Gay Marriage - Question.....

[JakeStarkey]

Bonzi, I know you are a humble Bible reader and follower of Jesus. Please do not attempt to instruct and lead men on Biblical principles. You know better.

I addressed that already - not going to do it again

You just like giving me a hard time... silly goose!

No, you are being haughty and stiff necked refusing to receive the instruction of the Word of God. It is a literal instruction, and as a woman, you do not get to interpret it or instruct men.

 

[Bonzi]

Bonzi, I know you are a humble Bible reader and follower of Jesus. Please do not attempt to instruct and lead men on Biblical principles. You know better.

I addressed that already - not going to do it again

You just like giving me a hard time... silly goose!

No, you are being haughty and stiff necked refusing to receive the instruction of the Word of God. It is a literal instruction, and as a woman, you do not get to interpret it or instruct men.

Love you Jake

 

[Cecilie1200]

... if you are not a Christian, or don't believe the Bible, why is it important to you to try to make it sound like God and/or the Bible is /does not condemn homosexuality?

If you don't believe, it should be irrelevant to you.

Now that gay people have the right to marry, you're right it IS completely irrelevent

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

In all fairness, because I've been ragging on the lefties for digressing and not discussing the topic, I do now have to point out to you that THIS is also not really on-topic.

People are not self-disciplined enough to stay on topic - chaos always ensues.
I guess that is why they have an area for structured debate - held more accountable to stay on topic.
I admit I don't redirect back to keep things on topic either, but mostly out of laziness. Plus, I like the side questions, I think the more people know about the Bible the better.....

While I don't have a problem with a bit of digression to answering an interesting point, I don't care for allowing leftists to completely derail a topic simply because they're too cowardly to admit it or even face being wrong.

This is actually a question I very much want to have addressed and answered, so I'm less willing to tolerate everyone (and I do mean everyone, as in "both sides") kneejerk to their standard squawking points and turn this into a mindless repetition of an argument we've done to death a million times already.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well that's fair enough.

The reason that the Left needs to reject the fact that the scriptures specifically forbid sexual deviancy is because the Ideological Left is the means by which evil is advanced politically.

Meaning that the purpose of rejecting the scriptural truth is to mislead others; to lead them into wickedness.

It's evil...

And that's all that there is to this.

 

[Skylar]

Well that's fair enough.

The reason that the Left needs to reject the fact that the scriptures specifically forbid sexual deviancy is because the Ideological Left is the means by which evil is advanced politically.

Or because civil law isn't bound to your personal religious beliefs.

Meaning that the purpose of rejecting the scriptural truth is to mislead others; to lead them into wickedness.

Given that you've lamented about the 'responsibility to eradicate homosexuals' as morally justified, clearly your sense of good and evil is hopelessly broken.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Well that's fair enough.

The reason that the Left needs to reject the fact that the scriptures specifically forbid sexual deviancy is because the Ideological Left is the means by which evil is advanced politically.

Meaning that the purpose of rejecting the scriptural truth is to mislead others; to lead them into wickedness.

It's evil...

And that's all that there is to this.

ISIS agrees. Nice company you keep...

 

[Cecilie1200]

... if you are not a Christian, or don't believe the Bible, why is it important to you to try to make it sound like God and/or the Bible is /does not condemn homosexuality?

If you don't believe, it should be irrelevant to you.

As long as opponents to homosexuals do not bring up the Bible- I will not. I personally do not care what a persons religious beliefs are.

However, if someone uses the Bible as a rationalization here on the boards for why they believe homosexuals should be discriminated against- then I am fine with actually discussing what the Bible says.

Frankly- from the rhetoric of the Far Right Christians, an ignorant outsider would easily assume that homosexuality is one of the main themes of the Bible- and that Jesus's primary message was regarding homosexuality. Because that is what the Far Right Christians focus on.

But instead- the NT barely mentions homosexuality, and Jesus's own words are barely mentioned.

So to recap- I won't challenge your belief in what the Bible says if you don't cite the Bible as your reason to discriminate.

You're a frigging liar. You bring it up all the damned time.

And you still haven't answered the question. What's it to you WHAT other people believe? Why do you feel the need to correct other people's personal beliefs, particularly when you react with such outrage if someone tries to do the same to you?

Free free to show how I have lied. Otherwise of course you would be lying- and I think your religion says something about that?

So to recap- I won't challenge your belief in what the Bible says if you don't cite the Bible as your reason to discriminate.

Yeah, you go ahead with that. I have no intention of spending my time at work digging through your body of retardation. Maybe when I get home later.

Won't change what everyone knows, anyway.

So, to recap, you drag religion into arguments and lecture people on their religious practices all the time, and you're a disingenuous sack of crap.

 

[Syriusly]

... if you are not a Christian, or don't believe the Bible, why is it important to you to try to make it sound like God and/or the Bible is /does not condemn homosexuality?

If you don't believe, it should be irrelevant to you.

As long as opponents to homosexuals do not bring up the Bible- I will not. I personally do not care what a persons religious beliefs are.

However, if someone uses the Bible as a rationalization here on the boards for why they believe homosexuals should be discriminated against- then I am fine with actually discussing what the Bible says.

Frankly- from the rhetoric of the Far Right Christians, an ignorant outsider would easily assume that homosexuality is one of the main themes of the Bible- and that Jesus's primary message was regarding homosexuality. Because that is what the Far Right Christians focus on.

But instead- the NT barely mentions homosexuality, and Jesus's own words are barely mentioned.

So to recap- I won't challenge your belief in what the Bible says if you don't cite the Bible as your reason to discriminate.

You're a frigging liar. You bring it up all the damned time.

And you still haven't answered the question. What's it to you WHAT other people believe? Why do you feel the need to correct other people's personal beliefs, particularly when you react with such outrage if someone tries to do the same to you?

Free free to show how I have lied. Otherwise of course you would be lying- and I think your religion says something about that?

So to recap- I won't challenge your belief in what the Bible says if you don't cite the Bible as your reason to discriminate.

Yeah, you go ahead with that. I have no intention of spending my time at work digging through your body of retardation. Maybe when I get home later.

Won't change what everyone knows, anyway.

So, to recap, you drag religion into arguments and lecture people on their religious practices all the time, and you're a disingenuous sack of crap.

To recap- this is a thread where a Christian is talking about gay marriage and her religion- and I respond about gay marriage and religion.

And to recap once again- you accused me of lying, but can't back up that claim because you pulled it out of your ass and then sniffed your fingers.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Let me put this another way.

It makes no more sense to me why Christians would object to homosexuals any more than they would Hindu's.

Based upon the Bible.

Let me put this another way.

Why does it have to make any sense to you at all, since you don't share their belief system?

Again- as long as a person is not using their Religion as an excuse to encourage discrimination- I really don't care.

But when you- or anyone else tells me that homosexuals are bad because God says so- be prepared for me to challenge your religious beliefs.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism.

I understand why you disagree with what people believe. What I'm trying to understand is why that translates into, "You're doing it wrong. You should be a Christian THIS way", instead of "Your religion sucks, I want no part of it", which would be the logical reaction. I mean, I disagree with Muslims, particularly the radical, violent ones, but it would never occur to me to start trying to reinterpret the Qu'ran for them and tell them they're not practicing Islam "correctly". I'm not any sort of Muslim, so that is both inappropriate and pointless.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well that's fair enough.

The reason that the Left needs to reject the fact that the scriptures specifically forbid sexual deviancy is because the Ideological Left is the means by which evil is advanced politically.

Meaning that the purpose of rejecting the scriptural truth is to mislead others; to lead them into wickedness.

It's evil...

And that's all that there is to this.

ISIS agrees. Nice company you keep...

ISIS?

That's the Islamic Cult that was ARMED, TRAINED AND FUNDED by your Peasantpimp?

Hmm... Well how about THAT! I guess even a stopped Cult-Clock is right twice a day. Go figure...

OH! Now let me asks... do you know if they LOVE BACON, too?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.(Timothy 2: 11-12) - No woman President I guess...the bible's against it.

The New Testament has a handful of verses in support of slavery and indicating that a slave was not fully human...I wonder if I would be religiously persecuted if I started using the bible to support bringing back slavery.

That's three people who think being asked WHY they do something is an invitation for them to do it even more. I have two private bets with myself, one about how many leftists/non-Christians will do this very thing, and the other about how many pages it will take before ONE of these assholes stops proving Bonzi's point and actually answers the ******* question.

The question was answered...you just don't like the answer given. Not my problem.

You need to look up the definition of "answer", because it definitely doesn't mean what you think it does.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Let me put this another way.

It makes no more sense to me why Christians would object to homosexuals any more than they would Hindu's.

Based upon the Bible.

Let me put this another way.

Why does it have to make any sense to you at all, since you don't share their belief system?

Again- as long as a person is not using their Religion as an excuse to encourage discrimination- I really don't care.

But when you- or anyone else tells me that homosexuals are bad because God says so- be prepared for me to challenge your religious beliefs.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism.

I understand why you disagree with what people believe. What I'm trying to understand is why that translates into, "You're doing it wrong. You should be a Christian THIS way", instead of "Your religion sucks, I want no part of it", which would be the logical reaction. I mean, I disagree with Muslims, particularly the radical, violent ones, but it would never occur to me to start trying to reinterpret the Qu'ran for them and tell them they're not practicing Islam "correctly". I'm not any sort of Muslim, so that is both inappropriate and pointless.

ROFLMNAO! Did you get the "ISLAM HATES QUEERS TOO!" ruse?

LOL!

Seems the degenerates are desperately conspiring to find a way to fix the leaks intrinsic to their fatally flawed vessel.

I for one and always impressed by mass delusion... it's so pitifully EVIL.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

To recap- this is a thread where a Christian is talking about gay marriage...

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

Therefore the only way that 'homosexual marriage' can exist, is where a homosexual male, joins with a homosexual female.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Or because civil law isn't bound to your personal religious beliefs.

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

This is a function of the natural design of the Human Species... thus sets well above the pitiful reach of 'civil law'.

Meaning that the purpose of rejecting the scriptural truth is to mislead others; to lead them into wickedness.

Given that you've lamented about the 'responsibility to eradicate homosexuals' as morally justified, clearly your sense of good and evil is hopelessly broken.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it is the duty of every free sovereign to destroy those who threaten their lives or their means to exercise their God-given rights.

This is the fundamental principle on which the very IDEA of America... rests. See: The Charter of American Principles, declared as the foundation of the Americans independence from the rapidly declining British Cult.

 

[Skylar]

Or because civil law isn't bound to your personal religious beliefs.

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

Or one man and one man. Or one woman and one woman. And that's true in 50 of 50 States.

See how that works?

This is a function of the natural design of the Human Species... thus sets well above the pitiful reach of 'civil law'.

You're confusing ******* with marriage. They aren't the same thing. And as all the same sex marriage demonstrates, your subjective personal opinion on marriage doesn't amount to much.

Marriage is whatever we say it is. As we invented it. Get used to the idea.

Yes, it is the duty of every free sovereign to destroy those who threaten their lives or their means to exercise their God-given rights.

This is the fundamental principle on which the very IDEA of America... rests.

Which has nothing to do with your insane murder fantasies about decapitating 'leftists' and 'eradicating homosexuals'.

You just want to hurt people. And your hopeless broken sense of morality is not what America is based on. No thank you.

 

[Skylar]

To recap- this is a thread where a Christian is talking about gay marriage...

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

Therefore the only way that 'homosexual marriage' can exist, is where a homosexual male, joins with a homosexual female.

Or if he finds a willing man who will marry him. It happens all the time, in every State.

Including yours, Keyes.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Or one man and one man. Or one woman and one woman. And that's true in 50 of 50 States.

The newly established US Supreme Legislature did not design humanity, therefore it has no say in that which is part and parcel of the human physiological design.

Ya see scamp, Humanity was designed with two distinct, but complementing genders. Each respectively designed to join with the other. Wherein the two distinct bodies are joined to form one sustainable body... thus establishing the blueprint of Marriage, as the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

What you have no means to understand is that Homosexuality is a function of the rape of an infant/toddler... wherein the degenerate engages in sex play with the child, which is comprised of much laughter and cooing, and which is centered upon the genitals of the infant/toddler initiating a premature hormonal response. This response imprints upon the child's psyche, the association of SEX with PLAY, FUN and ACCEPTANCE... and sexual desire with the gender of the rapist... which is why Homosexuals associate Sex with those of their own gender and relate to such as Play, Fun and Acceptance... rejecting such as the physiological purpose for which it is so otherwise clearly designed and thus as such is, quite literally: DEFINED.

We will often see this demonstrated where a degenerate is being exposed to the fact that Sexual Intercourse Defines the purpose of Marriage, at which point the degenerate launches into a feigned outrage, which demands that "MARRIAGE IS NOT *******!" or some other variation which may or may not reach so deeply into vulgarity, particularly where the individual at issue is having their pat rationalization stripped from them by irrepressible reason... .

Odds are we will see such a demonstration, right here in this thread... fairly shortly, when the would-be 'contributor'; cited above, returns to concede these points, in its own special way.

See how that works?

This is a function of the natural design of the Human Species... thus sets well above the pitiful reach of 'civil law'.

You're confusing ******* with marriage. ...

OH! Well... THAT was fast!

Your concession is again... Duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[hipeter924]

... if you are not a Christian, or don't believe the Bible, why is it important to you to try to make it sound like God and/or the Bible is /does not condemn homosexuality?

If you don't believe, it should be irrelevant to you.

I might have been baptized, but I am not Christian.

Even if I were to accept, even for a moment that there was a god. To worship a god would be giving into collectivism, abandoning individualism, giving up my freedom of thought and behavior, as well as condoning a god's actions and intentions (even if I am opposed to them) - simply on the basis of a reward after death; or a punishment if I refuse to comply.

If and when death comes, I don't expect anything, especially not a reward or punishment.

The Bible calls homosexual sex and relationships an 'abomination', but there is no evidence it views homosexuality as worse than adulatory, or that love thy neighbor and so forth are trumped by someone participating in an 'abomination', and the same applies for someone with another faith or ideology.

It isn't irrelevant to me when religious people insist on taking a text literally, unless their religious text states something entirely different, and their certain interpretation could lead to discrimination or even bloodshed - as in the case of massacres and then a genocide of Jews.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

.

... if you are not a Christian, or don't believe the Bible, why is it important to you to try to make it sound like God and/or the Bible is /does not condemn homosexuality?

If you don't believe, it should be irrelevant to you.

I might have been baptized, but I am not Christian.

Even if I were to accept, even for a moment that there was a god. To worship a god would be giving into collectivism, abandoning individualism, giving up my freedom of thought and behavior, as well as condoning a god's actions and intentions (even if I am opposed to them) - simply on the basis of a reward after death; or a punishment if I refuse to comply.

Based upon what?

God gave you your individualism... your freedom of thought and expression and the principles to guide you through life, as you would lead your life.

How does that in any way deprive, usurp, undermine, or infringe upon you... or your individualism?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

If and when death comes, I don't expect anything, especially not a reward or punishment.

You're in for one helluva surprise... except it will not BE a surprise.

At your final judgment, you will know that THAT YOU KNEW... and you rejected the truth, as a means for you to live a lie. There will only be shame, regret and eternal, unconsolable regret.