Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?

So, you as a business owner cannot refuse to hire a person because they are homosexual?

What if you run a religious organization?

You might need a napkin. That camel you let under the tent is slobbering on you. :thumbs:

 

I say again:
When GOD created a help mate for Adam HE did not create another Adam; HE created a woman. Both the Old Testament [Genesis 2:24] and Jesus Christ in the New Testament [Mark 10:6-9] teach that marriage is between a man and a woman. For a "professing Christian" to claim otherwise is certainly an indication of his standing with God.

The above Scripture is very straightforward. To imply that I have interpreted the scripture incorrectly is disingenuous at best and untruthful at worst.

 

I believe the punishment for homosexuality under Shiria Lay is the same as that for adultery: DEATH.

Of course it was the same under Old Testament Law.

 

Good reason to have our separation of church & state. Those founding fathers were wise fellows.

 

Appropriate protection of religious freedom would allow religious organizations to make hiring criteria that reflect the beliefs of the organization, as long as the position in question requires such belief.

I do not believe that a for-profit business venture should be allowed to refuse to hire a person because he or she is homosexual.

 

I guess it's too bad we have all those verse in the NT that talk about love. Wouldn't it just be easier to stone them?

(end sarcasm)

 

DING DING DING! We have a winner. :thumbs:

 

Your example does not make your point.

But it wasn't and everyone knows it.

Irrelevant, what does their current constitution say right now.

But you said it was as a matter of fact

And we all have a right to vote our conscience. And a Christians conscience does lean toward biblical principles. Withholding them from the voting booth is contrary a Christian judgment.

 

Newsflash---when a Deist is talking about the Creator, he's not referring to the Christian God.

History is not irrelevant. If the states had past histories of religious intolerance, it goes to show exactly what kind of dangers can exist when religion and politics are mixed. Of course, your assertion that the nation was founded on biblical principles is acceptable to you because it is your point, even if it is questionable historically.

My point regarding theocracy is that principles-based legislation does not necessarily lead to theocracy in every instance, but if you take it too far, it does go in that direction.

Example: a law outlawing rape can be considered as based on biblical principles, but it is also far from theocratic, as it enjoys broad based religious and secular support.

 

Thanks for making my point.

 

I think you're right to a degree. I don't like the fact that Republicans & Democrats have to do that to get their bills passed. To me, that's almost like taking one step forward & two steps backward.

I didn't think about until now, but in marriage that is also the case where compromise is accepatble. The husband & wife have to meet each other half way to ensure that their marriage is a happy one. The whole concept of "my" or "mine" has to be thrown out the window & replaced with "our" or "ours".

I can't believe that I just compromised on compromise. Okay, you got me.

I was simply referring to a person's beliefs. One should never compromise what they believe.

 

I assume you are implying that the Old Testament does not speak of love. May I say that ignorance of Scripture is no excuse for childish sarcasm!:laugh::laugh:

 

I'll go with the grace and truth that came through Christ (cf. John 1) over the violence of the law any day.

And for the record, stoning someone isn't loving, regardless of whether or not the law speaks of it.

 

So Joseph didn't love Mary ?

 

What is your point?

I never said that no love existed, only that some parts are not loving.

 

The grace and truth of GOD is revealed throughout the Bible beginning with GOD seeking out Adam and Eve after their rebellion. If you cannot understand that truth you are to be pitied.

 

If you cannot understand that Christ is the pinnacle of grace and truth that dwarfs all previous expressions, then you are to be pitied.

 

I made no point, I asked a question.

 

Then, yes, Joseph did love Mary.

 

OK, so now I can make a point. It seems stoning is ordained of God, and since God is love, the jump that stoning can be an act of love is a short one.