It's not about Gays,It's about Christian Values

1. 57

   Billjordanposted 12 years ago

   Since Obama came out of the closet and flip flop on Gay marriages there has been a lot of bickering back and forth about why Christian that are against Gay marriages are bigots and have no love or tolerance and are full of hate and are not really Christians. I believe we have lost sight of fellowships and secret societies and this country rules bylaws and things that constitute membership seem to matter less that's one of the issues with Gay marriages. Marriage has been set aside by the church as and act between a man and a woman. To ask the Church to do any thing different would be wrong and the separation of church and state protects the church. Know the government can marry who ever they want but the church does not have to recognize or accept such marriages and may condemn such marriages and there literature, sermons, schools and etc.
   
   This were the line must be drawn in the sand the church will not sit back in be silent.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Druid Dudeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Then it is about judgement and fingerpointing? What about the speck in thine own eye. Pick it out, lest it become a logjam between thyself and God.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I am not Judging anyone

         replyreport
   2. 0

      kimberlyslyricsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      that only defines for me we are not talking about peoples values but judgements, 2 very different things

      replyreport
   3. 71

      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Christian values? Hmmm...sounds like a Christian should do something about it for themselves and live by them, instead of telling other people how to.
      
      It is not your responsibility to interfere into someone else's life. You could look at my post as interfering in your life, but I am actually just pointing out the fact that your beliefs are your beliefs and those said beliefs apply to only YOUR life.
      
      It is nice that you want to talk about Christian values, but the truth is that very few Christians who claim being Christian, their actions speak so much louder than their claim.
      
      I have met very few on HubPages who truly understand Jesus' message. Much less associate Jesus' teachings with Christianity's religion. Christianity uses Jesus as it's example, but when you take honesty and apply it to Christianity, you walk away with knowing hypocrisy and bigotry. You walk away self-centered and egotistical.
      
      The fact that people have Christian values and think those values are acceptable for mainstream society in the 21st century or beyond, lack any understanding of anything beyond themselves.
      
      The rights of the individual circumvent any and all moral guidelines outlined throughout the bible or any other religious book. The "morality" offered by most religions are detrimental to the existence of the human species.
      
      Lastly, the rights of man and woman are as is regardless of religious beliefs. The right of a (wo)man to marry whomever s/he chooses is her/his right which isn't up for debate or dispute. This is called "freedom of choice". For anyone to step into someone else's life and dictate what "freedom of choice" is, is completely absurd.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         People choose to do lots of things and the name of choice are all of them okay with you people choose to do drugs is it absurd that others say it's not okay I am glad someone pointed out my choice was bad it saved my life.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Do you not know how to end sentences?
            
            First off, if a person chooses to do drugs, then they choose to do drugs. If you choose to drink, then you choose to drink. If I choose to live my life a specific way, which doesn't harm another living person, then you cannot rationally justify any position against me. I don't care if it comes from your religious beliefs or not.
            
            Secondly, I'm of the understanding that there happens to be a control factor also with regards to alcohol and drugs. The more dangerous drugs, well they are already illegal and many people choose to use it. There are plenty of people driven to drinking because of the environment in which they live is so oppressive that they start drinking to get rid of depression. Which is a common misconception among many people who drink. Alcohol is a depressant and not to be used for fighting depression.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Why am I so much nicer when drunk then?  My depression makes me irritable and bitchy... Alcohol makes me horny and happy.  I'm not disagreeing with your statement... I know it's scientifically accurate... just wondering aloud...

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  I hope you're not expecting me to answer your question.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     *Giggles* Actually I was hoping you would answer it... just to see what you said.   As an aside... I have also found that my drunkness is also a round-about temporary fix for my husbands depression as well... he always seems so much happier when I am drunk... although he is strangely body-guard like when when I am publically intoxicated.  He only drinks soda too...  I've always found that curious

                     replyreport
                     1. 71

                        Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        It is based on your specific state of mind as you take your first sip.

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           LOL... Nice. 
                           
                           /thread hijack

                           replyreport
            2. 59

               fpherj48posted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Whew!!!  Cagsil, my hero. Thanks for asking that question about "not knowing how to end a sentence..."  1st of all, I ran out of breath reading it....but, hard head that I am, I read it AGAIN, for I thought, surely my eyes deceived me.  After the 2nd reading, I realize I need some sleep......because of this entire LUDICROUS thread.....That Grammar-slaughter is the only thing that ran up my spine!!  The rest of this?  blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda kumby ya.  And that's my final answer.   Sleep tight,all......Peace!

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  say what you will but marriage is between a man and a woman.

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     And say what you will....stay out of other people's life.

                     replyreport
                  2. 92

                     gamergirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Except for where it's between other configurations of genders.

                     replyreport
   4. 59

      MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I am completely cool with that POV... Just remember that point of view exactly like that and you will have no problem with the BLGT community.
      
      I personally don't care if your church recognize my marriage.  Why would I?  I don't go to your church and likely wouldn't agree with anything they taught.  Your churches recognition or approval of my marriage means nothing to me.  It doesn't decided survivor-ship or health benefits.  It doesn't mean that the religion that I believe in doesn't support my marriage.  Your church's approval or disapproval is a complete and utter non-issue in my world.
      
      HOWEVER when you try and stop that whole "Know the government can marry who ever they want" thing then we have issues. See how simple that was.  As long as you stick by your statement verbatim then we are on the same side.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you for seeing things so clearly when people can agree to disagree the world is a better place for all

         replyreport
   5. 74

      Kathleen Cochranposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Let my religion be my religion, and let the laws of my country be fair to everyone.  Period.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         gamergirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         YES.  THIS.  So much.

         replyreport
   6. 61

      glockrposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The best solution would be for government to stay out of it completely. No marriage license fees, no special penalties or privileges for people who are married, no government involvement AT ALL in marriage. Of course if that happened, government would lose a revenue source and gay couples would lose a way to demand moral recognition even from those who consider homosexuality to be immoral.

      replyreport
   7. 57

      autumn18posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Bottom line is marriage may or may not have anything to do with religion. Most Christians will probably want to get married in a church but a church isn't required for a marriage ceremony. The U.S. is secular no matter how much some people want it to be otherwise.

      replyreport
2. 92

   gamergirlposted 12 years ago

   Obama didn't "come out of the closet."  He didn't "flip flop."  He announced, in a calculated fashion - as all Presidential stances on personal issues that may be of a controversial nature are done - his changed views on a topic of national and Global impact.
   
   That said, it's unreasonable to stand as part of the majority - heterosexual Christian American male - and claim that the majority suffers for the desires of the minority to have EQUALITY.
   
   Don't approve of gay marriage? Don't enter into a marriage with someone of the same sex.
   Don't want to support a politician who favors equality under the law for all Americans? Don't vote for those politicians.
   Don't want to be part of a church that stands on the side of LOVE? Find a different church.
   
   It's really simple.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I agree

      replyreport
   2. 87

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      So, you think Romney's support of standard marriage is calculated? Cause Obama just made his words match his actions if you ask me...so why does it have to be calculated?
      
      or  *sigh*  and *of course*  .....Obama is calculated and Romney is sincere.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         gamergirlposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Now, I'll admit I've been a silent voice in this forum for a long time - indeed, all forums for quite some time - but I'll lay this out clearly.
         
         I am registered as a Democrat.  I am a Navy non-combat veteran who was released from service under the DADT.  I voted happily for Obama.  Beyond that - I am a trans gender individual with a long history of support for equal rights for all people.
         
         That said-
         
         I do think that when taking a political risk, there is effort made on the part of the person TAKING the risk to attend to factors of timing, finding the best time to make announcements of personal importance.  This makes Obama's OBVIOUSLY controversial announcement (which I applaud with glee) one that has to be done with timing and political climate in mind.
         
         Romney's frequent assertions that he supports the limiting of equal rights aren't a risky political statement, they're following in line with the same old same old.

         replyreport
         1. 87

            lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Well, I guess all I'm saying is Obama is following a line too....and it may be that he was meaning to come out with it, and ole Biden beat him to it.
            
            As for Romney---he was for expanding gay rights when he was gvr here. He had to be to get elected. But now he is against even civil unions, isn't he? I'd say he's the calculating one. My opinion only--and not meaning to start a fight or be rude.
            
            sorry if I was. I thought you were the enemy

            replyreport
      2. 57

         Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I must say Romney and Obama both are calculated most and their line of work are.

         replyreport
3. 87

   lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

   Bigot:
   
   "a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race"
   [from Old French: name applied contemptuously to the Normans by the French, of obscure origin]
   
   Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003
   
   
   I's say the name fits. In fact, I am one too. I am totally intolerant of Tea Baggers.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      lovemychris are you sure you want to call some one a Bigot I have read a lot of you post in other forums if I am a Bigot read some of you comments in tell me who's the real Bigot.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         "In fact, I am one too. I am totally intolerant of Tea Baggers"
         
         Your turn.

         replyreport
         1. 57

            Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I might have a friend

            replyreport
   2. 61

      glockrposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Wow, and not only are you intolerant of those who disagree with you, you also use derogatory terms for them. You must be a "progressive"

      replyreport
4. 92

   gamergirlposted 12 years ago

   I'm glad you agree.  Does that mean we won't be seeing any more wildly unreasonable posts from you on this topic, Bill?

   replyreport
   1. 57

      Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      no Because I agree that Obama acted incalculated fashion.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         janesixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         At least youre admitting that you are wildly unreasonable.

         replyreport
         1. 57

            Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Wildly unreasonable yes when it comes to separation of church and state the state can marry who ever they want but the church does not have accept those marriages

            replyreport
            1. 60

               janesixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               So? What does the church have to do with the legality of marriage?

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  Billjordanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  I am not arguing a point I am just pointing out the difference between church and state if they want a state sanction marriage go for it.

                  replyreport
                  1. 66

                     bogusmossposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Do you think if we let states sanction civil rights for African American's we'd have equal rights for everyone? I can think of a few southern states that would love to have the opportunity to decide whether or not they allow someone of color to participate in their democracy.

                     replyreport
5. 97

   peeplesposted 12 years ago

   Your values should stay that! YOUR values! When it starts impacting other's it is no longer just YOUR value. It's your value that you are pushing on everyone else who doesn't agree! When a Christian will tell me just one REAL way gay marriage would impact them I will change my views. However it is impossible to name any real way. Just like my neighbors marriage has nothing to do with me.

   replyreport
6. 66

   bogusmossposted 12 years ago

   Christian values? Are you serious? I know that there are plenty of religious people out there that are reasonable so my comments are directed at the Evangelical Right and anybody else that supports the bigoted Republican party.
   
   First of all, the Christian Right need to get their own house in order before throwing stones at Marriage Equality and the gays of our country that only want to have their civil rights recognized. There's a 51% divorce rate and guess what, it's not the fault of the LGBT community.
   
   Secondly, there is plenty of evidence in the Bible itself that recognizes marriage, or unions, have not always been between just one man and one woman. God may have wanted that but it didn't happen. And, Romney, would have multiple wives right now if grandaddy didn't have to cave-in to the law of the land. Plus, the LGBT community isn't even asking to have the right to mulitple partner unions.
   
   Third, gay marriage won't interfere with Christian family values anyway or cause less children to be born. I would also like you to remember one thing: LGBT couples actually adopt those poor kids in our orphanages. Unlike those value cherishing, family oriented Christians they'll actually, lovingly, take the kid with AIDS or some other disability.

   replyreport
7. 80

   colpolbearposted 12 years ago

   You know, I usually disagree with Cagsil....but he hit this one dead on.  The issue isn't that the church won't recognize the marriages of homosexuals and the like, but that the state won't.  The leading argument for this reality has actually been religion, and politicians argue that the religion isn't making the decision, but the values of the lawmakers.
   
   So get this: the church is not the leading body in the nation.  If you think that to be the case, then you don't understand the word separation.  Any argument claiming Christian values being forced on other Americans, isn't exactly a reasonable one considering our country claims freedom of religion.  Furthermore, the church doesn't always interpret the Bible correctly.  They are arguably misleading with their messages, which is why many denominations have been founded.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      glockrposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The easy, obvious solution would be for the State to stay out of the marriage business completely. If marriage really is a moral issue, then the State has no write to regulate it, reward it, punish it, or have any involvement at all in it.

      replyreport
8. 67

   psycheskinnerposted 12 years ago

   The church can draw any lines they want, they don't run the country.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      glockrposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I agree, but likewise the State doesn't run the church(es) even though the 0 regime seems to think they do.

      replyreport
   2. 59

      fpherj48posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Nor do they influence many people, other than the blind believers who must be TOLD what to do, how, when and why, or they would trip over their own feet trying to get through life.  monkey see monkey do....Blindmice.
      Nor are they even impressing many any longer with their hate mongering...while preaching love and compassion...forgiveness and salvation.  Hyppocrites.....every last one of them.

      replyreport