Gay Civil Unions

I remember the time in the recent past, when no one would admit to having accepted this perversion as the way of life. Because a secular and godless society seems willing to allow this blasphemy does not mean we as Christians should. In fact, IMHO we should stand even stronger against it. As far as civil unions being more acceptable, they reflect the same perversion as homosexual marriage.

Decadence know no limits. A decadent society will find new ways to debase themselves and others. No real reason to prohibit homosexuality in a secular society? Using this logic, one can excuse and justify any behavior no matter how decadent. If your reasoning is sound , then why try to prohibit any behavior that is harmful. I am sure the NAMBLA (National Man Boy Love Association) would like more people to take this stand.

Using the secular society argument shows you as "one lacking the intellectual depth necessary to discuss this topic"

 

Living in the United States we get to choose for ourselves how we will live, even if that choice is contrary to traditional beliefs about marriage, it's called freedom. The views expressed by NAMBLA are already illegal for heterosexual or homosexual making that a nonsensical argument.

You are equally free to stand against same sex marriage because of your religious convictions and I would encourage you to do so, but the courts are not religious they are secular. As long as the behavior is legal those practicing homosexuality are to be treated without discrimination in the eyes of the court. Civil unions provide the avenue for that equal treatment in the eyes of the law. I open to other options, do you have any?

 

First off, I said nothing about "marry the dog," so your statements to that effect are a straw man.

However secular society may view homose*uality, Christians are to view what God calls sin as sin. Therefore, I do not see how any Christian can condone such unions. Just because they are legal in secular society should not mean Christians should accept them or be okay with it.

I think my argument is legit - in fact, some polygamists have already spoken out saying they want to try for legal marriage if gay marriage is legalized.

 

But all freedoms have limits. Why wasn't same s*x marriage okay 100 years ago? 200 years ago? It was because society was sticking more to the moral laws found in the Bible and reflected in the laws. The fact we are at this point now is not because the law is secular but because society has degenerated morally.

Are you aware that several academics have argued for the right for men to take minor children as partners? Is there any guarantee that what NAMBLA would like is going to remain illegal? I think not. As society degenerates further, we may see this barrier fall as well.

I know you are addressing someone else but I'm commenting anyway. The courts being secular is not really relevant; all laws reflect some kind of moral code. You can't have law without some kind of moral code backing it up.

It could be that it's too late to keep civil unions or same s*x marriage from being legalized; however, that does not mean Christians should agree with it or endorse it. Government can enact immoral laws; the fact that the courts or government enact immoral laws does not make them okay.

 

And this does not surprise me coming from you. There has been no fed ruling on banning homosexual marriage.

 

Yes we have freedom to make bad decisions. However, God has said we should warn those are violating His laws. If we fail to do so, we shall be punished. I do not say condemned to eternal Hell, but in this life, God will punish the believer who sits idly by in the face of such iniquity.

Ezekiel 3:17-19 (KJV)
(17) Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me.
(18) When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
(19) Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.

Do you not take this warning seriously? You should.

You seem to be greatly concerned about civil law. I wonder why, as a pastor, you are not more concerned about God's law. Could it be that you have more respect for the laws of man than those of a holy God? As far as my NAMBLA statement being a nonsensical argument, I said nothing about their legality. I merely stated "...Using this logic, one can excuse and justify any behavior no matter how decadent. If your reasoning is sound , then why try to prohibit any behavior that is harmful. I am sure the NAMBLA (National Man Boy Love Association) would like more people to take this stand." I stand by that statement.

If secular law is allowed to continue to overrule God's law, this is where this society is heading. It appears to me that you are ready to surrender to all manner of evil, excusing yourself by saying "We live in a secular society, and there is nothing we can do about it. Too bad."

 

I do not believe a Christian can support any homosexual behavior.

 

I wouldn't think so, not unless they don't mind violating God's word.
which we've seen is true here on this board.

 

When did Jesus, Paul, Peter or John ever concern themselves with what the government was or was not doing? They didn't, in fact they told us to be submissive to the government and at the time they were speaking about the Roman Empire! Homosexuality was allowed, some would say encouraged at this time and never once did Paul call for the government to help stop the practice that he said was "unnatural". His message was Christians instead do this...

I don't set government policy, they haven't asked me, but as long as homosexuality is legal it has to be as treated equal with other legal behavior in our secular society. I don't have to be happy about it, but this is how our society works.

In the church I declare the Bible to be true and like Paul, that we as believers have a higher standard in which to live up to regardless of what is permitted otherwise. I don't see how these two things can't exist together?

 

A different type government at a different time. This country was founded on public discourse. It is our right and responsibility to speak out. Your argument is false and without knowledge of the situation of which you speak.

 

No, you are trying to create a theocracy in which you tell everyone how they must act.

Speak out all you want, it is your right to do so. Just don't get bent all out of shape if no one wants to listen to you.

Also, I just love how you conveniently pull out the context card when it suits your need for Biblical interpretation. If that was the case, we shouldn't be talking about marriage at all since nothing we understand about marriage was understood when the Bible was written. Slippery slope alert!

 

Apparently you do not know what a theocracy is.

This appears to assume everyone else agrees with you. Such is far from the case.

Your false accusation is most likely based on your struggle to deal with context. It is really quite puzzling why you would not want to deal with context.

So you wish. It appears you do not even know when a slippery slope begins.

 

Whoever selected Option, "I believe in civil unions and I believe that Jesus does too", is either reading a different Bible than I do, or else does not believe what the scriptures clearly teach--from Genesis through the end of Revelation.

 

A government or court giving legal standing through marriage or civil union to a group of people they are going to have deal with in the future anyhow doesn't bother me nor surprise me. Governments are secular and will do secular things. It doesn't have any bearing on how I believe, what I teach and preach or live my life. There are all kinds of people that I don't think should be getting married but since we live in America, people are free to marry the wrong person if they so desire, I can't stop them. Realizing I can't stop them is not the same thing as giving approval to what they are doing.

Would you prefer that I throw myself on the steps of the courthouse when they come into get a license? How about a protest with rude and profane signs? I know, I could go on radio and wish they would all get AIDS and die. Would that more in keeping with what you expect a "wall watcher" to be doing?

Don't be ridiculous! Is your faith so weak and fragile that you need the government to prop up your beliefs with laws and definitions?

 

Your closed minded attitude is the same that has permitted the slaughter of 50 million unborn children.

 

Anyone who claims that Jesus Christ would endorse homosexual perversion is guilty of blasphemy. I cannot believe such a person is a Christian. If he professes to be a Christian he should identify and defend himself.

 

This may come as a shock, but I had nothing to do with Roe v. Wade. I have never preformed, been witness to or encouraged an abortion. I wish people would stop having abortions.

That being said, what does that have to do with civil unions?

 

There are other people who commit other types of sins should we be forced to "deal with them"as well? Rather poor logic

 

I think the whole "Civil-Union" thing is a cop-out. Either it's a marriage or it isn't. Why create a third rail?

 

So that incremental progress can be made.