"By attending, we are supporting real people who are of tremendous value to
God. By attending, we are imitating Christ"Wow, show me an
example where Jesus attended a same sex marriage or said publicly or privately
that he supports and blesses same sex unions? People with itching ears...
If a tree falls in a forest AND it is not witnessed by a Baptist pastor or a
Catholic Priest did the tree still fall?
Do humans choose to be homosexual?
I will add, God has the right to claim who is His and who is not, and He will do
it based on choices we make. We were all His when we started, but if you want to
retain your heir status, certain things are expected of you, as He has told us.
You can whine all you want that it isn't fair, but it is fair because He is
perfectly fair.I feel great love and anguish for my friends, family,
and fellow men/women who choose to hate God and hate me for following Him in the
way I believe is right. I cannot accept your expectation that I join you. But I
do invite you to join me in following His ways. You will be a lot happier if you
do.If you choose to continue to "kick against the pricks",
and live in misery, I respect your choice. Misery loves company, but no matter
how much company you win over, it is still misery. If SSM is legal everywhere,
and everyone on earth embraces it, you still won't be happy. Endorsement
doesn't equal happiness, nor does wickedness equal happiness.
"And enough with the obvious and overused red-herring of incest." There is only one marriage, the God endorsed union of a man and a woman.
There are mockeries of marriage, in all sorts of forms. Why would one seeking
tolerance for his/her mockery of marriage (SSM), withhold it from others
(brother/sister, polygamy, man and animal, etc)?"Or if you feel
that strongly about it, start a campaign."Campaigning
doesn't determine right and wrong. God does."They're
going to have to buck up; they're just churches."Ah the
'you have to embrace us while we belittle you' attitude. So prevalent
in SSM/liberal proponents, and so completely hypocritical. "The
Southern Baptist Convention has no authority to tell individual congregations,
chaplains, or members anything."If I hire you to represent my
company, I certainly have the right to tell you what you can and cannot say and
do in behalf of my company, and if you don't represent my company well, I
have the right to fire/kick you out of my company. You may not think that is
right, but that is how it is.
"What would Christ do?"Preaching repentance and forgiveness.
Not endorse and certainly not perform SSM."He told the
adultress, go and sin no more, not to keep doing it."Note that
he didn't provide her with a partner for further sinning."Religions do not have to accept it, but they do have to respect it."
Respect is earned and spitting in someone's face doesn't
earn it. It is not a constitutional right, and neither is marriage. "Why can't people get it through their heads that SSM is an issue of
CIVIL LAW, not religious marriage?"Marriage is God's
institution, existing before there were any civil laws. Civil marriage is a
mockery of God's institution. "No one has yet produced a
single shred of legally sustainable harm nor legal argument against SSM."Not true. There are tons of studies and evidence showing the ill effects
of same sex marriage, but proponents choose to ignore them.
The Southern Baptist Convention has no authority to tell individual
congregations, chaplains, or members anything. Members are responsible to
themselves and to their God for their beliefs and practices. The Convention is
simply a way to combine income from small congregations to fund new missions and
missionaries. It has no authority over anybody or anything.
Bravo for the Catholic Church. It tickles me they are standing up for what they
believe is right. A true marriage is between a man and a woman - nothing else
because that is what it has been since Adam and it's not ever going to be
accepted any other way. To marry someone of the same sex is perverted and an
abomination to the Lord.
I support same-sex marriage. If two people love each other and want to share
their life together, I'm all for it. There are way too many people who are
divorced, in a miserable marriage, or cheating on their spouse. Gay marriage is
evolving everywhere and it's not going away.
They're going to have to buck up; they're just churches.
Why can't people get it through their heads that SSM is an issue of CIVIL
LAW, not religious marriage? As the inevitable outcome of 50 state SSM becomes
fact, no religion nor church will be required to perform nor recognize ANY
marriage that it chooses not to. But the many churches that DO support gay
marriage will be able to perform and recognize them and those that choose no
church at all will still be treated equally under civil law via civil marriage.
It is our government which creates a legal marriage. Try getting married in a
church without a government issued license! No one has yet produced
a single shred of legally sustainable harm nor legal argument against SSM.
Until such time, people should live by their OWN beliefs and not try to force
them upon everyone else. And LDS members should be especially aware that at
some time the shoe could certainly be on the other foot. And enough
with the obvious and overused red-herring of incest. It belongs in the dustbin
along with the similar arguments about bestiality and marriage to inanimate
objects. Or if you feel that strongly about it, start a campaign.
Since it is obvious from all these posts that there is much confusion about
scripture, I feel we need some modern day revelation to clear things up. Wonder
where we could get some?
It's interesting and very clear that those who are most defensive have
something they feel guilty about. If one has a completely clear conscience,
there is no need to worry what others think. And no need to defend oneself so
vehemently.I wonder if Jesus ever called someone a bigot. My guess
The issue isn't cut quite as cleanly as one would suspect. It's good
for the Catholic Church to take a firm stand against homosexuality and gay
marriage but with a priesthood make up of more than a third, homosexual priests
combined with the numbers of cases of sexual child abuse that has put many local
units into bankrupcy the church should examine its failures on the topic first.
The piece concluded with a statement connecting conservative politics with
opposition to gay marriage, I have to wonder why is that so. The father of the
conservative movement was Barry Goldwater, he spoke put consistently against
mixing church church doctrine and party politics. The GOP has fallen off its
popularity since the 1994 marriage with the evangelical movement, the Moral
Majority, and Pat Robertson. It's time for a divorce so national cantidates
have a chance to win. Less than 40% of US voters oppose gay marriage, it will be
the law in all but a few states by 2020. Churches should work with legislatures
to fashion protection within gay marriage bills as was done in New York. If not,
they have no one to blame but themselves.
@Spider Rico;Just as you don't have to accept the views of any
other church on the issue, we DON'T have to accept the view of yours. Nor
do we have to live by the rules of your church.If you say otherwise,
guess what, that is hypocrisy and Jesus actually did have something negative to
say about hypocrites.
I frankly don't see why what some other Christian denominations decide to
do with homosexual marriage should have any effect on my view on the subject. I
don't belong to those churches. There is no correlation between what they
say and the truth in my eyes. If every other church in the world accepts gay
marriage besides mine I will continue to believe it is a sin. And no, you
don't have to accept my belief, but neither do I have to accept yours. And
I will judge what is right and wrong every minute of every day. That is not
wrong. Me condemning somebody to the eternal pit is, because that is my job. But
my judging something a sin is my job. How can I avoid sin if I do not know what
it is? You can disagree with me all you want but my stance will never change.
Call me what you will, I know my sins and I will not stop fighting the
@donn --1.Paul and slavery ----Also "Slaves, obey
your earthly masters in everything". (Col 3:22)2. The New
Covenant --"...the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to
theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since
the new covenant is established on better promises." (Hebrews 8:6)"By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one
obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear."(Hebrews
8:13)"He has made us competent as ministers of a new
covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but
the Spirit gives life." (2 Corinthians 3:6)And many other
passages about the New Covenant, which I don't have space for!3. The NT and homosexuality --"Jude 10:7"There
is no such thing as "Jude 10:7". You probably mean Jude 1:7,
which actually reads: "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the
surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and
perversion."Nope, nothing about homosexuality in particular.
"Sexual immorality and perversion" covers a LOT of territory.
@Contrariuser 1.Paul also supported slavery. True, “Paul a slave of
Christ Jesus, chosen by God to be an apostle…”(Romans 1:1).2. The O.T.the laws were replaced by the N.T. ? ….the law is made
not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful,
the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for
murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for
slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to
the sound doctrine. ( 1Tim 1: 9-10) 3.Paul was the ONLY person in
the N. T. who spoke against homosexuality. “…the cities of
Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring towns, all full of lust of every kind,
including lust of men for other men.” (Jude 10:7)
One solution would be to get rid of commercial corporate organized religion (big
business) and follow the example of Jesus religion of individual conscious .
@RG --"No, says modern prophets. "Fortunately,
this country isn't a theocracy. Your personal version of "God"
doesn't get to win over everybody else's, and your religion
doesn't get to determine our laws.
@Contrariuser"Sez you."No, says modern prophets. Jesus
and the Biblical prophets probably said lots more than we realize on the
subject, but we don't have all they said. Thus, the need for modern
revelation.Just because you may not accept Joseph Smith and his
successors as prophets of God, does not mean they were not. They were and are,
and they said homosexual behavior is wrong.I believe this is the
last comment DN will let me make on the subject. Bye.
Just remember -- How you judge others, is how you yourself will be
@RG --"One of those things God prohibits is intimate relations
with those of the same gender "Sez you.1. Old
Testament laws were replaced by the New Covenant.2. Jesus never said a
single word against homosexuality.3. Homosexuality isn't mentioned
anywhere in the Gospels, except for one passage in which Jesus acknowledges --
WITHOUT condemnation -- that some men are "born eunuchs" (in ancient
texts, the term "eunuch" included homosexuals) and that such men should
not marry women. (Matthew 19:12)4. Paul didn't like homosexuals. Paul
also supported slavery, believed that women were inferior to men, told everyone
that nobody should ever get divorced, and claimed that it was better to remain
single than to marry. He was a mortal, fallible man. Paul was the ONLY person in
the New Testament who spoke against homosexuality.5. Many religious people
-- including Christians, Jews, and members of other faiths -- support gay
rights. They have no trouble reconciling the text of the Bible with the full
citizenship of gay people.6. Many Christian denominations are already
happy to perform gay marriages.6. Even if God DOES consider homosexuality
a sin, it isn't our job to judge. Judging is GOD'S job.
@ RanchI gave a lesson in Church recently about not judging. (Based on a
talk by Dallin Oaks, August 1999 Ensign) We don't judge people, especially
anyone's ultimate state in the hereafter, but we are supposed to judge
between right and wrong. This is why the scriptures say "judge not" but
they also say "judge righteous judgment." Judge not people's
ultimate destiny, but judge what is right and wrong. God has said that certain
things are wrong. All of us have problems with one or more of these things, but
we're supposed to repent and stop doing them, not rationalize our behavior.
One of those things God prohibits is intimate relations with those of the same
gender (and while we're at it, of the opposite gender unless we're
married.) But God made the rule; I didn't. As far as minding my business,
true, someone else's relationship is not my business except 1) as a voter I
vote for what I believe helps society, and 2) if I was a Church leader,
I'd have to clarify Church standards. My 1st post was meant to clarify
@Ranch. It's not bad for us to speak up against sin. Christ spoke against
sin as well as all the prophets. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we should let
sins pass by unnoticed. We all sin and have fallen short of the glory of God,
but that doesn't mean we should let sin thrive. We must all stand up to sin
and its encroachment into our homes and our communities. We should not be forced
to accept sinful practices or become a part of them. Now you can quote some
scripture to make me out to be a hypocrite - go ahead. I know I have my own
faults and am working on them. But I will not sit idly by and let others attack
my belief system.
Navigating a world with legalized same-sex marriage is easy:Follow
the law.Treat others with respect and dignity, especially those who
subscribe to beliefs different than your own.Treat others the way
you would wish to be treated.How hard is that?
@RG;You said:"But associating with them does not
mean condoning their sin. He told the adultress, go and sin no more, not to keep
doing it."The article is about same-sex couples marrying.
Clearly, you are equating same-sex couples to "sinners" with your
comment that essentially we "keep on doing it" by being a couple and
getting married.Perhaps I am a bit sensitive, but I'm really
getting tired of religious hypocrites. If we're "all sinners" and
we should "sin no more", then perhaps religious people should stop
judging others and mind their own business.
@sashabill --"Moral standards, by definition, are
discriminatory"You don't seem to understand the legal
definition of "discrimination"."In Constitutional Law,
the grant by statute of particular privileges to a class arbitrarily designated
from a sizable number of persons, where no reasonable distinction exists between
the favored and disfavored classes. ...."Notice that essential
phrase: WHERE NO REASONABLE DISTINCTION EXISTS.In cases of moral
standards, reasonable distinctions DO exist. Therefore, they are not legally
discriminatory. In cases of sexual orientation, there are no such
distinctions."The LGBT crowd has confused "love" or
"tolerance" with relativism."EVERY moral standard is
relative. "Thou shalt not kill" -- unless you support the
death penalty. Unless you're killing in self defense. Unless you declare
war on another country."Thou shalt not create graven
images." -- unless you're a religious artist. "Remember
the Sabbath" -- even Jesus himself said that this one was relative. Acknowledging the relativity of morals does NOT mean that morality
doesn't exist!"There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the
one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your
neighbor?" -- James 4:12" Judge not, that ye be not
judged." -- Matthew 7:1
Article: "The rules... also prohibit chaplains from acknowledging a spouse
of the same gender at a retirement or promotion ceremony, or from assisting at a
funeral if it would 'give the impression that the Church approves of
same-sex 'marital' relationships.'"I can think of
few things more heartless or less Christlike (not to mention petty) than
intentionally withholding comfort to a grieving person who has just lost a loved
partner. Any person who could do so does not deserve to be called human, let
alone chaplain.At least if the chaplains won't come through,
gay service members may be able to resort to the Commander in Chief. This paper
reported elsewhere that former President G.H.W. Bush just attended a lesbian
wedding and signed the legal documents.
@ Ranch"You keep calling us sinners." How do I keep
calling you anything, since that was my first comment?Who is
"us"?And if you carefully read my original comment you will
see that I said "we are all sinners." But you still accused me of having
a beam in my eye.It seems that you might be overly sensitive to what
I considered a thoughtful comment. I wasn't thinking so much about funerals
as about marriage, but reasonable people might disagree about what actions
"condone" gay marriage. Nevertheless, my overall point was
that contrary to BYU Track Star's implication that Jesus' association
with sinners might mean that sin was ok, that Jesus never said sin was ok.
Shocker, they didn't post my message even though there were no cuss words,
vulgarity, or anything of the like. All I said was we should stand up to sin.
Even DN has to be politically correct on this issue. Unbelievable. "Sin is a
vice, so evil and mean, that to be hated need only be seen. But seen to oft,
familiar with its face, at first we endure, then pity, then embrace."
It is sad that Pastor Arterburn is choosing the world and it's opinion over
God. His comment does not show the "love the sinner but hate the sin"
requirement Christ followed in His own earthly ministry. God does love all of
His children, but those who turn from him an practice sin face those
penalties.Too many clergy are selling their birthright for a
"mess of pottage"...
Moral standards, by definition, are discriminatory - differentiating between
courses of action and behavior as distinguished from other courses of action and
behavior. Individuals are within their rights to make judgments based on those
standards, and religious denominations are within their rights to advocate such
judgments publicly. The LGBT crowd has confused "love" or
"tolerance" with relativism. By so doing, they have demonstrated the
shallowness and moral bankruptcy of their own position, not the homophobia of
anybody else's. It is not the job of religious leaders or military
chaplains just to dispense a lot of wishywashy fluff about "diversity."
...retirement or promotion ceremony, or from assisting at a funeral if it would
"give the impression that the Church approves of same-sex
'marital' relationships."I am not sure where I stand
on military chaplains conducting same sex marriages. But when you talk about
funerals of a spouse..that is a different story. Jesus wanted ministers to
minister, console, and help people in the worst times of their lives. No matter
what you believe this must be one of those times with a member of your flock.
If you follow this guidance I am most certain you will be harshly judged by our
creator. Just how low will these foolish people go? Please someone help me
I think the liberals here didn't understand what the Catholic Church, and
other churches are telling their Chaplains.As the article pointed
out. Their Chaplains are supposed to be there to support people in need, but
are to be cautious about engaging in activities that would make it appear that
their church supports gay marriage.So, in the case of a funeral, the
chaplain could do everything from comforting friends and family of the deceased
to even officiating, as long as it was clear that gay marriage is not endorsed.
If chaplains are to be forced to not have any scruples, then they don't
really have a purpose. Remove chaplains from the military.
@RG;How does recognizing that something is a certain way
"condone it"? Recognizing a spouse during a funeral is not
"condoning" the marriage, it is simply recognizing that it is how it
is.You keep calling us "sinners". I think you need to
remove a beam from your own eye before trying to pick the mote from ours.
@ donn: Matthew 22:34-40New International Version (NIV)"34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got
together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?";37 Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and
with all your soul and with all your mind.'[a] 38 This is the first and
greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as
yourself.'[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two
RE: Dr. Thom "what would Christ do" is a mute point since the answer has
already been answered scripturally. True, Matthew 19:5. (Jesus )
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’. Marriage= Man and
woman.Ephesians 6:2,3. (Paul) “Honor your Father and
Mother”[not significant other],which is the first commandment with a
promise”. God distinguishes father and mother from all other
persons on earth, chooses them and sets them next to Himself, occupying the
highest place in our lives next to God..
to BYU Track Star,Christ did indeed associate with sinners, as do
ministers of all faiths that I know of. In fact, ministers have no choice since
we're all sinners. But associating with them does not mean condoning their
sin. He told the adultress, go and sin no more, not to keep doing it.
It is far past time when all should be treated equally. That includes same sex
couples who are maried. Religions do not have to accept it, but they do have to
respect it. That means military chaplains or anyone else in the public service
needs to treat same sex couples the same as opposite sex couples.
Support our troops - unless they are gay. And there is no separation
of church and state - unless the churches want it to be there because it
benefits them - but prayer at public meetings, crosses on public property, and
God in the Pledge of Allegiance - those are all okay because separation of
church and state doesn't apply if it doesn't benefit religion.
It's a very confusing time we live in. Where can one go for truth?Few religions teach that clearly and they continue to struggle as a result.
Fortunately, the LDS faith has had a clear answer on that process
since its founder received his first spiritual prompting.
Asking the question "what would Christ do" is a mute point since the
answer has already been answered scripturally in that we should hate the sin,
but not the sinner. Child molesters and serial killer being the exception. As for some Christian churches that don't condone same sex
relationships as natural or normal but have members who still want to retain
their membership in a church, you can still be a homosexual and be a member of
this church, just not a practicing homosexual one.
Perhaps it's time for military chaplains to follow the example of LDS
Seminaries if they insist of imposing their sectarian beliefs on the troops. The
religions can build their own buildings just off base instead of using
taxpayer-funded facilities. Chaplains on base should remember that they are
there to serve the troops, not themselves.
Freedom of religion extends to individuals as well as organizations. All can
attend church, but it does not mean that a particular church is obligated to
adopt the latest doctrine in vogue, i.e. Martin Luther v. Roman Catholicism, et
Um, Church is for the sinners.So, that should mean ALL of us.
My earlier understanding of the Constitutional right of freedom of religion was
that it applied to individuals and that it was improper to force a religious
doctrine upon others. Currently it seems that the Constitutional right of
freedom of religion not only applies to churches and their actions but also that
churches have preference over the rights of individuals. I do not
support the current interpretation of the Constitutional right of freedom of
I also hear rumour that Jesus Christ associated with Sinners and Publicans. I
wonder if these folks have a problem with that too?
'The rules issued last week by the Archdioces of Military Services also
prohibit chaplains from acknowledging a spouse of the same gender at a
retirement or promotion ceremony, or from assisting at a funeral if it would
"give the impression that the Church approves of same-sex
'marital' relationships."'Pastor and author
Stephen Arterburn writes..."By attending, we are supporting real people who
are of tremendous value to God. By attending, we are imitating Christ and
allowing his love and grace to flow through us — rather than worrying what
is right and proper in the sight of our religious buddies."Simple solution; have Pastor Stephen Arterburn officiate and ignore the