Do you think I approve of Obamacare? I have no idea what was going on with that.
Both Republicans and Democrats supported DOMA in 1994 in both houses of Congress (342 in the House, 85 in the Senate, votes for this bill). That was enough to get a Federal Marriage Amendment through both houses. Unlike Obamacare (which Obama supported, for whatever insane reason), Clinton did not really support DOMA, he simply knew that it would be pointless to stop it. He didn't even allow photos to be taken when he signed it.
We'll let God sort that out.
We'll let God sort that out.
Lol. I highly doubt god is going to issue harsher judgment on, let's say, gay police, doctors, nurses, firefighters, soldiers, paramedics, peace corp volunteers
Than he is going to issue upon you - a man who spends countless hours spewing vitriolic hate at people who just want equality.
I'm pretty sure the ugliness that you display everyday on these forums will be taken into consideration by your god.
We'll let God sort that out.
You're time would be much more productively spent worrying about world hunger, poverty, education, healthcare, literacy..........
What about DOMA? Clinton signed it.
I also know that saying it's unfair for people in SSM to not have legal rights in states that don't permit SSM, its nothing but a new avenue to attack the laws of that state. Bring in custody of children who might suddenly end up there is another.
My question is why you would want to live in a state who's majority doesn't want you there?
What does Jesus' words have to do with the debate over same sex marriage.
Nearly every Christian marriage includes the phrase "What God has joined, let no man put asunder", yet not many Christians rally against divorce. It's accepted as a necessary civil proceeding. Same sex marriage should be viewed the same way. There is a distinct difference between what we should do as Christians and what we should do as a country. It's okay for them to be at odds. Maybe your church doesn't allow same sex marriage. I support that, Neither does mine. I can't (nor should anyone) support using that as reasoning not to allow equal treatment to others.
In Romans he made heterosexual people start lusting for people of the same sex as a punishment, it doesnt say anything about people who are homosexual to start with. In I Corinthians some translators have made convincing arguments that it is referring to rape when you look at other places the actual Greek words were used.
Sorry, I don't see that. Besides, gay sex was already condemned in the Old Testament as well as the NT.
But one poster up says it was the lesser of two evils. Evil being SSM.
Then as said you did not mean "ban religions" but ban some religions, which is not want you stated because you said:
Because if they say join Islam they cannot possibly be banning religion because Islam is a religion. And that would make them not ban religions but only allow 1 religion and one is not the same as none thus they would not be banning religion at all.
They kill Christians and Jews if they won't convert to Islam..........They behead women and children as well.
Are you referring to OT or both OT and NT?
My argument, presented, is demonstrating why my religion, Judaism (and my sect, Reform Judaism) sees no issue with homosexuality or SSM.
First, here is my treatment on the two Leviticus passages:
Leviticus 18:22: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
There are so many errors in the interpretation of these passages. One has to understand the section of the Torah that they were taken, what the context was, and the translations of the actual words. These passages cannot stand by themselves and mean what they were supposed to mean.
The section of the Torah where these passages were taken refers to codes of holiness and purity. It describes ways that God wants the Hebrews to be different from the Pagans. The passages that surround these two include passages about bestiality and incest, other unclean/unholy acts that were performed by Pagans. Now, we must first look at the word "abomination". This is taken from the Hebrew word "to'ebah". The actual translation of this is NOT abomination, but ritually unclean, something that fits perfectly with the codes of that section of the Bible. So, we now have it not an abomination, but just something that is ritually unclean.
Next, since this passage is included in the codes of holiness section, it refers to acts that Pagans do, that God wants the Hebrews to separate from. One of these acts is engaging in anal sex with male prostitutes. Now, even if we look at the issue, globally, Hebrew translations refer to anal sex acts; no mention of homosexual orientation or homosexual relationships are mentioned. At all.
Now, moving on to the actual words. Since Hebrews believed that the Torah was spoken directly to Moses from God, one must wonder why the passage reads like this:
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." If God was saying something against homosexuality in men, He would have just said this: ""Thou shalt not lie with mankind: it is abomination." Why the "as womankind" part? Think about it. A man should not lie with another man as if HE were a woman. Sexuality in the Torah is always presented as male dominant/female subservient. Hebrew scholars see this as meaning that if men have sexual relations, NEITHER shall be passive ("as womankind"). Also, since this was a norm of the time, this does not apply to today, anyway.
So, what can we conclude from the actual Hebrew interpretations and the context of what was being discussed? Firstly, the entire section refers to holiness codes, separating the Hebrews from the Pagans. Secondly, the word "abomination" is not accurate; ritually unclean IS accurate. This eliminates any punishment. Thirdly, only anal sex, probably in the context of male prostitutes is prohibited; homosexual orientation has no mention and has no such prohibitions. Fourthly, IF homosexual behavior does occur, neither man can be the passive (woman) in the relationship. Fifthly, this only applies to ancient Hebrews. Sixthly, lesbian relationships are not mentioned at all and, therefore have no prohibitions.
Now, there is MORE evidence that the prostitution theory holds water. Leviticus 18:3 says this: "After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances." God is saying that the Hebrews are NOT to behave like the Pagans (Canaanites and Egyptians). In both cultures, ritual gay sex with male prostitutes was common.
Now, my discussion of Sodom and Gommorah:
So everyone knows, Sodom and Gommorah was not about homosexuality at all. It was hospitality and protection. God punished those two cities because they were inhospitable, including towards his two angels that he sent. The "sodomy" that he was referring was NOT homosexuality, but was RAPE. The homosexuality misinterpretation comes from the fact that the angry mob wanted to rape (male homosexuality) the angels that visited Lot. This was a very common method of humiliation that was used at the time, especially amongst Pagans towards their enemies. During this time period, we had a patriarchal society, so, with the men in charge, humiliating and intimidating them was more effective. God's warning is that sodomy... RAPE, especially homosexual RAPE, is sinful... hence his destruction of those two cities where that practice occurred. The story says nothing about consentual homosexual behavior.
So, in conclusion, my religion sees nothing wrong with homosexuality based on the context of the passages, the cultures of the times, and the actual translations of the words. Based on these passages, there is nothing in the Bible that prohibits the gay sexual orientation, nor SSM.
referring posts:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-25.html
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-48.html#post1059558797
I wonder if any of the haters I encountered while discussing Noah's flood will be so quick to jump on you for pointing out translational problems as they were with me in that thread.No, just the OT. I'm Jewish, so I do not deal with the NT. I've posted this many times here, so I will again. Reposted with permission from my personal hero:
I wonder if any of the haters I encountered while discussing Noah's flood will be so quick to jump on you for pointing out translational problems as they were with me in that thread.
I suspect their political motivations won't inspire them to so flame you here as I was there, however, since these translational problems support their political ideals.
Cherry-picking indeed.
I think the best thing I like about this site is that in order to keep my head above water on any issue I am forced to reserch and learn more about the topic. In my experience that is the deciding factor in any thread. Right or wrong, the person who is more willing to learn, correct themselves, and refine their reasoning is the person who wins.I've been attacked repeatedly over "translational problems". My post originated in 2011 and I've reposted it about a dozen times. My guess that those who supported you will attack me. I'll go back and read your thread so I can point out their hypocrisy when they do.
I think the best thing I like about this site is that in order to keep my head above water on any issue I am forced to reserch and learn more about the topic. In my experience that is the deciding factor in any thread. Right or wrong, the person who is more willing to learn, correct themselves, and refine their reasoning is the person who wins.
All the rest are trolls.
And anyone who thinks discussions on abortion or gay marriage are volatile clearly has never discussed how to construct a space elevator or other science project. So many egos and all that pent-up agression, jeesh!
They kill Christians and Jews if they won't convert to Islam..........They behead women and children as well.
No, just the OT. I'm Jewish, so I do not deal with the NT. I've posted this many times here, so I will again. Reposted with permission from my personal hero:
Also, one must be willing to learn how to argue logically. The lack of logic in some arguments is so stark, I wonder why the individual doesn't see it themselves.
Also, one must be willing to learn how to argue logically. The lack of logic in some arguments is so stark, I wonder why the individual doesn't see it themselves.
Fine in the meantime you have no right to try and enforce your perverted ideas on others by trying to deny them SSM.
Lol. I highly doubt god is going to issue harsher judgment on, let's say, gay police, doctors, nurses, firefighters, soldiers, paramedics, peace corp volunteers
Than he is going to issue upon you - a man who spends countless hours spewing vitriolic hate at people who just want equality.
I'm pretty sure the ugliness that you display everyday on these forums will be taken into consideration by your god.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?