The bible and homosexuality

When you get a marriage license do you get it from the state or the church?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You don't have to live it, that's fine.But what about everybody who doesn't believe in your God? Why are they supposed to play by your religion's rules?After all, nobody expects you to stop eating hamburgers just because the Hindus believe its wrong.

Why'zat?

---

"Egos drone and pose alone, Like black balloons, all banged and blown
On a backwards river the infidels shiver in the stench of belief.
And tell my mama I'm a hundred years late; I'm over the rails and out of the race
The crippled songs of an age that won't thaw are ringing in my ears"
-Beck

To Hangdawg13:I am confused -You mentioned that:
1) You are heterosexual
2) You are exposed to physically desirable women on a daily basis
3) You understand that the desire/urge to pursue sex is not sinful
4) But "wishing and fantasizing" is because it is lust.So far, this boils down to "heterosexual lust is bad".Now I won't play the dummy and ask you why homosexual lust is bad (since I assume you meant that ALL lust is bad), but I would like to point out that you seem to have dismissed the fact that homosexuality is not all about lust.(As pointed out by CrashFrog) Just as heterosexuality is "ok" if the couple is motivated by love (hence love and not lust = thumbs-up), so homosexuality should also be "ok" if the couple is motivated by love.Are you challenging the notion that homosexuals may have loving relationships just like heterosexuals?Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

In this nation, I have a right to vote for the candidate or the law according to whatever the heck I think is best. I desire that this nation function according to God's principles because I believe this is the only way it will last and prosper. If enough people in a state desire that that state function according to God's principles, so be it. Those who disagree can either deal or get out.I like hamburgers. That is one reason out of many I do not live in India. If I get married just as the majority of America decides and votes that Homosexuality is the only valid lifestyle, I will simply leave.

Jesus said that to lust for a woman is the same as commiting adultery in your heart.Besides the fact that I have become arrogant and am no longer viewing her honorably as a child of God, but an object for my sexual gratification.This message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 06-11-2004 10:30 PM

Of course homosexuals can love one another. I am not challenging that notion. I do believe that any sexual activity outside of marriage (between one man and one woman) is related to lust.

Why do you have any problem with marriage between two people of the same sex?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

see previous post

That's a non answer.Why do you oppose marriage between two people of the same sex?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No, we actually have constitutional principles that protect the minority against a tyrannical majority. That's how we got rid of slavery; that's how we allowed for interracial marriage when most people were against it.Morever, homosexuals as a group tend to be bright, professional individuals. Doctors, engineers, thinkers of every stripe. You really want our brightest minds running off to Canada? Do you think that's going to be good for our country? You don't think you have a right in this country to practice your religion and customs as you see fit, in the country of your birth, assuming that you intend or cause harm to nobody?How can you even think that's American?This message has been edited by crashfrog, 06-11-2004 10:57 PM

He was none of those things.
Paul was a member of the Sanhedrin and as such, married. This must have been an unhappy experience for him, for it colored his view of women henceforth. In no way, would he be tempted to denote any of God's creation inferior - as in women inferior to men, all things God created are perfect in their kind. He would not be a racist for the same reason, nor would he be homophobic, since he understood the rules of loving one's neighbor and leave judgment of what is unacceptable to God. But speaking what is unacceptable, does not make him a bad person.
Some of the things Paul said about women, he clearly qualified by stating that he speaks them by permission and not command. Much like we today might talk about the things that make us unhappy, so did he. He was much determined that men should treat a wife with love and devotion, and love them as much as they love themselves. He knew that less than that is not acceptable. He was just not lucky in love and deemed service to God more to his liking, a thing he also stresses.
For a look-see, check 1 Cor. 7

To Hangdawg13:Ok. So for heterosexuals, we have "marriage between one man and one woman" so that they can display their love for each other (and have sex without the lust factor), which is all very convenient.For homosexuals, we are promoting "marriage between two partners of the same sex" so that they too can display their love for each other (again, have sex without the lust factor).Which part of the above do you have a problem with?Patiently awaiting your reply.

---

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

It doesn't work without lust. In the right setting, lust is a very positive ingredient to a relationship.
If you can understand that every negative has a positive........you can understand yin-yang. It's not that difficult.

See if you can spot the circular argument:1) Homosexuality is a sinful relationship because it happens outside of marriage.2) Homosexuals can't be allowed to marry because their relationships are sinful.PG and HD, does this more or less summarize your position?