Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Thank you, Buddy. :hug:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Marriage, Christianity and Homosexuality
- Thread starter BUDDY
- Start date
Linus
Well-Known Member
That's a rather rash conclusion. I was attempting to imply the opposite actually. There are plenty of gay people out there who are willing and able to convert to christianity. They must realize, however, that the act of homosexuality (that is, sexual intercourse between two members of the same sex) is sinful. It's just as sinful as pre-marital sex or adultery. So if gay people are permitted to marry other gay people, it presents a problem to those who wish to later convert to christianity. Not only are they in a sinful relationship, but now they are stuck in it, forcing them to either get divorced (another sin if not for the reason of adultery), or to continuously live in sin. So, what then should be done?pdoel said:
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Here's an op-ed I wrote for my local newspaper on this subject. (Prop. 2 was an amendment to the state costitution, banning homosexual marriage...it passed:banghead3):
There has been a lot of legal saber-rattling of late concerning the marriage of homosexual couples, the redefinition of marriage, and Proposition 2 on the Missouri ballot. Recently, congregations have been turning to their religious leaders to make some kind of public statement on the matter. To that end, I am writing this article. At this time, Im not concerning myself with the social implications, morality or scriptural veracity of homosexual marriage. These issues are compelling and extremely important, and they need to be addressed. However, Im concerned chiefly at this point with the constitutionality of the State determining who may and may not be married, and the advisability of people of faith allowing the State to do so.
Historically, matrimony has always been an institution of the Church, ordained by God and administered by its clerics, whatever the religion. The Constitution of the United States forbids the government to make laws concerning the doctrines and practices of the Church. For example, the State cannot determine who may receive Holy Communion. The State cannot determine who may be baptized. Why should the State be allowed to determine who may enter into Holy Matrimony? Marriage, as a religious institution, needs to be constitutionally protected for the Church to administer as it sees fit. No one has the right to receive communion; no one should have the right to be married.
That which has always been under the auspices of the Church and which is one of our most beautiful expressions of Gods boundless love for humanity is being given over to the political meat grinder. Marriage is being made into a bargaining chip for special-interest groups, both political and religious. Marriage has been made into a legal issue, rather than a matter of spiritual discernment. As a result, marriage has been diminished and cheapened. Moreover, I think a constitutional line has been crossed.
In the United States of America, we are free to believe as we choose and to practice as we choose. In calling for a constitutional amendment defining marriage, we are asking the government to make a legal decision concerning peoples sincerely held religious convictions. In calling for a constitutional amendment, the petitioners are actively seeking to foist their own religious beliefs and practices upon others. We cant bully people like that with the Constitution! I cannot, in good conscience, as a member of the clergy and an American citizen, support any law that forces religious beliefs upon others. To outlaw or to legalize homosexual marriage flies in the face of our constitutional right to be free from both religious tyranny and governmental tampering. It strips the religious bodies of their right to hold their own beliefs concerning Holy Matrimony, the power to define a religious act and to discern who may participate in such.
The marriage of homosexual couples is a very serious and complex issue that merits our serious attention. It calls into question our deeply held convictions about society, morality, family, and fair treatment. It upsets our religious and societal norms. I dont believe that this issue is as simple as some people claim. I dont believe that the passage of any law or amendment could possibly simplify it. What I do believe is that the government is neither qualified nor at liberty to decide a clearly spiritual issue such as this.
If we ask and allow the government to decide our religious differences, in effect, to legislate our religious issues, then we are treading on dangerous and insidious ground! To slug these issues out in the legislature and the courts is the wrong course of action. I suggest, instead, that we keep these religious issues within the Church, and act upon them in the context of spiritual awareness and discernment. Im suggesting that we send a different message to our government the message that its not right for them to tamper with one of our greatest religious acts. I plan to send that message by firmly saying no to Proposition 2, as well as any other ballot issue concerning marriage, or any other religious issue. You may do as your conscience dictates. Thats how America works.
There has been a lot of legal saber-rattling of late concerning the marriage of homosexual couples, the redefinition of marriage, and Proposition 2 on the Missouri ballot. Recently, congregations have been turning to their religious leaders to make some kind of public statement on the matter. To that end, I am writing this article. At this time, Im not concerning myself with the social implications, morality or scriptural veracity of homosexual marriage. These issues are compelling and extremely important, and they need to be addressed. However, Im concerned chiefly at this point with the constitutionality of the State determining who may and may not be married, and the advisability of people of faith allowing the State to do so.
Historically, matrimony has always been an institution of the Church, ordained by God and administered by its clerics, whatever the religion. The Constitution of the United States forbids the government to make laws concerning the doctrines and practices of the Church. For example, the State cannot determine who may receive Holy Communion. The State cannot determine who may be baptized. Why should the State be allowed to determine who may enter into Holy Matrimony? Marriage, as a religious institution, needs to be constitutionally protected for the Church to administer as it sees fit. No one has the right to receive communion; no one should have the right to be married.
That which has always been under the auspices of the Church and which is one of our most beautiful expressions of Gods boundless love for humanity is being given over to the political meat grinder. Marriage is being made into a bargaining chip for special-interest groups, both political and religious. Marriage has been made into a legal issue, rather than a matter of spiritual discernment. As a result, marriage has been diminished and cheapened. Moreover, I think a constitutional line has been crossed.
In the United States of America, we are free to believe as we choose and to practice as we choose. In calling for a constitutional amendment defining marriage, we are asking the government to make a legal decision concerning peoples sincerely held religious convictions. In calling for a constitutional amendment, the petitioners are actively seeking to foist their own religious beliefs and practices upon others. We cant bully people like that with the Constitution! I cannot, in good conscience, as a member of the clergy and an American citizen, support any law that forces religious beliefs upon others. To outlaw or to legalize homosexual marriage flies in the face of our constitutional right to be free from both religious tyranny and governmental tampering. It strips the religious bodies of their right to hold their own beliefs concerning Holy Matrimony, the power to define a religious act and to discern who may participate in such.
The marriage of homosexual couples is a very serious and complex issue that merits our serious attention. It calls into question our deeply held convictions about society, morality, family, and fair treatment. It upsets our religious and societal norms. I dont believe that this issue is as simple as some people claim. I dont believe that the passage of any law or amendment could possibly simplify it. What I do believe is that the government is neither qualified nor at liberty to decide a clearly spiritual issue such as this.
If we ask and allow the government to decide our religious differences, in effect, to legislate our religious issues, then we are treading on dangerous and insidious ground! To slug these issues out in the legislature and the courts is the wrong course of action. I suggest, instead, that we keep these religious issues within the Church, and act upon them in the context of spiritual awareness and discernment. Im suggesting that we send a different message to our government the message that its not right for them to tamper with one of our greatest religious acts. I plan to send that message by firmly saying no to Proposition 2, as well as any other ballot issue concerning marriage, or any other religious issue. You may do as your conscience dictates. Thats how America works.
This is a poor analogy. You know, as evidenced by science that smoking is harmful to your health, and can be the root cause of numerous deadly diseases. Do you have any such evidence that a marriage would cause harm? And more importantly, do you have any evidence that a heterosexual marriage is more "healty" than a homosexual marriage?Is preaching the Word of God mean passing a loved one a cigarette while telling him it's bad for him? HECK NO!! You won't give him the cigarette and tell him it's bad for him. But apparently you're willing to pass him a cigarette, while telling him it's bad for him. That makes perfect sense. Kinda like thinking gay marriage is wrong, but I'll let them do it anyways.
Ãanisty
Well-Known Member
Not to mention the fact that many, many Christians would pass a cigarette to a loved one while telling them it's bad for them.lovedmb said:
What's wrong with thinking gay marriage is wrong and letting someone do it anyway? Why do you care? If you think they're going to hell, well let them! It's not your job to jump in and rescue. I promise they don't want your help. It all comes down to minding your own business...you should try it.
Linus
Well-Known Member
The analogy is fine. The logic carries over perfectly well. I don't presume Victor is promoting the idea that homosexuality is bad for your health, but rather that it is bad for your spiritual well being.lovedmb said:
Just as homosexuality is harmful to your spirituality (your relationship with God through Jesus Christ), so is smoking to your health. So, a christian who opposes homosexuality but supports gay marriages (and therefore, sin), is following the same logic as a non-smoker who tells his friend that smoking is bad for his health, but proceeds to light his cigarette for him.
Draka
Wonder Woman
If you hold that to be true then why necessarily would the ethics and values that "must be infused" into government be that of Christianity? You could "infuse" those things from another religion that does not prohibit gay marriage and still have the morals of not stealing and raping and etc. Just because there are things that you would want to keep does not mean that you have to have all the things from Christianity.Victor said:Not completely, no. But I do believe that while the state should not establish a particular state religion or require religious observance, it still must be infused with the ethics and values of religion generally if it is to operate properly. Like not stealing, raping, etc. Would you allow something like consensual cannibalism, prostitution, etc. simply because they feel it's their right to do so? Where would you draw the line? After all, you don't want to take away their choice do you?
Draka
Wonder Woman
The only reason that this has anything to do with Christianity is the Christian influence over government. If Christianity did not have the influence over government that it has then this would not even be a question. My point is simply this. You can still have the morals and ethics of religion in general without the specifics that are outlined in the bible. There are many religions that do not have any problem with gay marriage...even some Christian denominations. And as for fighting against things I find wrong...well, that would be the imposition of one's beliefs on another that has absolutely nothing to do with how they live their lives. What concern is it to you personally if Tom and Harry down the street get married? Nothing...nothing at all...so why say they can't? You can personally believe it is wrong...but what gives you the right to say they can't get married...nothing.Victor said:
America is country of many religions. Each has its own holly books ans beliefs. And as we know, each has its own fanatics. Christianity, throughout history, is the most violent and most opinionated religion on the planet. It has killed more people than all the plagues put together.
Many countries, America included, allow religions a tyax free status. That makes them "better" than average folks. A church does not have to pay taxes but I do. Televangelists make millions from their naive followers, but they hide behind their church to avoid taxation. The same people who let their religious leaders drain them financialy are the opnes who try to impose laws on the rest of us. Since all religions are treated equally under American law, we should make laws that do not allow women to show their faces or go to school and other such nonsense. The Koran is as good as the Bible in the eyes of American law. Do not confuse preference for legal right. Do not impose beliefs above the law.
Unibeauty
Member
When you started I thought something totally different than when you ended. Like the end!