Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

Should places of worship be required to hold gay weddings

  • Yes, Denmark does it, the Scandinavians are enlightened

    Votes: 17 7.0%
  • No, I THOUGHT this was AMERICA

    Votes: 198 81.8%
  • You are a baby brains without a formed opinion

    Votes: 5 2.1%
  • Other, explain

    Votes: 22 9.1%

  • Total voters
    242
Oh, you mean that the God of "love and mercy" would damn anyone to hell for acknowledging two people's right to love each other? If God hates gays so much, why did He create people with the ability to love homosexually?

God doesn't hate homosexuals since there is no such thing anyway. God hates the sin, not the sinner. Read Jude 1 when you get a minute.

I have. It makes no mention of gay weddings, cake, clerks, licenses, or any of the other silly shit you claim it does.

You realize that we can't actually read the hallucinated version of Jude 1 that you've made up, right?
 
Oh, you mean that the God of "love and mercy" would damn anyone to hell for acknowledging two people's right to love each other? If God hates gays so much, why did He create people with the ability to love homosexually?

God doesn't hate homosexuals since there is no such thing anyway. God hates the sin, not the sinner. Read Jude 1 when you get a minute.

I have. It makes no mention of gay weddings, cake, clerks, licenses, or any of the other silly shit you claim it does.

You realize that we can't actually read the hallucinated version of Jude 1 that you've made up, right?
Jude 1 is a writing against false teachers who teach a form of Gnosticism (spirit is good, flesh is evil) so that whatever is done in the body does not matter. They teach that Jesus was spirit not body. Jude warns the people to avoid these false teachers.

Jude 1 is an applicable condemnation of Silhouette who is a false teacher, both about scripture, the Gospel's meaning, and about homosexuals. She only condemns herself.
 
Churches should not be forced to accommodate homosexual marriages. Should gays be allowed to marry? Yes.
Should churches have the right to decide whether or not to marry them? Also yes.

Pretty much everyone agrees on the latter. Churches should not be forced to accommodate homosexual marriage.

Then why should businesses? Should Churches get special privilege? Is THAT the point of the First Amendment???

Because business is commerce. And falls right under the State's authority to regulate. Religion isn't. And falls outside it.
How did marriage become a part of commerce, because that is a problem it seems. Being a part of commerce in some way, and in which has allowed government to strong arm it, and to have dominion over it somehow, has now become a huge mistake. Marriage is the uniting of one man and one woman in the eyes of God. Period.
 
Last edited:
Churches are religious institutions that exist to spread the word of whatever God they worship.
Businesses exist to make money and get rich, not promote some spiritual and moral agenda.

The two clearly aren't the same.
Yes, they aren't. A person's faith is protected Constitutionally.

Not to the extent that they can ignore any law they wish..

Passively refusing to promote homosexuality is Kim Davis' right as a Christian who knows the dire warnings of Jude 1 and what the Pope just re-asserted late September...


No court has ever found that Kim Davis has the right to use the State to impose her religious views on people who don't share them. Every court to hear her case has found that she is in violation of the constitution.

So you're stuck with no constitutional violation of Kim's rights. While Kim violates other people's rights. Are you starting to see why your pseudo-legal claims have nothing to do with any legal outcome.

Um, ever?

You may have forgotten so I'll remind you once again of the false premise. Homosexuals aren't a race of people. They are just people doing aberrent things strictly forbidden in the Bible.

A strawman that might have some relevance if I'd argued that gays are a race. Which I never did.

Try again. This time without the fallacies of logic.
Marriage should immediately be separated from the state.. Period.
 
Any type of religious ceremony or traditional religious ceremony as with the uniting of one man and one woman in marriage, should immediately be separated from state control, and placed back in it's rightful place to represent that which is good in the eyes of God, because it has been highjacked while it was under (what use to be a trusted state control) where it was adopted somehow by the state for various reasons in which once was good. The state being seized by various forces now, has made that a mistake to give the state control over some institutions in these ways.
 
How did marriage become a part of commerce, because that is a problem it seems. Being a part of commerce in some way, and in which has allowed government to strong arm it, and to have dominion over it somehow, has now become a huge mistake. Marriage is the uniting of one man and one woman in the eyes of God. Period.

Umm, no. Not here in the US. This is a secular nation & unlike religious States - no RELIGIOUS ceremony is valid nor legal without a marriage license issued by the State.

A civil marriage performed without benefit of religion is legal where as a religious marriage performed without a civil license is not.
 
Any type of religious ceremony or traditional religious ceremony as with the uniting of one man and one woman in marriage, should immediately be separated from state control, and placed back in it's rightful place to represent that which is good in the eyes of God, because it has been highjacked while it was under (what use to be a trusted state control) where it was adopted somehow by the state for various reasons in which once was good. The state being seized by various forces now, has made that a mistake to give the state control over some institutions in these ways.

Ah, now you enter the territory of which religious doctrine should be adhered to. Many religions allow multiple spouses (according to THEIR God). Why does your God get to take precedence?
 
Last edited:
Oh, you mean that the God of "love and mercy" would damn anyone to hell for acknowledging two people's right to love each other? If God hates gays so much, why did He create people with the ability to love homosexually?

God doesn't hate homosexuals since there is no such thing anyway. God hates the sin, not the sinner. Read Jude 1 when you get a minute.

I have. It makes no mention of gay weddings, cake, clerks, licenses, or any of the other silly shit you claim it does.

You realize that we can't actually read the hallucinated version of Jude 1 that you've made up, right?
Jude 1 is a writing against false teachers who teach a form of Gnosticism (spirit is good, flesh is evil) so that whatever is done in the body does not matter. They teach that Jesus was spirit not body. Jude warns the people to avoid these false teachers.

Jude 1 is an applicable condemnation of Silhouette who is a false teacher, both about scripture, the Gospel's meaning, and about homosexuals. She only condemns herself.
The false teacher here is you Jake. I know you would like to ignore this part of Jude but it still remain; "How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts." That is also talking about anyone who walks after their own lusts and attempts to condemn or chastise those who tell the truth of the matter. Sodom and Gomorrah were never found righteous in God's eyes and neither are those who follow in their footsteps. Quit trying to twist God's grace into something that allows anyone to try to justify their own lack of self control. Grace does not extend to those who willingly give themselves over and falsely accuse another. The Lord's mercy does endure but if you chose that path of sin you are given over to your own sin and you live in bondage to that sin when you do that, grace no longer applies.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2pe/2/19/s_1158019

2Peter 2:17-20
These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.

While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption
: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.

For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
 
Any type of religious ceremony or traditional religious ceremony as with the uniting of one man and one woman in marriage, should immediately be separated from state control, and placed back in it's rightful place to represent that which is good in the eyes of God, because it has been highjacked while it was under (what use to be a trusted state control) where it was adopted somehow by the state for various reasons in which once was good. The state being seized by various forces now, has made that a mistake to give the state control over some institutions in these ways.
Marriage is not a state function.

No church has to register a marriage with the state. The FLDS, as an example, marry all the time without the state being involved.

If the couple want the governmental perks and reciprocaties and obligations that go with state-recognized marriage, then it must be registered.
 
Rodishi continues to speak of things she understandeth not. She is like those who listen to Jesus below and amazed

Mark 12: 17 Well, then," Jesus said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God." His reply completely amazed them.

Romans 13: 1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.
4 For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.
6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.
7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
 
Rodishi continues to speak of things she understandeth not. She is like those who listen to Jesus below and amazed

Mark 12: 17 Well, then," Jesus said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God." His reply completely amazed them.

Romans 13: 1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.
4 For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.
6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.
7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
You are not my governing authority God is. Now where in the constitution of this great country says you have a right to lie and not be called on it.

I already told you God created a Rod of destruction and a Rod of correction. You seem to like the Rod of destruction better so go for it but do not include me in.

You serve your own not Jehovah as you try to twist the Word to fit your own desires.
 
Churches don't have to accommodate gay marriage. But people aren't churches. I would think this was obvious. But clearly I have to reiterate this fact for you.

The 1st Amendment doesn't say "freedom of church"...it says "freedom of religion"

So...churchs are tax exempt. Does that mean that people are too?

It should. If churches are exempt, so should other businesses, so should everyone. The First Amendment shouldn't be interpreted as special rights for special people. Interpreting it that way puts government in charge of deciding which religions are authorized and which aren't.
 
Rodishi continues to speak of things she understandeth not. She is like those who listen to Jesus below and amazed

Mark 12: 17 Well, then," Jesus said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God." His reply completely amazed them.

Romans 13: 1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.
4 For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.
6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.
7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
You are not my governing authority God is. Now where in the constitution of this great country says you have a right to lie and not be called on it. I already told you God created a Rod of destruction and a Rod of correction. You seem to like the Rod of destruction better so go for it but do not include me in. You serve your own not Jehovah as you try to twist the Word to fit your own desires.
Seek not to counsel St. Mark, who writes the words of Jesus, or St. Paul. The words of the Lord and the apostles are clear and correct. Submit to authority, for authority is of God. If authority is evil, then the judgement is from God, not Rodishi.
 
Last edited:
Churches don't have to accommodate gay marriage. But people aren't churches. I would think this was obvious. But clearly I have to reiterate this fact for you.

The 1st Amendment doesn't say "freedom of church"...it says "freedom of religion"

So...churchs are tax exempt. Does that mean that people are too?

It should. If churches are exempt, so should other businesses, so should everyone. The First Amendment shouldn't be interpreted as special rights for special people. Interpreting it that way puts government in charge of deciding which religions are authorized and which aren't.
I agree whole heartedly that churches should not be tax exempt.
 
Beagle, I counsel you to try to not counsel scripture, which is clear and to the salvation of the soul.

My take..

13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Couldn't it also be said that "SHE is also a minister of God" in that to councel thee for good, and so she is issueing marriage liscenses to that which God does approve of in her understanding of that which God would approve of ? Now if thou doest that which is evil unto her (PLACE HER IN CHAINS AND in BONDAGE), and to do this for her belief in that which in her understanding was good, and in that which was legal until she was brought before the unjust judge, then be afraid; for she beareth not the sword in vain; for she is the minister of God in her life, who is a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil against her.

Would this apply in her case maybe ?

If not then why not ?

Oh are we going to be quoting the Bible in debating Ms. Davis?

Romans is very clear that Christians are supposed to obey authority- there is no 'wiggle' room here- 'authority'- which the New Testament says God has appointed- told Ms. Davis to issue marriage licenses.

Ms. Davis is cherry picking from the NT about what she wants to obey.

Romans 13:1-5
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority?
Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good.
But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain.
For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

You feel compelled to alter the words of Roman 13 in order to justify her defiance of authority. Like all those who cherry pick from the Bible.

Do you not know the true meanings of what you have used above ? The above condems that which is bad, and lifts up that which is good. There is no authority recognized other than and/or except for that which God does approve of in order to be recognized as such..

The words are about as specific as Paul has ever gotten. Paul for instance never said "Do not engage in homosexuals relationships"- but Paul very specifically said to obey authority.

Why obey authority?

Because all authority comes from God. Why do you resist listening to Paul- for these specific instructions?

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment
.
For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority?
Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good.
But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain.
For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

Nowhere does Paul say "Obey authority- if you agree with authority"
For rulers are not a TERROR to good, so now that good is being redefined by man, then justifications begin to justify just about anything anymore these days. People speak about these things as if they are living for the moment now, but after the moment has passed, then comes the judgement.

Still waiting for you to explain why the explicit words of Paul are not important to you. Do you also ignore what Paul says about male homosexuals- or do you use Paul's words then as a rational to discriminate against homosexuals?

Here again.

The words are about as specific as Paul has ever gotten. Paul for instance never said "Do not engage in homosexuals relationships"- but Paul very specifically said to obey authority.

Why obey authority?

Because all authority comes from God. Why do you resist listening to Paul- for these specific instructions?

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment
.
For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority?
Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good.
But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain.
For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

Nowhere does Paul say "Obey authority- if you agree with authority"
 
Churches are religious institutions that exist to spread the word of whatever God they worship.
Businesses exist to make money and get rich, not promote some spiritual and moral agenda.

The two clearly aren't the same.
Yes, they aren't. A person's faith is protected Constitutionally. The right to do trade with this or that person isn't. And neither is the "right" to force a Christian to abdicate their faith to passively refuse to accomodate anyone's behavior that is forbidden under penalty of eternal soul death in the Bible. (see Jude 1 for details)

Jude says no such thing.

But Paul says that Christians- including if she is one- Ms. Davis- should obey authority- because all authority comes from God.

The words are about as specific as Paul has ever gotten. Paul for instance never said "Do not engage in homosexuals relationships"- but Paul very specifically said to obey authority.

Why obey authority?

Because all authority comes from God. Why do you resist listening to Paul- for these specific instructions?

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment
.
For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority?
Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good.
But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain.
For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.


Nowhere does Paul say "Christians don't have to obey authority"- Paul says 'Christians who disobey authority disobey God'
 
Oh, you mean that the God of "love and mercy" would damn anyone to hell for acknowledging two people's right to love each other? If God hates gays so much, why did He create people with the ability to love homosexually?

God doesn't hate homosexuals since there is no such thing anyway. God hates the sin, not the sinner. Read Jude 1 when you get a minute.

God says Christians should obey authority- read Romans 13 sometime in between your anti-gay tirades.
 
Any type of religious ceremony or traditional religious ceremony as with the uniting of one man and one woman in marriage, should immediately be separated from state control, and placed back in it's rightful place to represent that which is good in the eyes of God, because it has been highjacked while it was under (what use to be a trusted state control) where it was adopted somehow by the state for various reasons in which once was good. The state being seized by various forces now, has made that a mistake to give the state control over some institutions in these ways.
Marriage is not a state function.

No church has to register a marriage with the state. The FLDS, as an example, marry all the time without the state being involved.

If the couple want the governmental perks and reciprocaties and obligations that go with state-recognized marriage, then it must be registered.
So the state uses bribery to draw people in or to force people to come through it in order to make the rules apply to it, and that it so wants to in regards to it eh ?
 
Churches don't have to accommodate gay marriage. But people aren't churches. I would think this was obvious. But clearly I have to reiterate this fact for you.

The 1st Amendment doesn't say "freedom of church"...it says "freedom of religion"

Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from the law.

Christians have to obey the law- even if their religion tells them otherwise. Of course Paul tells Christians to obey the law- but some people who call themselves Christians ignore the law- and just do what they believe the Bible tells them to do.

So Silhouette- what about the First Amendment rights of these parents to beat their kids to death- because of their interpretation of the bible?

This week CNN reported that Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz, beat their seven-year-old daughter Lydia because they believed God wanted them to. The couple tortured the child for seven consecutive hours, taking breaks for prayer. When police arrived at the Schatz residence, Lydia was still alive. An officer administered CPR, but it was too late.

“We have heard the phrase ‘death by a thousand lashes,’” Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey told CNN. “That’s basically what this was.”

The Schatzes, who had eight other children, didn’t only beat Lydia. All of their children were regularly tortured in the name of God. Lydia’s sister, eleven-year-old Zariah was beaten so severely that she almost died.

CNN reported that the couple was heavily influenced by a Christian child-rearing book titled To Train Up a Child by Michael and Debi Pearl of Tennessee-based No Greater Joy Ministries.

“If you spare the rod, you hate your child,” author Michael Pearl told CNN. “But if you love him, you chasten him timely. God would not have commanded parents to use the rod if it were not good for the child,” the book states.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top