Hate the sin but love the person...except when voting?

Ever hear of annulment.I included a link so you could broaden your horizons.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This is one of many reasons for granting of annulment.Read the link. Ok I won't use snark here. But this would be a non-sequitor since the first part of the statement has been shown to be wrong and deceptive.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Proscribe :to denounce or condemn (a thing) as dangerous or harmful; prohibit.What word did you mean to use?Maybe I just misunderstand what you are trying to say here.
But this sentence means.
God's order condemns procreation within marriage.Please explain why you would say this.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

oops sorry didn't see this before I posted on it.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Of course He would. What kind of example would He be if He didn't follow His own rules? If you don't want them to vote against your marriage, don't vote against theirs. Taking something away from somebody else that you want for yourself is a hateful action. By their fruits ye shall know them. But voting for a hateful action does mean you hate the person. That's what I've been trying to tell you. You wouldn't want somebody to vote against your marriage, so don't vote against theirs.

---

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

People were getting married long before your god was even known, as for the tower of babel, more babbling from a bronze aged myth

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

Since you're not going to respond in kind, i.e. produce absolute evidence for the position you hold, I don't see why I should.What's good for the goose is always good for the gander.- One mans prejudice is anothers sound judgement. Look Taq, there's not a lot of point in exchanging worldviews as if one or other is suddenly going to fold in the face of it. Better to stick to the topic, paraphrased thus:"does the pursuit of society as you want it necessarily result in hatred towards individuals"- You would have to base that view on my evidencing it. You won't find that in what I say but are laying it onto what I say. Eigegesis is a way of getting a text to say anything you like. Stick to exegesis and you cannot hold that view.

Sorry. Perscribe was the word I meant.

The point was to show that sex and marriage where viewed as intrinsically intertwined. The fact that marriages can be annulled for other reasons doesn't impinge on that.- Do try to steer between the forum rules...

quote:

---

Deception, beguilement, deceit, bluff, mystification, and subterfuge are acts to propagate beliefs that are not true, or not the whole truth

---

No, because it's not the topic. The topic is whether or not activity towards prohibiting homosexual marriage is necessarily hatred-of-individuals driven.(You know that in your case especially, I restrict myself to as narrow a focus as possible. Dealing with single issue limits the scope of what I find to be serpentine wriggling on your part.) That's not the topic - although it is involved in the topic.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Let's not confuse my motivation for acting with a mode of acting. When it comes to actual action the object would be to utilise all the tools at my disposal to ensure the result desired.I'm sure the law on being fair to everyone isn't the only law involved. And that any law is open to interpretation and modification. That is the case in Ireland at least.- You were making an appeal to utility as a reason to permit homosexuals marry. I was making the point that I thought there were other, higher concerns - aside from utility (which is based on mans wisdom)I have the right to work towards shaping society in any way I like - just like everyone. I don't accept that I am restricted to a set of rules on how I go about that (like secular-liberalisms sense of what constitutes fair play).- True. But that's not an answer to the question asked.- You've sidestepped the point. You were positing the legal aspect of marriage the totality of marriage. I disagreed. That doesn't mean I think the legal aspect irrelevant.

I guess William Wilberforce will be turning in his grave then..

There's no material here to work with Panda. Sorry.

The society in which I live, yes. The wrath of God expressed would impinge on me too. No.Quite how/when God's wrath is expressed isn't for me to say. And I suspect that it would take the general form of a "handing men over to their sin" (per Romans). In other words, men intent on a slide downwards into depravity would be assisted on their way by the removal of God's restraint on them.That said: a God who won't stop at wiping out nations, and who intends to settle with all of mankind on an eternal basis couldn't be excluded as being behind the likes of tsumani and hurricanes.Phelps might be right in the letter, it's just the spirit with which he goes about his business might well be problematic in God's sight.- Seeing as you filled in all the blanks yourself... Crashfrog wasn't engaging in biblical exegesis. He was taking a statments like "blessed are the poor in spirit" and supposing it "blessed are the poor in finance". The three verses he supplied to support the notion of a 'political Jesus' were absurdly wide of the mark.More importantly however, a bible study has no relevance (that I can see) to the topic to hand. The issue is whether hatred of gays must be behind a desire for no gay marriage.- I haven't said anything about gay ministers being/not being true Christians

Considering the fact that whenever I have tried to get you to address the massive flaws in your arguement you have just cried like a baby - I did not expect very much.Clearly you are homophobic but you have to shoe-horn that hatred into the christian religion.