Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 16

• 0%

  david_nwpa11 months, 4 weeks ago

  It is occasionally necessary to remind one another that all people deserve a chance at love. All people deserve the chance to be happy. If part of that happiness stems from being in a loving, committed relationship, then they should have that love honored and recognized under the law. It is called marriage and should be extended to gay and lesbian couples too.

  Reply
• 0%

  marlenebomer11 months, 4 weeks ago

  Yep! Just as churches promoting racial equality back in the '60s received "visits" from the Klan, this church was visited by the same agents of hate, bigotry and prejudice!

  About 15 years or so ago, a Catholic church received a visit by sympathizers of the Oregon Citizen's Alliance (headed by Oregon's chief hatemonger Lon Mabon) broke in and desecrated the sanctuary and vandalized the building when the local priest denounced the OCA.

  AFAIC, *any* group who opposes equality is IMNSHO a hate group and is equal to the Nazis and the Klan.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    4mogger11 months, 4 weeks ago

    I do not oppose equality. All people are equal. But all relationships are not equal. Should a man have the right to "marry" a 10 yr. old boy?

    There is a group that believes just that. Do you not oppose the "equality" of the relationship they espouse?

    A marriage is a man and a woman. I do not oppose any recognition of a union of consenting adults. But to call it marrage is not a question of equality...it is a question of definition.

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Dionys11 months, 4 weeks ago

      A marriage by your definition is between a man and a woman. Likely deriving from either a narrow view or misguided religious beliefs. For others, a marriage occurs between two people who love one another and commit to one another.

      As for it being a question of "definition," then you have to take into consideration who gets to define "marriage." I personally wouldn't have it exclude the union of any two consenting adults.

      Reply
    • 0%

      marlenebomer11 months, 4 weeks ago

      First of all, Mogger, is the existence of "consent". A "marriage between a 40-year-old man and a 10-year-old girl is illegal in this country. There *are* states* which *do* allow for one of the parties to be at least 14, but marry with the parents' permission.

      Marriage was once "defined" as being between a man and woman *of the same race*, yet human beings moved past such bigoted restrictions, and has been legal in all states since 1967.

      Reply
• 0%

  ETproductions11 months, 4 weeks ago

  The Christian Right would do well to remember the answer Jesus gave when asked what was the greatest commandment.

  "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?"

  Jesus said unto him, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Matthew 22:36-40

  And follow that with: "If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" 1 John 4:20

  Reply
• 0%

  Redneck11 months, 4 weeks ago

  I do not promote violence against anyone and those who do should be punished and there are plenty of laws on the books to do that.

  Quoting verses you should include the following: Revelation 21:8 (KJV)

  8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and ******mongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

  2 Peter 2:9-10 (KJV)

  9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: 10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness (homosexual sin), and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.

  Con't.

  Reply

  9 Replies

  • 0%

    Redneck11 months, 4 weeks ago

    Con't. Romans 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, con't.

    Reply

    3 Replies

    • 0%

      Redneck11 months, 4 weeks ago

      CON'T.

      Romans 1:30-31 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

      There will be a day of judgment before God's holy counsel and not that of man. Who will stand in that Day? It is best to warn those who persist in such behavior of that impending judgment for none shall escape. It is not love to encourage people in behavior which will ultimately dictate their doom.

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        Dionys11 months, 4 weeks ago

        Oh.. If you're going to talk about not leaving out certain things you should include all the ridiculous prohibitions of Leviticus. Because I'm guessing that you wear clothing of more than one type of fabric (eg cotton/poly blend) which is prohibited by the bible. Or perhaps you plant a shade/sun grass seed mix. Also prohibited by Leviticus.

        If you're a Christian, that means you're literally a little Christ. Which means you should follow the example of Christ. Which isn't spreading hate and discrimination like you're doing, but instead following the great commandment and the example of the beatitudes along with helping the poor and *especially* the marginalized (such as the gay community today).

        Hypocrite.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          Redneck11 months, 4 weeks ago

          Present an alternative view and you resort to name calling! How mature.

          ET quoted Scripture presenting a viewpoint calling for LOVE LOVE LOVE. I say that if Love is your true objective then tell the whole truth. People will be eternally exiled from the presence of God if they persist in certain behaviors. That is not hate speech. It is not hate at all. It is HUMILITY. The Apostle Peter said that humility is to agree with what God has said. I quoted some of what He has said about this subject not in hatred but in love.

          Re: "ridiculous prohibitions" Scientists are considering the effect of such fabrics on the muscle tone of the wearers. There may be a conflict with the electrical field which is created by the body!! May not be so ridiculous after all. There are reasons for those laws as may be demonstrated by citing others regarding health issues like building latrines. As a Christian I am told we are free from obeying some OT Law. Praise God!

          Reply
  • 0%

    marlenebomer11 months, 4 weeks ago

    Using a millennia-old book whose passages were written in the Bronze Age, which promoted and condoned genocide, slavery and the subjugation of women, and using it to justify your actions is about as smart as getting a book from 100 years ago and trying to claim that space travel to the4 moon is a fantasy, and flying faster than sound is a mathematical impossibility!

    A former fundamentalist says that the bible is the most perfect example of Newton's Third Law she's ever seen: for one passage there's and equal but opposite passage!

    Try reading some more modern tests, my dear or are we to think you're as close-minded as a tree stump??

    Reply

    3 Replies

    • 0%

      Redneck11 months, 3 weeks ago

      I will address this as if you are addressing me. The "ancient book" you refer to has stood the test of time and generations as a source of great benefite to mankind so wrote the many of the Founding Fathers of our land. In the 1980's a study was done of the writings of the Founding Fathers and other influential writers of the period. It has been determined that a very high percentage of quotes cited to support philosophy of structure of society, laws and morality were either from the Bible or based on others who quote from the Bible. Blackstone, Locke, and others of their renown did not hold your opinion. If one were to follow your philosophy Plato, Aristole, and many others would have to be ignored as having nothing to say to us today.

      We would be poor indeed if we were left to the current "intelligentia" like Michael Moore and Billy-boy Clinton, or Alex Baldwin!!! LOL CON'T.

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        Redneck11 months, 3 weeks ago

        Con't. If asked to read books early colonial students studied graduate students of Yale cannot understand them but farmers who were contemporaries of Madison, Jefferson and Washington and Franklin understood them and shaped the foundation of this nation. Do not ridicule the wisdom of the past just because it is old. The wisdom of in the Bible has stood the test of time and continues to influence society for the good.

        Example: if the citizens of New York had merely followed the health laws in the Bible in the 1800's fewer people would have died due to disease. What? Yeah, do not allow feces to be cast from windows into the street, build latrines, etc. I could go on and on.

        Reply
      • 0%

        marlenebomer11 months, 3 weeks ago

        Sorry, redneck... but it hasn't if all these laws supposedly based on the bible (slavery, subjugation of women, child abuse, torture of left-handed children [more of a tradition then a law], ban on interracial marriage, ad nauseum) have been stricken from the books!

        You're looking at a book written men living in a society which viewed women as nothing but a higher form of animal and property to be sold off, endorsed genocide, and a myriad of other abuses we would consider war crimes today!

        I wonder if you would've approved of American soldiers during Gulf War I raping members of the Iraqi Republican Guard and bringing home Arab women as trophies as concubines -- which the bible condones!

        Reply
  • 0%

    hamy11 months, 3 weeks ago

    Umm...in my bible this isn't in there:

    "in the lust of uncleanness (homosexual sin)"

    That is your opinion.

    Reply