Debating Christianity and Religion

sleepthroughthestatic wrote:I wrote this paper for school, figured it wouldn't hurt to get outside perspective/discussion on it. Irrelevant note: I am writing this from the perspective of a staunch Christian, I personally don't know what I am.

In Defense of Homosexual Marriage from a Christian Worldview

Legal gay marriage is quickly shot down by Christians, not necessarily due to homophobia, bigotry, or any of the inflammatory words sometimes slung around by staunch gay-rights supporters. But rather, the Bible is clear that gay marriage is wrong. Most Christians believe the necessary extension of this is to be strongly against the legalization of it. However, the purpose of this essay is to demonstrate a Christian may be in favor of the legality of gay marriage while remaining wholly consistent with a fundamental Christian worldview.

For many people, it is very difficult to separate things they wouldn’t do themselves from whether or not something should be legal. Many religious people quickly jump from “my religious text says this is wrong� to “this should be illegal� and fail to see the distinction.

The reality of the matter is that there is a huge distinction that many religious people recognize and accept on an intuitive level, but do not rigorously apply the logic on a conscious level and to controversial political matters. For example, a Christian will readily admit the necessary legality of religious freedom for religions other than their own--very few would deny a Hindu the legal right to practice Hinduism.

Yet practicing religions other than Christianity is in stark contrast to the Bible. The reality of a fallen world is that not everyone will agree with each other, not everyone is a Christian, and laws must strive to reflect this reality in an unbiased way in order to maintain a civil, free society. When determining if something should be legal, the question is “should others have the right to do this?� and not “would I do this myself?�. Any other way of looking at the law leads to places like the Middle East, where it is illegal and punishable by law to have beliefs that do not line up with the Muslim faith.

So the question is, “should gay people have the right to get married?�. Answering yes or no need not be a religious or moral statement, it is primarily a governmental issue.

One can still believe homosexuality is a sin,

. . . yet recognize that in a free society, people should be able to do things you don’t agree with.

The United States is a free society. So, right away, it appears gay marriage should be legal.

However, as most Americans understand, there are limits to freedoms.

One cannot simply murder whom they please because America is a free society. If murder was not illegal, there would be societal chaos and absolutely no protection from harm for citizens. Restrictions are in place in order to protect the rights of others. So the next question would be “would legalizing gay marriage infringe upon the rights of others?�. The answer to this question is a simple one, gay marriage is between two consenting adults. It does not infringe upon the rights of others.

Around the time this realization begins to sink in, people begin screaming about the “sanctity of marriage�, polygamy, or even pedophilia. Any straw that can be grasped at is firmly waived in front of the face of Christians, and they are told that if they disagree they are somehow endangering society and violating their faith.

The sanctity of marriage is indeed a very important matter. For Christians, marriage should be about the unification of two people into one flesh, serving and honoring God together.

This is a fantastic approach to marriage and one that should be dearly held.

However, it again boils down to a fallen world needing to function in a civil manner.

Not everybody who marries sees it as a matter that God is involved in.

People should have the right to dedicate their lives to each other, and have it recognized by the government, even if they are not Christians. Christians do not claim that atheists shouldn’t be allowed to marry, or Jews, or Muslims, or any other faith or lack thereof. Yet, any non-Christian marriage would strictly violate the Christian interpretation of what marriage should be.

However, most Christians recognize marriage as a right that people should have--even if their view of it doesn’t directly correlate to those who are marrying. At a governmental level marriage is simply the legal recognition of two individuals dedicating their lives to each other.

The absurdity runs deeper, as those same people beating the drum about the sanctity of marriage have no problem with the legality of divorce for non-biblical reasons, which would violate the sanctity of marriage as well.

If Christians decide that the Bible is the authority on what should be legal regarding marriage, any non-Christian should be in a “civil union� and any Christian seeking divorce should only be legally allowed it in very extreme circumstances. This line of thinking is, quite obviously, not conducive to a free society and would not work in a fallen world.

The other arguments, that involve issues such as polygamy and pedophilia, are perhaps even weaker. Polygamy is an issue that can apply to heterosexual relationships, and there is no reason to bring it up as an exclusively homosexual-related matter.

Polygamy is an entirely different issue with it’s own set of consequences and matters to deal with. Gay marriage is only about the marriage of two gay individuals, and the only people bringing up polygamy are the opponents of gay marriage. Pedophilia marriage as an argument against gay marriage is completely faulty--the obvious fault being that it is not between two consenting adults.

The duty of Christians is not to legislate their beliefs. The Christian Kingdom lies in Heaven, and not this world.

This world is fallen, and it is necessary for Christians to recognize that fact and understand that in a fallen world, people will not always agree with Christian ideals. It is their right to deviate from Christian rules and thinking, because without that right--there would be no free will.

Legal issues are matters of society at large, and the government--not an issue of which religion it happens to line up with.

It is time for Christians to realize that though they may not agree with homosexual relationships, the right should be there--and with that right comes the right to marry, as it does with any other people who wish to.

The Christian focus is to glorify God through the Body of Christ, and to bring others to Christ. The Christian duty is not to make anything that does not line up with the Bible illegal.

99percentatheism wrote:You are wrong. That Christians should be silent on same gender sexual behavior is oppressing us.

There is no such thing as same gender marriage. Not to Jesus, nor in any position or perspective of Christian reality. If we are allowed to vote in a secular society, than our votes will have to align with the Gospel.

We can only be FORCED in a secular manner to tolerate homosexuality and homosexuals and their vociferous allies. We can never be made to accept it, them or any "law" that celebrates it or them. It is no different than tolerating the sexualization of our children in the western world.

To expect a Christian that believes the New Testament is not a set of old, dead ideas and ideals, but is the guidance and the guidelines of the Holy Spirit to believers, to accept that same gender sex acts are the "equal" of Christian holiness . . . is to inflict tyranny on the Universal Christian Church.

There is no justification for forcing Christians to "believe in" homosexual aims and goals. They simply exist outside of the Christian faith.

99percentatheism wrote:...

dusk wrote:As for the Christians I know, none of them ever had expressed anything but support for LGBT rights.

These people usually regard those so called Christians who incessantly focus all their attention on this topic, as backward bigots, who focus on all the wrong things and forgot all that is important.

They are almost all Catholics (as in members of the Catholic church) but do not think the Pope is infallible quite to the contrary that he is a stupid backwards fool.

I don't have any statistics but I think that a majority of Christians under the age of 45 are not that much opposed to LGBT rights.

It is only form America that I hear this strong opposition in many other countries it is very few noisy fools who realize they are a dying race and fight all the harder.

I think much of the so called religious revival is the death struggle against the pending insignificance of fundamentalist religious believes.

Young Christians are the future and they are more moderate and the old guys don't like it.

A current case in Austria
http://translate.google.at/translate?hl ... bestaetigt
http://queeringthechurch.com/2012/03/22 ... h-council/
People voted for a parish council member who lives in a gay marriage and this obviously gay and doesn't hide it. The local priest wanted to prevent it but failed. Even the Bishop seems okay with it.

Christians aren't all as anti gay as it must appear in the US and media. The moderate Christians just aren't as vocal about such stuff.

sleepthroughthestatic wrote:

99percentatheism wrote:...

This is quite the passionately obnoxious post for someone who seemingly didn't understand my point.

This is your thread right?: Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview

My point has nothing to do with "celebrating" homosexuality.

LGBT's see that way. As you can see even in this thread, the atheists do too.

It is about recognizing that in a free civilization, people are entitled to lifestyles and beliefs that don't line up with your own. I don't know why you're quoting Bible verses at me, because my paper has nothing to do with whether or not homosexuality is biblically wrong--and everything to do with it being biblically wrong doesn't mean one cannot support it's legislation (because it is the correct, constitutional course of action under the U.S. Constitution).

Then you do the reading of the New Testament so that I don't have to contend against your premise again in this reply. Becasue your thread says "Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview "

There is NO defense for gay marriage from a Christian worldview. There is no justification for defensing abomination. Read Romans and Jude and see.

My paper also had nothing to do with the fringe homosexual agenda.

FRINGE??? There is major legislation that has been introduced AND that has passed that forces the ACCEPTANCE not tolerance, of gay sexuality on to every person in America. LGBT goals are anti-Christian through and through.

Any normal, moderate homosexual (see: person) would never claim that kids should be taken from their homes if their parents teach them that their religious text says it's a sin. Half of your "rebuttals" are you saying "tell THAT to the crazy, evil, child-stealing homosexuals!!!". I don't care what the fringe agenda is, I'm talking about how it should be handled.

Speaking out against homosexual sex is a crime now pal. The LGBT's haveing cunningly taken over even the word bullying to be propaganda for gay behavior to be encouraged even in elementary schools.

If you are a Christian, you are absolutely not handling this issue with any degree of humility.

Humility? Contending for the faith is what I'm doing against your treatise about there being a "Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview." There is not a shred of defense for homosexuality from a Christian worldview that comes FROM the Gospels or the rest of the New Testament writings.

Your opinions are presented arrogantly for no reason--and you really do give the impression that you've never even spoken to a gay person and that you believe they are all truly evil.

The movement is evil. It is stalking the Church like an empowered demon. Look at how the atheists cheer on the LGBT community AND those people calling themselves "Christians" that are just gay activists in Clergy-Garb . . . and the "moderate" youth that follow them.

And arrogance? You discard the words of Jesus, Paul, Jude and Peter as if the New Testament were a Baseball Rules Book that needed to be updated for a new game. Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.

And there is no way around knowing LGBT's. They make sure of that.

When they win their demands uber alles, it will be against the Church first and foremost that they will move to crush. Obviously, it is already happening.


If you're going to write on

sleepthroughthestatic wrote:

99percentatheism wrote:...

This is quite the passionately obnoxious post for someone who seemingly didn't understand my point.

This is your thread right?: Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview

My point has nothing to do with "celebrating" homosexuality.

LGBT's see it that way. As you can see even in this thread, the atheists do too.

It is about recognizing that in a free civilization, people are entitled to lifestyles and beliefs that don't line up with your own. I don't know why you're quoting Bible verses at me, because my paper has nothing to do with whether or not homosexuality is biblically wrong--and everything to do with it being biblically wrong doesn't mean one cannot support it's legislation (because it is the correct, constitutional course of action under the U.S. Constitution).

Then you do the reading of the New Testament so that I don't have to destroy your premise again in this reply. Becasue your thread says "Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview "

There is NO defense for gay marriage from a Christian worldview. There is no justification for defensing abomination. Read Romans and Jude and see.

My paper also had nothing to do with the fringe homosexual agenda.

FRINGE??? There is major legislation that has been introduced AND that has passed that forces the ACCEPTANCE not tolerance, of gay sexuality on to every person in America. LGBT goals are anti-Christian through and through.

Any normal, moderate homosexual (see: person) would never claim that kids should be taken from their homes if their parents teach them that their religious text says it's a sin. Half of your "rebuttals" are you saying "tell THAT to the crazy, evil, child-stealing homosexuals!!!". I don't care what the fringe agenda is, I'm talking about how it should be handled.

Speaking out against homosexual sex is a crime now pal. The LGBT's haveing cunningly taken over even the word bullying to be propaganda for gay behavior to be encouraged even in elementary schools.

If you are a Christian, you are absolutely not handling this issue with any degree of humility.

Humility? Contending for the faith is what I'm doing against your treatise about there being a "Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview." There is not shred of defense for homosexuality from a Christian worldview that comes FROM the Gospels or the rest of the New Testament writings.

Your opinions are presented arrogantly for no reason--and you really do give the impression that you've never even spoken to a gay person and that you believe they are all truly evil.

The movement is evil. It is stalking the Church like an empowered demon. Look at how the atheists cheer on the LGBT community AND those people calling themselves "Christians" that are just gay activists in Clergy-Garb . . . and the "moderate" youth that follow them.

And arrogantce? You discard the words of Jesus, Paul, Jude and Peter as if the New Testament were a Baseball Rules Book that needed to be updated.

And there is no way around knowing LGBT's. They make sure of that.

If you're going to write a paper on " Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview," then try using scripture to show some kind of support for that.

And, there is no way you can.

99percentatheism wrote: FRINGE??? There is major legislation that has been introduced AND that has passed that forces the ACCEPTANCE not tolerance, of gay sexuality on to every person in America. LGBT goals are anti-Christian through and through.

Speaking out against homosexual sex is a crime now pal. The LGBT's haveing cunningly taken over even the word bullying to be propaganda for gay behavior to be encouraged even in elementary schools.

The African and Chinese Churches are growing rapidly. The Evangelical movement within South and Central America show your desires are not reality. That Americans that identify as Christian are being beaten down by the intensity of the LGBT political and social machine is more the case for the apathy to do anything to slow the decay of American Society. Most want to keep their jobs and know if the even squeak against LGBT's they be canned.

They are almost all Catholics (as in members of the Catholic church) but do not think the Pope is infallible quite to the contrary that he is a stupid backwards fool.

African American Churches voted overwhelmingly to drive back the gay agenda in California. Guess again.

A secularized so-called Christian population.

sleepthroughthestatic wrote:At a governmental level marriage is simply the legal recognition of two individuals dedicating their lives to each other.

sleepthroughthestatic wrote:That’s all it needs to be, and all it should be. Gay people should have all the legal ramification that marriage has for anyone else. The “sanctity of marriage� as an argument against homosexual marriage is abusing a valuable Christian concept and making it a veiled political weapon, taking it places it needn’t go. The absurdity runs deeper, as those same people beating the drum about the sanctity of marriage have no problem with the legality of divorce for non-biblical reasons, which would violate the sanctity of marriage as well.

dusk wrote:

99percentatheism wrote: FRINGE??? There is major legislation that has been introduced AND that has passed that forces the ACCEPTANCE not tolerance, of gay sexuality on to every person in America. LGBT goals are anti-Christian through and through.

Speaking out against homosexual sex is a crime now pal. The LGBT's haveing cunningly taken over even the word bullying to be propaganda for gay behavior to be encouraged even in elementary schools.

That is because you live in a cosmopolitan society.

AKA a morally depraved society. The age old repeat of history from those too common of wit to get out of the way of debauchery ad infinitum. The story of mankind.

It is legal for black & white people to marry, even though there were those that used to think it an abomination.

White supremecy is a far cry from two dudes thinking they are a husband and a wife.

Actually it's like watching the insane writing the new DSM.

It is illegal to discriminate against Jews, Black people, Orange people, religious people. Their rights and freedoms are protected by law as long as they do not affect the freedoms and rights of others.

Yet discrimination is taught to our offspring "Watch out for strangers," as a matter of very smart teaching. To discriminate against human beings that use their orifices same gender ish, may be a very smart choice. loosing the "anything goes" of human depravity is not wisdon, but incredible stupidity.

Intolerance towards LGBT is no different that intolerance towards Jews in the 3rd Reich, Black people in America, Christians in Arab countries.

Ahhh, the brainwashing of intensely effective propaganda. The devious and deviant always seem to so this throughout history. Now we are redefining the human anatomy and equating that to tolerance and diversity? Now the Marquis de Sade is the role model for our children.

Just because you or in the general sense a portion of the population believes one group to be the worst abomination for whatever reasons (Hitler believed in his oddly distorted Christianity that he was doing God's work in eradicating Jews) is not enough to treat them as such.

Hitler's odd Christianity proves that the No True Scotsman "fallacy" is an absolute reality. Per Jesus.

Also, by the way, Lennin and Stalin's atheism wasn't odd at all. It was just plain old applied atheism. They were true Scotsman.

Hate crimes are for good reasons punished harshly.

The depraved have taken over lexicography. Now no one can fend off the monster or they are guilty of a hate crime.

Pederasty is here and proud. i'. e. Harvey Milk the gay hero.

People like you need to understand that if you want your own theocratic county you need to buy an island an move there. Western modern Democracies have minority rights.

Good. Because as it is right now, atheists, homosexuals and garden-variety seculaists are driving us into little ghetto's where we lose our numbers to seduction and fear. So, we'll be the minority and the effective voices rather soon. Are there any Christianbs left in Europe? I mean ones that actually say anythung about the origiunal Gospel and letters of the New Testament? The ones I hear about are gay clergy and their gay allies. hardly anything the Apostles have anything to do with. And trust me, Nietsche, Engels and Marx didn't write any of the Gospels.

Just because a muslim firmly believes his religion demands from him to kill his sister to restore family honor, doesn't make it any more tolerable. It is still murder and still illegal.

I'm not a Muslim.

The impecable display of knowledge in geography and the world probably gives evidence to your understanding of different world views and understanding what tolerance means, or are you just dyslexic.

Anybody that celebrates those that use their disgestive tract exclusvively for sexuality are not only dyslexic, but depraved. can't call 'em insane anymore because the gay activists are influential in the APA.

The African and Chinese Churches are growing rapidly. The Evangelical movement within South and Central America show your desires are not reality. That Americans that identify as Christian are being beaten down by the intensity of the LGBT political and social machine is more the case for the apathy to do anything to slow the decay of American Society. Most want to keep their jobs and know if the even squeak against LGBT's they be canned.

How can someone not see the similarities with racism here.

Because screwing someone is not the same as race. How can your side not see logic and reason when you puff out so loudly that you dwell in their midsts always?

They are almost all Catholics (as in members of the Catholic church) but do not think the Pope is infallible quite to the contrary that he is a stupid backwards fool.

This Pope sure is solid on the truth of the Gospel though. He gets some things 100% right. I'm not a Catholic either.

African American Churches voted overwhelmingly to drive back the gay agenda in California. Guess again.

a) What guess? I stated a fact in my local Catholic population.

Catholics don't exactly have a great track record historically with implementing the Gospel as Jesus describes it should be.

b) What do european Catholics have to do with African American Chruches?

Debauchery. It's almost synonymous with European.

A secularized so-called Christian population.

The secularist so-called Christians think in turn that the fundamentalist so-called Christians also only call themselves so.

The fundies line up with the Gospel and New Testament letters. The secularists line up with the powers and principalities of a lost world.

One thing I do appreciate with some atheists, they actually know how a Christiann should act and believe. Christopher Hitchens used to use that observation about "secularized" Christians, that they are hardly any different than non-believers.

A broken clock . . .

That works both way and just proves the stupidity of the statement.

I just sowed how your use of the analogy has you tasting crow.

Anybody who believes it to hold any actual truth is an idiot. It is subjective opinion

no more.

I'll put my trust in the objective truth in the New Testament that shows your opinion as invalid.

All I wrote was that this is the opinion of the moderate Christians.

The ones that get spit out of the mouth of Jesus. Even symbolically, it doesn't bode well for those "Christians" that have both feet in two different worlds. The secularism of filth and insult to God, and the Church of the faithful. They only fit in the outside world.

There's a reason that Jesus used so many parables about choices.

Good ones and bad ones. And showed such a seperation between the two.

The OP sides with the bad ones.