Gay couples 'to get equal rights' in the UK

Right on just-want-peace.

The delusion of 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 also is still strong.

My prayer for those who believe in God, and His Christ, and the Word given to us, all of it, is 2 Thessalonians 2:15-17.

 

Joshua-I don't know what "bible" you are reading, but mine tells me that homosexuality is a sin. Do you really think that Jesus Christ would condone such a thing??? If that is your stance, I feel sorry for you. If homosexuality is okay, then ALL consensual adult sex is also okay in God's eyes, right? I don't know where you came up with your view that this type of sinful behavior is okay, but I DO KNOW that it WAS NOT from the One, True, Living God!!! YOU ARE WRONG!!!

[ December 09, 2002, 02:09 PM: Message edited by: Bro. James Reed ]

 

You should ask Joshua what he thinks the Bible is.

Sherrie

 

I will pray for you Joshua, That God will open your eyes and give you wisdom concerning what his word means. See Lev.20:13, Romans1:24,25,26,and27. This sin is forbidden.
Sid

 

LOL Joshua, give people at least 100 posts before you expect them to have already heard your defense. Or...you might want to consider just making it part of your name if you really want people to know right off where you stand.
btw, are you on bridges?
Gina

 

Yes, you should also know Joshua's church has homosexuals attending, and not only members but leaders in his church.

Yes Gina you are right. It would save a whole lot of time and bandwidth, if Joshua would just put his bio's out there at first for all to read, or give the new ones a handicap. A 100 post lead is good. Ahhhh....is this where Post-It comes back into the picture also?

Sherrie

 

We can go further on this topic. Included within this legislation is the "right" for homosexuals (real definition of "gay", historically, is happy) and unmarried heterosexuals to adopt. Two issues develop from this:

1) Children do need the dual role model of male/female as they develop in life, whatever our moral position may be.

2) Though there may be situations where children inevitably lose a parent, ideally Children develop best in a stable family life. Though divorce statistics are rising it is equally true that married couples have a surer future together than those who are not married.

In all the issues of political correctness lets not lose sight of who the real losers are within all of this. Forget gay rights & the rights of unmarried couples for a while, what about childrens rights.

yours, Jon.

 

AMEN Brother jonmagee !!

 

Was that directed at me? If so, I don't understand the question.

Joshua

P.S. I was looking at the date they joined, not the number of posts .

 

If anyone cares to notice, most of my arguments on this particular issue are in the legal and philosophical vein. Threads like this are about legal issues within a secular society. I've said before that no matter our personal views on homosexuality, a secular society has no business forbidding it (or those who embody it) based on its sinfulness. Sin is not for the government to judge or punish. We have laws, and the only laws of the government I consider valid are those that deal directly with the defense of the nation, the safety and security of the body and safety and security of possessions. Sin doesn't enter into that.

Do we have laws against things that are sinful? Sure. Murder, for instance, is illegal as well as sinful. But its illegality goes along with protecting the direct safety and security of the body. It isn't against the law because it's sinful - it's against the law because of it's direct violation of another citizen's body.

If anyone doesn't already know, I have a background in sex education and sexual anthropology, as well as a lighter background in legal philosophy - these are issues with which I'm familiar. We all have our areas of interest and heavier knowledge - these are some of mine.

Just figured I'd put that out there for the rest who might wonder why I post strongly about these and similar issues.

 

I'm with Gwyneth. It is a reproach upon our nation.

 

stubborn kelly, have you thought of the legal rights of the children as per my last post?

yours, Jon

 

Sherrie, you asked about postit, which reminds me ive not seen him in a while. Is he ok?

yours, Jon.

 

Absolutely, jon. And I'm glad you put them forward.

First of all, I haven't seen much relevant evidence that shows that gay parents can't provide both male and female role models - perhaps not in and of themselves, but certainly through their friends and relatives. A similar argument is made against homeschooling - that children aren't socialized properly because they aren't around kids their age - but most homeschooling parents find opportunities for their children to be around other children. The same is often true of gay couples (as far as making sure their children have a role model in the opposite sex). But on that point also, I'm not so sure they need both male and female parents in order to develop sexually and socio-sexually. Now, if you go the route that sex roles and the like are socially created, then I might go with that (but give you my first argument), but if you go the other route (that sex roles and femininiy and masculinity are innate), then there is no argument.

If same sex couples are allowed to marry, then a stable relationship is being cemented, just as much as that of an opposite sex couple that marries. The very act of making such a familial commitment (as a civil union) indicates the kind of stability you're talking about. Or, if you'd say that it does not, then we may as well scrap that notion for het couples, too and make them show some higher standard of stability than marriage in order to "protect the children."

I don't think any childrens' rights are being violated by the civil joining of two people of the same sex and those two people rearing children.

 

But... what are you "marrying" (bringing together to make one)?

Genesis 2
21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. 22 Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.
23 And Adam said:

“This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Same-sex marriage?
That was not designed by God, that is a man-made abomination. How can people who call themselves children of the Living God, who poured out His precious blood for them even speak of such things?

"In the last days there will come scoffers..."
They're here.

 

I misspoke - I did mean to keep with the language of the thread and speak of same sex civil unions. My apologies.

But still - laws than can only* be backed up Biblically have no place in secular government.

*"Only," not to mean "merely." Rather, "solely."

 

Surely you don't mean laws like:
Exodus 20
13 “You shall not murder.
14 “You shall not commit adultery.
15 “You shall not steal.
16 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

These are laws that can be "backed up Biblically" and most certainly have taken firm root in secular government. Where do we get our law from? We don't make it up as we go along.

Romans 2
14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts

God has written His law in every one of us. We know right and wrong (good and evil). It had something to do with our distant relatives taking a bite of fruit... We must base our law on that law that is given to us by God. His is the only absolute moral compass. Anything else is just making it up as we go along - the end is anarchy. We have God's revealed Word. We have been terrible stewards of it and are now reaping the harvest we and our ancestors have sown.

I say stop the madness now.
Who will stand in the gap against unrighteousness?
Is there not a cause?

 

Well Bro. James (good name BTW), I guess you and I will be standing together for Christ's cause. How can we say we are true believers if we don't even believe that Christ should lead our government? I say that Christ certainly belongs in this government. How can we expect to succeed as a society unless we put our faith in God? "If God be for us, who can be against us?" As much prosperity as God has blessed on us and our country and, now, we are going to turn our backs on Him and say He has no right to be involved in our society and our government? I tell you one thing, the day we lose all of our good Christian leaders, so few as there may be, and the day this country turns its back on God Our Father is the day I'm leaving! GOD BLESS THE USA!!! Bro. James

 

Well said jonmagee!

But how sickening can this be to children to even be subjected to this. It makes me sick and I am an adult.

What examples for the next society are we setting?

What exactly is not alright, if this is ok?

Sherrie

 

Thank you Sherrie, though withregard to kellys answer I do not understand the "logic" nor can I see any attempt to answer the second issue which is encompassed within the legislation referred to.

yours, Jon.