Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Religion
GTA Warehouse Forums > Community Discussion Forums > Serious Discussion
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Sid Vicious
wow go ssera
danells
QUOTE
Hmm why must religion revolve around our future generations?Anyway to make it clear, you don't have to get married to be together forever so who gives a shit? tongue.gif And if you were meant to abort you're children, it would have been built into you're body (the abilty to abort the child,that is)


Not all religions revolve around future generations. Most simply revolve around being a good person. This arguement is simply about the sanctity of life.

You don't have to get married in order to be together forever, but in order to receive the 1700 rights given to married couples guess what? you have to be married.

It is built into your body. Women have spontaneous abortions all the time they're just called miscarriages. If a woman is under stress the baby will be aborted, if the baby has a major physical problem they will be aborted. In fact the psychological status of the mother can cause a miscarriage.

QUOTE
even if the child was that of a rapist woulden't you give it a shot at life, I mean come on it can't even think yet and you're never going to let it, thats just plain cruel, I mean social services take any unwanted children and give them to adoption centers don't they?


A man violently forced himself upon the woman. Afterwards the woman is practically in shock and is emotionally a wreck. A rape is one of the worst things that can happen to a person, emotionally, physically and mentally. The last thing a person who has gone through this will want is a constant reminder of what happened. And, even if they give it up for adoption they HAVE to have the child of that asshole within them for 9 months constantly reminding them of the trauma.
Lovefist
QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
Abstinance- A blow job will still relieve that same stress as sex, but a girl can't get pregnant from giving a blow job. My definition of sex is anyway the sperm and egg can meet. Which is only through vaginal penetration. So, no matter what you do; oral, anal, etc., it's still considered abstinance because you don't have a chance of getting pregnant.


Do you have a girlfriend? Go and tell her that she can only give you blowjobs until she's ready to have a kid and only then are you allowed to have sex. Of course once she's pregnant it's back to blowjobs. Please, just go and tell your girlfriend that... see what her reaction is.


I give back. It's not like I was saying thaty I can only get my pleasure and that's it. It was just an example of an alternative to sex. Would masturbation be better for you?

QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
Adoption- Have the government pay someone else to raise your child. There are tons of people who want to have a child but can't, and you want yours sucked int a fuckin' blender just because you were a slut and got knocked up? BULL SHIT!

How the hell can you call someone who gets pregnant automatically a slut? And why exactly is it *only* the woman's fault if she gets pregnant?


Ok, I was angry when I wrote it, so I went over the top. I never said that it was *ONLY* a woman's fault. And uh, sex is 50 50 (unless it's rape).

QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
Contraceptives- Holy shit! Did you know that there is a pill that stops women form getting pregnant and rubber thing that stops semen from entering the vagina among other things. It is possible to use at least 3 of these metods (birth control, diaphram, condom) of contraception together thus putting the pregnancy chances to a VERY low number, but yet the number of unwanted pregnancies grow and grow.


And as we all know contraceptives are not 100% fool proof so what would happen to the girl in your example if she still DID get pregnant. Also I think you'll find that generally it isn't the woman who doesn't want to use contraception (especially condoms) - it's the man. But of course it could never be our fault because we're perfect and women are not. Right?


But everyone still knows they are taking a pregnancy risk if they have sex. Why should it be the child's fault? And, uh, excuse me but just because the guy doesn't want to use contraceptives doesn't mean that they have to have sex without them. There is a very popular word in our language that I'm gonna teach you know. You put an N with an O....say it with me now "NO!"


QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
Stop being a slut!- I guess this would fall into the abstinance group, but I just felt like saying it. The less you have sex, the less of a chance of getting pregnant you have.


The less you have sex the less chance the person you're sleeping with will get pregnant. So I guess following your own philosophy you'll never have sex except at times when you absolutely want to have a child. Or not because you think women are the source of all this evil and it's not actually men's fault that they get pregnant?


I didn't say "Stop having sex unless you want a child." You and I both know that there are some people who are sex addicts and sex rules their lives. I'm just saying that people have WAY too much sex to not think about/prepare for pregnancy.


QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
Do you think that it would be fair that if when you were younger and your parents decided that they didn't want you/didn't have the money to take care of you that they could just kill you and throw you in a dumpster.....


Fair? Well I don't think I'd care much either way as I'm not even born yet.


Exactly,. they don't have a say for themselves, so does that mean they should be taken out of the equation?

QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
... a LIFE has begun. If you stop that life, it is murder. Abortion is one of the most vile things used today.....this coming from such a liberal person as myself.


If a being that is alive and has no functioning consciousness is killed and you call that murder, then every time we kill an animal to eat it, every time we pick a flower to give it to a girlfriend - every time we swat a fly that is annoying us... all those times we are murdering something. Tell me then.. how many beings have you murdered in your life?


An animal has no consciousness or feeling? We don't do those just cause it's there and we're cold-hearted. We do those things for reasons. I know abortion has a reason; it will stop a problem for the parents, but there a other methods of preventing that problem without killing someone.

QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
What about instances of rape or incest? "Medically, we know pregnancy in these cases would be rare. As reasons for legalizing abortion rape and incest are nothing more than emotional screens used by those profiting from abortion." I saw this online here.


rare but not impossible... so what happens when someone is raped and DOES become pregnant?


They can choose then, this is one of little circumstances it could be a legal choice.

QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 19 2005, 09:37 AM)
What about sick and retarded kids? I believe this is OK, since it is preventing suffering. You may say though "Chuck, regular abortion stops the mother and/or father from suffering too, so why is it stll wrong?" True it does stop the mother and/or father from suffering and so does the methods listed above and they do without hurting ANYONE.


Are you saying that aborting kids that will be born sick and retarded is "OK"? If so then you are a big hypocrite and if not - well explain what you meant then. Why would a child that may be born with mental problems be treated any different to one that lives normally? Do you know that many of the world's greatest geniuses are/were disabled in one way or another?


OK, let me clear this up for you. By sick I mean terminally ill. By retarded, I mean unable to function in society, you know, Terry Schiavo style.

QUOTE
I agree, abortion is not nice but it is absolutely not our place to decide if it's right or wrong.  The women created that life (along with the man and so he should be allowed to discuss things with the woman) and ultimately she has the choice.  Besides, if you look at countries where abortion is illegal, you'll see many many more deaths realted to poorly done blackmarket abortions where not only does the child die, but also the mother.  Would you rather it was illegal and women aborted themselves in back alleys using coat hangers or would you rather it was done in a hospital properlly?  Bear in mind that whether it's legal or not it still is going to happen.....


Well, in that case let's legalize everything. If it's still going to happen if it's illegal, why have a law in the first place? It may still happen but it doesn't happen as much now does it?

QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 19 2005, 11:57 AM)
Also... stop being such a male chauvinist, it's as much our responsibility to not get the women we are sleeping with pregnant, as it is theirs.


I NEVER said anything about it being the woman's fault/responsibilty.
danells
QUOTE
Well, in that case let's legalize everything. If it's still going to happen if it's illegal, why have a law in the first place? It may still happen but it doesn't happen as much now does it?


Making something illegal does not lessen the instances of it. Everytime we have banned anything it just goes undergound and in the undergrouns ALL safety barriers are removed. The only thing making it illegal does it make people HAVE to go to shady back alley "doctors" who use unsafe means to preform the abortion.
Lovefist
DAMMIT! I HATE YOU....not really. Well, then, uh....um.....uh, maybe they should learn another way. Seriously though, it makes them think "Do I want to risk going to a back ally abortionist, or use another method to not get pregnant/save this babies life," right?
Ssera
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 21 2005, 07:43 AM)
DAMMIT! I HATE YOU....not really. Well, then, uh....um.....uh, maybe they should learn another way. Seriously though, it makes them think "Do I want to risk going to a back ally abortionist, or use another method to not get pregnant/save this babies life," right?

The trouble is I don't think people actually plan on this happening so they don't necessarily think "Should I think about the possibilities of getting pregnant and the possibility that I might have to go and see a back alley abortionist" before they get pregnant. It's usually a case of them finding out they're pregnant and then trying to figure out how they got pregnant in the first place.

Sex education etc does help a lot, making people aware of the risks but I honestly don't think that people who want abortions actually intended to get pregnant. You can't force them to keep their child, or even worse - give it to someone else, just because they made a mistake... and you can't even be sure if it was a mistake or just an accident (like a condom breaking).

By forcing a mother to go through with the birth you force her into a position where she has to chose whether to keep the child and try and bring it up in an environment that is not suited for it (usually the mother is a minor, still going to school - not ideal for a growing child), or to give it away - which is bound to leave heavy psychological scars in the mother (I can't imagine it would be easy to give up your own child because you know you wouldn't be able to take care of it) and possibly the child too if/when they find out the truth.

No one should ever have to chose that. You may think that abortion is a choice which is just as bad and you're right, it is... but at least in this case the mother can continue with her life and the child - well, he will never have known life. You can also bet your life that the mother will not get pregnant again any time soon.

Yes it's a sad and a terrible thing, but it is better than the alternative.


QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 21 2005, 06:23 AM)
I NEVER said anything about it being the woman's fault/responsibilty.


Yeah I was baiting you as you seemed rather hyped up calling women "sluts" etc. But you've explained why you said that and that's fine with me wink.gif
danells
QUOTE
By forcing a mother to go through with the birth you force her into a position where she has to chose whether to keep the child and try and bring it up in an environment that is not suited for it (usually the mother is a minor, still going to school - not ideal for a growing child), or to give it away - which is bound to leave heavy psychological scars in the mother (I can't imagine it would be easy to give up your own child because you know you wouldn't be able to take care of it) and possibly the child too if/when they find out the truth.


Both giving up your child or having an abortion will leave emtional scars on any woman. And, the majority of children who go through the foster system or adoption system are emtionally scared on some level.
HUGOMAND
I disagree against gay marriage, because i find it unatural, and against the bible. (Not that im' xtreme religious or somethin, but i heard it was against the bible.)

About abortion, I think it's a womans right to do what she wants with the baby. No matter what, a woman should always have that option.
danells
QUOTE
  I disagree against gay marriage, because i find it unatural, and against the bible. (Not that im' xtreme religious or somethin, but i heard it was against the bible.)


Monogamy is unnatural. Should all people HAVE to be promicuous?
Homosexuality has been seen in nearly all mammals and is very prominant amongst primates, therefore it's pretty natural.

The verse in the bible denouncing homosexuality is highly contested. The story of Sodom and Gemorrah could be seen as a desire for homosexual acts or it could be seen as wanting to rape someone. The Romans were destroyed more for denouncing god than for having butt sex. Also the Bible says some radical things. Things like insolent children can be stoned, your daughter can be sold into slavery, touching a football makes you unclean, working on the sabbath makes you eligible for another stoning, etc.

And, just like it was said earlier you agree with killing a human (albeit an undeveloped, unconscience human) but you don't think that two peple should get the same rights as everyone else just because they are the same sex. Interesting.
HUGOMAND
QUOTE (danells @ Apr 21 2005, 07:13 PM)
QUOTE
  I disagree against gay marriage, because i find it unatural, and against the bible. (Not that im' xtreme religious or somethin, but i heard it was against the bible.)


Monogamy is unnatural. Should all people HAVE to be promicuous?
Homosexuality has been seen in nearly all mammals and is very prominant amongst primates, therefore it's pretty natural.

The verse in the bible denouncing homosexuality is highly contested. The story of Sodom and Gemorrah could be seen as a desire for homosexual acts or it could be seen as wanting to rape someone. The Romans were destroyed more for denouncing god than for having butt sex. Also the Bible says some radical things. Things like insolent children can be stoned, your daughter can be sold into slavery, touching a football makes you unclean, working on the sabbath makes you eligible for another stoning, etc.

And, just like it was said earlier you agree with killing a human (albeit an undeveloped, unconscience human) but you don't think that two peple should get the same rights as everyone else just because they are the same sex. Interesting.

Wow you know your homework biggrin.gif

Well, about abortion, I think the couple should be careful (using condoms etc.) But what would you do if you were a 17 year old girl, and condom broke while you were at it, and you suddenly were pregnant ph34r.gif
danells
I'm not saying that I disagree with abortion, I think it should be legal, I'm just pointing out that, to you, it is ok to kill an unborned child, in certain instances, but that an entire group of people should be denied 1700 individual rights simply because something is unnatural (it's not) and denounced by the bible (along with eating shellfish), even though murder is denounced by the bible.
HUGOMAND
QUOTE (danells @ Apr 21 2005, 07:30 PM)
I'm not saying that I disagree with abortion, I think it should be legal, I'm just pointing out that, to you, it is ok to kill an unborned child, in certain instances, but that an entire group of people should be denied 1700 individual rights simply because something is unnatural (it's not) and denounced by the bible (along with eating shellfish), even though murder is denounced by the bible.

Yea you're right...


This is indeed a very difficult discussion...
Phil-Cassidy
If you lived were I do you would know that gays are terrible on my farm road is a layby or truck stop and on a night there are maybe 20 gays a night its even advertised on the internet (According to the police) and they do nothing about it they let them I myself have painted signs which we hang from the trees telling gays to 'bugger off' but that dont have any affect in which I think all gays should be banned full stop. Im tryin my hardest not to be predujiuced(sp) but its a big problem my end of the world. thumbsdown.gif
danells
QUOTE
If you lived were I do you would know that gays are terrible on my farm road is a layby or truck stop and on a night there are maybe 20 gays a night its even advertised on the internet (According to the police) and they do nothing about it they let them I myself have painted signs which we hang from the trees telling gays to 'bugger off' but that dont have any affect in which I think all gays should be banned full stop. Im tryin my hardest not to be predujiuced(sp) but its a big problem my end of the world. thumbsdown.gif


What are you talking about? 20 homosexuals get on the bus a night? Oh lord that's just horrible. Gay people shouldn't be allowed on buses. What's next? gey people on airplanes? Oh the humanity!!!.

If they are congregating to have sex, first off who cares? They're having sex good for them. If they are having s3ex out in the open than you can call the police and have them arrested. But, if your just bitching about gay people on buses you really have some problems and are an idiotic homophobe.
Lovefist
QUOTE (Ssera @ Apr 21 2005, 05:29 AM)
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 21 2005, 07:43 AM)
DAMMIT! I HATE YOU....not really. Well, then, uh....um.....uh, maybe they should learn another way. Seriously though, it makes them think "Do I want to risk going to a back ally abortionist, or use another method to not get pregnant/save this babies life," right?

The trouble is I don't think people actually plan on this happening so they don't necessarily think "Should I think about the possibilities of getting pregnant and the possibility that I might have to go and see a back alley abortionist" before they get pregnant. It's usually a case of them finding out they're pregnant and then trying to figure out how they got pregnant in the first place.

Sex education etc does help a lot, making people aware of the risks but I honestly don't think that people who want abortions actually intended to get pregnant. You can't force them to keep their child, or even worse - give it to someone else, just because they made a mistake... and you can't even be sure if it was a mistake or just an accident (like a condom breaking).

By forcing a mother to go through with the birth you force her into a position where she has to chose whether to keep the child and try and bring it up in an environment that is not suited for it (usually the mother is a minor, still going to school - not ideal for a growing child), or to give it away - which is bound to leave heavy psychological scars in the mother (I can't imagine it would be easy to give up your own child because you know you wouldn't be able to take care of it) and possibly the child too if/when they find out the truth.

No one should ever have to chose that. You may think that abortion is a choice which is just as bad and you're right, it is... but at least in this case the mother can continue with her life and the child - well, he will never have known life. You can also bet your life that the mother will not get pregnant again any time soon.

Yes it's a sad and a terrible thing, but it is better than the alternative.


QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 21 2005, 06:23 AM)
I NEVER said anything about it being the woman's fault/responsibilty.


Yeah I was baiting you as you seemed rather hyped up calling women "sluts" etc. But you've explained why you said that and that's fine with me wink.gif

Well, see my main point is that people should think about things like that before they do them. And if people would just be careful, a life won't be ended and no one ends up with emotional scars (at least from pregnancy issues).

Actually, that point (broadened a bit) could be a point to everything. "People should think."
danells
QUOTE
Well, see my main point is that people should think about things like that before they do them. And if people would just be careful, a life won't be ended and no one ends up with emotional scars (at least from pregnancy issues).

And, he's pointing out that most people getting abortions (except the dumb fuck slut 13 year olds) did take precautions. They thought about it and took precautions, but still got pregnant.
Ssera
QUOTE (Lovefist @ Apr 22 2005, 04:29 AM)
Actually, that point (broadened a bit) could be a point to everything. "People should think."

yeah but people are stupid sad.gif
distroyer1
i don't give a damn!!!
thedude97
QUOTE (distroyer1 @ Apr 22 2005, 05:52 PM)
i don't give a damn!!!

Then fuck off and post somewhere else! These are real issues that need dealing with now.
Ride_The_Lightning
QUOTE (thedude97 @ Apr 23 2005, 12:15 AM)
QUOTE (distroyer1 @ Apr 22 2005, 05:52 PM)
i don't give a damn!!!

Then fuck off and post somewhere else! These are real issues that need dealing with now.

Seconded.
lazylatvian
QUOTE (Ride_The_Lightning @ Apr 22 2005, 08:39 PM)
QUOTE (thedude97 @ Apr 23 2005, 12:15 AM)
QUOTE (distroyer1 @ Apr 22 2005, 05:52 PM)
i don't give a damn!!!

Then fuck off and post somewhere else! These are real issues that need dealing with now.

Seconded.

x3
danells
Just ignore distroyer1. He's an idiot and never contributes anything to anything. Personally I think he should be banned and then shot in the head. Not fatally though, just make him too retarded to get out of bed, then I'd be happy.
Urgittenjackt
Why homosexuality IS wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, for that is detestable under Lord our God.

Gay marriage is wrong because the whole concept of marriage came from GOD. Adam and Eve, hello?

Abortion is wrong because you are doing work of the Lord by taking a life. That life is not hers or yours to take. It's God's. The same goes in the Schiavo case and the death penalty. When God wants us to leave this green earth he'll call.

That being said I just want everyone to know that, the Lord wants to bless you, he just needs to hear you ask for it thumbsup.gif

thedude97
QUOTE (Urgittenjackt @ Apr 23 2005, 03:21 AM)
Why homosexuality IS wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, for that is detestable under Lord our God.

Gay marriage is wrong because the whole concept of marriage came from GOD. Adam and Eve, hello?

Abortion is wrong because you are doing work of the Lord by taking a life. That life is not hers or yours to take. It's God's. The same goes in the Schiavo case and the death penalty. When God wants us to leave this green earth he'll call.

That being said I just want everyone to know that, the Lord wants to bless you, he just needs to hear you ask for it thumbsup.gif

Well, you're right. It does say in the bible that gay marriage is a sin. But let me share with you a revelation i found.

The bible says basically 3 things about marriage:

1: Marriage is between a man and a woman
2: You should never divorce unless your spouse has committed adultery
3: You should never remarry unless you are a widow or widower

Whoa whoa whoa. So that means you can't divorce your husband even if he is ABUSIVE? That doesn't seem right. If your man's hitting you, you deserve the right to stay as far the fuck away from him as possible. So logically, if we can't accept one of those beliefs on marriage, why do we feel it's necessary to accept ANY of them?
osiris.
QUOTE (Urgittenjackt @ Apr 23 2005, 08:21 AM)
Why homosexuality IS wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, for that is detestable under Lord our God.

Gay marriage is wrong because the whole concept of marriage came from GOD. Adam and Eve, hello?

Abortion is wrong because you are doing work of the Lord by taking a life. That life is not hers or yours to take. It's God's. The same goes in the Schiavo case and the death penalty. When God wants us to leave this green earth he'll call.

That being said I just want everyone to know that, the Lord wants to bless you, he just needs to hear you ask for it thumbsup.gif

you are aware that not everyone believes in god right?

and thus no it isn't wrong.
Urgittenjackt
First of all, if you would read deeper, God wants you to choose a mate to his liking meaning not only does the mate believe in Jesus Christ but tries in earnst to live his/her life as close to God's will as the person can very well be. With that, I can't see this person being abusive if that is how you go about choosing your mate. But see most people these days dont evaluate a person according to God or the Bible and that is where alot of relationships go wrong if you ask me. A Christian should always be putting God first in everything. If they did while choosing a partner in marriage, I don't think there would be AS MANY divorces. And if you don't, it is sort of like God's punishment to have to stay with an abusive mate, follow?

And how many people actually know they are in love? I'm speaking from experience here. I was with a girl for 4 years and we called it love and really it was nothing more than lust. But you only realize these things in hindsight if you are not on the straight and narrow path with Jesus Christ.

I encourage you to read a life study Bible. It can help you out with so many things. That is, if you are reading the Bible for a way to live, not just reading it for laws of what I should and should not do.
Lovefist
QUOTE (Urgittenjackt @ Apr 23 2005, 02:50 PM)
First of all, if you would read deeper, God wants you to choose a mate to his liking meaning not only does the mate believe in Jesus Christ but tries in earnst to live his/her life as close to God's will as the person can very well be.

Just listen for the big booming voice that says "MARRY HER NOW OR BURN IN ETERNAL HELL!" when you see yopur "chosen one."

QUOTE
A Christian should always be putting God first in everything. If they did while choosing a partner in marriage, I don't think there would be AS MANY divorces.


If God created life for us, I don't think he'd want us to waste it by putting him FIRST. I understand living by his ways, but remember it's your life, not God's. That would be awful selfish of him, "I will create life just so the humans can devote their entire life TO ME! Mwuhahahahahahahahahahaha!"

QUOTE
And if you don't, it is sort of like God's punishment to have to stay with an abusive mate, follow?


Punishment for liking the worng person? That's a little harsh. I hope you get stuck with an abusive mate so you can say "Oh, it's just my punishment," and then you'll gladly take it up the ass for God (that's a figure of speech). By the way, what's the punishment for choosing the wrong shampoo, cause I'm not sure which to by and I don't want to be stuck with eternal pain.

QUOTE
I encourage you to read a life study Bible. It can help you out with so many things. That is, if you are reading the Bible for a way to live, not just reading it for laws of what I should and should not do.


There he goes, trying to change everybody. I don't see atheists telling people not to believe in God.


From the older post:

QUOTE
Why homosexuality IS wrong: Leviticus 18:22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, for that is detestable under Lord our God.


A book in which no one knows the exact origins of or any of the actual writers said it's wrong so it is. Hey, I'm gonna write a book, and everything I say has to be true....you know, cause it's a book.

QUOTE
Gay marriage is wrong because the whole concept of marriage came from GOD. Adam and Eve, hello?

No wonder there's always a tag on my weddings that say "God's Creation."

QUOTE
Abortion is wrong because you are doing work of the Lord by taking a life. That life is not hers or yours to take. It's God's. The same goes in the Schiavo case and the death penalty. When God wants us to leave this green earth he'll call.


But yet, most religious people believe in the death penalty, the bible even supports killing for justice. But if it comes to something else, It's the Lord's job. I suppose it's the Lord's job to judge people, but I willing to bet in yopur response to this (if you make one) you will judge me in some way.

QUOTE
That being said I just want everyone to know that, the Lord wants to bless you, he just needs to hear you ask for it 


I'm sure Jesus talked to you last night and said "Oh, and tell the people at GTAWH that I said 'I want to bless them, but I need to hear them ask for it, (even though I love everyone no matter what....except gays because they kiss men)."
danells
This a series of quotes from AINT Nobody's business if You Do by Peter Mcwilliams. I will Try to keep this a short as possible but it's still going to be long. First off a link to the full text of the book:
http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/aint/
And the section I will be quoting:
http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/aint/403a.htm

You may be wondering why I chose to quote this instead of presenting my own opinions. This is because Peter McWilliams has already presented my basic opinions and he does it better than I.

QUOTE
    W.C. FIELDS LAY ON his deathbed, reading the Bible. An old friend came in and said, "Bill! You don't believe in God. Why are you reading the Bible?" Fields responded in his familiar cadence, "Looking for loopholes."
    Anyone interested in social change—regardless of religious beliefs or lack of them—should read the Bible for no other reason than it is the book quoted most often to relieve us of our personal freedoms.
    I must admit that I initially turned to the Bible "looking for loopholes." I knew I could pull quotations out of context to support my point of view. In planning this, I thought of myself in an adversarial relationship: the religious right has presented its out-of-context quotations, and has done a good job popularizing them. I could do the same, and make my out-of-context quotations support my beliefs. Somewhere between the extremes, perhaps people would discover something approaching the truth.
    Along the way, however, I made an astonishing discovery: There was no need to pull quotations out of context. There was no need for me to ignore certain passages and highlight others. The "scriptural basis" for the religious right's claim to righteousness simply did not exist. In order to support my opinion I didn't have to—with a certain degree of guilt—leave out "incriminating" passages: the passages were not there.
    Certain quotations were there, of course, but considering the context they were in, no sane human being would take them seriously. (All of the admonitions against "sexual immorality" fall into this category.) Other concepts—promoted loudly by the Bible-quoting moralists of our day—were entirely absent.
    The Bible can be used to praise or condemn practically any human activity, thought, belief, or practice. As with the works of Shakespeare, if one looks carefully, one can find a quotation, incident, or story to support or undermine anything.
    Alas, this practice has been used by many people to justify their own prejudices (by proving that "God thinks this way, too"), as a justification for grabbing and holding power ("It's not what I want, it's what God wants!"), or as the perfect excuse for not taking a fearless look at themselves and making necessary—although admittedly uncomfortable—personal changes in attitude and behavior.
    It's not the Bible itself that condemns most consensual crimes, but the misuse of the Bible by petty, fearful, manipulative, or misguided individuals who deceptively quote from the Bible not as an illumination of truth, but as a justification of their own limited point of view.
    Allow me to quote Alan Watts at length. He says all I want to say here, and says it much better than I.
QUOTE
            [The Bible is] an anthology of ancient literature that contains sublime wisdom along with barbaric histories and the war songs of tribes on the rampage. All this is taken as the literal Word and counsel of God, as it is by fundamentalist sects, which—by and large—know nothing of the history of the Bible, of how it was edited and put together. So we have with us the social menace of a huge population of intellectually and morally irresponsible people.

            [The Bible is a] translation of Hebrew and Greek documents composed between 900 B.C. and A.D. 120. There is no manuscript of the Old Testament; that is, of the Hebrew Scriptures, written in Hebrew, earlier than the Ninth Century B.C. But we know that these documents were first put together and recognized as the Holy Scriptures by a convention of rabbis held at Jamnia (Yavne) in Palestine shortly before A.D. 100. On their say-so. Likewise, the composition of the Christian Bible, which documents to include and which to drop, was decided by a council of the Catholic Church held in Carthage in the latter part of the Fourth Century.

            The point is that the books translated in the . . . Bible were declared canonical and divinely inspired by the authority (A) of the Synod of Jamnia and (cool.gif of the Catholic Church, meeting in Carthage more than 300 years after the time of Jesus. It is thus that fundamentalist Protestants get the authority of their Bible from Jews who had rejected Jesus and from Catholics whom they abominate as the Scarlet Woman mentioned in Revelation.


Old Testament Admonitions.
The Old Testament presents long lists of forbidden activities, some of which most of us do regularly (shaving, getting a haircut, wearing clothing woven of two kinds of material, eating rare meat). These books also present a series of acceptable or even required practices that we wouldn't dream of doing (animal sacrifices, keeping slaves, stoning people to death for infractions such as cursing their parents).
Please understand that, in this examination, I in no way intend to ridicule, question, or even minimize any of the wisdom to be found in the Bible. I simply mean to show that no one follows all the teachings of the Bible. Certainly not a single fundamentalist Christian—not one. Even the most devout Jew has abandoned burnt offerings, keeping slaves, stoning, and a great many other activities which are permitted or required by the biblical Laws of Moses.
The first seventeen chapters of the book of Leviticus, for example, go into great detail as to which animals are to be sacrificed for what sins or celebrations, which skin irritations are diseases and which are sins, and which animals cannot be eaten—or even touched. These animals include rabbit, lizard, pig, shrimp, lobster, clam, scallop, eel, octopus, or squid. You may, however, eat "any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper" (Leviticus 11:22–23).
Chapter 18 of Leviticus contains sexual activities that are not acceptable. It's a long list; here's the Reader's Digest version: don't have sex with your stepmother, stepsister, "the daughter of your father's wife," your aunt, "a woman and her daughter," a woman and "her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter"; with any woman while she's having her period; with your neighbor's wife. As verse 29 explains, "Everyone who does any of these detestable things—such persons must be cut off from their people" (18:29).
Chapter 19 is a grab bag of laws:
Verse 19: "Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your fields with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material."
Verse 27: "Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard."
Verse 28: "Do not . . . put tattoo marks on yourselves."
Verse 32: "Rise in the presence of the aged, show respect for the elderly. . . ."
Similarly, chapter 20 offers a variety of sins and punishments. Among them:
Verse 6: "I will set my face against the person who turns to mediums and spiritists to prostitute himself by following them, and I will cut him off from his people."
Verse 9: "If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He has cursed his father or mother, and his blood will be on his own head."
Verse 10: "If a man commits adultery with another man's wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."
Verse 11: "If a man sleeps with his father's wife, he has dishonored his father. Both the man and the woman must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
Verse 13 (Falwell's Favorite): "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
Verse 14: "If a man marries both a woman and her mother, it is wicked. Both he and they must be burned in the fire, so that no wickedness will be among you."
Verse 15: "If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal." [*FN]
QUOTE
[*FN] If this seems an extreme punishment—whether your compassion is for the man or the animal—and if you think it could never be a law, allow me to quote from William Bradford, governor of Plymouth, Massachusetts (1642): "Ther was a youth whose name was Thomas Granger; he was servant to an honest man of Duxbery, being aboute 16 or 17 years of age. (His father & mother lived at the same time at Sityate.) He was this year detected of buggery (and indicted for the same) with a mare, a cowe, two goats, five sheep, 2 calves, and a turkey. Horrible it is to mention, but the truth of the historie requires it. He was first discovered by one that accidentally saw his lewd pracise towards the mare. (I forbear perticulers.) Being upon it examined and committed, in the end he not only confest the fact with that beast at that time, but sundrie times before, and at severall times with all the rest of the forenamed in his indictmente. And accordingly he was cast by the jury, and condemned, and after executed the 8. of September, 1642. A very sade spectakle it was; for first the mare, and then the cowe, and the rest of the lesser cattle, were kild before his face, according to the law, Levit: 20:15, and then he him selfe was executed."

Verse 16: "If a woman approaches an animal to have sexual relations with it, kill both the woman and the animal. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
Verse 27: "A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads."
In Chapter 24 someone has "blasphemed the Name with a curse" (24:11).
QUOTE
Then the Lord said to Moses: "Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. Say to the Israelites: `If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death. . . .'" Then Moses spoke to the Israelites, and they took the blasphemer outside the camp and stoned him. (24:13–16,23)

Chapter 25 introduces the Year of Jubilee. Every seven years—Leviticus instructs—the land is to go fallow. Whatever grows there is to be harvested by the poor. This is the Sabbath for the land. Every seventh Sabbath for the land—seven times seven years—becomes the Year of Jubilee. In the Year of Jubilee, all slaves purchased are to be set free, all houses purchased (except houses within walled cities) are to return to their original owner ("Quick! There's only three months until the Year of Jubilee. Let's build a wall."), and all land sold is to return to its original holder. Nothing, it seems, is sold permanently; it is sold only until the Year of Jubilee; all contracts are good for a maximum of forty-nine years.
In Chapter 27, the last chapter of Leviticus, the price is set for slaves of various ages. A male between the ages of twenty and sixty is worth fifty shekels, and a female between twenty and sixty is worth thirty shekels. "If it is a person between the ages of five and twenty, set the value of a male at twenty shekels and of a female at ten shekels. If it is a person between one month and five years, set the value of a male at five shekels of silver and that of a female at three shekels of silver (27:5–6).

Laws from Exodus

If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do. If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. (21:7–8)

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property. (21:20–21)

If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins. (22:16–17)

Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the Lord must be destroyed. (22:20)

If you lend money to one of my people among you who is needy, do not be like a moneylender; charge him no interest. (22:25)

You must give me the firstborn of your sons. (22:29)

Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death. (31:15)

Do not light a fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day. (35:3)

Laws from Numbers

While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. Then the Lord said to Moses, "The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp." So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the Lord commanded Moses. (15:32–36)

So Moses said to Israel's judges, "Each of you must put to death those of your men who have joined in worshiping the Baal of Peor." (25:5)

Laws from Deuteronomy

If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" . . . do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the Lord your God. . . . (13:6, 8–10)

Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to an alien living in any of your towns, and he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner. (14:21)

There should be no poor among you. (15:4)

You will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. (15:6)



The man who shows contempt for the judge or for the priest who stands ministering there to the Lord your God must be put to death. (17:12)

Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (19:21)

A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this. (22:5)

Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together. (22:10)

If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death. (22:23–24)

You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute or of a male prostitute into the house of the Lord your God to pay any vow, because the Lord your God detests them both. (23:18)

If you enter your neighbor's vineyard, you may eat all the grapes you want, but do not put any in your basket. (23:24)

If you enter your neighbor's grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to his standing grain. (23:25)

If brothers are living together and one of them dies without a son, his widow must not marry outside the family. Her husband's brother shall take her and marry her and fulfill the duty of a brother-in-law to her. (25:5)

If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity. (25:11–12)

Those were just some of the laws from four of the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament. A few obvious observations:

1. Aren't you glad the police aren't out enforcing more of these laws than they already are?

2. The laws of the Bible (the ones we've just reviewed are more than 3,500 years old) make a poor basis for the laws of the United States today.

3. The religious right has decided to disregard most of the Old Testament laws as no longer applicable. Yet these same people cling to a select few Old Testament restrictions as a basis for judging other people's morality and criminality.

4. What justification is there for almost everyone to ignore one biblical law and make another biblical law the basis for imprisonment, persecution, and discrimination?

5. The next time a televangelist (or senator) quotes Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, or any other Old Testament book of the Bible as a justification for locking people up, remember the context from which their interpretation of "God's law" comes.


QUOTE

there emerges a pattern of a man who, fundamentally, taught love, acceptance, and tolerance. That is the essence of Jesus' teaching. He said it himself, quoting the "heart" of the Jewish faith: "`Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind'" (Matthew 22:37) and he summed up the rest of the Old Testament—the Law of the Prophets—as "Love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39). To this, at the very end of his teaching (at the Last Supper), he gave those closest to him a final command. "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another" (John 13:34–35).
    And how did Jesus love?

            1. He healed the sick.

            2. He taught love, compassion, and tolerance.

            3. He attacked hypocrisy, especially among those in power.

            4. He taught grace rather than law, acceptance rather than judgment, and forgiveness rather than punishment.

    And then Jesus made one of the most brilliant moves in the history of human thought. He gave a series of examples that illustrated a being so loving, so giving, and so trusting in God that it was absolutely impossible for a human being to achieve the ideal. He then specifically prohibited any attempts to improve others until you, yourself, were entirely loving, giving, and trusting.
    According to Jesus' plan, everyone would be so busy loving, giving, and trusting (or learning to be that way) that there would simply be no time to judge others. If one, however, were tempted to judge others, giving in to the temptation was specifically prohibited by the teachings of Jesu.s

So if you wanna talk about jesus and the bible you better stop judging people.
QUOTE
Jesus and Traditional Family Values

        One of the most absurd claims made by the religious right is that their interpretation of "traditional family values" is supported by Jesus. It is not. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.
        Jesus never married. Within the Jewish tradition in the time of Jesus, not marrying was nearly a sacrilege. Jewish males were considered men at thirteen. It was then a boy had his bar mitzvah; he declared to the community, "Today I am a man," and the responsibilities of manhood were upon him. By this time, he knew a trade (which he entered into), and he married. (Marriages, like the son's profession, were almost always arranged by the parents.) The first child was expected within the year.
        By not marrying and fulfilling his obligation to God, his family, and his ancestors, Jesus blatantly defied tradition. The pressure on him could hardly have been more intense, and yet he resisted.
        When Jesus was twelve, his parents took him to Jerusalem for their annual celebration of the Passover.

                After the Feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. (Luke 2:43)

        Here they are, leaving Jerusalem for Nazareth—quite a trek—and Mary and Joseph must have assumed he was with the caravan. (Caravans were the jumbo jets of their day.) Besides, Mary and Joseph had at least six other children—four of them boys. Jesus, the eldest, was expected to be responsible.



            Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him. After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you." (Luke 2:44–48)

    Jesus is hardly the apologetic child:

            "Why were you searching for me?" he asked. "Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?" But they did not understand what he was saying to them. (Luke 2:49–51)

    Given his druthers, it's obvious he would rather stay in the house of his Father, where he "had to be." It also indicates, that Mary and Joseph did not realize the significance of Jesus' mission on earth. That it took them three days to figure out Jesus would be in the temple indicates that they hardly saw Jesus as the Messiah.

    The Bible is entirely silent about Jesus for his next eighteen years. When we fade back in, we find Jesus performing his first public miracle—thanks to his mother:

            On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus' mother was there, and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, "They have no more wine."

            "Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied. "My time has not yet come." (John 2:1–4)



        Not exactly the anything-you-say devotion we have been led to believe Jesus had for his mother.
        Jesus is saying, in essence, that he is not yet ready to perform a public miracle, that his mother knows this, and why is she bothering him with this problem of the wine? What does his mother do? Like most mothers, she completely ignores him:

                His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever he tells you." (John 2:5)

        Mary starts involving other people. One can almost hear her saying, "My son will take care of the wine problem. Servants! Come over here! Help my son make some more wine. Do whatever he tells you." Jesus performed the miracle, and, according to John, "thus revealed his glory." Imagine: being spiritually outed by your own mother.
        One of the most important passages indicating Jesus' relationship with his family is found in the third chapter of Mark and also in Matthew (12:46–50) and Luke (8:19–21). Concerning "traditional family values," here is one of the most significant—and least quoted—passages in the entire Bible:

                When his family heard about this [healing the sick and teaching], they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind." (Mark 3:21)



        If you were teaching and your mother and brothers thought you were out of your mind and came "to take charge of" you, what would you do? That's just what Jesus did: he didn't go near them. He stayed in the house where he was protected by his followers and sent to his mother and brothers his true message concerning "family values":

                Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you."

                "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.

                Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." (Mark 3:31–35)

        Considering Jesus' relationship with his brothers, this incident from the book of John is telling:

                But when the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near, Jesus' brothers said to him, "You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do. No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world." For even his own brothers did not believe in him. (John 7:2–5)

        If it wasn't for John's comment, "For even his own brothers did not believe in him," it might sound as though his brothers were encouraging him to make his teachings more widely known. In fact, with the information John provides us, we know that they are, at best, encouraging him to "go public" so he'll get this whole savior thing out of his system, or, at worst, they are taunting him with some sibling, "We dare you! We double dare you!" Jesus handles them as any typical misunderstood sibling might: he deceives them.

                "You go to the Feast. I am notyet going up to this Feast, because for me the time has not yet come." Having said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the Feast, he went also, not publicly, but in secret. (John 7:8-10)



    In his hometown of Nazareth, Jesus was not exactly remembered as "Little Jesus, Boy Messiah":

            Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed. "Where did this man get these things?" they asked. "What's this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.

            Jesus said to them, "Only in his home town, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor." (Mark 6:1–4)

    Like many before and since, Jesus found it difficult to "be himself" "among his relatives."

    On another occasion, Jesus was preaching and a woman interrupted his teaching.

            As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you."

            He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it." (Luke 11:27–28)



        Jesus did not say, "Yes, and. . . ." He said, "Blessed rather. . . ." Jesus somehow felt the need to correct the impression that his mother was especially "blessed."
        After Jesus' childhood, Mary is conspicuous in her absence, except for sometimes being mentioned as one of the women who followed Jesus. Except for the Nativity, practically every incident involving Jesus' mother in the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John has been detailed here. There is no record of Jesus returning to her after his resurrection, and in the remainder of the New Testament, she is mentioned only once.
        None of this is intended to denigrate Mary. It is merely intended to show that Jesus' relationship with his blood relatives—including his mother—was far closer to normal than we have been led to believe.
        When it came time to gather his chosen family (his disciples), Jesus concerned himself not at all with what their "traditional" families (that is, their blood relatives) might think, say, be, or feel.

                As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. "Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." At once they left their nets and followed him. Going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James son of Zebedee and his brother John. They were in a boat with their father Zebedee, preparing their nets. Jesus called them, and immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him. (Matthew 4:18–22)

                Peter said to him, "We have left all we had to follow you!"



            "I tell you the truth," Jesus said to them, "no one who has left home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life." (Luke 18:28–30)

            Still another said, "I will follow you, Lord; but first let me go back and say good-by to my family." Jesus replied, "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:61–62)

            Another disciple said to him, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father." But Jesus told him, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." (Matthew 8:21–22)

            "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)

            "For I have come to turn `a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'" (Matthew 10:35–36)

            "From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." (Luke 12:52–53)

            "Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved." (Mark 13:12–13)

    Not exactly Leave It to Beaver, is it? But what did Jesus have to say about other relationships, like marriage and sex? If he didn't teach traditional family values, surely he taught morality with regard to sex.
    Oh, yes—far stricter than most Christians care to know.


QUOTE
Jesus on Sex and Marriage

        How did Jesus really feel about sex? It's a hard question to answer because (a) he almost never talked about it, and (cool.gif the one time he did, his answer did not prove very palatable. "It is better," religious leaders throughout the centuries have decided, "to assume that Jesus was a good man, that we are good men, so the way we feel about sex must be the way he felt about sex."
        Here, however, is what Jesus had to say:

                When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery." (Mark 10:10–12)

        A hard teaching this, but it leads directly to Jesus' true feelings about sex:

                The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."

                Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." (Matthew 19:10–12)



        For Jesus himself, then, marriage was out of the question—the ideal was celibacy.
        The word eunuch in Greek is eunouchos, which means "a castrated person," or "an impotent or unmarried man." It's doubtful that Jesus is recommending all males become castrated. His suggestion for those who "can accept this word" is to abstain from marriage and sexual activity.
        Does Jesus expect perfection in the pursuit of celibacy? Hardly. That's why marriage poses a problem. If one is single and "slips," no one is harmed other than the person slipping. If married, however, slipping means breaking one's word with another, and that's not good. Jesus invokes the larger sense of adultery: not keeping one's word; not being faithful to one's promise; adulterating one's integrity. Jesus' message, then, was, "fornication is a lesser sin than adultery, so before you get married be absolutely sure that this is the only person you plan to have sex with for the rest of your life."
        How did Jesus treat those who had a sexual orientation or practice different from his own? Without exception, his response was tolerance and acceptance.
        No incident from the Gospels more clearly shows how Jesus wants his followers to behave toward those who have "sinned" sexually than the one in which he saves the adulteress from being stoned.

                The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. (John 8:3–6)

    If Jesus said, "Don't stone her," he would—according to the law—be as guilty as she. The Pharisees would then have grounds for stoning him, too. On the other hand, if he said, "Go ahead and stone her," he would be betraying his central teaching of love, tolerance, and forgiveness. From a consensual-crimes perspective, it's important to note that adultery was a sexual transgression which Jesus personally and spiritually frowned on. Nevertheless...

            But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. (John 8:6–8)

    Brilliant. Jesus took the responsibility from a faceless crowd self-righteously fulfilling "God's law" and placed it in the hands of each individual, saying, "If you've never made a mistake, go ahead: throw the first stone." It was restating his fundamental teaching: "First, take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye" (Matthew 7:5). He was saying, yet again, "Unless you're perfect, don't judge." Here, in fact, he was taking it a step further: "If you ever have sinned, don't judge." So much for judgment. So much for throwing stones. So much for Jesus' supposed endorsement of laws against consensual activities.

            Jesus straightenned up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

            "No one, sir," she said.

    "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin." (John 8:10–11)

    He does not demand prayer, fasting, or atonement—he simply tells her to leave her life of sin.[*FN]

            [*FN] Sin in the original Greek meant "mistake"—not "transgression against God."

    If each elected official, before voting on the next law to take away yet another consensual freedom, would reflect on his or her own personal transgressions, unpopular preferences, and unsuccessful experiments, maybe we'd have a Christian nation after all.
Karnag3
gays go to hell
danells
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 23 2005, 06:54 PM)
gays go to hell

And your a fucking retard faggot. In the christian sense (and jewish and muslim) the people who are going to hell are those who denounce the teachings of god, not gays. Beyond that what business do you have saying who goes to hell and who doesn't. You're not god and he makes that decision. Plus, earthly law doesn't need to reflect god's law. If god finds something wrong he has more than enough power to punish the people involved, the last thing he needs is help from us.
Karnag3
laugh.gif rofl, your funny laugh.gif
Urgittenjackt
Look by no means was I telling anyone how to live. I was telling you how I believe. You have your beliefs and I have mine. If you believe in Jesus Christ and are a true Christian, everything I said is true. Including and especially the part about putting God first in our lives. If you don't believe, I aint mad at ya. I was replying to Danells when I mentioned the thing about a study Bible. Danells, I can't really gather whether you believe or you don't, but I know my opinions on my life of what is right and wrong will come from the Bible loooong before it will come from some dude writing a book on him twisting the Word. It's called Faith.

I realize most religious people support the death penalty. They do the same thing you did, bring up the Old Testament law about eye for an eye etc...But These are a few of the laws that since Jesus Christ was sent to save all of us from our sin, we no longer need to take heed of. Jesus said to love one another and to judge no one and also that vengance was the Lord Almighty's. So, there should be no need for the death penalty.

And I judged noone. Judging is " He's a fag, He's going to hell." Not quoting verses from the Bible that I BELIEVE is right whether you agree with it or not. I'm sorry that you feel so convicted by what I believe that you feel I'm judging anyone on this board. That was not my intention. I realize that judging is one of the main reasons most people are turned off by Christianity. Please do not take my beliefs as judging. Everyone sins, even the most mature of Christians. That is why it is wrong to finger point.But just as you expect them to not judge you, shouldn't you refrain from doing the same? I will end this by saying that only humans put a degree on sin. No sin is worse than the other to Jesus Christ our God. The worst sin to God is only the unforgiven one.

Oh and I do try to love everyone, even homosexuals and athiests. Doesn't mean I have to agree that everything they do is right and good for everyone else so let's make it officially legal for them to tinkle all over what I believe.
danells
QUOTE
These are a few of the laws that since Jesus Christ was sent to save all of us from our sin, we no longer need to take heed of


Who decides which laws we need to take heed of? The law you quoted denouncing homosexuality comes from the Old testament why do we follow that one and not the others?


QUOTE
Gay marriage is wrong because the whole concept of marriage came from GOD. Adam and Eve, hello?


Here's a quick history of marriage from http://www.theweekmagazine.com/briefing.asp?a_id=567
QUOTE

The origins of marriage
The institution of marriage is now the subject of a bitter national debate. How did marriage begin—and why?

How old is the institution?
The best available evidence suggests that it’s about 4,350 years old. For thousands of years before that, most anthropologists believe, families consisted of loosely organized groups of as many as 30 people, with several male leaders, multiple women shared by them, and children. As hunter-gatherers settled down into agrarian civilizations, society had a need for more stable arrangements. The first recorded evidence of marriage ceremonies uniting one woman and one man dates from about 2350 B.C., in Mesopotamia. Over the next several hundred years, marriage evolved into a widespread institution embraced by the ancient Hebrews, Greeks, and Romans. But back then, marriage had little to do with love or with religion.

What was it about, then?
Marriage’s primary purpose was to bind women to men, and thus guarantee that a man’s children were truly his biological heirs. Through marriage, a woman became a man’s property. In the betrothal ceremony of ancient Greece, a father would hand over his daughter with these words: “I pledge my daughter for the purpose of producing legitimate offspring.” Among the ancient Hebrews, men were free to take several wives; married Greeks and Romans were free to satisfy their sexual urges with concubines, prostitutes, and even teenage male lovers, while their wives were required to stay home and tend to the household. If wives failed to produce offspring, their husbands could give them back and marry someone else.

When did religion become involved?
As the Roman Catholic Church became a powerful institution in Europe, the blessings of a priest became a necessary step for a marriage to be legally recognized. By the eighth century, marriage was widely accepted in the Catholic church as a sacrament, or a ceremony to bestow God’s grace. At the Council of Trent in 1563, the sacramental nature of marriage was written into canon law.

Did this change the nature of marriage?
Church blessings did improve the lot of wives. Men were taught to show greater respect for their wives, and forbidden from divorcing them. Christian doctrine declared that “the twain shall be one flesh,” giving husband and wife exclusive access to each other’s body. This put new pressure on men to remain sexually faithful. But the church still held that men were the head of families, with their wives deferring to their wishes.

When did love enter the picture?
Later than you might think. For much of human history, couples were brought together for practical reasons, not because they fell in love. In time, of course, many marriage partners came to feel deep mutual love and devotion. But the idea of romantic love, as a motivating force for marriage, only goes as far back as the Middle Ages. Naturally, many scholars believe the concept was “invented” by the French. Its model was the knight who felt intense love for someone else’s wife, as in the case of Sir Lancelot and King Arthur’s wife, Queen Guinevere. Twelfth-century advice literature told men to woo the object of their desire by praising her eyes, hair, and lips. In the 13th century, Richard de Fournival, physician to the king of France, wrote “Advice on Love,” in which he suggested that a woman cast her love flirtatious glances—“anything but a frank and open entreaty.”

Did love change marriage?
It sure did. Marilyn Yalom, a Stanford historian and author of A History of the Wife, credits the concept of romantic love with giving women greater leverage in what had been a largely pragmatic transaction. Wives no longer existed solely to serve men. The romantic prince, in fact, sought to serve the woman he loved. Still, the notion that the husband “owned” the wife continued to hold sway for centuries. When colonists first came to America—at a time when polygamy was still accepted in most parts of the world—the husband’s dominance was officially recognized under a legal doctrine called “coverture,” under which the new bride’s identity was absorbed into his. The bride gave up her name to symbolize the surrendering of her identity, and the husband suddenly became more important, as the official public representative of two people, not one. The rules were so strict that any American woman who married a foreigner immediately lost her citizenship.

How did this tradition change?
Women won the right to vote. When that happened, in 1920, the institution of marriage began a dramatic transformation. Suddenly, each union consisted of two full citizens, although tradition dictated that the husband still ruled the home. By the late 1960s, state laws forbidding interracial marriage had been thrown out, and the last states had dropped laws against the use of birth control. By the 1970s, the law finally recognized the concept of marital rape, which up to that point was inconceivable, as the husband “owned” his wife’s sexuality. “The idea that marriage is a private relationship for the fulfillment of two individuals is really very new,” said historian Stephanie Coontz, author of The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap. “Within the past 40 years, marriage has changed more than in the last 5,000.”

Men who married men
Gay marriage is rare in history—but not unknown. The Roman emperor Nero, who ruled from A.D. 54 to 68, twice married men in formal wedding ceremonies, and forced the Imperial Court to treat them as his wives. In second- and third-century Rome, homosexual weddings became common enough that it worried the social commentator Juvenal, says Marilyn Yalom in A History of the Wife. “Look—a man of family and fortune—being wed to a man!” Juvenal wrote. “Such things, before we’re very much older, will be done in public.” He mocked such unions, saying that male “brides” would never be able to “hold their husbands by having a baby.” The Romans outlawed formal homosexual unions in the year 342. But Yale history professor John Boswell says he’s found scattered evidence of homosexual unions after that time, including some that were recognized by Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches. In one 13th-century Greek Orthodox ceremony, the “Order for Solemnisation of Same Sex Union,” the celebrant asked God to grant the participants “grace to love one another and to abide unhated and not a cause of scandal all the days of their lives, with the help of the Holy Mother of God and all thy saints.”


Notice how god has nothing to do with it? But wait, "God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve." Of course he did. He also created, steve, genvieve, mary, tracy, sue, roland, jonathan and me. He created all of us. "But, the first two people were male and female." Of course they were. If they had both been male (or female) humanity would have died out after them. In order to propagate there must be both a male and female. That doesn't necessarily mean that ALL unions must be between a man and a woman.

QUOTE
The same goes in the Schiavo case and the death penalty. When God wants us to leave this green earth he'll call.

Don't you think god had his say when she had the heart attack that sent her into a coma?

QUOTE
I encourage you to read a life study Bible. It can help you out with so many things. That is, if you are reading the Bible for a way to live, not just reading it for laws of what I should and should not do.


I ahve read The Bible, many times in fact. I was born and raised a Christian and have read the Bible for inspiration My entire life. I've also researched the origins of the Bible including the many times when it was reviewed and edited to better mesh with the society of the time.

QUOTE
Look by no means was I telling anyone how to live. I was telling you how I believe. You have your beliefs and I have mine. If you believe in Jesus Christ and are a true Christian, everything I said is true. Including and especially the part about putting God first in our lives. If you don't believe, I aint mad at ya. I was replying to Danells when I mentioned the thing about a study Bible. Danells, I can't really gather whether you believe or you don't, but I know my opinions on my life of what is right and wrong will come from the Bible loooong before it will come from some dude writing a book on him twisting the Word. It's called Faith.

I realize most religious people support the death penalty. They do the same thing you did, bring up the Old Testament law about eye for an eye etc...But These are a few of the laws that since Jesus Christ was sent to save all of us from our sin, we no longer need to take heed of. Jesus said to love one another and to judge no one and also that vengance was the Lord Almighty's. So, there should be no need for the death penalty.

And I judged noone. Judging is " He's a fag, He's going to hell." Not quoting verses from the Bible that I BELIEVE is right whether you agree with it or not. I'm sorry that you feel so convicted by what I believe that you feel I'm judging anyone on this board. That was not my intention. I realize that judging is one of the main reasons most people are turned off by Christianity. Please do not take my beliefs as judging. Everyone sins, even the most mature of Christians. That is why it is wrong to finger point.But just as you expect them to not judge you, shouldn't you refrain from doing the same? I will end this by saying that only humans put a degree on sin. No sin is worse than the other to Jesus Christ our God. The worst sin to God is only the unforgiven one.

Oh and I do try to love everyone, even homosexuals and athiests. Doesn't mean I have to agree that everything they do is right and good for everyone else so let's make it officially legal for them to tinkle all over what I believe.


We were simply telling you how we feel.

The book I was quoting in no way twists the word of the Bible. It directly quotes passages from the bible and raises the point that NO ONE, not even the most devoute of christians and jews, follow every law handed down in the Bible, they simply pick and choose which laws to follow.

I didn't think you were judging anyone on this board. In fact, as far as I know, there aren't any open homosexuals on this forum (I'm probably wrong). And, I didn't think you were judging anyone in general, that post was aimed at the forum in general and not directly at you. I am very heated about this debate because one of my best friends is homosexual and is constantly having trouble with bigoted homophobes.

And, it is officially legal for them to tinkle on your beliefs, it's called the first amendment. I am hoping that one day they will be officially equal to others.
Lovefist
QUOTE (Urgittenjackt @ Apr 24 2005, 03:16 AM)
....but I know my opinions on my life of what is right and wrong will come from the Bible loooong before it will come from some dude writing a book on him twisting the Word

QUOTE
. I realize most religious people support the death penalty. They do the same thing you did, bring up the Old Testament law about eye for an eye etc...But These are a few of the laws that since Jesus Christ was sent to save all of us from our sin, we no longer need to take heed of. Jesus said to love one another and to judge no one and also that vengance was the Lord Almighty's. So, there should be no need for the death penalty.


Leviticus is in the old testament and you said that you don't like gays because it was said in the bible, but Jesus didn't change that when he came to save us. Why are people that aren't hurting anybody looked down upon so much?

QUOTE

And I judged noone. Judging is " He's a fag, He's going to hell." Not quoting verses from the Bible that I BELIEVE is right whether you agree with it or not. I'm sorry that you feel so convicted by what I believe that you feel I'm judging anyone on this board. That was not my intention. I realize that judging is one of the main reasons most people are turned off by Christianity. Please do not take my beliefs as judging. Everyone sins, even the most mature of Christians. That is why it is wrong to finger point. But just as you expect them to not judge you, shouldn't you refrain from doing the same?


I know you didn't judge me, it's just that most people do during a religious argument. And why should I try to do the same as you if I don't believe it? I don't believe in God, so why should I refrain from judging people because it's "God's job." Now, i don't go around and say "You're this or that," withput actually knowing what's going on.

QUOTE
Oh and I do try to love everyone, even homosexuals and athiests.


That's good, I think we should all tolerate each other without trying to change each other (if no one's hurting anybody).

QUOTE
Doesn't mean I have to agree that everything they do is right and good for everyone else so let's make it officially legal for them to tinkle all over what I believe.


So, it should be illegal so you can tinkle on their beliefs?
Karnag3
yep....gays are goin to hell....yep
DiabloDog360
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 25 2005, 05:45 AM)
yep....gays are goin to hell....yep

...and you can too thumbsup.gif
Delphi1618
QUOTE (DiabloDog360 @ Apr 25 2005, 08:05 PM)
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 25 2005, 05:45 AM)
yep....gays are goin to hell....yep

...and you can too thumbsup.gif

You need to stop, Karnag.

There's really no helping whether or not you're gay. It's just as hard for a gay man to love a straight woman as it is a straight man to love a gay man. You can't expect them to change if you're going to be so narrow minded. Plus, if a Christian is also gay, he won't gay to Hell. As long as he accepts Jesus Christ as his savior, he's golden. Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". You yourself are not without sin, therefore you have no right to judge them. Get it?
Karnag3
yep...gays are goin to hell....you choose to be that way, it makes god sick..
DiabloDog360
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 25 2005, 09:22 PM)
yep...gays are goin to hell....you choose to be that way, it makes god sick..

you do know that nothing you say in here is of any intellectual value whatsoever, and is very crude and immature. and by the way..... no one CHOOSES to be gay, they are BORN that way. 13 years of religion classes has engraved that into my brain. it is in thier chemical makeup and God MADE them that way. you're a very sad person
Delphi1618
QUOTE (DiabloDog360 @ Apr 25 2005, 10:00 PM)
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 25 2005, 09:22 PM)
yep...gays are goin to hell....you choose to be that way, it makes god sick..

you do know that nothing you say in here is of any intellectual value whatsoever, and is very crude and immature. and by the way..... no one CHOOSES to be gay, they are BORN that way. 13 years of religion classes has engraved that into my brain. it is in thier chemical makeup and God MADE them that way. you're a very sad person

God would be contradicting Himself if He was sickened by His own creation. Perhaps, by His creation's choices. But not how He created them. Yes, you are rather dumb in the head, Karnag.
DiabloDog360
oh, and dude... this is "Serious discussion", obviously you have nothing serious to say dry.gif
Lovefist
Pwned. Oh yeah, sorry Dannells, UrGittenJackt was talking to me.....at least I think he was.
Delphi1618
And you smell funny ermm.gif



Did anyone here about the boy that was excluded from the prom because he wanted to bring his boyfriend and was prohibited to do so? It was awhile back, just seeing if anyone remembered
Karnag3
good, gays shouldnt be given the same treatment as straights, its against the bible and god did NOT make fags
Vercetti_thug
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 25 2005, 08:30 PM)
good, gays shouldnt be given the same treatment as straights, its against the bible and god did NOT make fags

God (assuming he is real) created everyone equal, so they should be given equal rights.
Karnag3
not when they go against him, and also..why am i being flamed for giving my input?? every last one of you said yourselves this is SERIOUS dicussion..thus making it ok to share your thoughts..lol...yall are some backass people..
Delphi1618
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 26 2005, 12:30 AM)
good, gays shouldnt be given the same treatment as straights, its against the bible and god did NOT make fags

Dude, then who did make "fags"?


And you're flaming just as much, using derogatory words. If you're going to be narrow minded, then you can't expect us to be nice, either.
Karnag3
but you see...im not targeting any one of you therefore it shouldnt effect you
Karnag3
also, god made men and women..with sexual attraction to each other...its your choice to be like that
Delphi1618
QUOTE (Karnag3 @ Apr 26 2005, 12:46 AM)
but you see...im not targeting any one of you therefore it shouldnt effect you

Hitler wasn't targeting anyone specifically. Just a broad group. Yet it affected millions of people.




Like I said, you can't "choose" to be gay.


Let's try this. Next time you see a guy, try and fall deeply in loev with him. I'm guessing that you won't be able to. You are not physically attracted them. You can't help no being attracted, it's the way you were made. the same goes for homosexuals. My friend Ella tried dating men for a while, but she didn't like it. She just wasnt attracted to them. It's not like we have a gay switch that can be turned on and off.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.