A long-time lesbian couple believe in the sanctity of marriage.

[GePap]

These couples did not get married in chuches, they were married by the State of California, which happens to have a fully secular government.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Theben
No, you put words in my mouth. I said values change. I never said a 50%+ majority, based on citizen polling no less, is a requirement to enact new legislation.

How do you measure the values of a population or how it may or may not change without somesort of polling?

Originally posted by MrFun
I'm sure there were some bigoted opponents to legalizing interracial marriage in 1950s who used the red herring approach of screaming about polygamy becoming the next thing to be legalized.

Is this how you intend to respond to questions you can't come up with an easy answer for?

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The bible says nothing about miscegenation, but it does have provisions against homosexuality, which you seem to enjoy ignoring. How can Christianity bless that which is contrary to their own teachings?

Based on my conversations with CivNation when he was still here, I would be willing to argue that your interpretation of those scriptures are at the very least debatable. You are correct though in stateing that it is against the current doctrine of the religion. Interestingly there appears to be some evidence of gay marriages within the early Christian Church.

[Ben Kenobi]

Based on my conversations with CivNation when he was still here, I would be willing to argue that your interpretation of those scriptures are at the very least debatable. You are correct though in stateing that it is against the current doctrine of the religion. Interestingly there appears to be some evidence of gay marriages within the early Christian Church.

I've not had the privilege to discuss with CivNation.

Scripture is pretty clear, at least Christ's words in Matthew.

Matthew 19:4-8

"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

Christ lays out adam and eve as the model for marriage, the union of a man and a woman together.

[Asher]

Christ hates people who talk about him on Apolyton.

Asher 69-3.

[Theben]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
How do you measure the values of a population or how it may or may not change without somesort of polling?

Are you taking BK lessons?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by GePap
These couples did not get married in chuches, they were married by the State of California, which happens to have a fully secular government.

And thank god for secular government.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Scripture is pretty clear, at least Christ's words in Matthew.

Matthew 19:4-8



Christ lays out adam and eve as the model for marriage, the union of a man and a woman together.

Oh for f*ck's sake. That passage has nothing to do with heterosexuality; it's about whether or not divorce is permissible. Let's quote Matthew 19:3-9 rather than 4-8, and see what happens when we expand it by two teeny tiny verses:

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?”

He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?”

He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

Ben, are you dishonest, stupid, or both?

[Ben Kenobi]

Oh for f*ck's sake. That passage has nothing to do with heterosexuality; it's about whether or not divorce is permissible.

Your point? He is doing two things here. First, he is explaining what marriage is, and secondly, why divorce is contrary to the ideal of marraige. The two go hand in hand together. You cannot explain why divorce is wrong without first explaining what marriage is and what it ought to be.

Ben, are you dishonest, stupid, or both?

I think you are the one being dishonest here. Christ explicitly holds Adam and Eve to be the model for marriage, which is why he refers to the point "and he created them male and female", etc.

Jesus was answering much more then just the question posed. Yes, the question was why is divorce contrary to the ideal of marriage, and his answer is that marriage is the union of a man and a woman together. He does not say the union of two persons.

Why is this? You claim it's not an affirmation of the sanctity of marriage, when I see it as very clear, and Christ spells it all out.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Wrong, Ben, as usual. I though you might understand the Bible a little better that you understand the American political system, but alas.

Christ, in Matthew 19, is never asked to define marriage; indeed, he never brings it up. It's the Pharisees who enter the discussion by talking about man and wife, and only then does Christ bring up Adam and Eve. He's asked a question that presupposes a heterosexual couple, and he answer based on that presupposition. There is no way any reasonable person would read that passage as "defining marriage."

But it gets better, because it's later in that very same chapter (19:16-19) that Jesus is asked

“Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?”

And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.”

He said to him, “Which ones?”

And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

So there it is. Does Jesus say don't be a homo? No he does not. Does he say don't marry someone of the same sex? No he does not. He doesn't even say, worship me as a God. He says, follow a handful of rules that could apply to anybody, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that's all God asks.

Stop offending God by misusing his Holy Word, blasphemer.

[Asher]

It doesn't matter what "God" or "Christ" or even Ben thinks, so why is this up for discussion?

Marriage predates Chrisitanity and Marriage is a secular concept as far as the government (a secular entity goes). If you don't like, **** right off to Iran or some similar theocracy.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
This is so repulsive, just the idea of gay people getting it on

Why do you think about gay people getting it on? I doubt they think about conservatives like you getting it on. Not intentionally anyway. Oh God No!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
How can Christianity bless that which is contrary to their own teachings?

Is that rhetorical or a trick question?

[Ben Kenobi]

Wrong, Ben, as usual. I though you might understand the Bible a little better that you understand the American political system, but alas.

Ad hominem to start. Excellent biblical reasoning to defend your position.

Christ, in Matthew 19, is never asked to define marriage; indeed, he never brings it up.

What passage are you reading? He spends his whole time discussion marriage, it's foundation, and why it was created in the first place.

I'm not sure where you are coming from Rufus, it's plain as day. I already said that while Christ was not asked the question "where does marriage come from", Christ answered that question along with the other one on divorce, because to explain that God instituted marriage in the first place requires a discussion on the origin of marriage.

It's the Pharisees who enter the discussion by talking about man and wife, and only then does Christ bring up Adam and Eve. He's asked a question that presupposes a heterosexual couple, and he answer based on that presupposition. There is no way any reasonable person would read that passage as "defining marriage."

Why didn't he say "persons" instead of man and woman as the union of two "persons"? That was my question from previous and you remain silent.

“Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?”

You are so far off from this passage, but go ahead raise it up.

Look at Christ's response:

And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.”

Who is the only one who is good Rufus? Christ is saying two things here. First, it does not matter what good deeds you do, because there is only one who IS good, and that is God. He rephrases the question:

"If you would enter life keep the commandments".

This says too things. We cannot be good, but we can be saved if we keep the commandments.

He said to him, “Which ones?”

Now, you left out the point that this is the parable of the rich man. Let's look at Christ's list:

And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Which ones has he left out?

You shall have no other gods before me
You shall not make for yourself an idol
You shall not covet your neighbor's house
You shall not covet your neighbor's wife

There's a significance there, because this is the parable of the rich man for he replies:

"All these I have kept."

This is where Christ says, sell all you have and follow me, and the man was unable to do so. That is what is going on in this parable.

So there it is.

Does that mean "thou shalt not covet, and "thou shalt not make before thyself an idol" do not count as commandments because Christ did not mention them?

Secondly, Christ does mention adultery. Here is how he defines it in the sermon on the mount, Matthew 5:27-30

"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. and if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

So yes, he does condemn homosexuality, and all sexual activity outside of marriage, which again he defines in Matthew 19.

Does he say anywhere that a man and a man are to marry and be blessed? No. Does he say that a man and a woman are to be joined together, and let no man tear them asunder? Yes, he does, in Matthew 19 again.

Does Jesus say don't be a homo? No he does not.

Do you believe that "thou shalt not covet" is one of the ten commandments?

Do you believe that "love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength" is a commandment?

Does he say don't marry someone of the same sex? No he does not. He doesn't even say, worship me as a God. He says, follow a handful of rules that could apply to anybody, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that's all God asks.

Again, the purpose of the parable of the rich man is that the list he gives is not complete. There is as much to say in what he does not list, because he is aware of what that man has and has not done.

Stop offending God by misusing his Holy Word, blasphemer.

And I haven't even quoted Romans or Corinthians. What will you say then?

[Ben Kenobi]

Is that rhetorical or a trick question?

When you bless something what does that entail? You cannot bless anything that is contrary to what Christ says, who is the source of the blessing. You can attempt to bless, but it won't work. It just won't. It will be no different then if a bum on the street gave you a BK crown and anointed you king.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
Marriage predates Chrisitanity and Marriage is a secular concept as far as the government (a secular entity goes).

Moreover, early Christians apparently practiced something very much like same-sex marriage (I don't know that we have enough evidence of the sexuality of the people involved to call it "gay marriage," but it was definitely same-sex).

I'm not going to bother with Ben's continued perversions of the Gospels to suit his own homphobic ends. I got out of teaching because I got tired of dealing with students who couldn't subordinate their own prejudices to reason and evidence; if I gave up being paid to bang my head against that wall, I'm sure not going to do it here for free.