Gay couples 'to get equal rights' in the UK

The following site was revealed to me recently:

http://w.w.w.frc.org/get/isO1j3.cfm

check it out.

yours, Jon.

 

Kelly, I guess you still havnt noticed the post dated 10th Dec.

yours, Jon.

 

You're crazy.

 

jonmagee...I cannot get to your web page. Do you have the right address posted.

Sherrie

 

No, jon, I have. Don't worry (not that you are) - I'll respond to it.

 

Sorry, Sherrie, at the moment I can't get into it neither. Don't know why.

yours, Jon.

 

Kelly, can you also respond to the other post I keep reminding you of above?

yours, Jon.

 

The URL should be http://www.frc.org/get/is01j3.cfm

[ December 13, 2002, 04:43 PM: Message edited by: JamesJ ]

 

Thanks, yes thats the one.

Sherrie, did you get that?

yours, Jon.

 

Thanks jonmagee...and JamesJ!

http://www.frc.org/get/is01j3.cfm

Wonderful article jonmagee! And there is plenty more.

Sherrie

 

To Bro. Curtis, Jon Magee, and Sherrie; Amen and thank you all for the information.
Rick

 

For some reason my post concerning what God desires is consistently ignored!

Can we take this as an arguement from silence that we all agree that God does not agree with the concept that

 

sorry pushed the wrong button again.

to continue:
the silence is indicative that no one beleives that God agrees with the concept that His moral code has no place in secular society!

Kelly, thank you for this acknowledgement.

yours, Jon.

 

Once God said something is an abomination, He never changes His mind, for He is always the same, yesterday, today, & forever.

So, if some of these liberals want ot insert a theory into the Bible, it better remain consistant with God's Word in other parts, or they are no better then the other cults out there!

Merry Christmas!

 

And we must also remember when sharing the Lords word we must be direct. Standing firm in that word, but with compassion and love. Always humbled, remembering where we came from; even in correction.

Sherrie

 

If homosexuality is a sin and most people here don't feel that homosexuals should raise children... is it because it is a sin or is it because a sinful person can influence a child to become sinful?

 

Both
Rick

 

Postit, we all are sinners, both homosexual and heterosexual. As already said before, Statistics consistently support the position that the children, (who we should be considering before the wants of adults) will develope best in a family situation that includes the dual rolemodel of male/female. Whilst there are occassions where that does not happen, e.g. when a parent dies, it can not be for the best interests of the child/children to artificially impose something contrary to this dual role model scenario.

yours, Jon.

 

Any one know if Kelly is alright? We have not seen her here since I asked whether God agreed we should ignore his moral code in secular society?

yours, Jon.

 

No, I'm fine. Thanks for your concern. I simply haven't been online in the past 18 hours or so.

I certainly didn't want to give a haphazard answer to the question, which is why I acknowledged your query with the promise to respond. I didn't want to give any impression of avoidance or perpetual silence on the issue.

It has been proposed that because God is "king of nations" (Jer. 10:7), Christians must have God's law be mirrored in civil law. Similarly, Romans 13:1 gives us this: ""There is no power but of God: the powers that be, are ordained of God." Influence of pagan kings aside, these verses would have it be that civil law and God's law are the same. Right?

In recognizing God as the source of power and authority, we should shape our civil law according to His will. That's how the argument goes.

And in a theocracy (to use that wretched phrase), this would not be inappropriate. In fact, it's not inappropriate to use Scripture as part of our reasoning in creating laws, even in a secular society (government). Yet our Constitution does not give the authority of law to God or the Bible. It gives it to the people, through a democratically selected government.

Now, we, as Christians, may choose governors who use the Bible as their rulebook, and who may use Scripture alone in justifying laws they make. But, given the way we have created our government - which includes the right of the people to be free from any religious institution - we cannot give solely Biblical reasoning to justify our laws. To do so would be violating the first amendment of our Constitution, as well as forming a theocratic government, rather than the democratic one we seem to enjoy.

I, for one, respect the right of the people not to be bound to a particular religion, and as such, respect their right not to be bound by a particular religion's law. Am I wrong to think that way? Maybe. I can't eliminate that possibility.

Perhaps we dishonor God by having created a secular government. At the same time, we have been given the power to create government, and we do by it what we believe to be just - by not imposing religious beliefs (through law or oter means) on the people.

I'm sure that isn't a complete answer to the question, and I'm exploring this earnestly . . . I don't have a complete answer at this time. The question you raised, jon, is not invalid, and it has certainly gotten me thinking.

Should we even have a first amendment? What was it that led the framers to put in an anti-establishment clause, if they were such good Christians? Certainly, they could have been wrong to do so. I'm not inclined to believe that, but it's a possibility.

Yet God allows men to choose other rulers would they not be ruled by Him, as Samuel chose a king for God's people. But what happens when we do that? It would seem that we make our bed and lie in it. That seems to be what's happening here. We've created a government that does not permit religious establishment, and as such, cannot use the Bible as our means of establishing law. To do so would be in violation of the rule we created, ostensibly with God's permission. Permission to fall amongst or within ourselves? Maybe. But permission just the same.

Pardon the stream-of-consciousness writing. I really am searching for an answer to this. I'm intrigued by what I've found thus far, and if it's less than academic, well, it's because I'm trying to be mindful, and specifically not closed to being wrong. Believe that or not, I guess, but it is truth.