in the light of God's relevant, infallible Word. I will answer why this is after this:

I don't think anyone really ever thinks about how difficult that really is. It's very agonising to have certain feelings, that you've been taught are wrong and not know how to change them. You can't imagine how hopeless it feels to pray and pray, so hard, for God to change your heart, and find that they're the same. It is very painful and depressing and an extreme reality that someone would commit suicide from that.

Do you think the following would be an unfair parallel? I struggle with sexual sin on several levels, including but not limited to pornography and random encounters. I don't always act on them, but I have had an addiction to porn in the past for 8 years. I prayed and prayed that God would remove it from me. I felt hopeless. Telling people didn't help a whole lot either. Most of the time, it either gave me a dirty look or a silent room. I am not free from porn, and women still entice me.

It is depressing and I want to be free from this chain of sin.

The key is not acting on sin, not changing the perspective of the sin itself to something accepting of it. That is exactly what we are to flee from. We are not hopeless, we just need extra work. ...Even if it means disconnecting my computer from the wall or only meeting women in public with friends who know about my problem. Likewise with homosexuality? Stay away from the people who tempt you unless you know that you can keep yourself tame, have friends who will encourage you to not act on those feelings present. If anyone thinks he is not attracted to the opposite sex, then celebacy is also an option.

T'rotter:
I am just saying this in passing -- the "I have feelings for my cat" argument was not only weak, it is two-fold fallacious (slippery slope fallacy and weak analogy). No one would compare a human to an animal for gay rights, and no one should think that the next logical step from giving gay rights for marriage is to also include marriage with animals. That is absurd and does not follow.

Geneva:
I said it is easier, not easy. Not everyone knows every sin. And not every sin has any obvious hurt -- though it makes God's stomach turn.

Further, it is God's place to hate or love whomever He wants. Christians are called to love others. This is true regardless of the sin, for God's morality is more certain and established than the existence of all creation -- it has and will always be set in stone. God says it is immoral to act on homosexuality.

I don't know who posted it, but this is just a general shout-out:
In the USA, the people make the laws according to what they find acceptable. Just because it is the law does not mean it is right, nor does it make it right if it is not against the law. Christians should vote for God's perfect law, regardless to what non-Christians will vote because we are serving and striving to please GOD and we should not accept any law which permits sin.

unshakeable15
05-05-2007, 11:24 AM
Three times in Song of Solomon (2.7, 3.5, 8.4) it says: Do not arouse or awaken love until it so desires. It was addressed to Daughters of Jerusalem, but i'm certain that it applies to both sexes.

What this verse tells me is that there can be love that perfect and good, but wrong simply because of the time or the person it's directed towards. You can have a desire for someone that is perfectly healthy and non-lustful, but if it is before it's time, or it does not have a time, then it would be wrong to allow it to reign over your actions and emotions.

theelectric3
05-08-2007, 03:15 PM
Further, it is God's place to hate or love whomever He wants. Christians are called to love others. This is true regardless of the sin, for God's morality is more certain and established than the existence of all creation -- it has and will always be set in stone. God says it is immoral to act on homosexuality.



one thing, i believe God loves all people. example? God so loved the world that He gave His Son.

God does not love the sin in the world. He loves the people of this world. (and we, His children and believers, must do the same.)


God does not say homosexuality is immoral because He hates homosexuals. He says the homosexuality is wrong because it will destroy us (STDS, AIDS and the like).

God loves people too much to stand by and let us kill ourselves (be it drugs, other sexual sin, stealing, etc.). So He set up law. This is good. This is bad. It's the heart of the Father.

Geneva
05-08-2007, 03:42 PM
God does not say homosexuality is immoral because He hates homosexuals. He says the homosexuality is wrong because it will destroy us (STDS, AIDS and the like).




Homosexual couples are not the only ones who pass on STDs like HIV and AIDS.

In fact, people can get HIV from things that aren't sexual encounters.

Something as simple as getting a paper cut, and accidently touching that area to someone else with a cut that has AIDs, or something like using a dirty needle.

theelectric3
05-08-2007, 03:56 PM
Homosexual couples are not the only ones who pass on STDs like HIV and AIDS.

In fact, people can get HIV from things that aren't sexual encounters.

Something as simple as getting a paper cut, and accidently touching that area to someone else with a cut that has AIDs, or something like using a dirty needle.

i absolutely agree. i wasn't going to do a tangent on all the possible ways to get AIDS or STDS as it is not needed.

Geneva
05-08-2007, 04:10 PM
Sorry, guess I sort of read that wrong.

Oops... lol

theelectric3
05-08-2007, 04:53 PM
it's alright. i'm glad you brought it up so it cleared up any misunderstanding.

alienyouth9292
05-17-2007, 03:56 AM
God does not say homosexuality is immoral because He hates homosexuals. He says the homosexuality is wrong because it will destroy us (STDS, AIDS and the like).

God loves people too much to stand by and let us kill ourselves (be it drugs, other sexual sin, stealing, etc.). So He set up law. This is good. This is bad. It's the heart of the Father.

....and it is also not the way God designed marriage to be. if everyone was gay, how would we follow God's command to populate the Earth??? i understand what you're saying, but i think that diseases are just a small part in its immorality.

Geneva
05-17-2007, 01:22 PM
Well, really, the Earth is highly populated, and many kids are in adoption centers waiting for a family.

Yes, eventually, if everyone was gay, the earth's population may die out, but I highly doubt every person is going to turn out gay...

bob
05-17-2007, 07:03 PM
....and it is also not the way God designed marriage to be. if everyone was gay, how would we follow God's command to populate the Earth???

Actually, they've developed a type of artificial sperm (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11601-bone-stem-cells-turned-into-primitive-sperm-cells.html) which can be made by extracting DNA from a woman's bone marrow. So conceivably you'd be able to produce children in lesbian couples. As weird as that sounds, scientists are finding yet another way to play God.

NightCrawler
05-17-2007, 11:41 PM
Well, really, the Earth is highly populated, and many kids are in adoption centers waiting for a family.

Yes, eventually, if everyone was gay, the earth's population may die out, but I highly doubt every person is going to turn out gay...
We have plenty of space. And no, people would not necessarily be gay because their adoptive parents are gay.

NightCrawler
05-17-2007, 11:41 PM
Actually, they've developed a type of artificial sperm (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11601-bone-stem-cells-turned-into-primitive-sperm-cells.html) which can be made by extracting DNA from a woman's bone marrow. So conceivably you'd be able to produce children in lesbian couples. As weird as that sounds, scientists are finding yet another way to play God.
... and how is that playing God? Or is this for another thread?

Geneva
05-18-2007, 04:07 AM
We have plenty of space. And no, people would not necessarily be gay because their adoptive parents are gay.

Just like straight parents don't always raise straight kids.

bob
05-18-2007, 07:24 AM
... and how is that playing God? Or is this for another thread?

It doesn't seem weird to you that they would even try to do that? It just seems wrong.

DarkestRose
05-18-2007, 01:45 PM
I feel a more than a little bit iffy on the artificial sperm idea as well. We probably do have the knowledge and technology to do it, but I don't know if it is ethical at all. An idea for another thread, however.

Metalfrk012
05-18-2007, 04:20 PM
^i agree with your view on that subject.

my view on homosexuality. i hate the lifestyle, not the people. I believe homsexuality to be wrong, God created marriage for man and woman, no exceptions. i will not hate you if you are gay, but i will not be your best friend. thats the way i see it

DarkestRose
05-21-2007, 12:00 PM
Well, I don't know about not being their friend. One of my friends in high school was a lesbian or bi.

earthfiregurl
05-21-2007, 12:15 PM
Too many people at my school are gay, everywhere i turn, I see one. I don't want to call them gay (in my mind, not to their face) but what else am i supposed to call them? I think its wrong to be gay. Period.

lament
05-21-2007, 01:25 PM
There's nothing wrong with being gay, really. It's just something someone comes to terms with. I'm going to stay away from this thread because I fear it may anger me, lol. But being gay is not a disorder, disease, or anything terrible. I'm gay (not openly and I don't parade it around, but I don't hide it all the time; I'm actually really girly and not at all what you'd call a typical lesbian, i'd say about 95% of people don't even know I am until they bring it up.) and my girlfriend's mother is an avid Christian and basically told her she'd rather she had cancer then be how she is. We're not any different than straight people, we don't have different dna or any kind of mutations, we're not the X-Men ;)

somasoul
05-21-2007, 02:08 PM
we're not the X-Men ;)

But it'd be cool if you were. Then you could be like Storm but a lesbian: "Winds, I command you to come hither to my feminine wiles!!!" or like Gambit but instead of playing cards you could "charge" up autographed pictures of Rosie O'Donnell and Ellen Degeneres and throw them at Fred Phelps.

Ok, I'm having way too much fun with this. Just ignore me.


(The above post was not meant to offend anyone, expect people who hate the X-Men. Those people, well..........they suck)

lament
05-21-2007, 02:11 PM
Being an X-Men fan, I had a good laugh at that! Thank you for embarassing me at work lol

DarkestRose
05-21-2007, 02:12 PM
X-Men are too cool! I couldn't figure out a way to mention them, but I wanted to. Congrats, Somasoul!

riz
05-21-2007, 03:24 PM
Too many people at my school are gay, everywhere i turn, I see one.

OMG, if you aren't careful, you might catch it and become gay also!!1

DarkestRose
05-21-2007, 03:38 PM
OMG, if you aren't careful, you might catch it and become gay also!!1

I think we need to tone things down before people start to get too snarky.

bob
05-21-2007, 03:47 PM
Certainly, gay people aren't contagious. At my school there's a kid who is very openly gay and I always try to talk to him but he won't talk to me. Why? Because I'm a Christian, now how is that fair? I guess I'm the one who is contagious. :P

I have to disagree with you on saying that there's nothing wrong with being homosexual. God says otherwise and that's what I have to adhear to.

DarkestRose
05-21-2007, 03:52 PM
I guess I'm the one who is contagious. :P

Ahhh! I have Bob Disease!

DarkestRose
05-21-2007, 04:17 PM
On a more serious note, it seems to me that homosexuals typically avoid Christians because of fear of judgment. This bothers me because sinners flocked to Jesus because they knew they would find healing. Christians should reflect Jesus if we are following Him. Jesus upheld holiness and still showed mercy, we should be able to do the same.

But at the same time, I think some people just don't want to be convicted.

Geneva
05-21-2007, 05:15 PM
Yeah. I know some people who became athiest because they didn't wanna be judged for their sexuality.

And I dragged 'em back to church. :P

unshakeable15
05-22-2007, 02:51 PM
Yeah. I know some people who became athiest because they didn't wanna be judged for their sexuality.

And I dragged 'em back to church. :P
Not exactly the healthiest way of sharing love and truth with them. ::]

Jennifer, i too think it's sad that people (not just homosexuals) run away from Christ-followers because they don't want to be condemned, but those same types of people were flocking to Christ. It tells me we're doing something wrong.

Geneva
05-22-2007, 03:18 PM
Not exactly the healthiest way of sharing love and truth with them. ::]



lol. Yeah... True. But I dragged them in a nice way, if that counts for anything.

DarkestRose
05-22-2007, 05:56 PM
How is "dragging them back to church" bad, Mike? I don't think Geneva meant she kidnapped them and literally dragged them there.

somasoul
05-22-2007, 05:58 PM
On a more serious note, it seems to me that homosexuals typically avoid Christians because of fear of judgment. This bothers me because sinners flocked to Jesus because they knew they would find healing. Christians should reflect Jesus if we are following Him. Jesus upheld holiness and still showed mercy, we should be able to do the same.

But at the same time, I think some people just don't want to be convicted.

When I bought my house I didn't know I'd have gay neighbors. They found out my family was born again and they were concerned about their new born again neighbors. So my neighbor (we'll call him "Jake") confided in a co-worker about his aprehension. Turns out, he works with my cousin and my cousin told him he and his partner had nothing to worry about (And they don't). After I moved in I found all this out, that Jake worked with my cousin.

One day we were talking and Jake revealed that his partner (Bob......but not our Bob) used to be woman, but now she's a guy.

Whatever. Sinners.......well, they sin. And Christians......we sin too! I don't know why people do the things they do, I don't understand it. I don't have to. Obviously Bob didn't feel right being a woman, the prostitutes next door weren't "happy" being sober, the rich men never have enough to satisfy their lusts. We live in a broken world, full of broken people, and we Christians ain't the least of 'em.

We don't have an answer to make all the confusion stop, but we know someone who will guide us through the hard times we have. We don't have a band-aid to fix the world, heck, half the time we can't even agree on what's broken.

Geneva
05-22-2007, 06:09 PM
How is "dragging them back to church" bad, Mike? I don't think Geneva meant she kidnapped them and literally dragged them there.

I only kidnapp the people I really like. ;)

But seriously, I didn't kidnapp them. I was like "Hey, come to church with me." And then they came...

I guess I'm persuasive? :P

somasoul
05-22-2007, 06:25 PM
I only kidnapp the people I really like. ;)

But seriously, I didn't kidnapp them. I was like "Hey, come to church with me." And then they came...

I guess I'm persuasive? :P

That's how another girl named Geneva got me to go to church & how I got "saved" (or whatever).

Geneva
05-22-2007, 06:26 PM
Haha did I do that? :P

That's actually how I got to church and stuff too.

Sort of.. in a way...

somasoul
05-22-2007, 06:35 PM
Haha did I do that? :P


No. Another Geneva.

Geneva
05-22-2007, 06:46 PM
Haha yeah, I figured since I don't really know you.

somasoul
05-22-2007, 06:54 PM
Haha yeah, I figured since I don't really know you.

Yeah. You don't know me at all.

JenniferAnn
05-22-2007, 06:57 PM
I don't know. My guy friend is gay and he's still way into our faith. Maybe not everyone is afraid of judgement, but some just need a little more reassurance.

And i my friend Jamie came with me to Mass one time. She's not really into religion, but it was a Life Teen Mass so she was kinda happy about the music and stuff. I dont know if she's been back since.

Geneva
05-22-2007, 07:00 PM
Yeah. You don't know me at all.

I know your name is Tim, does that count for anything?

bob
05-22-2007, 07:02 PM
My guy friend is gay and he's still way into our faith.

How can someone be into "faith" but remain homosexual. Does Romans 6:1 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%206&version=50) mean anything?

Geneva
05-22-2007, 07:04 PM
People can sin and still be into their faith. Everyone sins...

bob
05-22-2007, 07:07 PM
1 Corinthians 6:18 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=6&verse=18&version=50&context=verse) says to flee it. I can understand if somone is Christian or in your case it's Catholic (correct me if I'm wrong) and is struggling with homosexuality. But to accept it and say that it's okay to continue practicing it is wrong.

Geneva
05-22-2007, 07:08 PM
A person can be gay without "practicing it." I know a guy who's gay and religious, so he just doesn't date.

theelectric3
05-22-2007, 07:21 PM
yes, everyone is a sinner because of our ancestors Adam and Eve. but Jesus came and broke the power of sin through the cross, and brought forgiveness through His blood.


i believe that we, as believers, should not use the "everyone sins" as an excuse to continue in sin.

Romans 13:13-14 tells us:

"Let us walk properly, as in the day, not in revelry and drukenness, not in lewdness and lust, not in strife and eny.
But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh to fulfill its lusts.

it is our responsibility to make no provision (or provide no opportunity) for the flesh to fulfill its lust. how do we do that? by putting on the Lord Jesus Christ.

how do we "put Him on?"

in looking up the word "put" a few interesting definitions come up:

1. to move or place (anything) so as to get it into or out of a specific location or position

2. to place in the charge or power of a person, institution, etc.

put on - to clothe oneself with (an article of clothing).
--

there is more research to look into by looking up the greek words... just this quick look up lead to some interesting points.

put on the Lord Jesus Christ - like you would put on an article of clothing, so that He covers you. It is our responsibility to put Him on. And He is faithful (like a trusted coat) to cover us and protect us from the elements outside.

also showing that in putting Him on, and allowing Him to cover us, we are allowing Him to be Lord over us. putting Him in authority. submission to Christ. putting Him in His rightful place in our lives. which is King.

and in doing so, we will be making no opportunity for the flesh to have its way. and we will find freedom.

now, are we willing?

fire-inside
05-22-2007, 11:14 PM
How can someone be into "faith" but remain homosexual. Does Romans 6:1 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%206&version=50) mean anything?
Do you mean to say that it is impossible for a homosexual to love Jesus and have a relationship with Him? Becuase I speak from personal experience that it is not. I have a relationship with the Lord and pray regularly, etc. The only thing I don't do is go to church - because I have yet to find a "gay friendly" one in my area. And at this point in my life, I refuse to regress back into "the closet." Because yes, that is what I would have to do to attend a church. Because many Christians, not all by any means, are unaccepting to people who openly lead alternative lifestyles.

And to Kait [lament], thanks for speaking up and being open. It's nice to know I'm not the only one around here. Truly.

bob
05-23-2007, 12:11 AM
My point is that you can't be a Christian and continue being a hmosexuality. It's a contradiction. Yes, everyone sins. But doing it over and over again shows no remorse.

To compare it to the bible, it would be like if Paul after becoming a follower of Christ kept on killing jews.

fire-inside
05-23-2007, 01:51 AM
To compare it to the bible, it would be like if Paul after becoming a follower of Christ kept on killing jews.
Perhaps an unwise comparison as now it seems you are equating homosexuality to murder. I understand your motive in that example, but it wasn't really a good one.

Regardless - do you believe or not, that a homosexual can have a real, genuine relationship with Jesus?

somasoul
05-23-2007, 02:51 AM
My point is that you can't be a Christian and continue being a [homosexual].

I disagree with this. I'm a Christian and some sin I struggled with from the time I wasn't a believer is still with me. I commit the same sins over and over and over again.

The only thing I don't do is go to church - because I have yet to find a "gay friendly" one in my area.

I think it's really important to be involved in some sort of Christian community. You need to be a part of that, gay-friendly or not. You don't need to tell anyone that you're gay or wear a sign or anything. Be a part of a community and show people love how Christ showed it. Over time once they learn you're gay I bet they don't care at all.

bob
05-23-2007, 10:45 AM
Perhaps an unwise comparison as now it seems you are equating homosexuality to murder. I understand your motive in that example, but it wasn't really a good one.

Regardless - do you believe or not, that a homosexual can have a real, genuine relationship with Jesus?

Sorry, it was the best example I could think of in a pinch. But Paul did become arguably the best scholar ever.

Yes, a homosexual could have a genuine relationship with Jesus. But the bible tells us to flee sexual immorality. Since homosexuality falls under sexual immorality then pursuing a homosexual relationship would not be fleeing it.

terrasin
05-23-2007, 10:56 AM
Perhaps an unwise comparison as now it seems you are equating homosexuality to murder.
As it should be. Just as stealing a candy bar from a store is just as bad as murder. Sin has no degrees. It's simply sin.

alienyouth9292
05-23-2007, 11:16 AM
"Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." Lev. 18:22

i hate how people try to twist this verse into meanings that allow them to practice homosexuality....gay actions are not only wrong and immoral, they are "destestable"!!!

alienyouth9292
05-23-2007, 11:23 AM
Do you mean to say that it is impossible for a homosexual to love Jesus and have a relationship with Him? Becuase I speak from personal experience that it is not. I have a relationship with the Lord and pray regularly, etc. The only thing I don't do is go to church - because I have yet to find a "gay friendly" one in my area. And at this point in my life, I refuse to regress back into "the closet." Because yes, that is what I would have to do to attend a church. Because many Christians, not all by any means, are unaccepting to people who openly lead alternative lifestyles.

And to Kait [lament], thanks for speaking up and being open. It's nice to know I'm not the only one around here. Truly.


praying doesn't make you a Christian. believing in Jesus Christ and wanting to turn away from your sin(or homosexuality)makes you a Christian. i am not denying your relationship with God, but it seems that if you were truly a believer you would feel an urge to get rid of your homosexuality, as it is a mockery to God....

NightCrawler
05-23-2007, 12:21 PM
This has been edited probably 7 times now.

Everyone sins, but those who hate their sin and are washed by the blood of Christ have the Holy Spirit and thus salvation. These particular people are known as Christians; anyone who accepts his or her sin (no matter how bad it is) as OK/fine/moral is not living according to the Holy Spirit.

Romans 8:1
Therefore now there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not live according to the sinful nature but after the Holy Spirit.

Thus we conclude that
1. You can have homosexual temptations.
2. You can have homosexual actions.
3. You may even have a pattern of homosexual behaviour.
4a. But the Holy Spirit, which indwells Christians, HATES homosexuality and wants to flee from it.
4b. That is, the homosexual should have the urge to repent and stop sinning -- even if it is hard and one keeps falling back into it.

A homosexual can have a genuine relationship with Christ. HOWEVER, that person cannot accept his or her own sinful actions (in this case, homosexuality) as right before God's eyes (and should thus desire to flee from such).


FYI:
IF YOU DISAGREE, SHOW SCRIPTURE.

DarkestRose
05-23-2007, 01:06 PM
That's what I've been thinking, Jonathan. I couldn't say it as clearly as you did, however.

somasoul
05-23-2007, 04:46 PM
praying doesn't make you a Christian. believing in Jesus Christ and wanting to turn away from your sin(or homosexuality)makes you a Christian

Really?

SkFan1983
05-31-2007, 09:10 PM
Even know I dont support Gay rights like my parents. I still dont judge them. I'm actully keep the rights thing to myself because I dont want my parents to still think I'm Homophobic. I have a friend I graduated from Highschool that was Lesbian She loved me like one of my straight friends and thinks I'm a SweetHeart,

DarkestRose
05-31-2007, 10:49 PM
I think the accusation of “homophobia” for every person who disapproves of the homosexual lifestyle is abused. A person can disagree with something someone does (be it homosexuality, stealing, drug/alcohol abuse) and harbor hatred, hostility or fear toward the person. There is a difference between someone with a “God Hates Fags” sign and a person who disagrees with the notion of homosexuality but doesn’t hate homosexual people. I think that that should be noted.

The agree-with-our-lifestyle-or-you-are-a-bigot accusation is a stupid intimidation trick because most people want to be seen as altruistic people. Also, the phrase “homophobia” is pretty much thrown around because anyone can control the debate if they cry “bigotry” because we’re in a politically correct age.

alienyouth9292
06-01-2007, 09:22 AM
i believe that there is no such thing as homophobia....

bob
06-01-2007, 09:27 AM
i believe that there is no such thing as homophobia....

I beg to differ.

Checked out www.godhatesfags.com lately? :P

I mean, here's a direct quote from their site:

THE SODOMITES' ONLY HOPE IS TO HAVE THE UNAMBIGUOUS TRUTH PREACHED TO THEM, AND PERHAPS GOD WILL SOFTEN THEIR HEARTS AND GRANT THEM REPENTANCE TO DEPART FROM THEIR SIN AND NAME THE NAME OF CHRIST. NOT VERY LIKELY, THOUGH, SINCE GOD HAS GIVEN THEM UP.

Total crap.

DarkestRose
06-01-2007, 09:47 AM
Yeah, what Bob has quotes is homophobia.

alienyouth9292
06-01-2007, 10:39 AM
i guess so....

NightCrawler
06-01-2007, 11:41 AM
I thought homophobia was not wrought from hatred, but rather fear. "He's gonna make me gay!" or "I don't like him hitting on me!" "He is creepy on the sole basis of being gay." Or similar.

DarkestRose
06-01-2007, 11:51 AM
That could be. I've heard it described as fear or hatred but then again, some people go as far to say that if you don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle, you're homophobic.

bob
06-01-2007, 04:59 PM
I thought homophobia was not wrought from hatred, but rather fear.

Fear can provoke hatred.

alienyouth9292
06-01-2007, 05:12 PM
but now if you're against homosexuality, you're homphobic according to the media today.

bob
06-01-2007, 05:26 PM
Right, that's what Jennifer was talking about.

eowyn
06-02-2007, 08:13 AM
I beg to differ.

Checked out www.godhatesfags.com lately? :P

I mean, here's a direct quote from their site:



Total crap.


But see parts of this ARE true... although, the manner in which they are presented is far from loving and helpful. The homosexuals that I am friends with..and I have quite a few friends who ARE..oftentimes SHOVE their homosexuality in my face. It's not enough to love..you have to AFFIRM they're behavior..and I refuse to affirm a sin. Homosexuality is extremely more prevelent than I ever thought..particularly here, on my college campus and it breaks my heart because like any of us, they are deceived by a LIE...and that lie makes me so angry. It is a lie that my friend buys into because she was abused by a previous boyfriend..she is so insecure and she looks to her girlfriend to affirm who she is, to love her..when what she is really seeking, is the love of our Father..