Quote - I am simply stating Biblical Truth.

Biblical truth? So what? This is AMERICA. We have amelting pot of cultures AND religions. YOU...  are free to believe as you choose. The point here is that you do not impose YOUR religious beliefs upon others.

Quote - The Bible is not flawed, some translations just may not be 100% accurate as the original writings.  But there can be no mistake about God's position on homosexuality, considering Sodom and Gomorrah (and every single person in those cities with the exception of Lot and his family) were destroyed for their sin and depravity.  This is just one of countless examples in the Old Testament of God's judgement on people for their sin.

Again, you know nothing about HOW the Bible came into being. Read up on it to truly understand. There are BIBLICAL scholars who attest to othe fact that the Bible has been altered over the centuries and many of the meanings have been lost AND/OR misunderstood. You can see this happening even today.

For example...   if you were to say to someone in the 1920's "You seem so gay." And then say the same this to someone today...  you can see the VERY different meanings. The EXACT SAME THING has happened within the Bible. You MUST read books written by various Bible scholars to understand that you are mistaken.

And God's position on Homosexuality? So you must be considering yourself a Jew - since Christ NEVER said anything against homosexuals. And since we have two VERY differerent types of Gods when comparing the old testament God and the new testament God, it's interesting to see that so many people decide to choose the old testament God when it comes to same-sex marriage. Why is it that paople want to "impose Gods Will" on us rather than have God do the judging? Simpy amazing.

mpromised. 

And it's VERY interesting that you bring up that passage - for it was NOT in the original writings written by the apostle. "Let he who is without sin..." was added at a later date. Another error in the Bible. It IS flawed. If you choose NOT to accept that, then you are blinding yourself to the facts - plain and simple.

Quote - Homesexual or heterosexual it doesn't matter at all, we're all stand quilty before God because we failed to keep His commandments and only one Person can save us from the fate ahead!

But this is YOUR belief, not many others. I've always found it quite arrogant of the various religions when they say that THEY are right and EVERYONE else is wrong. It's funny and it's sad.

Quote - In answer to the original posting, no I'm not with you on this.

                         " <---------------------- ditto

cheers,
dr geep
;=]

P.S.  It is sad that some expend great effort to foist their opinions and lifestyles on others.
I, on the other hand, appreciate those who do not.

Quote - > Quote - In answer to the original posting, no I'm not with you on this.

                         " <---------------------- ditto

cheers,
dr geep
;=]

But of course. So many people want to impose their will on others and deny them happiness. That's why the religious right exists.  :(

Quote - deny them happiness.(

Crikey, that line really stood out to me. It really seems to be this way with alot of people. I just don't understand it.

Oops ??? :unsure:

Hmmm, did I just contradict myself?
Did I just "foist" my opinion on you?
Perhaps, but .................. please note that I did NOT expend any great effort to do so.
Therefore,  I remain ... :lol:

cheers,
dr geep
;=]

Quote - > Quote - deny them happiness.(

Crikey, that line really stood out to me. It really seems to be this way with alot of people. I just don't understand it.

Precisely!

Why some want to impose their will on others when it does not even concern them is beyond me. If you believe in God and that that God will judge everyone, then please let others make their own decisions and leave the judging to God!

Quote - Anayway I'm glad Rendo allows a bit of discussion on the subject and they're not as upthight as DAZ is. They allow certain people to take a stand for the issues, but remove every comment that is made against it. When you take a stand for the issue you're not political, religious and so on, but when you take a stand against it you suddenly are.

Quoted for agreement

My goodness! Funny how people can get so ruffled about other people's lives. At any rate, congrats to Sulu, for finding someone he cares for, and being able to share it openly.

Applause, applause, @ kuroyume0161

Give em hell back and know that at least I'm with you for what you posted!!! (as straight man btw)

And congratulations to George Takei and Brad Altman :)

:-D

Quote - ... but this is SECULAR law and marriage. 

...which makes me wonder why government is in any sort of marriage business in the first place. Seriously - the gov't has no business at all in marriage, of any kind.

/P

But ........................ lest ye forget ..................... they MUST control !!!

'Tis their nature, m'ess pas?

I reccommend anyone who think's God hate's gay people take a trip to BlockBuster video and rent "For The Bible Tells Me So".

I'm just here for the views for my Dragon Eggs. This thread oughta hatch em'!

Quote - But ........................ lest ye forget ..................... they MUST control !!!

'Tis their nature, m'ess pas?

 
Actually that sounds like religion to me. Think history....   Catholic Church...    Oh wait a minute...   that's what they want to do again.   ;)

Apparently too many people think that you NEED religion to marry.

Again...   that's sad.   :(

Lol these issues are just deceiving all of you on the real reason behind  everything: Money and Power. Simple fact: if there is no problem, there is no money. The only blunder to profit is a close knit family lead by husband and nurtured by a wife. Destroy the family and you will get money. How to destroy a family? Tear man and woman apart with issues of gender and once the balance is tipped, you will get whole herd of lost souls who will be willing to buy your 'solution' to their problems. Plus tax.

Quote - one other thing: altho I qualify as a christian (e.g. not jewish, muslim, hindu, buddhist et al.)
I got confused about the part in the bible where apparently eve was the only woman, but cain
and abel musta had kids, so where did their wives come from?

Something along the lines of "And the Sons of God found the daughters of Men to be beautiful, and took them as wives..." (heavily paraphrased). So I'm suspecting that someone had a veritable 'human factory' that wasn't mentioned...

/P

Quote -
 
Actually that sounds like religion to me. Think history....   Catholic Church...    Oh wait a minute...   that's what they want to do again.  

Again...   that's sad.   :(

It sounds a whole lot like modern secular cults as well, come to think of it.

(Yes, they not only exist, but seem to be very popular in many quarters)

/P

Quote - It sounds a whole lot like modern secular cults as well, come to think of it.

(Yes, they not only exist, but seem to be very popular in many quarters)

/P

What modern secular cults are you talking about?

Regarding same-sex marriage....  they ONLY want to have the same rights that hetero's do. YOU aren't required to marry a same-sex partner. How do they want to control you? Since that is primarily what THIS conversation has been about.

Quote - > Quote - But ........................ lest ye forget ..................... they MUST control !!!

'Tis their nature, m'ess pas?

 
Actually that sounds like religion to me. Think history....   Catholic Church...    Oh wait a minute...   that's what they want to do again.   ;)

Apparently too many people think that you NEED religion to marry.

Again...   that's sad.   :(

The Catholic church regards Marriage as a Sacrament, binding of body and spirit, and therefore a Religious Ceremony! :) And yes, I'm Catholic and I have absolutely nothing against gays etc.

Quote - I have no doubt this is going to turn a lot of people off to me, but so be it.  I personally do not agree with homosexuality, but niether am I trying to appear self righteous or 'holier then thou'.  I am simply stating Biblical Truth.

**Genesis 19:4, 5
**"Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house.  And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight?  Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally."
 
Know them carnally meaning that the men of Sodom desired homosexual relations with Lot's visitors.

If we're throwing BIble quotes around, let's be comprehensive about it, shall we?

Okay, everyone, sit down. It's time for today's episode of BIBLE TALK.

Now, here's the first few verses that describe that situation. No editting, straight from the KJV --

*And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

and he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night. *
*
And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: *

*and they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,

and said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.*

Now, a couple of things come to light almost immediately: (1) your use of "carnally" aint substantiated by the KJV, nor is it really posed that way in what we have of the original texts. The suggestion has been made that the "sin of Sodom" (which, please note, isnt specifically described in the BIble) was a near paranoid fear of strangers -- something pretty antithetical to the basic Middle Eastern tenet of providing strangers with shelter for the night. In a desert region, that's almost as much a social necessity as anything else you can think of. (2) Please note that, to dissuade the people of Sodom, Lot offers up his own daughters because they're virgins. Yeah, Happy Father's Day, bud! That just strikes me, anyway, as kind of the WRONG thing to do when you're trying to tell a story about God's sense of morality and judgment.

So put these together, and you have a few more questions than some facile "Oooo! Evil Sodom! wish fulfillment about gays and lesbians. What was the "sin of Sodom"? The Book aint all that specific, and, sadly, the two towns get burned to a crisp before we can find out. Why did Lot offer to allow his daughters to be gang-banged? Did God really want Lot to do that? I'm kinda thinking not, but then we get to the punishment phase: both towns are nuked right out of existence. Everyone -- the bad men, the bad women, and (we assume, anyway) the bad toddlers and infants, not to mention the bad horses and sinful cattle and frogs and insects driven by the forces of Satan -- are wiped right off the face of the planet. Gosh, nothin' too ruthless about that, is there? But you have to remember that this is (theoretically, anyway) the same God that tells various Hebrews that they have the God-given right to marraude and murder various tribes, to the point of killing their animals as well... which, let's face it, takes "vengeance" to a whole new level.

So to anyone that quotes this story of S&G -- if you honestly believe these were the actions of a loving, merciful diety... well, y'know, there's a few issues there you might want to work on.

The "bottom line" is ...

**One either believes or .............. one does not !

**It's an individual's choice.

Do you believe? (rhet)

cheers,
dr geep
;=]

The real bottom line is that one believes what one wants to believe, n'est pas? (rhet)
An interesting discussion none the less. ... ;=]

Quote - [ Seriously - the gov't has no business at all in marriage, of any kind.

Well, for now, it is, and as such we have to act accordingly.

Quote -
The Catholic church regards Marriage as a Sacrament, binding of body and spirit, and therefore a Religious Ceremony! :) And yes, I'm Catholic and I have absolutely nothing against gays etc.

I think that's the main point here. For some, marriage is a holy ritual, only to be done between a man and a woman. For some, it's just a sort of formal contract, a try to bond two people together and give them rights and duties. I would like to state that most marriages don't really have much to do with the former, but with the later, aspecially if you see how many choose a divorce later - which is as well only possible with the later, according to the catholic church. If this two things weren't so much tied together, the whole thing would not be that much of a problem, at least not in my view.

As it's said already in this thread - Jesus isn't really famous for hating people, but for forgiveness. When I look at the Sermon on the Mount then I don't read anything about going to other peope and force them to live "the right way". I think that a main part of Jesus teaching was to leave the judgement to God. If the christians who disapprove gays would live up to that, all should be fine.

I thought this was a Poser forum???

Why is this even on here?

Who cares?

*eyeroll.

:b_confused:  ___ Poser? ... What's that?

Quote - I thought this was a Poser forum???

Why is this even on here?

Who cares?

*eyeroll.

Is that anything like an eggroll?

jk

those biblical references may be more relevant than we had previously believed.
for example, IIRC it was cain and abel, not cain and mabel. :lol:

Quote -
What modern secular cults are you talking about?

Well, here's a few that come to mind:

• Anthropogenic Global Warming
• Various Political Party Issues ("Planks")
• Greenpeace
• PETA
• moveon.org
• 9/11 conspiracy theorists

...and many, many more.

Basically, any group of individuals who carry an irrational passion for a pet issue (be it political, scientific, philosophical), to the point of getting visibly angry (or worse) at anyone who dares challenge it. That group successfully turns the issue's talking points and supporting arguments into dogma, the lead proponents as apostles, and the issue itself as their god. Anyone who brings conflicting facts into the arena are instantly treated as heretics and apostates. Instead of logical rebuttals and defenses, the adherents lose objectivity in favor of viciousness and raw anger.

Even atheism itself becomes a religion - after all, one's personal conclusions concerning belief are tentative at best, and that internal instability is almost always a source of discomfort. Having others come along, presenting arguments that make things even more unstable? Well, it more easily leads to a casting-aside of logic and more towards raw emotion. Even when the adherent is claiming to use logic (either by parroting talking points, or by presenting original arguments based on bad assumptions --or worse, bad or disproven facts-- ), it is often readily apparent that emotion is in charge.

I mean, look at this thread for instance... perjoratives like "Jesus Nuts" and "Sinners" get thrown around as the salt-and-pepper of many posts in this thread. Personally, if you (the generic "you", no particular person) have to use such terms, then your argument and its logic are likely too weak to stand on its own - even to your estimation, since you felt compelled enough to use them in the first place.

I haven't seen the inside of a church for longer than some folks reading this thread have been alive. That said, I do have to give props to (albeit sometimes overzealous) religious types in this thread. Why? At least they admit to relying on religion as a basis for their opinion - foibles, faulty logic, bad assumptions, blind faith, the whole ball of wax. OTOH, others in here claim to be 'above' that, yet the hallmarks of their prose suggest strongly that they are just as zealous, just as frail, just as dismissive, just as unsure of what its really all about... and just as human. They just refuse to admit otherwise.

Once we all admit that we're dealing with a lot of philosophical issues for which there is no scientific or factual analogue to be found, then the rest is just tentative postulation.

Personally, if two (or more) people want to set up house somewhere, cool - just know that you get the bad along with the good, and states with common-law marriage laws are going to be fun to live in... even if you and your partner never get married officially, or were just roommates.

You now get the grand booby-prize of risk: divorce proceedings, higher tax rates (depending on how you file), tax suckiness in general (ever have to file injured spouse paperwork w/ the IRS to keep from getting your tax return garnished?), custody cases (doesn't matter if you had the kid before you and your partner hitched up - the partner now has rights), property ownership, debt and collections, you name it... just like the straight couples have to deal with. You wanted reality? You got it.

So, err, before you pack your bags for Cali, you may want to stop and think about this. George Takei (no, not "Sulu" - the man does have a real name, folks) and his partner were together for roughly eternity IIRC, so they probably already knew what they were getting into - they just made it official. You and your partner may not - you think you do, but honestly, you probably don't. Just like the straight folks.

/P

Quote -
So to anyone that quotes this story of S&G -- if you honestly believe these were the actions of a loving, merciful diety... well, y'know, there's a few issues there you might want to work on.

Good post. Most scholars IIRC figure the sins of S&G to be more along the lines of disobedience, hostile treatment of guests (Lot offered his daughters because, as any good Mideast house host with guests in your home, you always protect your guests at all costs) and a badly unorganized list of priorities (which means He wasn't at the top of the list).

As for mercy? God was actually haggled down from his original intent of just wiping out the city, to sparing it if there were five good and honest men in the joint. Throughout the Old Testament, God is often self-described as jealous, vengeful, and judging by some descriptions, pretty over-the-top when it comes to revene for injustices. But then, when you run the Universe and your subjects are semi-civilized humans who do far worse to each other on a near-daily basis... let's just call it Getting One's Undivided Attention.

Not until a far more advanced (relatively) stage of civilization do we see the radical concepts as put forth by one Yeshua of Galilee: Love, Forgiveness, Tolerance, Kindness...

/P

>> You now get the grand booby-prize of risk: divorce proceedings, higher tax rates (depending on how you file), tax suckiness in general (ever have to file injured spouse paperwork w/ the IRS to keep from getting your tax return garnished?), custody cases (doesn't matter if you had the kid before you and your partner hitched up - the partner now has rights), property ownership, debt and collections, you name it... just like the straight couples have to deal with. You wanted reality? You got it.

When Steve was taken to the hospital in the final days of his bout with AIDS in 1984, I was forbidden to be in the hospital room because I wasnt "immediate family". We'd been together for almost a decade, and his family, who had ignored him not only throughout his illness but for a good 15 years prior to that, were able to skip right through and set up camp. Because they were "blood" and I wasnt, I was tossed out and they got to move in, for the sole purpose, I might add, of punishing him and me and all our friends who had been with us as he dealt with this disease.

Yeah, I'll take reality. And know what? Because I've seen the horror stories that are many of the straight couples around me, I know exactly what I would be getting into. But because I have to work that much freaking harder to get it, I'd also be a damn sight more appreciative.

Well-put, Penguinisto. I have to agree with every word you've said.

Secular marriage is a legal contract. Nothing more, nothing less. It grants rights and imposes duties on both partners, and it often grants (depending on state/country laws) some financial or social privileges to the partners. Including the right - as Penguinisto describes - to the miseries of divorce.

Where I live, there's a clause in the constitution that forbids discrimination based on gender, age, religious/spiritual beliefs or sexual preference. Same-sex secular marriages should be allowed based on this clause of the constitution. And yes, same-sex marriage is legal and grants the same rights and imposes the same duties as "regular" marriage in the Netherlands.

Church marriage (I mean "church" in the broadest sense, including every possible spiritual or religious groups) is different. It would not be a good idea to impose same-sex church marriage on these religious groups - in my opinion, freedom of religion is a more important right.

The right to same-sex marriage has lead to another interesting pickle here in the Netherlands. A secular marriage is conducted (don't know how to describe it better) by designated local government officials. It's in their job description.
Now what about those officials who object to same-sex marriage, based on their personal convictions? Should they be forced to conduct those marriages - infringing on their right to spiritual/religious freedom, or should they be exempted from that duty - possibly infringing on the right of the partners to get married? A fine pickle indeed, and cause for some heated debate in the highest government circles.
In my opinion, anyone who applies for the job of marriage official now cannot have the right to turn down same-sex couples - marrying same-sex couples is in the job description, so you'll have to do it. But those who already held this job when same-sex marriage was legalized should be exempted IMO - it was not in the job description when they applied for it. Probably too simplistic a view, and in need of refinement, but I thnk that should be the basis.

I expect that the states that have legalized same-sex marriages will run into exactly this problem, and I'm curious as to how California and other states are going to resolve it. The Dutch government hasn't figured it out yet, and same-sex marriage was legalized a couple of years ago....

>> Now what about those officials who object to same-sex marriage, based on their personal convictions? Should they be forced to conduct those marriages - infringing on their right to spiritual/religious freedom, or should they be exempted from that duty - possibly infringing on the right of the partners to get married? A fine pickle indeed, and cause for some heated debate in the highest government circles.

IMHO, it's not a pickle at all. Faith is a matter between the individual and God, no one else. Just as I do not have the right to impose my personal beliefs on you, neither do you have that right. If one believes in s/s marriage, the religious consequences of that are between him and God, period, end of story. If one doesnt, again, it's between him and God and no one else. But even as Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's", so a public official has the obligation to do his job. If he feels it infringes on his freedom to worship as he chooses, he should look for some other line of work.

Again, IMHO, the folks who are making this a pickle are the ones who vocally and demonstratively think their beliefs are the Way and the Truth and the Light. Jesus had something to say about such folks: He didnt think much of them at all.

This site is about ART and this forum is about Poser.  It doesn't matter whether you're religious, an atheist, agnostic, gay, straight, smoke, don't smoke, and so on, and so on, and so on.  Bringing up divisive issues has no purpose but to inflame others.   We all have a different perspective about how we view the world, BUT we all share a common goal and that is producing art.  That is what we are about and that is what is important.

True enough, but if you find these threads an issue, may I respectfully suggest you avoid anything marked OT?

Just a suggestion, made only because yes, I am a Poser user, but I'm also a cat owner, a former seminarian, a bowler with a 180 average, someone fond of Chinese and Indian food, someone who prefers jazz over hip-hop, someone who reads until 1AM even when he has to get up at 5AM to go to work. someone who has lived in five countries in different parts of the world, someone who is a social liberal and an economic conservative -- and all of these influence not only my view of the world as a whole but my artwork, such as it is, as well. These are the things that make us who we are, whether united or divided.

Amd sorry, but I see little reason not to discuss those things that make us different if it's going to lead to a better understanding between us. If things get out of control... well, this is why we have folks like JenX around, isnt it?

Quote - >> You now get the grand booby-prize of risk: divorce proceedings, higher tax rates (depending on how you file), tax suckiness in general (ever have to file injured spouse paperwork w/ the IRS to keep from getting your tax return garnished?), custody cases (doesn't matter if you had the kid before you and your partner hitched up - the partner now has rights), property ownership, debt and collections, you name it... just like the straight couples have to deal with. You wanted reality? You got it.

When Steve was taken to the hospital in the final days of his bout with AIDS in 1984, I was forbidden to be in the hospital room because I wasnt "immediate family". We'd been together for almost a decade, and his family, who had ignored him not only throughout his illness but for a good 15 years prior to that, were able to skip right through and set up camp. Because they were "blood" and I wasnt, I was tossed out and they got to move in, for the sole purpose, I might add, of punishing him and me and all our friends who had been with us as he dealt with this disease.

Note that I never said there weren't benefits. But, lost in all the hoopla is the (merely partial) grand list of pitfalls, which is the point of the paragraph. Well over 50% (or more... prolly way more) of marriages today end in divorce before 10 years have passed. My first one lasted seven, almost eight. It involved a whole lot more than merely getting my stuff out of the house I once paid the mortgage on, loading it into a rented truck, and shouting loud and vile curses out the driver's-side window as I drove away. Oh, no - you get months and months of paperwork, court appearances, meetings with lawyers, phone calls from both the ex and her family, and spending money... very large wads of money.

Quote - Yeah, I'll take reality. And know what? Because I've seen the horror stories that are many of the straight couples around me, I know exactly what I would be getting into. But because I have to work that much freaking harder to get it, I'd also be a damn sight more appreciative.

You would - now would the other massive percentage of folks out there be appreciative - not only of the benefits, but of the risks? Note that this is not endemic to any one group or category of humanity...

/P

>> You would - now would the other massive percentage of folks out there be appreciative - not only of the benefits, but of the risks? Note that this is not endemic to any one group or category of humanity...

There is nothing more fanatical than a convert, Tom. And yeah, I like to think that because we've had to work so hard for it, we know what we're getting, both bad and good. Sure, someday, when it's treated as casually as "Hey, let's drive to Vegas and get married by an Elvis impersonator!:, then yeah, we'll have just as many problems as everyone else. But right now? The grand majority? I'm going out on a limb and saying that we'd be much more willing to accept the bad with the good. We can see the bad all around us, any time we want. That probably explains why a lot of gays and lesbians arent in favour of marriage. But those who do? Whole other story.

BTW: first time marriages -- 62% fail rate. Second ones -- 30%. I'm sure gay marriages will follow that stat at some point in time.

*quote: 'BTW: first time marriages -- 62% fail rate. Second ones -- 30%.'

I wonder how much these stats contribute to the general (secular) antipathy to same sex marriages, i.e., feelings that the institution of marriage is already under assault?

People with certain spiritual beliefs may oppose S/S marriage on moral grounds but I'm sensing a secular backlash arising from the sense that maybe a wheel is falling off the social wagon in regards to matters like these.

'Don't ask don't tell' is one thing but S/S marriage grants a social legitamacy to the gay/lesbian lifestyle that I don't think many hetero's are comfortable with.

*quote:'When Steve was taken to the hospital in the final days of his bout with AIDS in 1984, I was forbidden to be in the hospital room because I wasnt "immediate family".'

That's one of the most compelling reasons for supporting S/S marriage that I've ever heard :(

• Rick

>> I wonder how much these stats contribute to the general (secular) antipathy to same sex marriages, i.e., feelings that the institution of marriage is already under assault?

If it's under assault, it's from within, not without. Gays and lesbians arent the problem with the failure rate of heterosexual marriages. We're simply a convenient scapegoat for folks who dont want to deal with their own failings and need to find someone else to blame so they can be "victims" and shove their own faults onto anyone else they can. Not saying we're blameless when it comes to such a tactic, but when it comes to a 62% divorce rate, sorry, I doubt we have anywhere near that much sway. If we did, gay marriage would have been a fait accompli a long time ago. :)

>> 'Don't ask don't tell' is one thing but S/S marriage grants a social legitamacy to the gay/lesbian lifestyle that I don't think many hetero's are comfortable with.

Sorry, no sympathy there. Our history has been littered with someone's need to feel superior to someone else, which is why this nation of freedom and liberty took almost two centuries to fully recognize blacks as participating citizens and one hundred and fifty years to grant women the right to live as something more than property exchanged in the legal rites of marriage. We have also systematically jerked around the Natives, the Irish, the Jews, the Japanese-Americans, and -- well, no surprise here -- the gays... all in our searching need to be superior.

So pardon me if I'm not interested in knowing what other people's "comfort level" might be. That's irrelevant, just as I doubt they lose sleep at night worrying what I might think of them.

>> That's one of the most compelling reasons for supporting S/S marriage that I've ever heard

And it's a pity that the reason even has to exist in the first place. But I appreciate your kind thoughts. It's been over two decades, and I still miss him, a lot. Were he still alive, I'm sure by now we'd be on our way to California, even at our somewhat advanced ages. At least, I can console myself with the thought. :)

*quote: 'So pardon me if I'm not interested in knowing what other people's "comfort level" might be. That's irrelevant, just as I doubt they lose sleep at night worrying what I might think of them.'

Oh I understand completely and I didn't mean to imply that it should be your personal concern. I think these things are part of this issue though and they have to be considered. It's fairly easy to disregard all the bible scripture being slung around because if you are not a member of any particular faith you are certainly not bound by their moral strictures. But 'acceptance' and 'comfort levels' are the 800 pound gorillas in the 'secular' room even if it's become politically incorrect to mention it - and these are the things that will determine people's decisions when they are facing a constitutional amendment against same sex marriage in the voting booth.

I am very sorry for your loss.

• Rick

Quote - Throughout the Old Testament, God is often self-described as jealous, vengeful, and judging by some descriptions, pretty over-the-top when it comes to revene for injustices. But then, when you run the Universe and your subjects are semi-civilized humans who do far worse to each other on a near-daily basis... let's just call it Getting One's Undivided Attention.

Not until a far more advanced (relatively) stage of civilization do we see the radical concepts as put forth by one Yeshua of Galilee: Love, Forgiveness, Tolerance, Kindness...

/P

Oh come now...  you actually call this a REASON why God is how He is? Because of who WE were He acted like this? And we reached a FAR more civilized tone so he behaved better? This is the first time I've heard anything like this and it sounds like you're reaching and trying to reconcile the differences. We did not advance THAT much. We did not change THAT much. The two Gods in the Bible are RADICALLY different from each other and the reason you propose is insufficient.

Answer me this. If He is all-knowing and all-seeing, how come he did not know EVERYTHING that was going to happen LONG before it ever happened? And KNOWING all of these things...   HOW could He get angry?

**Let me put it another way...    a mother is preparing to bake bread. She gets all of the ingredients together - except the yeast. She puts the bread in the oven and when the timer goes off and she pulls it out of the oven she finds it has not risen. AND THEN SHE GETS MAD. Now of course she KNEW it would not rise because she intentionally left out the yeast - and YET...   she still got mad. DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? Apparently God did the same thing when He created us. Of course we all have "free will," but then He IS God and knows what will happen nonetheless. Interesting, huh?
**

The devoutly religious really do not ask the hard questions and the vast majority of the time resort to "We don't understand Gods' Plan."  Uhh...  yeah. We're supposed to understand everything else and BELIEVE in Him with nothing but a collection of misrepresented letters as proof.

As has already been pointed out here, it is obvious that most religious consistenly misinterpret the stories in the Bible and sway them to mean what they want them to mean. This is why we have so many sects of Christianity since none of them agrees with each other. It's just very sad when they try to change laws based on their religious beliefs BASING them on false interpretations.

Not forgetting that  over 1 Billion Catholics put their faith in God!

Visionaries and Saints have seen into the other world, Fatima, Lourdes, etc. and relayed messages for mankind and confirmed much of what the bible states. They were also subject to all kinds of Scientific and Medical examinations, many of which couldn't be explained!

Near Death experiences have been recorded, even by those who didn't believe in any God, and changed their life afterwards!

>> Oh come now...  you actually call this a REASON why God is how He is? Because of who WE were He acted like this?

I dont think that was Tom's point, actually. If anything, what he's saying is that our particular vision of God is coloured by how we act, not the other way around. During the early, more primitive days of the times described in the OT, God was seen as a reflection of ourselves -- easy to ire, vengeance-driven -- because that's who we needed Him to be, not the other way around.

But thats not new, when you think about it. We rarely allow God to manifest Himself as He is, just who we need Him to be to justify our own miserably human actions. And face i: we've done some pretty awful stuff to each other in His name. Need to justify slavery? The Bible can do it for you. Need to make sure women are kept in their place? The Book is replete with scripture that will support that. Want to make sure those gays are kept where you want them? Well, hey, three verses are all you need to tell to one and all that the Truth says we're an abomination in His eyes.

Whether or not we actually are is another question, bound by one's personal sense of faith and no more. But lots of folks cant allow that, you see, because religion (not faith) requires order and a sense of hierarchy: spiritual "leadership" built on as many bureaucratic levels as the federal governmen, with plenty of people to tell you what you should believe, that this or that is what God says. Never mind that it might not make sense; it's still "Truth". Because "we" say God says so, and that should be good enough for you, so shut up and send us the donation today.

:)

Quote - The suggestion has been made that the "sin of Sodom" (which, please note, isnt specifically described in the BIble)

Actually the sin of Sodom is VERY EXPLICITELY described in the bible and it has nothing to do with Homosexuality!

**Passage Ezekiel 16:49:
**   49Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
 

So Sodom was overweight, stuck on herself and lazy, never helped others and was a poor parent? I can see the last 4 as being sins way more than I can see falling in love being a sin, but what do I know? My church encourages us to love everyone regardless of orientation, race, breed or sex. We even have trans-gender support groups! I do not understand people who walk around with hate in their hearts, yet preach the word of God. Other people's actions do not affect me personally, so what does it matter? If you give love out, it will always come back to you in one form or the other I think.

-Sarah

Quote - So Sodom was overweight, stuck on herself and lazy, never helped others and was a poor parent? I can see the last 4 as being sins way more than I can see falling in love being a sin, but what do I know? My church encourages us to love everyone regardless of orientation, race, breed or sex. We even have trans-gender support groups! I do not understand people who walk around with hate in their hearts, yet preach the word of God. Other people's actions do not affect me personally, so what does it matter? If you give love out, it will always come back to you in one form or the other I think.

-Sarah

Unfortunately most people claiming Christ as the basis of their religion are basing that belief off what their pastors tell them and not on what the bible actually says. So much for enlightened thinking.

Definitely making a note of that. Thanks, Lost.

Attached Link: Golden Rule

A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.
*John 13:34

*There's also the Golden Rule which is another excellent one to live by and pretty much every religion has a version of it. I won't quote them all since there are many, many different religions, but I will provide a link to that you can read it for yourself. Point being, if we all truly lived by these two commandments alone, the world would be such a better place.

And last but not least, a card given to me by my late sister that I carry in my wallet.

**Card carrying member of the Human Race. As such I am entitled to live my life as I see fit as long I do no harm to anyone."

*Such a shame that not everyone can remember these 3 things.

*Note...there's lots of ads on that site. But some interesting articles on all types of subjects.

**

Just like at my husbands job, there is a Gay Pride day there, and this is a government office, yet if he puts anything up that has the work God or Christ on it, they take it down immediately. I don't run around demanding that I be accepted as a Christian, I just am a Christian. So please lighten up on the gay stuff, getting tired of hearing about it.

Quote - > Quote - Throughout the Old Testament, God is often self-described as jealous, vengeful, and judging by some descriptions, pretty over-the-top when it comes to revene for injustices. But then, when you run the Universe and your subjects are semi-civilized humans who do far worse to each other on a near-daily basis... let's just call it Getting One's Undivided Attention.

Not until a far more advanced (relatively) stage of civilization do we see the radical concepts as put forth by one Yeshua of Galilee: Love, Forgiveness, Tolerance, Kindness...

/P

Oh come now...  you actually call this a REASON why God is how He is?

I honestly don't (and literally cannot) claim any of it to be a "reason" - just that it lends insight towards finding one.

Quote - Answer me this. If He is all-knowing and all-seeing, how come he did not know EVERYTHING that was going to happen LONG before it ever happened? And KNOWING all of these things...   HOW could He get angry?

Dunno - and if I ever find out, I'd likely to have gained omniscience, in which case I think I'd be too busy putting such a gift to my advantage, instead of discussing how to gain it. ;)

Quote - a mother is preparing to bake bread. She gets all of the ingredients together - except the yeast. She puts the bread in the oven and when the timer goes off and she pulls it out of the oven she finds it has not risen. AND THEN SHE GETS MAD. Now of course she KNEW it would not rise because she intentionally left out the yeast - and YET...   she still got mad. DOES THIS MAKE SENSE?

Bad premise - bread dough doesn't have any concept of free will.

Quote - The devoutly religious really do not ask the hard questions and the vast majority of the time resort to "We don't understand Gods' Plan."  Uhh...  yeah.

Do you fully understand String Theory, enough to repeatably and reliably prove the concept in a laboratory?

You don't?

Well, I guess String Theory is false then, and the scientists working on it are fools. Best get on with ignoring it and finding something else.

(...and before you say it, note that even the biggest proponents of this physics theory don't fully grasp the thing, and will readily admit as much).

You also make a lot of bad overly-generalistic assumptions - that the "devoutly religious do not ask the hard questions". How on Earth would you know that? ...all of them? What questions would you consider "hard" enough, given that outside of geologic scales of measurement, "hard" is a subjective term?

Quote - As has already been pointed out here, it is obvious that most religious consistenly misinterpret the stories in the Bible and sway them to mean what they want them to mean.

Call it a side-effect of struggling to make sense of a document that has been through a whole lot of mishandling over the millennia. Also, you too easily lump in benign individual (and group) struggles for insight, vs. malicious intent and propaganda.

It also happens that misinterpretation (either through mistake or by malicious design) occurs with alarming frequency in secular documents as well - see also the series of UN/IPCC reports.

So no, misinterpretation is not a religious thing - it's a human thing. Which is part of what I was trying to say all this time.

IOW, I'm really sorry, but atheism does not make one superior, nor does it grant you anything special. You're still as human and frail as the rest of us, and just as statistically prone to our foibles and failings of intellect and wisdom... and just as prone to speaking it as if it were (s'cuse the pun) Gospel. ;)

/P