How To Explain Gay Rights To An Idiot

So you put your full faith in legends, huh ?......Bigfoot ?....Loch Ness Monster ?...The Yeti ?.....

well, to each his own.

Excellent comparison, bravs. You really seem to know the concept of "legends" as it applies to anthropological discovery.

So, when you say "school's out"...you mean pre-K, right?
 
Only if you ignore what repent meant when Jesus said it. I've explained this before on the site. Repent doesn't mean what people think it does today. You don't get to just say "sorry"... The Greek word used denotes a complete change of mind and action, not just saying "sorry"...

Basically, you need to regret and STOP the sin.


And I studied in the Bible College at our church, as I described before. The Bible in Greek (ancient greek), the Bible in Hebrew, etc. for over 11 years. I translated for the deaf during three sermons a week, was in the Prison ministry, et al.

I can go on but you'll promptly "forget" and call me an Atheist tomorrow because you refuse to allow actual information to flow into your mind.

I may be a Buddhist, but I am a Buddhist that knows more than most about the Bible.

Which makes you the most boring faux Buddhist in the history of mankind
 
Excellent comparison, bravs. You really seem to know the concept of "legends" as it applies to anthropological discovery.

So, when you say "school's out"...you mean pre-K, right?

Thats it ?.....thats all ya got ?
===========================================================

Marriage, from earliest recorded history was instituted because societies needed a secure environment for the perpetuation of the species, a system of rules to handle the granting of property rights, and the protection of bloodlines.

That alone excludes homos.....
 
Why do you care who is having anal sex? Plenty of heterosexuals do. Why do you think we care what you do in bed? No one cares. No one here even thinks you're having any kind of sex anyway.

I saw you at the store buying lots of batteries. We know who you're having sex with.
 
According to Loving it is a fundamental right..
Loving v. Virginia

"Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888). To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0388_0001_ZO.html

Not the same issue at all.
 
Not any more egregious than any other. Sin is sin, DY. According to the Bible even the simplest sin without Grace will still net you a spiritual death.
We Catholics are taught that some sins are worse than others. Murder is worse then stealing, which is worse than swearing. We tend to interpret the Bible using common sense.
 
You're confused, as usual. All your histrionics and flailing is not going to convince me that your beliefs hold any water. Do you think you appear righteous in the eyes of the board, because of them? No one fucking cares. I know I don't. The only one you're trying to convince that you're right, is yourself.
So you're closed-minded, as if I didn't figure that out in the beginning.
 
I don't care what you or anyone has to say. To commit yourself, body, mind and soul to one person, be they of the opposite sex, or the same sex is not a sin.
And if it is, and God condemns me to Hellfire, then so be it. Get off my case. You're not my judge, and neither is anyone else here.

My point isn't that I think homosexuality is a "sin" only that the New Covenant didn't make "sin" disappear. It isn't personal, it's what the book says. I don't believe the religion, I don't think you're going to Hell... nor Heaven for that matter.

I just really want you to get it through your head, me not being Christian does not mean I don't know that book. I couldn't have possibly lived my life and not know that book.
 
We Catholics are taught that some sins are worse than others. Murder is worse then stealing, which is worse than swearing. We tend to interpret the Bible using common sense.

So you are now saying that you "interpret" it to say what you want, interesting that you are against poet doing that same thing.

The Bible doesn't give you a list of "worse" sins... all have sinned and "fallen short", one sin isn't worse than the other any one of them nets you the same result.
 
Oh, he's going to hell...

I don't think you can judge that. In fact the Bible says that you can't. The responsibility for his soul lies between him and God.

Both of you profess to believe that Jesus saved you from your sins. At that point, he's as likely to be numbered in "the Saints" as you. You just can't know how you and he will be judged.
 
I don't think you can judge that. In fact the Bible says that you can't. The responsibility for his soul lies between him and God.

Both of you profess to believe that Jesus saved you from your sins. At that point, he's as likely to be numbered in "the Saints" as you. You just can't know how you and he will be judged.
God is the final Judge, but the case is quite clear. And as Catholics, we are told to shine our light, even if is a harsh light.
 
So you are now saying that you "interpret" it to say what you want, interesting that you are against poet doing that same thing.

The Bible doesn't give you a list of "worse" sins... all have sinned and "fallen short", one sin isn't worse than the other any one of them nets you the same result.

The Catholic Catechism does teach that certain sins are worse than others, and we are also taught that common sense doesn't go out the window.
 
Christians are now under Grace, not condemnation. Sin is still sin, but by faith in Jesus Christ we are protected by his blood and cleansed. Grace means "God's favor". We don't earn it by being good. We attain it by faith in Jesus and what he did on the cross. God doesn't grade on a curve. Catholics have their own little quirks just like sects and other denominations. Society's rules grade on a curve so some people naturally think God does also.

God no longer looks at us as sinners if we are in Christ. God sees Jesus Christ when he sees the believer in Jesus.

Start reading the epistles and notice how many times it says...."In Him"....."In Jesus"......."In Christ"......"by faith"....."Through faith"........
 
Christians are now under Grace, not condemnation. Sin is still sin, but by faith in Jesus Christ we are protected by his blood and cleansed. Grace means "God's favor". We don't earn it by being good. We attain it by faith in Jesus and what he did on the cross. God doesn't grade on a curve. Catholics have their own little quirks just like sects and other denominations. Society's rules grade on a curve so some people naturally think God does also.

Correct. And apparently so does the Catholic Catechism. I can only tell you what the book says. There was no special extra-Biblical book of rules that negated what the Bible said in the church in which I grew up.
 
As opposed to your own view of what a marriage "should" be. You and your pals complain about us "shoving our religion down your throats" while you want to shove your religion of liberalism down our throats. Tell me once more there is such thing as the homosexual agenda.

How is anything shoved down your throat? Don't like gay marriages? Don't go to the freakin wedding and ignore the rest. Allowing gay marriage will not effect you one iota.
 
How is anything shoved down your throat? Don't like gay marriages? Don't go to the freakin wedding and ignore the rest. Allowing gay marriage will not effect you one iota.

Exactly. Any more than allowing atheists "marriage"... Of course I still believe that "allowing" or "disallowing" marriages through the law is an overreach. There is no power of government that allows them to regulate our personal lives in this way.
 
Exactly. Any more than allowing atheists "marriage"... Of course I still believe that "allowing" or "disallowing" marriages through the law is an overreach. There is no power of government that allows them to regulate our personal lives in this way.

Which is why I agree with Dixie (hard to even type that) in that there should be no gov't licencing of marriages at all. Let people decide what they will do, as free people should be allowed to do. And keep the gov't completely out of it. Allow a simple contract to convey all the rights or benefits that marriage would, but the rest should be tossed out.

But that ain't gonna happen. Once the gov't gets in you never get it out.
 
Back
Top