The bible and homosexuality: Round 3

I would say it is what helps me discern right behavior.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

How is using the same word differently in two different contexts "talking out of both sides of your mouth"?If you say that you think gays should be allowed to have a contract that is identical to a marrage contract then you are saying that IN A LEGAL CONTEXT they should be allowed to have something that is identical to marrage. But you say that you shouldn't call it marriage becase marriage is between a man and a woman. BUT if you call it something other than marriage the rights won't be the same becase they will be two sperate kinds of contract and the govenmnet can change one contract without changing the other.Please respond to this argumnet in a way that shows you understand it. This is not "talking out of the side of your mouth" this is using a word one way in a legal setting and anther way in common conversation. Do I realy have to give examples of how we do this all the time?In response to my question: You said: OHH I see now! so Becase I am unwilling to stone a woman to death that means I must beleve that adultary is ok and that there is nothing wrong with it.Did you think before you posted this? Come on! I joined this forum to have well reasoned debates. Why does a belief that adultary is wrong nesessitate a belief that stoning is right?

Oh my atheism has nothing to do with morality, although i'm not sure how anything I wrote above makes it obvious I am an atheist.Anyway, reasons for me being atheist are even more off topic than anything else we've been discussing, i'm not sure the admins would let us get away with going that far.

That is exactly right!Now if you don't understand why, let me ask you a question.
If 2 men get a divorce, whos the mother?
Who gets the children? Your just not thinking relatively. Today stoning seems unfair, barbaric, and down right unthinkable.
Well today we have our own set of rules for dealing with these situations, and 2000 years from now(if we are even here), they may seem unfair, barbaric, and down right unthinkable.The point is God knew exactly how to deal with the situation based on the times. When it was time for a change he sent his son.Those people back then upheld the values of a man and a woman being together so high, that if you messed with it, it was punishable by death. You couldn't even touch a woman unless you were planning on spending the rest of your life taking care of her. So all those rules say one thing to me, don't mess up or your dead.You may think that is unfair also because you are then trapped with the person you married, and stuck in a lifetime of anguish. You will have to figure out how to make it work (gasp!).Well I say that is no different than today where people get married and the divorce rate is over 50% and many people are suffering (mostly children) anyway.People today have no clue what the word commitment means anymore.

Well seeing as how you missed the point of those verses so badly, I could only imagine how you view the rest of God's word.Well I'm not going anywhere, and if I have to, I will try to explain it to you, and we can hash it out. This threads about to close anyway.
I plan on starting another one about the whole rape thing, to help put it in perspective for people, and myself. I have to do some research first. I may even not like what I find out.

I think it's time to put this one to bed.

---

How pierceful grows the hazy yon! How myrtle petaled thou! For spring hath sprung the cyclotron How high browse thou, brown cow? -- Churchy LaFemme, 1950