Proposed Law Would Force Churches to Host Gay Weddings

[Midswat]

Where'd JBond go?

Is he and his congregation out queer bashing in the name of the Lord?

 

[Jon88]

Yeah

God hates fags

 

[VTA]

Seems legit.

No doubt. Serious bible study. This is prime dope I'm handing you guys Middy, you're not going to get this stuff in the run-of-the-mill church.

 

[Midswat]

I wonder if in two thousand years people will read the Lord of the Rings trilogy and believe that Gandolf existed and there were walking trees and shit.

 

[VTA]

I wonder if in two thousand years people will read the Lord of the Rings trilogy and believe that Gandolf existed and there were walking trees and shit.

Of course not. Just like we know Zeus and minotaurs never existed.
Discernment brother Mid.

 

[Midswat]

Of course not. Just like we know Zeus and minotaurs never existed.
Discernment brother Mid.

Viewd objectively, much of the Bible is just as unbelievable as Zeus, minotaurs, Lord of the Rings, etc.

 

[Jon88]

Religious people are notorious for being lazy intellectuals.

In other words, stupid as fuck. They have that reputation now, thank God.

I know VTA is not. He's in the minority. But their days of following the crowd are numbered because the world has learned that crowd is stupid.

 

[VTA]

Viewd objectively, much of the Bible is just as unbelievable as Zeus, minotaurs, Lord of the Rings, etc.

Maybe out of context, but in context it fits perfectly.

It might seem that entertainment is impactful, but these thing you're mentioning are only really relevant to the part of cultures brought up on entertainment and that relevance is limited to how much luxury time you're afforded. No one is going to die for or because of those things, because only the truth stirs emotions strong enough to impel people to real action, one way or another. You can get people to argue over the merits over a book or movie, but you're not going to geo-political shifts and sacrifices based on them. Fiction has it's limits.

 

[VTA]

Religious people are notorious for being lazy intellectuals.

In other words, stupid as fuck. They have that reputation now, thank God.

I know VTA is not. He's in the minority. But their days of following the crowd are numbered because the world has learned that crowd is stupid.

This really applies to any group, ideology, etc. Political ideologies - and horrid ones - provide great evidence for that truth. Religious imbeciles like Jim Jones, are not much different than political tyrants who commit genocide.

The fact is people are followers, and few are leaders. God knows this and is why He repeatedly stresses limited faith in man and greater faith in Him.

 

[Rock Slamdance]

I feel like I just walked into my favorite pub, only to find it has been turned into a church. Luckily I had a flask in my pocket, so I'm staying to watch.

 

[Midswat]

Maybe out of context, but in context it fits perfectly.

Context?

You're going to tell me you understand the full context of a book written 1600 years ago by 40 different people on three different continents in multiple languages and translated multiple times?

 

[junk]

Inflammatory? Trolling? Whatever....

Sure, you started the thread with this comment

The gay community is the most disrespectful, intolerant, hateful group in the country.

You then proceeded to post an article that is over a year old. It is from April 23, 2012. It wasn't like you stumbled upon it.

Furthermore, the proposed legislation which the whole article is based upon was voted down......in November 2012.

And, finally, the entire article was poorly written and meant to only be sensationalist.

The Kansas Equality Coalition first raised the issue last November when it asked the Hutchinson City Council to consider amending the city’s anti-discrimination ordinance to add sexual orientation to the list of protected classes, which already included race, color, gender, age, disability and national origin.

After conducting three public forums, the city’s Human Relations Commission voted 9-0 to recommend that the City Council amend the ordinance to provide protection for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people in all matters of employment, housing and public accommodations.

But the City Council voted 3-2 on June 5 for a compromise that provided narrower protection – only from firing from a job or eviction from a home, and only to gays, lesbians and bisexuals. Transgender people were excluded. So, too, were other issues or discrimination in employment and housing. Discrimination in public accommodations was left out entirely.

So, not only is it poorly out of date, the actual legislation that went to vote was only to protect homosexuals from being fired or evicted from a home because they were gay.

Yet, somehow the article was entirely focused on gays forcing their way into churches.

http://www.hutchnews.com/Todaystop/Anti-discrimination

 

[junk]

Interpretating it in such a way is entirely subjective and most likely wrong, considering what follows after the not respecting of an established religion is the prohibition of it's exercise. It isn't claused with 'except in government buildings'. In fact prayers were held in official meetings, etc, throughtout the history of this nation.

Possibly. It certainly has been a long and drawn out affair from the perspective of the Bronx Church.

I only agree with the Establishment Clause from the standpoint that it should prevent the government from appearing to give favoritism to one religion over another. The biggest advantage to this is to keep religion out of education (as in curriculum) and out of government (as in legislating things based upon religious beliefs). However, that is another discussion entirely.

Maybe you're misunderstanding my analogy. I know it's not discrimination in the work place, it's protocol. The right to set parameters within the confines of your business, association, group or church.

I'm still not sure you are grasping the concept of discrimination. Yes, a business can set protocols about how they do business. They can't set protocols that unfairly target a protected class.

I've asked questions along these lines before and I think you've more or less avoided them.

How would you feel if you were told that you couldn't use the break room at work because you were Christian? Only atheists in the break room. Sorry, bud. Protocol.

But is your point on target? There's plenty to be questioned about your views on it, as well as you can question mine. If, when there are plenty of options at your disposal and you insist on forcing, yes forcing your lifestyle, events and presence on others in their own sanctuaries, then what else can you can call it? The church has the right to have it's own sanctuary. It's not discrimination, it's like the above stated, protocol.

Being treated equally is not the same as "forcing your lifestyle, events and presence" on others. If that were the case, the church in the Bronx would be guilty of the same thing. It is a perfect example actually.

I know this whole article was simply sensationalism aimed at a minor corner case that would be unlikely to actually happen for a whole slew of reasons (number one being that the church could have prevented it even if the law did pass). However, kudos to the church because that sensationalism worked. Even a reduced bill, one that would have simply prevented a homosexual from being fired or evicted, was rejected.

The whole thing reeks of hypocrisy to me. Even if you assume sexuality is a lifestyle choice, well.....so is religion.

 

[junk]

Homosexuality should not be a special protected class in the same way race and gender are. To equate the plight of African Americans in our country with some guy shoving his dick up another guy ass is completely out of line and does a disservice to people that have suffered genuine persecution based on their race.

Should drug addicts be a special protected class?

So where is your line regarding acting out on impulses and what makes you view any more legitimate than mine?

Should religion be a protected class? After all, it is a lifestyle choice.

 

[Midswat]

 

[junk]

Oh Jon are you getting tense reading all of this? :wave
We've been respectful and fact-forwarding. Nothing to get upset about.

And kudos to you on this. This has been a good discussion. I've learned quite a bit.

 

[Midswat]

What abt me Junk? Can I has kudos?

 

[Angrymesscan]

The whole thing reeks of hypocrisy to me. Even if you assume sexuality is a lifestyle choice, well.....so is religion.

This seems a very interesting point.

I must say though that I consider that church and state should be completely seperate.

Do I think gays should be able to get married? Sure!

Should any church be forced to hold said weddings? Absofuckinglutly not.

Unless of course said church is living off the goverment...

Which reminds me I'm pissed off at churches being tax exempted...

 

[jnday]

No where near it. I'm not going to go phony humble and paint myself as closer to God, the truth is I know more theologically than I practice.

But I don't celebrate and try to make others see my failings as a way of life. The point is to 'flee from sin', not feed it then call it natural because it's grown on you. Cancer wil grow on you too, and it's natural to boot! Why try to treat it then?

This is the best post in this thread. VTA, this explains our decline as a society in a simple post. It seems like our morals and values decline as sin becomes more accepted and tolerated, even embraced by certain groups.

 

[VTA]

Context?

You're going to tell me you understand the full context of a book written 1600 years ago by 40 different people on three different continents in multiple languages and translated multiple times?

Yes. Hind-sight is total clarity. The bible interprets the bible, through cross-referencing itself, it's meanings, prophecies and consistencies across those 40 authors and times, etc. The authors didn't know they were writing 'the Bible', they were given their roles and it fit in over time. Certainly no man could have been singularly charged with such a task.

The language thing is not a problem. First and foremost it's original manuscripts are 3 languages and none are dead, or not recognizable. Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. We can cross check any thing against it's original language. (I won't pretend to speak those languages, and have to use reference when I check).

Jon's statement about intellectual laziness extends beyond religious people and a lot of the bible is mis-interpretated by believers and non-believers alike because they simply won't check it out for themselves.