liberal definition

What? I don't understand where you're coming from with this.

Every human being deserves to be treated fairly by every other human being. When the government, through overt or covert means, deals injustice to a set of individuals, that injustice must be addressed by Christians.

If heterosexual couples get tax breaks and survivor's rights from the government, then all couples should - must - be afforded those same benefits.


Beyond this, you;re gonna have to be a little less "stealth" in your approach if you want a discussion.

 

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=36459

The same question was asked twice in that thread without an answer. I, too, would like to have a response although it may not be fair to ask anyone other than Galation.

 

Galatian is a libertarian, not a liberal, as far as I know.

 

Many of the liberals I know would define homosexual oppression as disagreeing with the behavior. They call it homophobia (or something like that). They are rather silly if you ask me.

 

So a man and woman living together should get the same benefits even though they are not married? How long do they (fornicators or homosexuals) have to be a couple before they get these "equal" benefits? Who has the right to make that decision?

 

The difference is a heterosexual couple can choose to forego marriage and forfeit those benefits. Homosexual couples are offered no choice at all.

If we're going to argue terminologies, let's argue apples and apples, shall we?

 

I'm not surprised.

Mormons no longer practice bigamy.

Define the circumstances.

Because they're ten. Again, apples to apples.

A sighted person doesn't need a service dog.

 

The problem with same sex unions is they are not "marriage" in the eyes of God or the state.

If they want to be recognized as a legal entity, they should make an effort to change the laws concerning the recognition of thier union and bind it with a legal document other than a "marriage" license. They can't change the "eyes of God".

What they really want is to force the recognition of their aberrant lifestyle on all of us by malappropriating the term, "marriage".

Since God only recognizes marriage between a male and a female, that's the definition I wiil continue to recognize, and none other.

 

The eyes of God are a separate argument.

Why? If the state, which is most decidedly not God, terms a legally binding union between a man and a woman as "marriage," then the state, which is most decidedly not God, should term a similar union between individuals of the same sex as "marriage." In any case, what matters is equity, not terminology.

What they really want is equal treatment under the law.

That's on you, then. You aren't God, and you aren't the State.

 

Tragic, it looks to me like you only want God in your life when it's convenient and matches your worldview. That truly is...

Tragic.:tear: Especially for a Christian.:tear:

 

It sounds like you only want a God who conforms to your own definition of "right" and "wrong."

You still don't get that I am not advocating for gay marriages in church. You still don;t get that i am not advocating churches doing anything at all differently in regards to said church's stance on homosexuality.


No, but by all means stand superior over me in judgement, O Pharisee. Stew in your righteous arrogance.

 

This is all just another symptom or result of taking God out of our culture. You will no doubt see much more of this and and worse in the future. To have to define marriage to another Christian who claims to know the Bible is ludicrous. Marriage, Church and Family all represent our relationship to God. To throw something in there that He has clearly condemed is bascially Burger Kng Christianity where you can "have it your way!"

 

Again, I am not talking about Christian marriage, but State-sanctioned marriage.

Once, just once, I'd like a FundieCon to argue apples-to-apples. It never happens.

 

Who authorized the state to sanction marriage? God maybe?

 

There is no difference to a Bible believing Christian.

 

The state authorized the state to sanction marriage. The church, apparently, didn't argue the point at the time, and now it's too late.

 

The Church does not charge taxes. The Church does not determine probate. Thus the so-called "Bible believing Christian" who thinks it's OK to support state-sponsored injustice isn't believing their Bible.

 

==What Biblical basis do homosexuals have to have a choice (ie...marriage)? Marriage was created by God and not society. So what "right" does society have to re-define it? Marriage, btw, is not a right. Only people who qualify can marry. Homosexuals have never been allowed to marry in America. The American government has only recognized Biblical marriage.