"Across the country, these opponents of LGBT equality are working to persuade state legislatures to pass laws known as Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRAs) — statutes that ostensibly allow individuals to deny goods and services to [TAX PAYING] LGBT people on the basis of their religious beliefs. ... legitimizing the very idea that LGBT rights threaten religious liberty."
JAKE TAPPER Let’s talk about same-sex marriage. You said a few years ago that you were evolving on the issue, where are you?As with presidential candidate Ben Carson, they say his appeal is that he is not part of the political process, but I don’t believe for a second that the Bible is his “favorite” Book, nor do I think he really cares whether gay couples can legally wed or not (he must have gay friends), but he has demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that he’s a misogynist and a racist (“Mexicans are rapists and murderers). It is my belief that he’s just playing to the amoral base of the Republican party, but we can now add heterosupremacist to his list of themed hate speech.
HETEROSUPREMACIST UNREPENTANT ADULTERER DONALD TRUMP (according to his own beliefs): I’m for traditional marriage, it is changing rapidly.
TAPPER: But what do you say to a lesbian who’s married or a gay man who’s married who says ‘Donald Trump, what’s traditional about being married three times?’
TRUMP: Well, they have a very good point, but you know, I’ve been a very hard working person, actually I have a great marriage, I have a great wife now and my two wives were very good and I don’t blame them, but I was working twenty two hours a day…
TAPPER: I’m not asking you to explain your divorces.
TRUMP: I blame myself because my business was so powerful for me…
TAPPER: But what do you say to a lesbian or a gay man who are married?
TRUMP: I really don’t say anything, I’m just for traditional marriage.
 |
| Stone thrower Pat Fagan |
Al Qaeda says the United States has another crime to add to its litany of atrocities: support for same-sex marriage.
In the latest issue of Inspire, the Al Qaeda-produced English-language magazine that teaches readers how to cause traffic accidents, torch parked cars, and "make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom," the terrorist group goes after President Barack Obama for "evolving" on marriage equality.
In 2004, when Massachusetts became the first state in the Union to affirm marriage equality Mohler compared the day the court decision came down to 9/11. And Pearl Harbor.Compared to all this, anti-gay activists will LONG for the days they hated being associated with Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist “God Hates Fags” Church.
MANHATTAN DECLARATION: A CALL OF CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE
Drafted October 20, 2009 & Released November 20, 2009
The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24They then soften us up with some “acknowledgement” of mistakes (without the anti-gay parts):
And then proceed to bash gay-marriage.We confess with sadness that Christians and our institutions have too often scandalously failed to uphold the institution of marriage ... we have too easily embraced the culture of divorce ... we repent, and call upon all Christians to do the same.
The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex [marriage] ... would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about procreation..."
We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct. We have compassion for those so disposed; we respect them as human beings possessing profound, inherent, and equal dignityYes, I felt more "dignified" by the syllable.
Marriage is what one man and one woman establish when, forsaking all others and pledging lifelong commitment, they found a sharing of life at every level of being—the biological, the emotional, the dispositional, the rational, the spiritual— on a commitment that is sealed, completed and actualized by loving sexual intercourse in which the spouses become one flesh, not in some merely metaphorical sense, but by fulfilling together the behavioral conditions of procreation.So, in order to blunt the accusation of hypocrisy in regard to having no problem with non-procreative heterosexual-marriages, they now maintain that gays shouldn't be able to marry because LGBT-sex DOESN'T LOOK LIKE hetero-sex?
That is why in the Christian tradition, and historically in Western law, consummated marriages are not dissoluble or annullable on the ground of infertility, even though the nature of the marital relationship is shaped and structured by its intrinsic orientation to the great good of procreation.
…the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships;No. No it could not be asserted with equal validity.
it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No.
1) Slippery slope argumentSo there's that, plus all this stuff:
This argument states that should one event occur, so will other harmful events. There is no proof made that the harmful events are caused by the first event.
2) Slippery Slope Fallacy
The fallacy here is the assumption that something is wrong because it is right next to something that is wrong. Or, it is wrong because it could slide towards something that is wrong.
WORLDmag.comAlan Chambers believes just the opposite: that the new gay marriage bonanza is a trap.“My major concern is that homosexuality is a counterfeit of what God intended us to experience in human sexuality…"
"My major concern is that homosexuality is a counterfeit of what God intended us to experience in human sexuality," said Chambers, president of Exodus International and a former homosexual who left the lifestyle 17 years ago. "There will be young people who are like I used to be, who will see homosexuality as their only option for happiness and relationship fulfillment. [Normalizing] gay marriage is a stumbling block for them. A lot of people look at this from a policy perspective. But I think of all of those hearts that are searching for something legitimate in a way that's absolutely not able to meet their need"
No one is saying that change is easy… …But we find hundreds of former homosexuals who have found a large degree of change--attaining abstinence from homosexual behaviors [celibacy], lessening of homosexual temptations [denial], strengthening their sense of masculine or feminine identity [behavior], correcting distorted styles of relating with members of the same and opposite gender [behavior]. Some former homosexuals marry and some don't, but marriage is not the measuring stick; spiritual growth and obedience are.And there’s the rub. The goal isn't heterosexuality, it’s all about being a good anti-gay Christian.
Studies suggesting change rates in the range of 30-50% are not unusual, although "success rates" vary considerably and the measurement of change is problematic. For details and review of several studies, see the link below.Remember from above, “change” means: celibacy, denial, behavior, and behavior -- NOT heterosexuality. And the study they link to counts celibacy as successful “change.”
Chapter 1, page 15: The Exodus Project [conflict of interest, anyone?] reported here was directed at answering two simple questions: (1)…is it ever possible for an individual who has a homosexual orientation to change that orientation via religious means? (2) Is the attempt to change harmful, as so many today claim?As part of their “Christian Ethical Responses to Homosexual Behavior,” in their quest to define “homosexual behavior as a moral prohibition,” they endorse mass murder twice, on pages 55 and 57, by citing Leviticus 20:13, without so much as a whisper as to the immorality of such a position.
Love Not Laws aspires to show that Margaret Mead was correct when she said "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." None of the people who appear in this video received any compensation for their time.Gratuitous offensive language on my part taken out, 5-6-09 @ 7:35
None of the people who worked on this video received any compensation for their time. All materials used to create the video were donated. We simply came together to promote the ideals of love and equality.
Contact us: lovenotlaws@gmail.com ©2009
“Instead, a gay or lesbian person can only gain the same rights under the statute as a heterosexual person by negating the very trait that defines gay and lesbian people as a class—their sexual orientation.And:
In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d at 441. The benefit denied by the marriage statute—the status of civil marriage for same-sex couples—is so “closely correlated with being homosexual” as to make it apparent the law is targeted at gay and lesbian people as a class.”
Religious doctrine and views contrary to this principle of law are unaffected, and people can continue to associate with the religion that best reflects their views.Thanks to BTB, Ex-Gay Watch, and Cynthia and Aunt Bea from TTF (and Iowa!), for making this post possible.
A religious denomination can still define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and a marriage ceremony performed by a minister, priest, rabbi, or other person ordained or designated as a leader of the person’s religious faith does not lose its meaning as a sacrament or other religious institution.
The sanctity of all religious marriages celebrated in the future will have the same meaning as those celebrated in the past.
First of all, marriage is a civil contract, not a religious one, just to get that canard out of the way.Marriage began in the heart of God, and He designed it perfectly, for one man and one woman. A husband, a wife, a family. The building block of every community, every culture, every race, every nation. Governments have recognized and uniquely protected marriage for more than 2,000 years, so families can pass life to the next generation.
In West Virginia however, there is currently no clear definition of marriage as only the union of one man and one woman, yet marriage has a public status, and in most states is protected in law. Marriage between a man and a woman is held up as the ideal in all of civilized society because of its profound stabilizing influence on our culture, as well as the important economic benefits of strong and intact families.
But today that ideal is under and unrelenting attack, and same-sex marriage in West Virginia is a closer reality than you may think. 30 states have already passed constitutional amendments defining marriage, but activists outside our state are aggressively targeting the remaining 20, including West Virginia. Working tirelessly to redefine marriage away from God's design, to favor the desires of adults over the needs of children, for the naturally balanced model of a mother and a father.
The push for same-sex marriage has produced an historical crisis for the Church. Today in courtrooms across the country, in decisions as recent as last month, our constitutional guarantee of religious liberty is going toe to toe with an aggressive social agenda, and religious liberty is losing.
Judges in California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Connecticut, have arbitrarily redefined marriage and religious freedom. And virtually every area of ministry is coming under legal attack. Threatening our ability to freely and legally follow the faith. Church day care, faith based marriage counseling, Christian adoption agencies, religious schools, Christian businesses, doctors, professionals, para-church ministries, even the church, its clergy and lay leadership. Each is a growing battleground for promoting same-sex unions against church teaching, even individual conscience, with the full weight of the law standing against the faithful.
With alarming swiftness, these sweeping changes are moving from the courtroom to the classroom. In many schools today teachers are being ordered to stop using the words "mother" and "father." Father's Day celebrations are not observed, and the very concept of motherhood is abandoned to political correctness. Across the country, elementary school children are being taught to equate homosexuality with heterosexuality, and incredibly a parent's right to object to this indoctrination is becoming legally impossible.
In West Virginia, same-sex advocates could easily launch the state and its churches into legal chaos. They know that what was done in California was never intended to stay in California. A weekend trip to San Francisco for a West Virginia same-sex couple, plus a pro-bono ACLU attorney, could easily become a nightmare for marriage in West Virginia. In fact, a currently pending same-sex adoption case here, could effectively allow 5 unaccountable judges in Charleston to alter the Biblical definition of marriage for all of West Virginia. It's time to legally define marriage now, before costly litigation makes it politically and practically impossible.
West Virginians should define marriage, not judges under pressure to be progressive. West Virginians have an opportunity to take a stand for God's design, but only if elected officially will allow a vote in 2009, and West Virginians clearly desire to preserve the definition of marriage as one man and one woman in our state constitution. What's also clear, is that to pass a marriage amendment in West Virginia this year, the Church must lead. Pastors and their congregations must be willing and committed to defending God's design for marriage.
Please, pray about your active involvement at this critical moment in our state's history. Some of the things you can do include: Pray for marriage in West Virginia. Meeting personally with your delegate and state senator. Share with them your concerns about religious freedom and the moral definition of marriage. Ask for their support to allow the people of West Virginia to decide on marriage, not unaccountable judges. Pray for them, and remember that it is the Church's calling to speak truth to power, so power will speak the truth.
Your involvement matters, voting and involvement in the public square is central to being salt and light, and bearing witness to the truth. 2009 is West Virginia's best opportunity to take a stand for God's design. The time to preserve the definition of marriage in our constitution is now. One man. One woman. That's marriage.
www.wv4marriage.com
A pastor for 20 years and a pioneer leader in the values voter movement, Dr. Kenyn Cureton, former Vice President for Convention Relations for the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, currently serves as Vice President for Church Ministries with the Family Research Council in Washington, DC.So I am assuming that Dr. Kenyn Cureton is the author of the document, and will be referring to him as such throughout this post.
What is the divine pattern, God's original intention for marriage and the home? Go back to Genesis, the book of beginnings. For example, Genesis 1:27: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." Aren't you glad God created Adam and Eve, man and woman?What they always neglect to mention, is that God's perfect design for marriage and family included incest. Adam and Eve and their children were the only humans on Earth, simple math.
I gave your master's house to you, and your master's wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.Well He "allowed" it alright, and according to the Bible, He also condoned and approved of it.
The Word of God, which does not err, is abundantly clear about homosexuality. Leviticus 18:22 says: "You are not to sleep with a man as with a woman; it is detestable." Leviticus 20:13 says: "If a man sleeps with a man as with a woman, they have both committed an abomination..." Those are severe statements.The FULL text of Leviticus 20:13 is thus: If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
Some say: "Well, that's Old Testament, but Jesus never said anything about homosexuality." I would disagree. Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-18: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."So the "moral law" -- that includes having we gay guys put to death -- "remains in force," unlike those pesky dietary, ceremonial and sacrificial laws.
Some say: "Well Christians don't restrict their diets like they did in the OT Law, why should we pay attention to restrictions against homosexuality." It is true. We don't keep kosher. Why? Because Christ's death on the cross not only provided a way for sins to be forgiven, including the sin of homosexuality, but it also rendered obsolete the dietary, ceremonial, and sacrificial laws (see Hebrews 8:13). Yet the principles of the moral law remain in force. The moral law calls homosexuality an abomination [and deserving of death]. Jesus said: "I didn't come to change that."
Equally severe is God's own version of the Extreme Makeover of Sodom and Gomorrah, which were destroyed in a hail of fire and brimstone primarily because of this sin (Gen. 19).Let's take a look at "this sin" of Sodom and Gomorrah, the pith of which we can find specifically in Genesis 19: 4-8:
Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom-both young and old-surrounded the house. They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."So Dr. Kenyn Cureton, the author of this propaganda piece, considers, or at least wants pastors across West Virginia to believe that adult same-sex consensual relationships are the equivalent of gang rape, and to be silent about Lot, the hero of the story, who willingly offered up his virgin daughters to be gang raped in lieu his stranger-guests.
Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing. Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."
In fact, Jesus basically condemned homosexuality by affirming the divine pattern for marriage. In Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9, quoting from Genesis 1 and 2, Jesus said that marriage is between one man and one woman.And now for what Jesus says immediately after those texts:
Matthew 19:9: "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."I wonder how many haters that would throw out of the ring.
Mark 10:11: He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.
"Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit God's kingdom? Do not be deceived: no sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, or swindlers will inherit God's kingdom. Some of you were like this..."We've covered the adulterers, now let's cover the revilers...
Revile: abuse, admonish, berate, blame, castigate, censure, chide, criticize, denigrate, denounce, disparage, give a talking to, lambaste, lay down the law, lecture, rake over the coals*, ream, reprimand, reproach, reprobate, reprove, scorn, tongue-lash, vilify, vituperateI guess we'll see them all in hell.
Dr. Kenyn Cureton: While as many as 2 out of 3 Americas are opposed to "gay marriage," homosexual activists and their allies have looked to the Courts to further their destructive program. Take a look at their successes in the legal arena. In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the nation's remaining Sodomy laws.What a tragedy, our relationships are no longer criminal.
A new website called Marriage4All.org has launched with a handy, searchable database and map so you can find out who in your area gave money to take away the rights of others. But this site provides more than just names of contributors, it also has information on conflict resolution and how to approach those around you to talk about the real impact of Amendment 2.From Marriage4All.org
It's not retribution, it's about changing minds and holding people accountable.
This website was created in response to the passage of Amendment 2 in the State of Florida. In November 2008, Amendment 2 was passed with 62.1% of the vote. This action by Florida voters has enshrined hatred and discrimination as a part of the Florida Constitution.Related links:
Amendment 2:
"This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."
Bishop Michael Sheridan: God the Author of MarriageThe leaders of two Canadian polygamist groups are defending their "marriages" by referencing the nation's 2005 decision to legalize same-sex marriage, reports the Associated Press.
So we all know what's coming next. Shrieks and howls from the Christian hate groups about how the legalization of gay marriage leads to the legalization of polygamy - JUST LIKE THEY SAID IT WOULD.One Man, Many Wives, Big ProblemsAlso, remember that the comparison itself is fallacious. Same-sex marriage is about marrying 1 partner, polygamy is about marrying additional partners.
The social consequences of polygamy are bigger than you think
Other things being equal [male to female ratio] (and, to a good first approximation, they are), when one man marries two women, some other man marries no woman. When one man marries three women, two other men don't marry. When one man marries four women, three other men don't marry. Monogamy gives everyone a shot at marriage. Polygyny, by contrast, is a zero-sum game that skews the marriage market so that some men marry at the expense of others.
[snip]
The social dynamics of zero-sum marriage are ugly. In a polygamous world, boys could no longer grow up taking marriage for granted. Many would instead see marriage as a trophy in a sometimes brutal competition for wives. Losers would understandably burn with resentment, and most young men, even those who eventually won, would fear losing. Although much has been said about polygamy's inegalitarian implications for women who share a husband, the greater victims of inequality would be men who never become husbands.
By this point it should be obvious that polygamy is, structurally and socially, the opposite of same-sex marriage, not its equivalent. Same-sex marriage stabilizes individuals, couples, communities, and society by extending marriage to many who now lack it. Polygamy destabilizes individuals, couples, communities, and society by withdrawing marriage from many who now have it.
biblicalpolygamy.com:This is one I like to remember:
The purpose and outline of this web-site are simple:
As based only on the Bible, to provide
-the Exegesis / Argumentation Proofs in the Bible,
-the list of all the Polygamists in the Bible,
-and the examples where The Lord Himself is self-described in polygamous terms in the Bible,
all in a simple and easy-to-use web-site.
God said He GAVE WivesCheck out what Focus on the Family's Citzenlink recently had to say:
Sometimes, people are indeed honest enough to admit that the Bible really does not prohibit polygamy (polygyny). However, as a hedge against that admission, such ones may then resort to saying one of the following assertions:
-"Yes, but God never condoned polygamy."
-"Yes, God allowed it, but He was against polygamy."
-"Polygamy was only man's idea, not God's".
-"Yes, but God never approved of polygamy."
The passage involving 2 Samuel 12:8 rather clearly reveals otherwise.
"And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things."
Dr. Ron Jones, senior pastor of Immanuel Bible Church in Springfield, Va., has written an open letter to the new president.And what is this "Solomon-like wisdom" like, you ask? Well it goes a little something like this:
"We will pray that God will grant you Solomon-like wisdom in all of the decisions you make."
1 Kings 11:3 "He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray."
By John Corvino, columnist, 365gay.comGlenn Stanton is a friend of mine. He’s also badly wrong about same-sex marriage, and I tell him so—frequently, publicly, and sharply.Some background:
Glenn has written about our relationship in the January issue of Christianity Today, where he describes us as “highly unlikely but dear friends.” It’s a good description.
Monogamy in male homosexual relationships is difficult to sustain, even in long-term relationships [10] And if we can’t expect monogamy of homosexual males in marriage, the social-norms bar gets lowered for everyone, making it even more difficult to expect in of heterosexual males.And what does that footnote [10] include? The Dutch Study, a study that REQUIRED its participants to be non-monogamous.
Question 3. Shouldn’t two people who love one another be allowed to commit themselves to one another?In other words, if you're gay, you're too stupid to know that your love is any different than that between a parent or child, or athletes, or coworkers, or soldiers, or moms and dads, or brothers and sisters, or pupils and coworkers, etc., etc., etc.
Answer. Yes. But we don’t’ always call it marriage. Parents commit themselves to their children, but they aren’t married. Friends love and commit themselves to each other, but they aren’t married. Coworkers, athletes and soldiers can even love each other and enjoy great commitment, but we don’t call it marriage.
John discovers things about me that surprise him, such as that I can believe the world is older than 6,000 years and remain an evangelical in good standing.Where exactly does Adam and Eve fit into that "good standing" Mr. Stanton? You’re not confirming anything here, all you’re doing is demonstrating error in the perception of you.
It's an interesting point that prompted me to ask our audience why many Christians, as well as Scripture-twisting revisionists, never address either the Creation narrative or Jesus' clear affirmation of that narrative in the Gospels. These pericopes show the centrality of male and female to the family anthropologically, sociologically, and theologically, teaching us that male and female bear the image of God in unique, essential ways. Humanity and the family need male and female to need each other.OMG. Spare me out of my fricking mind. If at this point, you are STILL maintaining the notion that somehow the anomaly of “gayness” or “homosexuality” or of “same-gender attraction” is trying to DO AWAY WITH MALE AND FEMALE ITSELF, then you, Glenn Stanton, are a hateful bigot for the sheer sake of enjoying it.
I clarified my opposition to all sexual relationships that are not between a husband and wife. But I also said that whenever one human denies herself for the good of another and dedicates herself to the other's value, that was a praiseworthy thing. True selflessness is an intrinsic good, whether the person is a lesbian, a gossip, or a tax-cheat.Gossip or tax-cheat?
I ran across this post earlier from the "Chronicles of Chew," subtitled, "Cogitations to masticate upon."A Question of Love - Keith OlbermannYes, lettuce. Since only a person who knows the mind of God could know that the Bible was made of the mind of God.
Keith Olbermann, on MSNBC news had this to say to the people voting for propisition 8 in California.
Plainly put Mr. Olbermann, you certainly do not understand what the faith of Christianity is, or what the bible says about love and homosexuality. First off lets clear the air about this "Universal Love".
People for some reason believe that the God of the bible is a lovey dovey kind of, "aww it's ok I love you" kind of God.Oh my, that's terrible.
God does love you, but you have to understand in what way does God say He loves you. A parent doesn't just raise their children and tell them "aww it's ok, I love you" when their child does something wrong. The parent will tell the child what they have done is wrong and will punish them for it. The same is true of God and the sins of man.God is a god of limited love. Check. And here to think that I’ve been foolishly wasting my time worshipping a god without limitations...
God has told us in the bible that sins are wrong and points out what sins are in the Ten Commandments:So that’s your opening salvo? That there should be laws preventing Americans from working on Sunday, among other things? And what if your parents tell you to work on the Sabbath?
In particular to homosexuality, the God of the bible says this:Wow! And you think that it’s a good thing that you had to be told that mass murder is a good thing?
If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie witha woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be putto death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them. -Leviticus 20:13
Homosexuality is a sin, just as lying, murdering, and adultery is a sin.Reeelly? And here’s where I think you missed Keith’s point, do you really think that two people loving each other is exactly the same thing as lying, murdering and adultery?
The God of the Bible is a Loving God, but He is also a God of Justice…This is the love the Bible speaks of, not a "universal love" or a worldy love.So you’re saying that God’s love is "conditional," as opposed to the "universal" AKA unconditional love that dominates this world?
God doens't just love everyone,Unlike we Earthly-bound sinners who do love everyone?
He loves everyone in such a way that He sent His Son to die for them as a sacrifice to atone for their sins. If you don't believe in Jesus, then you will still stand condemned.According to whom? The god of the Bible whom you consider yourself to be on par with?
The "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" statement Kieth Olbermann is talking about is half right, it is from the book of Mark in the Bible:Actually it’s from the book of math, everybody love everybody = maximum freedom for all.
So yes, we should love each other as we love ourselves, but we should also love God with our entire being. How do we show God our love? The same way a child shows a parent their love, by listening to them and obeying them.Blindly? Isn't one of the responsibilities of a parent to teach their child to think for themselves, AKA - how to be responsible?
Commiting to what God has said to us in the bible we show Him our love.Let me know when your “Biblical commitments” include the illegalization of divorce and remarriage, and we’ll talk. Until then, BULLSHIT!
By believing that Jesus paid the price for our sins, and that He was truly the Son of God, God in the flesh, and that through Him, turning away from our sins, we are saved from being condemned to an eternity in Hell.
This doesn't mean we shouldn't share the same rights as human beings in this country,I take it that the "same rights" part was a typo?
but please don't sit there and argue that Christians should "do unto others as you would have other do unto yourself".Who, moi? I've been arguing for years that the best way for you Christians to bring we godless heathens to Christ is to fuck us all over - legally and with impunity.
Using this argument and saying that God is a God of Love, why can't you love us the way your God does is a misunderstanding of this.Those damn godless heathens and their godless god. Breathtaking audacity I tell ya, just breathtaking.
God is a God of Love and Justice.Good God, and here all this time I thought Love was about injustice. *Phew*
As humans we all have rights, however as sinners we all don't deserve any of them. It is only by God's grace alone we have anything at all.(Pause for emphasis...)
Lorri Jean of the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center:
Good afternoon.
This Tuesday, by a very slim margin, the voters of California passed Proposition 8, in an effort to strip an entire group of people of their fundamental right to marry. That slim margin passed this proposition for one reason and one reason only. They fell victim to campaign of lies and deceit that was perpetrated by the Yes on 8 forces.
campaign of lies and deception was immoral and reprehensible. With malice of forethought, the Yes on 8 campaign lied to California voters, and they started right from the very beginning.
Their very first ad said “Churches would lose their tax exemption,” if Proposition 8 did not pass. A lie.
Their second claim, was that ministers would be prosecuted if Proposition 8 did not pass, and they did not agree with the right to marry. Again, an absolute lie.
Third, they claimed that schools would be required to teach children about gay marriage if Proposition 8 did not pass. Another complete falsehood.
And you don’t have to take my word for it. You can look at many of the newspapers throughout the state, who exposed this campaign of lies and distortions for what it was, like the LA Times. But you didn’t have to be in an urban area like LA, the Fresno Bee, not a paragon of liberal thought, called their campaign “a flat lie.”
Also, a prominent Mormon legal scholar issued a memorandum analyzing all of their claims, and found them to be false and misleading, attorney Morris Thurston. And in fact, many fair minded Mormons, many fair minded members of the LDS Church are very upset that Proposition has passed, and are equally upset by the deceptive and false campaign that was run by the Yes on 8 forces.
They even stooped so low as to send a campaign mailer, targeted to African Americans, with Barack Obama’s picture on it, implying that Barack Obama supported Proposition 8, when they knew full well that Barack Obama has come out against Proposition 8. That is the kind of lying and deception that helped them cleave to a very small margin on Tuesday.
And they took this dirty campaigning to a new low in our state. And how were they able to do this? They were able to do this, because the majority of the donations that came to the Yes on 8 campaign, came from members of the Mormon Church. And not on their own initiative, but at the direction, the express direction of the president of the Mormon Church. He sent a letter, and instructed it that it be read in every Mormon congregation, directing members of his church to get involved this campaign. And so, from all over the country, they flooded the Yes on 8 coffers with money, to run this lying and deceitful campaign.
We are here today to decry those lies. To expose them for what they are. And the LDS Church members were not the only ones. Other, conservative, religious, anti-gay organizations from outside of our state, did similar things. Like Focus on the Family, or the national office in Connecticut of the Knights of Columbus.
These organizations are entitled to their views, but they are not entitled to run campaigns of lies and deceit, and try to impose their views upon the civil law in the state of California.
We have a separation of church and state in our nation for a reason, and it is to stop those kinds of things. Our nation was founded on the principle that no minority should ever be subject to the tyranny of the majority when it comes to fundamental rights. What has happened with Proposition 8, sets a very dangerous precedent. For the first time in our nation, one group has voted to take away the fundamental rights of a smaller group, and that is wrong and disturbing, and it makes me wonder, who is next? Who’s fundamental rights will a conservative church, from out of state, focus on next?
We should all be protected by our constitution. And we are here today to announce a new campaign. We are not going quietly.
Yesterday, some of the finest attorneys in the state of California joined by the city of Los Angeles, filed suit in the California Supreme Court, to invalidate Proposition 8, as an improper way to amend our constitution, and subjugate a small group of people to the discriminatory will of the majority.
I believe that a majority of Californians would not have voted for this measure if they had known the truth. If they had not been lied to and deceived by the Yes on 8 campaign, funded mostly by donations from member of the Mormon Church.
So, today, we have decided to included the president of the Mormon Church in a campaign that is more productive for our community. We are going to raise money to fight the--to support the effort to repeal Proposition 8. And we are urging people to make donations on our new website, www.invalidateprop8.org. And for every donor who makes a donation, even a small donation of $5, a postcard in the name of that donor, will be sent to President Thomas Monson of the LDS Church, and I want to read to you what that postcard says:“Dear President Monson:
A donation has been made in your name by (and we will insert the person’s name), to “invalidateprop8.org” to overturn California's Proposition 8 and restore fundamental civil rights to all citizens of California. The money will be donated to legal organizations fighting the case and to support grass-roots efforts in support of full marriage equality. Although we decry the reprehensible role that the Church Latter Day Saints leadership played in denying all Californians equal rights under the law, we are pleased a donation has been made on your behalf to the effort to overturn the discrimination your church members helped enshrine in the California Constitution. Given that throughout its history the Mormon Church has been subjected to bigotry, we hope you appreciate the donation in your name to fight religious bigotry here in California.
I'm looking for a copy of the ballot online to offer objective verification, but so far, this is the best I can do. And that page comes from the Florida Division of Elections itself, which appears to be as official as it gets as far as Florida elections/ballots go.NO. 2
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE I, NEW SECTION
Florida Marriage Protection Amendment
This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.
The direct financial impact this amendment will have on state and local government revenues and expenditures cannot be determined, but is expected to be minor.
