Perhaps. But even today, the issue of gay marriage is hardly decided. Roughly half the country is for it but that means that roughly half is against it. In a rural state like where I live, I would bet the VAST majority of this church would have preferred it be left in the public arena. If it had, everyone FROM BOTH SIDES could enjoy attending...just like they have for 50 years.
So, all wives should be virgins or they should be stoned to death, adulterers should be stoned to death, and rapists should be forced to marry the women they rape? After all, it's in the Bible... Deuteronomy 22...
the dumbest, most intellectually lazy game you can play is to cherry pick select Bible verses and claim that you've called somebody out. rimrocker, looking right at you.
Are you saying that is what the church discusses every Sunday? I've never heard of a church that did more than preach openess on the issue, and never heard of a gay friendly church that regularly focused on homosexuality.
I'm saying it inappropriate for a church to openly advocate gay marriage. The church is supposed to be about religion and spirituality...not social issues.
Up until a few years ago, it was a pretty big deal to the majority of people when a man/woman came out of the closet. In some states, people would fear physical harm for being found out as being gay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_States). Kids, teens and young adults were bullied and those that were known as gay or lesbian were shunned for being so by their family/peers. The world just wasn't as connected as it is today. Homogenous societies are changing as we learn to understand one another and see differing viewpoints. Kids and teenagers who identify themselves as being gay are coming out at a younger age and are rightfully proud in being our equals. Nobody is stopping Christians from being Christian. But when the major religion actively proselytizes, it's going to have a hissy fit when society doesn't conform to its rulebook. Given that its one of the best businesses this country has, I can personally guarantee you that the church won't say no to gay family dollars in the future.
That's certainly all true - but at the end of the day, it's still the Church's choice. Your mom has no right to say that the Church has to fit her views. A huge majority of young people support gay marriage, so maybe the Church has an eye on its future membership. In the end, the Church changed, as it has the right to do - no one forced that. And your mom left, as she has the right to do - no one forced that either.
A huge part of what Jesus preached about was dealing with social issues, and of being accepting of those with different views and those who are looked down upon.
I would agree with this. My original point was that the way this has been "forced" so quickly and (IMHO) inappropriately on many facets of life HAS... as opposed to what some here have claimed...caused harm to some. I support the cause of gay marriage and equality for all. I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't. I simply disagree with some of the methods the GLBT community has used to push their agenda. The "advocacy" of churches being one of them.
yes yes, natural law theory is based on a whole host of factors, and I oversimplified for comical reasons. If you want to argue a complex analysis of how one frames positive vs. natural law, you are more than free to start it in another thread. I am referring to those who postulate that natural law is somehow based on things gone past in time immemorial that are cardinal virtues of human nature, and specifically those dumb enough to take a "Lion King" view of nature and apply it to human relations. a) nature is f**ked. b) the modern Christian framework for what is right and wrong is very biologically f**ked to say the least. Humans are meant to be sexually dimorphic and polygamous to a certain extent. You can argue whether or not that is "morally" right or wrong in terms of following those urges, but don't look to innate religious principles to shape that discussion, because if there is a God, and you believe in a God and that ID stuff, well, He designed you to have sex with as many people as possible (and designed clownfish to change sexes and do it with their children).
You left out the other definitions for marriage. Anyway, for most of the time we have been marrying, marriage was an agreement between the father of the bride and the prospective husband or his father. Really it is only within the last 100-150 years or so that both men and women got to routinely decide who they would marry. Our idea of marriage is certainly not what marriage was at the time the Bible was written. Did it take God millennia to develop the economic and cultural forces that would allow women and men to choose their marriage partners? The contention that society does not define marriage is absurd on it's face. The only definitions given to marriage comes from society, be they sacred or secular.
or maybe.... just maybe.... the membership of the church changed its views? perhaps.... just perhaps.... the church as a whole openly wants to join the 21st century, regardless of what your mom who - no offense - is literally a dying member of the church. maybe the church, as a whole, realized the benefit to its congregation and its ability to survive beyond the "old generation" as a greater good than just appeasing your mother's antiquated viewpoint? no, that can't be it... it's got to be those darned GLBT's and their menacing ways. jesus f@cking christ.
bigtexxx is big government... i thought everyone knew that. he's also much more lenient on the homosexual lifestyle of men as long as they are wearing the appropriate footwear. God hates **** in addidas.
Being accepting of the people is different than accepting or even promoting their views. I can't believe you can't decipher that.
If she wants to divorce me that's her problem....I'm not at fault if she chooses to go against God's word....
