This thread is a rebirth of AcidSniper's "Being against gay marriage makes you a bad Christian" thread. This is also my supported opinion.
Reader beware: this post houses mature concepts, and this thread houses otherwise mature content. The images may be PG-13, but the words are adult in nature.
Updated: April 12, 2007
Updated: April 4, 2009 (see bottom of first post for hell discussion update/concession)
If you are Christian and opposing gay marriage, you are:
likely violating the Law of Agape (specifically, Matthew 22:39, Mark 12:31, Matthew 19:19, Romans 13:9), which is at the core of Yeshua's teachings.
judging your fellow man, which is warned against in the bible (Matthew 7:1-2, Luke 6:37).
inaccurately referencing the bible and making a false case, as homosexuality is not a sin. Don't worry, we'll get to this in great detail, I'm sure. Don't even bother posting "NO UR WRONG" unless you're prepared to post verses along with your assertions. If you do, do not expect to be taken seriously.
arguing against rights which would clearly benefit a people who are hardly different from the norm and who never offended you. Only recognizing heterosexual unions means that homosexuals will be hurt. I wouldn't want to have to marry someone I didn't love and wasn't attracted to in order to get those nifty things like tax writeoffs, health care, adoption rights, and the dignity of legal marriage, which carries great social meaning.
likely making a grievous error. Legal and Judaic marriage are distinct and not to be confused with one another. "To protect marriage" is not a valid reason for voting for a ban on gay marriage, as the two have nothing to do with one another. Nothing is threatened - legal or Judaic - and nobody is trying to force your church to marry gay people. Honestly, nobody cares about your particular church. If you think the rest of us do, I suggest you get over yourselves. Religious considerations have little to do with societal ones. (Especially for a bunch of Goyim. ;P)
If your church dictates how you should vote, you should rethink not only your adherence to but your membership concerning a power-obsessed organization. There is strong canonical evidence (e.g., Matthew 22:21) as well as strong social evidence (e.g., the subjugation of the Gnostics, the Spanish Inquisition, and the Puritannical witch hunts) affirming the necessity of a clear line between the two.
You may also be under the misconceptions that marriage is a purely Christian term, or that Christian marriage is a church affair. Both are false, as marriage is a legal term, and does not mean "Christian partnership" or any other such nonsense, and marriage in the biblical sense consists of two people getting to know one another in the biblical sense, and sticking around to spend the rest of their lives with one another afterward.
There was not even a Greek or Hebrew word for homosexuality in biblical times, and just because it is used in popular mistranslations does not make it an actual part of the bible. Every word taken to mean "homosexuality" has either been twisted or misconstrued in a way that cannot reasonably be considered to be definitive.
Additionally, before you start citing Leviticus, the Mosaic Law is moot according to Acts (the Council of Jerusalem), Galatians (Paul), and Collossians 2 (Paul). If these three references are in any way correct, the Old Law no longer applies, and certainly not to non-Jews. Were your ancestors enslaved in Egypt? Did they wander in the desert? Did they do dumb things with a golden idol? Because if not, there isn't even the beginning of a case for the continuity of Mosaic Law.
And before you start quoting Romans 1, read the second post. Also, do the world a favor and note that God is the one causing people to do things they wouldn't ordinarily in retribution for the same people ignoring God.
Please observe the
forum rules and
subforum rules at all times.
Discussion update (4-4-2009), with little bearing on the above points: Conceding to TNG that a form of Hell is a potentially valid concept within the canon in light of Revelation (see: limne pur/lake of fire/crazy ramblings of some John person). I think we're agreed on a general distaste for Revelation as canon-worthy material.
Personally, I've never given Revelation much in the way of merit; I'm sure some new hell discussion thread will be spawned at some point. Let's hope it originates/remains in M&R this time and is suitable for public consumption.
