home
RSS
My Take: The Christian case for gay marriage
The author backs same-sex marriage because of his faith, not in spite of it.
May 19th, 2012
02:00 AM ET

My Take: The Christian case for gay marriage

Editor's Note: Mark Osler is a Professor of Law at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

By Mark Osler, Special to CNN

I am a Christian, and I am in favor of gay marriage. The reason I am for gay marriage is because of my faith.

What I see in the Bible’s accounts of Jesus and his followers is an insistence that we don’t have the moral authority to deny others the blessing of holy institutions like baptism, communion, and marriage. God, through the Holy Spirit, infuses those moments with life, and it is not ours to either give or deny to others.

A clear instruction on this comes from Simon Peter, the “rock” on whom the church is built. Peter is a captivating figure in the Christian story. Jesus plucks him out of a fishing boat to become a disciple, and time and again he represents us all in learning at the feet of Christ.

During their time together, Peter is often naïve and clueless – he is a follower, constantly learning.

After Jesus is crucified, though, a different Peter emerges, one who is forceful and bold. This is the Peter we see in the Acts of the Apostles, during a fevered debate over whether or not Gentiles should be baptized. Peter was harshly criticized for even eating a meal with those who were uncircumcised; that is, those who did not follow the commands of the Old Testament.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

Peter, though, is strong in confronting those who would deny the sacrament of baptism to the Gentiles, and argues for an acceptance of believers who do not follow the circumcision rules of Leviticus (which is also where we find a condemnation of homosexuality).

His challenge is stark and stunning: Before ordering that the Gentiles be baptized Peter asks “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?”

None of us, Peter says, has the moral authority to deny baptism to those who seek it, even if they do not follow the ancient laws. It is the flooding love of the Holy Spirit, which fell over that entire crowd, sinners and saints alike, that directs otherwise.

My Take: Bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality

It is not our place, it seems, to sort out who should be denied a bond with God and the Holy Spirit of the kind that we find through baptism, communion, and marriage. The water will flow where it will.

Intriguingly, this rule will apply whether we see homosexuality as a sin or not. The water is for all of us. We see the same thing at the Last Supper, as Jesus gives the bread and wine to all who are there—even to Peter, who Jesus said would deny him, and to Judas, who would betray him.

The question before us now is not whether homosexuality is a sin, but whether being gay should be a bar to baptism or communion or marriage.

Your Take: Rethinking the Bible on homosexuality

The answer is in the Bible. Peter and Jesus offer a strikingly inclusive form of love and engagement. They hold out the symbols of Gods’ love to all. How arrogant that we think it is ours to parse out stingily!

I worship at St. Stephens, an Episcopal church in Edina, Minnesota. There is a river that flows around the back and side of that church with a delightful name: Minnehaha Creek. That is where we do baptisms.

The Rector stands in the creek in his robes, the cool water coursing by his feet, and takes an infant into his arms and baptizes her with that same cool water. The congregation sits on the grassy bank and watches, a gentle army.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

At the bottom of the creek, in exactly that spot, is a floor of smooth pebbles. The water rushing by has rubbed off the rough edges, bit by bit, day by day. The pebbles have been transformed by that water into something new.

I suppose that, as Peter put it, someone could try to withhold the waters of baptism there. They could try to stop the river, to keep the water from some of the stones, like a child in the gutter building a barrier against the stream.

It won’t last, though. I would say this to those who would withhold the water of baptism, the joy of worship, or the bonds of marriage: You are less strong than the water, which will flow around you, find its path, and gently erode each wall you try to erect.

The redeeming power of that creek, and of the Holy Spirit, is relentless, making us all into something better and new.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Mark Osler.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Christianity • Episcopal • Gay marriage • Opinion

soundoff (15,115 Responses)
  1. Douglas

    There is no Christian case for "gay marriage".

    Marriage is a solemn union bewteen one man and one woman.

    The Bible is abundantly clear about this topic.

    No Christian church can marry LGBTQ cuoples and call themselves Christian.
    The rules for Christian marriage are clearly and unambiguosly defined by
    Christianity's founder Jesus Chist in the Gospel of Matthew Chapter 19.

    Please identify the scriptual references that point to Jesus defining
    marriage any other way.

    November 10, 2012 at 8:11 am |
    • midwest rail

      Please explain how any of that is relevant to American secular law.

      November 10, 2012 at 8:23 am |
    • Lorraine

      yahwhaey, wrong, just to add, i don't mind at all to have a nice piece of rump roast, a bullock, and a tender slice of lamb, emmm sounds real good to me, feast up. Soon, it will be for the righteous to share, and celebrate, life, and love, daily, not just wait on these pagan days of nothing, then the next day treat each other like s..t hiding their faces from the lies, and hate they truly live.

      November 10, 2012 at 8:57 am |
    • mama k

      The Bible (Gullible's Travels, Parts 1 & 2), is of course nothing more than iron age myth. Who cares what anyone thinks its views on civil matters are? We are starting to see the tide turning on this issue. But if it doesn't happen quickly enough, don't be surprised if you soon see it being argued before the SC – and arguing for civil liberty infringement using the 1st Amendment as a basis – separation of church and state.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:35 am |
  2. Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

    And just to rub salt into the wound, Bob/Lorraine: Maryland just voted to allow gays to marry.

    And you can't do a thing about it.

    November 9, 2012 at 6:58 pm |
    • Lorraine

      tom piper, i can careless its no surprise much of wrong is going on these days calling it good, but it is not of the creator, and King YHWH, never. This is between those that do what they want and YHWH, this is 'man's law' not YHWHs, we all have to be responsible for our 'own' righteousness in the end, not just gays but all people. TO EACH HIS OWN. Ezekiel 14:14-20 praise YHWH.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:01 am |
    • Yahweh No Way

      Lorraine, how's your daily animal sacrifice looking for today? Got your knife nice and sharp? You made a right bloody mess of it last time.

      Righteousness my ass, you deluded wingnut.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:20 am |
    • Lorraine

      yahweh LordGod,not His name anyway, The sacrifices have been suspended until the new temple is built again prophesied in Haggai 2, Jeremiah 31:37-40, and in Ezekiel 40-48, this is why one must read the truth, in Genesis-Malachi to know what YHWH has said, and will soon do, our future people, many are being mislead, its your call. YHWH Bless.

      November 10, 2012 at 8:50 am |
    • Lorraine

      yahwhaey, wrong, just to add, i don't mind at all to have a nice piece of rump roast, a bullock, and a tender slice of lamb, emmm sounds real good to me, feast up. Soon, it will be for the righteous to share, and celebrate, life, and love, daily, not just wait on these fake pagan days of nothing, then the next day treat each other like s..t hiding their faces from the lies, and hate that they truly live among each other.

      November 10, 2012 at 9:01 am |
    • Guster

      Loopy, your side lost. Get over it and lay off the bottle a bit for a change.

      November 10, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
  3. YeahRight

    " His is the procreation of 'life' "

    LMAO! – This is such a load of crap. Homosexual relationship have been found in over 1500 other types of species, because it's part of nature, there are infertile men and women so they must not be allowed to marry either. If someone is older they too should not be able to get married or remarry based on your stupid logic and load of crap about procreation. Thanks for proving the point that the writers didn't understand sexual orientation. LOL! Oh and because you can't actually use your brain, gays and lesbians have children too. Duh!

    Heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

    November 9, 2012 at 4:14 pm |
    • Leeann

      About as normal as a deformed limb.

      November 9, 2012 at 5:47 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      A "deformed limb?" Isn't your god in charge? If a limb is different, does that mean it's "abnormal?" If so, how did it get that way? Your god must have intended to make it so, therefore it is perfect in his sight, no?

      How do you think gay people get here? If you believe in an omniscient, omnipotent god, then he must have created them. They're no more "abnormal" than anything else your god created, LeeAnn.

      November 9, 2012 at 6:56 pm |
    • Lorraine

      yeahr, species, that cannot rationalize duh, and their anatomical make up is much different that humans, duh2, b ut YHWH'S concern, and who He made for His own sake, and pleasure are human beings who can make decisions, and choices. With all of your professor crap with something as beautiful as 'life' none of those professionals you have listed here can create life from scratch, they can only make analysis and data, on the functions of how it works, or not, ha!

      We as human beings, know right, from wrong those who have their good sense, and mind, and there you go, we must do what is righteousness by one another, that is the bottom line, or we'll have what we have now a mess of the lost doing whatever they think is good, but its wrong. As i said this is obviously allowed by man's law, and his version of it, because he's truly just guessing it, and for the most part 'selling' it, as they do everything that comes along, they make a buck, or two off of it, whether its the right thing, or not; just as like most know it all's do they 'profit' YHWH BLESS.

      November 9, 2012 at 7:22 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Loopy's drunk again.

      November 9, 2012 at 7:26 pm |
    • mama k

      Thank's for letting me know that I need not read dingbat Lorraine's post, Tom, Tom. I was wondering if maybe she slipped into some bath salts too long.

      November 9, 2012 at 7:35 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Oh, mama k, Loopy hasn't just slipped into them, she's friggin' embalmed.

      November 9, 2012 at 7:44 pm |
    • Lorraine

      tom the piper, and mama kb, hello my haters, nice to see you digging me as usual. YHWH BLESS.

      November 9, 2012 at 7:56 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Oh, sweetie, the only thing we're "digging" is the grave for your antiquated, nonsensical, hateful views.

      Maryland has voted to legalize gay marriage, Loopy. What do you think of them apples?

      November 9, 2012 at 7:58 pm |
    • Lorraine

      tom piper, This is between those that do what they want and YHWH, this is man's law not YHWHs, we all have to be responsible for our own righteousness, not just gays but all. TO EACH HIS OWN. Ezekiel 14:14-20 praise YHWH.

      November 9, 2012 at 8:35 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Then why are YOU here? Who needs YOU to interpret? Beat it, bozo.

      November 9, 2012 at 8:45 pm |
    • Lorraine

      tom boy, because of freedom of speech 'mans law' i can do, its my choice. tom Lowlife. and it aint nothing you can do about it, HA! LOL. YHWH BLESS.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:09 am |
    • Yahweh No Way

      Ha Ha Lorraine your Moron lost the election and the power of deluded losers like you is diminishing fast. Better pray that you don't lose your job sweeping floors or you'll have a hard time paying for that trailer pad rental.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:23 am |
    • Lorraine

      Yahrwhey, wrongway, Sorry, I don't do elections, I know its just a selection, its already planted for you true looser, Im never into Religions, not my style, religions are idolatry, pagan, and so are holidays, all bunk, fake dog, and pony shows, and events to control the masses, mines is the word of truth movement, to 'know' the truth from the beginning to the latter, today, and shall be the future soon. Religions are not of the King YHWH, don't get it twisted, many have been blind since Ptolemy, vambooselled!! lol, for over 2000 years now, but in YHWHs time His righteousness is near Isaiah 51:5. YHWH BLESS.

      November 10, 2012 at 9:33 am |
    • 0G-No gods, ghosts, goblins or ghouls

      Who is this YHWH dude? Where does he fit in the god hierarchy – before or after Zeus? How does he relate to Thor? What astrological sign was he born under? These are important questions that must be answered before we conduct our lives according to his alleged guidance.

      November 10, 2012 at 9:43 am |
    • AtheistSteve

      Except Yahwey is a myth...no different than Harry Potter. A bronze age fairy tale. For that reason taking what the Bible says seriously is just nuts.

      November 10, 2012 at 9:45 am |
  4. Lorraine

    As long as many of you are talking about man's laws then yes this is all fine, and dandy, but you must jest if you want this to go over with the King Creator of life YHWH, no way, His word is what it is, its 'not' His intention for mankind. His is the procreation of 'life' and to do the law of righteousness, do right, not might, or maybe, there is no gray. Only YHWH can judge us, we're all responsible for our own, to each his own, but one will answer in the end, whether right, or wrong, as given in Isaiah 45:18-25, every knee shall bow, and Isaiah 2:7-22, every man. YHWH BLESS.

    November 9, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
    • Stan

      And Lorrain (Bob) gets PWNED again, as usual, you and reality are far separated.

      November 9, 2012 at 4:16 pm |
    • JWT

      Nobody that does not believe in your god has to answer to your god,. A simple fact of life and deities.

      November 10, 2012 at 4:01 pm |
  5. YeahRight

    "gay marriage how could gay marriage be ok when being gay was not?"

    This is how dumb this posters is because sexual orientation wasn't studied till the 19th century, that means there is no way the writers of the bible could know that. The hundreds of thousands of experts have now shown that heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

    November 9, 2012 at 3:43 pm |
  6. Bob

    James/yeah as for the Physco s orientation which is the biggest bs I have ever heard like trying to sell feces on the street corner. Let me explain the facts of life God made man knows all the behavior of man and as for gay marriage how could gay marriage be ok when being gay was not? The act the person that is for God to sort out. It was inconceivable to think that this behavior was anything but deviant and being deviant behavior marriage unlike a unwed mother does not put it right in fact its indulgence into further sin as the Bible describes it.

    November 9, 2012 at 1:22 pm |
    • Melvin

      " Let me explain the facts of life God made man knows all the behavior of man"

      The Scriptures at no point deal with homosexuality as an authentic sexual orientation, a given condition of being. The remarkably few Scriptural references to "homosexuality" deal rather with homosexual acts, not with homosexual orientation. Those acts are labeled as wrong out of the context of the times in which the writers wrote and perceived those acts to be either nonmasculine, idolatrous, exploitative, or pagan. The kind of relationships between two consenting adults of the same sex demonstrably abounding among us - relationships that are responsible and mutual, affirming and fulfilling - are not dealt with in the Scriptures.

      November 9, 2012 at 3:41 pm |
    • Stan

      And Bob gets PWNED again, this time by Melvin. Bob, as usual, you and reality are far separated.

      November 9, 2012 at 3:57 pm |
    • Lewis

      Bob
      You are so right in what you say its only there lack of intelligence and understanding that keeps them from seeing it. Keep up the good work cheers!

      November 9, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • Lorraine

      Melvin, i don't care how much one tries to clean it up, again the scripture clearly explains that a 'man is not to lay with another man as with a woman' meaning 'mankind' there is no getting around this, not by the Creator, and King YHWH, sorry dear that is 'man's law' doing whatever sells. We must do what is right by the law of the King YHWH in the end. Praise the Only King YHWH.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:22 am |
    • Yahweh No Way

      The scriptures also explain, Lorraine, that you need to get out and sacrifice a goat today, in typical lurid, gory Christian detail. And no humping the goat this time like you tried on the last one. You are an embarrassment to your trailer park.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:27 am |
    • Lorraine

      Yahwhey ur silly, sacrifices are suspended until the new better temple is built, a feast to look forward to of truth, and sharing, in Haggai 2, read, and stop being the biggest forked tongue on this site, liar, liar, pants on fire!!, grow up, wake up take off blinders.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:14 am |
    • Guster

      Lorraine: Leviticus. Read it and weep, you creep. Your Jeebus said all the old laws apply, so don't try to claim they don't. Go get on that sacrificial cow now or mean ole Yahweh blahweh is gonna torture your sorry fat stupid ass forever since you've disobeyed him again.

      November 10, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
    • Guster

      And you've also gotta ask why that sacrifice stuff was ever put in there. Yahweh must be quite the ass hole to animals.

      November 10, 2012 at 5:11 pm |
  7. Don

    The most beautiful word in the Gospel of Jesus Christ is "whosoever." All of God's promises are intended for every human being. This includes gay men and lesbians. How tragic it is that the Christian Church has excluded and persecuted people who are homosexual! We are all created with powerful needs for personal relationships. Our quality of life depends upon the love we share with others; whether family or friends, partners or peers. Yet, lesbians and gay men facing hostile attitudes in society often are denied access to healthy relationships. Jesus Christ calls us to find ultimate meaning in life through a personal relationship with our Creator. This important spiritual union can bring healing and strength to all of our human relationships

    Biblical Interpretation and Theology also change from time to time. Approximately 150 years ago in the United States, some Christian teaching held that there was a two-fold moral order: black and white. Whites were thought to be superior to blacks, therefore blacks were to be subservient and slavery was an institution ordained by God. Clergy who supported such an abhorrent idea claimed the authority of the Bible. The conflict over slavery led to divisions which gave birth to some major Christian denominations. These same denominations, of course, do not support slavery today. Did the Bible change? No, their interpretation of the Bible did!

    Genesis 19:1-25

    Some "televangelists" carelessly proclaim that God destroyed the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of "homosexuality." Although some theologians have equated the sin of Sodom with homosexuality, a careful look at Scripture corrects such ignorance. Announcing judgment on these cities in Genesis 18, God sends two angels to Sodom, where Abraham's nephew, Lot, persuades them to stay in his home. Genesis 19 records that "all the people from every quarter" surround Lot's house demanding the release of his visitors so "we might know them." The Hebrew word for "know" in this case, yadha, usually means "have thorough knowledge of." It could also express intent to examine the visitors' credentials, or on rare occasions the term implies sexual intercourse. If the latter was the author's intended meaning, it would have been a clear case of attempted gang rape. Several observations are important.

    First, the judgment on these cities for their wickedness had been announced prior to the alleged homosexual incident. Second, all of Sodom's people participated in the assault on Lot's house; in no culture has more than a small minority of the population been homosexual. Third, Lot's offer to release his daughters suggests he knew his neighbors to have heterosexual interests. Fourth, if the issue was sexual, why did God spare Lot, who immediately commits incest with his daughters? Most importantly, why do all the other passages of Scripture referring to this account fail to raise the issue of homosexuality?

    Romans 1:24-27

    Most New Testament books, including the four Gospels, are silent on same-sex acts, and Paul is the only author who makes any reference to the subject. The most negative statement by Paul regarding same-sex acts occurs in Romans 1:24-27 where, in the context of a larger argument on the need of all people for the gospel of Jesus Christ, certain homosexual behavior is given as an example of the "uncleanness" of idolatrous Gentiles.

    This raises the question: Does this passage refer to all homosexual acts, or to certain homosexual behavior known to Paul's readers? The book of Romans was written to Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome, who would have been familiar with the infamous sexual excesses of their contemporaries, especially Roman emperors. They would also have been aware of tensions in the early Church regarding Gentiles and observance of the Jewish laws, as noted in Acts 15 and Paul's letter to the Galatians. Jewish laws in Leviticus mentioned male same-sex acts in the context of idolatry.

    The homosexual practices cited in Romans 1:24-27 were believed to result from idolatry and are associated with some very serious offenses as noted in Romans 1. Taken in this larger context, it should be obvious that such acts are significantly different from loving, responsible lesbian and gay relationships seen today.

    What is "Natural"?

    Significant to Paul's discussion is the fact that these "unclean" Gentiles exchanged that which was "natural" for them, physin, in the Greek text, for something "unnatural," para physin. In Romans 11:24, God acts in an "unnatural" way, para physin, to accept the Gentiles. "Unnatural" in these passages does not refer to violation of so-called laws of nature, but rather implies action contradicting one's own nature. In view of this, we should observe that it is "unnatural," para physin, for a person today with a lesbian or gay sexual orientation to attempt living a heterosexual lifestyle.

    I Corinthians 6:9

    Any consideration of New Testament statements on same-sex acts must carefully view the social context of the Greco-Roman culture in which Paul ministered. Prostitution and pederasty (sexual relationships of adult men with boys) were the most commonly known male same-sex acts. In I Corinthians 6:9, Paul condemns those who are "effeminate" and "abusers of themselves with mankind," as translated in the King James version. Unfortunately, some new translations are worse, rendering these words "homosexuals." Recent scholarship unmasks the homophobia behind such mistranslations.

    The first word – malakos, in the Greek text-which has been translated "effeminate" or "soft," most likely refers to someone who lacks discipline or moral control. The word is used elsewhere in the New Testament but never with reference to sexuality.

    The second word, Arsenokoitai, occurs once each in I Corinthians and I Timothy (1:10), but nowhere else in other literature of the period. It is derived from two Greek words, one meaning, "males" and the other "beds", a euphemism; for sexual intercourse. Other Greek words were commonly used to describe homosexual behavior but do not appear here. The larger context of I Corinthians 6 shows Paul extremely concerned with prostitution, so it is very possible he was referring to male prostitutes. But many experts now attempting to translate these words have reached a simple conclusion: their precise meaning is uncertain.

    The rarity with which Paul discusses any form of same-sex behavior and the ambiguity in references attributed to him make it extremely unsound to conclude any sure position in the New Testament on homosexuality, especially in the context of loving, responsible relationships. Since any arguments must be made from silence, it is much more reliable to turn to great principles of the Gospel taught by Jesus Christ and the Apostles. Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. Do not judge others, lest you be judged. The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love . . . against such there is no law. One thing is abundantly clear, as Paul stated in Galatians 5:14: "...the whole Law is fulfilled in one statement, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself".

    November 9, 2012 at 9:55 am |
    • Bob

      There is no, none, lack of, void of, acceptance of gay marriage in the Bible

      November 9, 2012 at 10:24 am |
    • Lorraine

      Don, who is paul, who is timothy, and none of these men, and the men of old, who went astray from the beginning, had counseled with the King YHWH, of which He teaches us this in Jeremiah 23, and in Jeremiah 10, and in other prophectic books, these men as YHWH says if they had used HIS counsel, the King Creator YHWH, then we would all be healed then and, now, in Jeremiah 23:21-23. You have been mislead from the truth of the prophets in Genesis-Malachi, the last prophet until this day, look it up. For YHWH does nothing without them, and if there is anything new He'll tell us through a prophet. Amos3:7, and Isaiah 42:9.

      Read the front of this book thoroughly, pray, and do the law to see the word of the Only savior, and redeemer is YHWH, in Isaiah 49:26, and Isaiah 60:16. Don't be mislead, there is no gray in the word of YHWH, either you do right, or don't, that's ones' choice, we are all responsible for our own righteousness in Ezekiel 14:14-20. As He teaches there is no one with Him in Deuteronomy 32:39,40. All praise goes to YHWH, YHWH BLESS.

      November 9, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
    • YeahRight

      Hey Lorraine (aka Bob) don't forget to mention Deuteronomy 22:28-29 I am sure you wouldn't follow even that one because you're such an idiot when it comes to the teachings of the bible. LMAO! LOL!

      November 9, 2012 at 3:49 pm |
    • Stan

      Bob, fewer and fewer people care what is in your bible AKA Gullible's Travels, and that is great progress for humanity.

      November 9, 2012 at 4:01 pm |
    • Lorraine

      yeahright, what's your point, a man should provide for a damsel showing her father that he is worthy of her, and for all of her days for him to be responsible for her, that is much more than what many are getting these days. This is one reason why women think they are men, and men think they are women, and those doing anything for reward 'wrong' in this do whatever crazy society many have lost their barring, their way, mayhem, a mess. Then say regardless i got paid, vanity. THEY NEED YHWH, AND THE LAW. YHWH BLESS

      November 9, 2012 at 4:24 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "yeahright, what's your point, a man should provide for a damsel showing her father that he is worthy of her, and for all of her days for him to be responsible for her"

      LMAO! Thanks for proving you no reading comprehension skills. LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!

      November 9, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
    • Lorraine

      yeahurwrong, Deut. 22:28,29, is a total different scenario from the other previous scriptures, mr/ms, forked tongue2 is what i'll call u, stop lying!!

      November 9, 2012 at 7:53 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Loopy, you sound a mite perturbed! What's the matter, dear? Finding that your views aren't so valued by the majority these days? Poor little you.

      November 9, 2012 at 7:56 pm |
    • Lorraine

      tomlow..life boy,get a life, tootles, you must be jesting, i do this for the zeal, and love of YHWH, all people are responsible for their own righteousness, son, i can care less, it is between them, and the Creator YHWH, not my call to judge. pay attention, one of lost cause, what it is, is what it is, ok. Praise the King YHWH.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:31 am |
    • Mirosal

      Lorraine, your god is a myth, just like EVERY SINGLE "god" that has been worshipped for the 200,000 years our species has been around. Face it, you're just a bigot who is using religion to justify your actions and words. you are no different, and certainly no better, than a Taliban extremist who uses "holy texts" to kill in the name of your "god". Oh, and just so you know, Muslims, Jews, and Christians all worship THE EXACT SAME "god".

      November 10, 2012 at 6:38 am |
    • Lorraine

      Mirasol, i suggest you call 1-773-874-0325, with any of your questions, and dates of history of this book, if your pride will allow it. As i've said before, you can't have it both ways, using these truths in the american history, then deny it from this book, look it up, then connect the dots people. Here's one for you, king Jehoiakim of Judah, with Jeremiah chapter 26, now do your homework children.

      And this is no religion, and none of those or any religions do YHWH, they are all twisted with idols not of YHWH, Deuteronomy 32:39, YHWH has no one with Him, He is the King. YHWH IS His true Hebrew name YOD HE WAV HE , in English, which they all hide, and fear, this is the 'truth' of our life, our history, you, and many have been vamboozelled since Ptolemy, he was tricked too, for over 2000 years now. praise YHWH.

      November 10, 2012 at 9:54 am |
    • AtheistSteve

      Sorry Lorraine but mirosal is correct. The God you call YHWY was created by Hebrew Jews and is predated by numerous older God myths. Your depth of devotion and belief do not in any way validate this man-made deity. You can spout all the texts and books you want... still doesn't make it true.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:10 am |
    • Lorraine

      atheiststeve, you have been vamboozelled!! just as Ptolemy was for over 2000 years now, again, what is a myth are all religions, and if your pride will let you, call the movement of Jeremiah 23:1-8, at 1-773-874-0325, with any of your questions, facts, dates, etc..put down your pride, and learn some truth. For the Hebrew jews have no say, they were, and are puppets, (not all jews complicit to this) that YHWH allowed what He wanted, and its all going right in His plans prophesy is in process, the end times are right on time . Praise YHWH.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:29 am |
    • Lorraine

      atheiststeve, and for the record i only have 1 book, and prayer, is all i need with the anointence of YHWH, any other text, and books are what this society does to mislead, and control the masses, i use their example of how they lie, and surgar coat, and cover up truths. call that number now don't get cold feet. YHWH BLESS.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:40 am |
    • TruthPrevails :-)

      "for the record i only have 1 book"

      Funny how that works...poor deluded Lorraine seems to think that one book provides EVERY answer required, yet we use numerous books for our answers and our books are dated within the last few decades and don't usually exclude people and are based on factual evidence supported by science.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:43 am |
    • mama k

      Well if all you have is a book of prayer and what someone else taught you, Lorraine, then it's obvious you need professional psychiatric help, dear.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:45 am |
    • AtheistSteve

      It's bamboozled Lorraine and recorded history refutes what you say. Not your fault really. You've been deceived just like 30% of the worlds population(for the Christian tradition). And while it's fair to grant the ignorant masses of the distant past for falling for these lies, modern rational thinking and real answers to the questions that baffled them is no longer a valid excuse.
      YHWH is a fabrication, by man for man, to control using fear, not a message from on high.
      The cult of Abrahamic religions is the greatest con of all time. Sorry that you've become one of it's many victims. Maybe if you got your head out of simply reading the Bible and studied actual books of learning you might find a path to reality...somehow I doubt that however.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:52 am |
  8. midwest rail

    November 6th will be remembered as a victory for rational discourse.

    November 9, 2012 at 7:14 am |
  9. Bob

    Joh 8:34 Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.
    Joh 8:35 "The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever.
    Joh 8:36 "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.
    Joh 8:37 "I know that you are Abraham's descendants; yet you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you.
    Joh 8:38 "I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father."
    Joh 8:39 They answered and said to Him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus *said to them, "If you are Abraham's children, do the deeds of Abraham.
    Joh 8:40 "But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do.
    Joh 8:41 "You are doing the deeds of your father." They said to Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father: God."
    Joh 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me.
    Joh 8:43 "Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word.
    Joh 8:44 "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
    2Co 3:13 and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away.
    2Co 3:14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.
    2Co 3:15 But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart;
    2Co 3:16 but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
    2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
    2Co 3:18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.

    November 9, 2012 at 7:02 am |
    • from Gullibles Travels, Part 2

      November 9, 2012 at 9:27 am |
  10. midwest rail

    Post election congratulations are in order for the voters of Indiana, Maine, Maryland and Missouri. A very good day for rational humans.

    November 9, 2012 at 6:51 am |
  11. Douglas

    The dissembling continues by the atheists and gay apologists for fornication.

    The Bible is what it is.

    The Old and New Testaments caution believers to abstain from LGBTQ coupling, clearly and unambiguously.

    We continue to see long treatises posted here in a failed attempt to convolute the meaning of scripture with Romney-like lies about how the Bible "actually says nothing about LGBTQ fornication".

    Folks you really need to do a better job then that.

    Another tactic used here by the fornicating atheists and gay apologists is to post long diatribes in attempt to:

    1. Justify sin.
    2. Push counter messaging way down or off the scroll lines and into the archives.

    You just can't hide the truth...no matter how many screen names and diatribes you post.

    We accept celibate LGBTQ folks into our sanctuary and we provide guidance and counseling services for strugglers,
    many of who break free from the bonds of fornication after the give and take of tough love strategies aimed at sin risk reduction.

    There is hope for strugglers. Salvation and deliverance is possible through celibate living for LGBTQ folks and abstinence for straights who also struggle with fornication.

    November 9, 2012 at 12:24 am |
    • Bob

      Douglas well put,

      November 9, 2012 at 7:11 am |
    • you're right - the Bible is what it is - fable. (Gullible's Travels - parts 1 & 2).

      November 9, 2012 at 9:30 am |
    • James

      " "actually says nothing about LGBTQ fornication"."

      You're wrong no matter how many times you re-post it. The scriptures actually say nothing about homosexuality as a psychosexual orientation. Our understandings of sexual orientation are distinctly modern ones that were not present in the minds of Scripture writers. A few passages of Scripture (seven at the most) object to certain types of same-sex expressions or acts. The particular acts in question, however, are sexual expressions which are exploitative, oppressive, commercialized, or offensive to ancient purity rituals. There is no Scriptural guidance for same-sex relationships which are loving and mutually respecting. Guidelines for these relationships should come from the same general Scriptural norms that apply to heterosexual relationships.

      November 9, 2012 at 9:57 am |
  12. Bob

    Lieth at home – Βεβληται, lieth all along; intimating that the disease had reduced him to a state of lifelessness, through the grievous torments with which it was accompanied.Sick of the palsy – Or paralytic. See Mat_4:24. This centurion did not act as many masters do when their servants are afflicted, have them immediately removed to an infirmary, often to a work-house; or sent home to friends or relatives, who probably either care nothing for them, or are unable to afford them any of the comforts of life. In case of a contagious disorder, it may be necessary to remove an infected person to such places as are best calculated to cure the distemper, and prevent the spread of the contagion. But, in all common cases, the servant should be considered as a child, and receive the same friendly attention. If, by a hasty, unkind, and unnecessary removal, the servant die, are not the master and mistress murderers before God?

    November 8, 2012 at 7:38 pm |
  13. Troy

    One of the themes of Jesus' ministry was a recurring conflict with the Pharisees, a powerful group of legalistic religious leaders. The Pharisees were waiting for the Messiah to come, and they believed that would happen only when their entire nation became righteous. So, in their minds, anyone who failed to follow their particular set of rules was bringing down a curse on their nation and worthy of contempt.

    Sound familiar?

    The list of people despised by the Pharisees was long:

    – The Samaritans were considered religious heretics and ethnically impure.

    – Sick people were believed to be sinners whom God was punishing.

    – Women were deemed unworthy of discipleship.

    – Tax collectors and Roman soldiers were regarded as the enemy.

    – The poor, who had neither the time nor resources to maintain rigorous rites of religious purity, were thought to be beyond God's grace.

    Jesus emphatically rejected each one of these prejudices. You can read the stories yourself in your own Bible. E.g., John 4:1-42; Luke 10:29-37; John 9:1-34; Luke 8:1-3; Matthew 11:16-19; Matthew 5:38-48; and Matthew 9:18-26.

    A classic example is provided in Matthew 8. There, a Roman soldier asked Jesus to heal his "pais." This is a Greek term often used in ancient times to refer to a servant who was his master's same-sex partner. When the soldier said, "Lord, my 'partner' is lying at home paralyzed, in terrible distress," Jesus was immediately compassionate and spoke no words of exclusion or condemnation. He simply said, "I will come and heal him."

    In the dialogue that followed, Jesus commended this Roman solider for having more faith than anyone he had ever met and assured him that he would sit down in the Kingdom of Heaven with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. By this miracle of healing, Jesus preserved this loving same-sex relationship.

    The Gospels are clear. Jesus refused to be bound by cultural prejudice. Repeatedly, he took up the cause of the oppressed and defended them against narrow-minded religious leaders.

    November 8, 2012 at 12:12 pm |
    • Bob

      What a bunch of bull this is the meaning saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home,.... It would be a difficulty whether it was a son or a servant he was so concerned for; since παις, the word here used, more commonly signifies a "son" or "child"; but that Luke, supposing it to be the same case he relates, expressly calls him δουλος, "a servant", Luk_7:2. The concern of the "centurion" for him, shows him to have been a good servant, faithful and obedient to his master; since he was so much affected with his case, and took so much care of him; and Luke says, he "was dear unto him"; in great esteem, highly valued, and much beloved: and also, that the centurion was a good master; he does not put his sick servant from him, but takes care of him at home, and seeks out for relief for him, being greatly desirous of his life. And as his keeping him at home discovered a tender regard to him; so his not bringing him forth, or ordering him to be brought out to Christ, which was sometimes done in such cases, shows his great faith in Christ, that he was as able to cure him lying at home, as if brought before him; absent, as well as present. It is in the original text, "is cast"; or, as it is rendered, Mat_8:14 "laid in the house", as if he was dead, speechless, and without motion; and Luke says, that he was "ready to die", being as one laid out for dead. The phrase answers to מוטל, a word often used by the Rabbins; sometimes of sick persons, as when they say (i) of anyone, that he is חולה ומוטל במטה, "sick, and laid upon the bed"; and sometimes of a person really dead, and laid out: and often this phrase is to be met with, מי שמתו מוטל לפניו, "he that hath his dead cast", or "laid out before him" (k); concerning whom they dispute many things; as what he is free from, the reading of Shema, prayer, and the phylacteries; and where he ought to eat and drink till such time his dead is buried out of his sight. But this man's servant was not dead, but lay as one dead;

      November 8, 2012 at 7:27 pm |
    • bicker all you want. it's all fable anyway.

      But I'll take the compassionate Christian any day over the one who:

      – thinks they know what God thinks
      – is filled with hate and fear
      – contributes more to divisiveness than to bonds between people

      November 9, 2012 at 9:33 am |
    • Troy

      In the original language, the importance of this story for gay, lesbian, and bisexual Christians is much clearer. The Greek word used in Matthew’s account to refer to the servant of the centurion is pais. In the language of the time, pais had three possible meanings depending upon the context in which it was used. It could mean “son or boy;” it could mean “servant,” or it could mean a particular type of servant — one who was “his master’s male lover.” Often these lovers were younger than their masters, even teenagers.

      To our modern minds, the idea of buying a teen lover seems repugnant. But we have to place this in the context of ancient cultural norms. In ancient times, commercial transactions were the predominant means of forming relationships. Under the law, the wife was viewed as the property of the husband, with a status just above that of slave. Moreover, in Jesus’ day, a boy or girl was considered of marriageable age upon reaching his or her early teens. It was not uncommon for boys and girls to marry at age 14 or 15. Nor was it uncommon for an older man to marry a young girl. Fortunately civilization has advanced, but these were the norms in the culture of Jesus’ day.

      In that culture, if you were a gay man who wanted a male “spouse,” you achieved this, like your heterosexual counterparts, through a commercial transaction — purchasing someone to serve that purpose. A servant purchased to serve this purpose was often called a pais.

      November 9, 2012 at 10:10 am |
  14. midwest rail

    Well done, voters of Maine and Maryland.

    November 8, 2012 at 12:10 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      YES!

      November 8, 2012 at 7:34 pm |
  15. Bob

    Why can't we the religious just make the choices for others because we know better than they do. Just because they don't care about their everlasting soul doesn't mean we shouldn't care and take action by making personal choices for others. When they try to speed on the highway, we should be able to put a regulator on their car so they can't go faster than 45 mph because anything faster is just unsafe and taking a risk with the body God gave you. When they try to have a third drink at a party we should make some laws that would make it illegal to have more than 2 drinks because any more than that and you are a drunkard who will not inherit God's kingdom. When they try to stay home and watch football on Sunday instead of helping their souls by going to Church, we should make laws forcing them to attend. When they try to eat steaks on Fridays we should make sure that no store will sell beef that day because they just don't realize they are putting their soul at risk, and those who think being gay or gay married is okay, we must ban that because they just don't understand the risk they take with their souls...

    November 8, 2012 at 12:06 pm |
    • Bob

      Not me but O will be happy to take all the freedoms you listed away for you.

      November 8, 2012 at 7:33 pm |
    • Bob is an ignorant d . i . c . k

      Bob: "Why can't we the religious just make the choices for others because we know better than they do."

      Because in the U.S. at least, the government had the foresight early on keep ignorant asses like you from dictating your fairy tales through legislation.

      November 9, 2012 at 9:38 am |
  16. Brent

    "There is no approval for gay marriage in the Bible."

    The term “traditional marriage” is a term employed by anti-gay religious groups and individuals to promote bigotry, prejudice, hostility and discrimination toward gay and lesbian citizens.

    The term is used to justify a social injustice both in terms of denying gay and lesbian individuals equal treatment guaranteed by our Constitution and also denying them human dignity. The use of the term is an action that promotes constitutional unfairness and human indignity and therefore one which is morally wrong.

    If a person of faith agrees that a practice that promotes looking upon a segment of society as inferior, unworthy and undeserving of that which we find as good in our lives, the use of the term “traditional marriage” therefore also must be sinful.

    Regardless of their particular faith, the person would be hard-pressed to say that love, compassion and wanting what is best in our lives for others around us are not the core principles of most religions. When a person of faith stands opposed to those principles, their attitude and actions stand opposed to the principles which they strive to uphold in the everyday interactions with those around them.

    There is also deceit involved in the use of the term “traditional marriage” because those who employ the term attempt to perpetrate an untruth and ulterior motives of hostility and prejudice.

    The untruth comes when “traditional marriage” is offered up as a term that defines a religious concept of a God-blessed union of a young man and woman who fall in love, get married with no prior sexual experience, have children and remain together into old age. They are implying that this is how God ordains marriage.

    If it is, it took him until just 50 years ago to arrive at that conclusion.

    The tradition of marriage in Old Testament times meant the man and his wife could have the same father.

    In the Bible, the patriarch of the Hebrew people, Abraham, and his wife, Sarah, couldn’t have children so Sarah put forth her slave Hagar for Abraham to have children by.

    In Old Testament times, it was normal, sometimes even required for a man to take multiple wives. A man having multiple wives was accepted by the church as late as the 5th Century, 500 years after the teachings set forth in the New Testament. The church for a very long time apparently did not interpret biblical teaching as an edict for one-man, one-woman marriage.

    The tradition of marital unions in the 1700s and 1800s in America doesn’t seem to measure up to God-ordained – especially from the female perspective.

    One third of brides were pregnant at the altar in Concord, Massachusetts during the 20 years prior to the American Revolution.

    In this quote from a wedding couple in 1855, we see that the church had no problem blessing a legal marriage that was considered by many – including this couple – as a violation of the woman’s dignity and civil rights:

    “We believe that personal independence and equal human rights can never be forfeited, except for crime; that marriage should be an equal and permanent partnership, and so recognized by law; that until it is so recognized, married partners should provide against the radical injustice of present laws, by every means in their power…”

    So we can look back and see that religious teachings which uphold the ideals of love, dignity, compassion and respect for each person within marital unions throughout history has taken a back seat.

    In other words, the definition of a God-ordained tradition of marriage has never been constant rather it has evolved.

    History shows us it’s the marital union that should be uplifted…not the evolving traditions of a social institution. In other words, it’s not about how we come together but why.

    Rev. Mark Gallagher, a Unitarian minister, in 2004 asked “what about a marriage could have that quality of spiritual beauty? What makes for sacredness in a marriage?” He names four things.

    “First and foremost, mutual love. A feeling of heightened affection, respect, concern, and appreciation between marital partners. It gives a certain sparkle to the time spent together, and potentially to the entire experience of life. The presence of love makes a marriage sacred.

    “Fidelity contributes to the sacredness of a marriage. Commitments fulfilled. Coming through. Hanging in. Placing the integrity of the relationship over personal preference and convenience. It builds a powerful trust. Fidelity makes a marriage sacred.

    “Intimacy brings sacredness in a marriage. When two people reveal themselves to one another over time, they cannot help but gain acquaintance with the deep regions of the human experience. They get to know one another, of course. But more importantly, they get to know themselves.

    Through relating intimately over time, deeper honesty and authenticity become possible. This is the spiritual journey to know and be known, behind the public charade, however subtle or crude that may be.

    “And forgiveness generates sacredness in a marriage. We all make mistakes and need forgiveness. Our spiritual liberation requires that we become masters of forgiveness letting go of resentment for slights and injuries. The prolonged togetherness of marriage will present myriad opportunities for the practice of forgiveness. When forgiveness flows freely, there is a palpable quality of gentleness and compassion.”

    Does the heterosexual couple uniting in marriage today lift up the union as characterized by love, fidelity, intimacy and forgiveness. We expect they do and we suspect those characteristics as Gallagher concluded in his sermon are what exude sacredness.

    We also know that gay and lesbian couples uphold those same characteristics for their unions. Why would they not? Why would a parent of a gay son or daughter not want their child to enjoy the happiness derived from a lifelong devotion to those characteristics? Why would a brother or sister with a gay sibling not want their brother or sister to enjoy the happiness derived from a lifelong devotion to those characteristics?

    Why would a person of faith not want the gay or lesbian individual to enjoy the happiness derived from the pursuit of marriage sanctity?

    Why would we as Americans not want our government and its laws to recognize that same marriage sanctity for gay and lesbian individuals in their pursuit of liberty and happiness?

    There can be only one reason and that is because many of us have been conditioned by years of misguided church teaching to look upon gay and lesbian individuals as morally inferior, unworthy and therefore undeserving of that which which we uphold as good and sanctified in our lives.

    The use of the term “traditional marriage” embeds in our minds and hearts a moral and religious stamp of disapproval on gay and lesbian individuals and that brings immense harm to their lives, their happiness and their well-being.

    November 8, 2012 at 11:56 am |
  17. Lorraine

    mama k, to each his own dear, try looking up the kings of Judah, and their dates, then maybe you can connect the dots to this book as in the king Jehoiakim in Jeremiah 26 . I know you did not call that number forked tongue, with dates, and questions about the histories of any facts, you have too much pride to do it. YHWH BLESS.

    November 8, 2012 at 11:07 am |
    • judy

      She probably didn't call an astrology hotline or Pat Robertson's prayer hotline, either, lol. YHWH worship – give me a friggin break. It's as lame as numerologists.

      November 9, 2012 at 9:44 am |
  18. Bob

    What we see here is a justification of sin because 2 people are fornicating. Love is not created in fornication that is lust. The stats on gay relationships show that lack of one partner life long relations. Even in countries that allow gay marriage. we don't see all of them wanting to get married because why marry when you want to have many partners. Even in marriage its not the same for most gays since this desire and idea of marriage is to have not one partner for life but one main and as many as desired outside partners. This would be called a open marriage. The argument that since the gay copulation doesn't draw gays away from God then it must be ok, is the farthest from the truth. All have sinned yet all who come to God find themselves looking to God for the forgiveness of sin and the help to turn a life around. To have a life that shuns sin and desires to have more of God in their lives and to conform to what God and the Bible says is the way life should be lived. Gays just like anyone else need to come to God, as they like everyone else are created in Gods image. But do not look to justify a wrong relationship but look intently into the face and laws that God has setup as the pattern for how things should be. It is compromise to want to have a relationship with God yet continue in a sinful pattern of relationships. The same argument can be made about couples wanting to get married but living together. The promises and will of God will not be fulfilled in this way. This is why the Law in the Old Testament was given to act as a guide so all would know what is acceptable and not. They didnt try to change the law, they changed their lifestyle to conform to the law. The atheists here would want to change the laws of God to accept a lifestyle that is wrong. Not the person but the lifestyle, we can all choose to sin or we can choose not to. Isnt it wonderful that we have a God that didnt leave us as orphans and helps us in our weakness.

    November 8, 2012 at 11:00 am |
    • YeahRight

      "he stats on gay relationships show that lack of one partner life long relations"

      More prejudice, lies and stupidity from Bob. Well....DUHHHHHH Bob the divorce rate among straights is at 50% so you can't use that lame argument. By the way people Bob is getting this information from well known hate groups and it's not based on facts.

      November 8, 2012 at 11:49 am |
    • YeahRight

      "This is why the Law in the Old Testament was given to act as a guide so all would know what is acceptable and not. They didnt try to change the law, they changed their lifestyle to conform to the law."

      More lies from Bob, because if this was true then women would have to marry their rapists, parents would have to stone there children to death for talking back, christians wouldn't have tattoo's, christians wouldn't eat shellfish, etc.. Oh...that's right folks, Bob is only picking out the scriptures to try and justify his unfounded prejudice attitude toward the gay community. You have NO idea what you're talking about. What an idiot. LMAO! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!

      November 8, 2012 at 12:00 pm |
    • Janet

      " The atheists here would want to change the laws of God to accept a lifestyle that is wrong."

      The Biblical condemnation of homosexuality is based on human ignorance, suspicion of those who are different, and an overwhelming concern for ensuring the survival of the people. Since the Bible regards homosexuality as a capital crime, it clearly assumes that homosexuality is a matter of free choice, a deliberate rebellion against God. We have learned from modern science that people do not choose to be gay or straight; hence it is neither logical nor moral to condemn those whose nature it is to be gay or lesbian.

      November 8, 2012 at 12:04 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      What we see here is a justification of sin because 2 people are fornicating. Love is not created in fornication that is lust.

      One does not need to be in love to fornicate, I'll give you that. No one is claiming that having sex = love. However, love does often lead to sex. What exactly is your point?

      The stats on gay relationships show that lack of one partner life long relations.

      I don't follow this statement. Are you stating that gay relationships don't last? How is that even an argument against marriage? Look at straight marriages. A full half of straight marriages end in divorce.

      Not to mention that there are no stats on this, seeing as gay marriage is only just beginning to be legal. However, anecdotally, most of the gay relationships I'm aware of have at least five years, and a good 20% of them are working on more than 20 years together.

      Even in countries that allow gay marriage. we don't see all of them wanting to get married because why marry when you want to have many partners.

      Marriage is not for everyone, gay or straight. This is a part of being human. There is also the group of us who are polyamrous, who have no desire for a monogamous relationship, but do engage in committed, long term relationships with multiple partners.

      Even in marriage its not the same for most gays since this desire and idea of marriage is to have not one partner for life but one main and as many as desired outside partners.

      I think you're confused. That has nothing to do with orientation. It is not a gay thing. It's a part of human nature. As I said, not all of us are made to be monogamous. Even your bible addresses this. Multiple wives was a normal thing for many thousands of years.

      This would be called a open marriage.

      Not necessarily, it depends on the agreed upon rules within the relationship. And again, it is not a gay thing. I know far more straights with an open marriage than I do gays. But again, I'm poly and tend to have poly friends.

      The argument that since the gay copulation doesn't draw gays away from God then it must be ok, is the farthest from the truth.

      Gay sex is sex. Nothing more. What that has to do with god is between the gay folks in question and their belief.

      All have sinned yet all who come to God find themselves looking to God for the forgiveness of sin and the help to turn a life around. To have a life that shuns sin and desires to have more of God in their lives and to conform to what God and the Bible says is the way life should be lived.

      This is what you believe. Good for you. I hope it brings you peace.

      The atheists here would want to change the laws of God to accept a lifestyle that is wrong. Not the person but the lifestyle, we can all choose to sin or we can choose not to. Isnt it wonderful that we have a God that didnt leave us as orphans and helps us in our weakness.

      Being gay is not a lifestyle. Nor is it sin. Being gay has nothing to do with atheism or christianity. It is who a person is.

      November 8, 2012 at 12:29 pm |
    • judy

      This is the problem with our country – bigoted idiots like Bob running around, spouting off lies.

      November 9, 2012 at 9:45 am |
    • Bob

      Marriage is not a civil right just as being a doc is not. It is a inst-itu-tion made by God with certain criteria that all who want to get married aspire to. It is not like freespeech which is a civil right but is a inst-itu-tion with laws and has restrictions and is more like a business agreement. It is not a automatic in the conveyance of citizenship. The easiest description is a man and woman joined in marriage for life. Open marriages are two people who cannot find enough in each other to satisfy them and their lusts, don't have God in the relationship so they look to others to satisfy that need. They are married as defined by law but fall short of Gods description and actually have their own description which actually by Gods standards is more sin but how the world defines it is open. Why would anyone want to admit I am cheating my wife knows and participates we cant fulfill this intimacy between us and let our lust go where it wants. This goes for every type of relationship that people make efforts to categorize relationships that are not marriage. The atheists are trying to take God out of the US by declaring separation of church and state and if you do that then the courts do not have a way to say that it is established by God. So if not God then what, well mans ideas then, while it is still man and woman and a contract but it does not recognize God and therefore all think they can bend the ideas and terms of marriage. So then we see gay marriage and heck why would you have marriage at all who cares in a name but somehow this name of marriage seems important doesn't it. Gays were offered civil unions with all the rights and that was not good enough. This is why we see atheists here they could care less for gay marriage in reality but they want the moral confines of Gods definitions and how things were patterned taken out of the US and other countries. This applies for anywhere Gods moral laws apply. This then opens the door for anything goes as with the supposed new definition of marriage. Even to the ranting and raving and trying to change the Bible we see here and all over. It will NEVER CHANGE it is the Word of God. I like alot of others have no malice against gays and relationships these types of relationships have been established for centuries all kinds of relationships but it is that badge of marriage that still is sought after. Recap the atheists take God out of the gov then the gov becomes mans laws then we can bend them anyway we want then consequences then the fall. There is no new way this has been the downfall of every civilization on earth and man does not have the ability to keep a moral standard.

      November 9, 2012 at 10:07 am |
    • Bob

      What gays and atheists are trying to do is redefine and tear down the definition of marriage as current law upholds Gods definition and make marriage in their own image since they cannot live up to the definitions of marriage as they are now. They in effect want to be God and don't want to see Him saying this is the way that you are not making the standard therefore changing it not only for themselves but for all. Dam the consequences as long as they get what they want.

      November 9, 2012 at 10:22 am |
    • 2Cents

      "Marriage is not a civil right "

      The NAACP has passed a resolution endorsing same-sex marriage as a civil right, putting it stamp on an issue that has divided the black community.

      The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's board voted at a leadership retreat in Miami on Saturday to back a resolution supporting marriage equality, calling the position consistent with the equal protection provision of the US constitution.

      "The mission of the NAACP has always been to ensure political, social and economic equality of all people," board chairwoman Roslyn M Brock said in a statement. "We have and will oppose efforts to codify discrimination into law."

      Same-sex marriage is legal in six states and the District of Columbia, but 31 states have passed amendments to ban it.

      The NAACP vote came about two weeks after President Barack Obama announced his support for gay marriage, setting off a flurry of political activity in a number of states. Obama's announcement followed vice-president Joe Biden's declaration in a television interview that he was "absolutely comfortable" with gay couples marrying.

      "Civil marriage is a civil right and a matter of civil law. The NAACP's support for marriage equality is deeply rooted in the fourteenth amendment of the United States constitution and equal protection of all people" said NAACP president Benjamin Todd Jealous, a strong backer of gay rights.

      Gay marriage has divided the black community, with many religious leaders opposing it. In California, exit polls showed about 70% of black people opposed same-sex marriage in 2008. In Maryland, black religious leaders helped derail a gay marriage bill last year. But state lawmakers passed a gay marriage bill this year.

      Pew Research Center polls have found that African Americans have become more supportive of same-sex marriage in recent years, but remain less supportive than other groups. A poll conducted in April showed 39% of African-Americans favor gay marriage, compared with 47% of white people. The poll showed 49% of black people and 43% of white people are opposed.

      The Human Rights Campaign, a leading gay rights advocacy group, applauded the NAACP's step.

      "We could not be more pleased with the NAACP's history-making vote – which is yet another example of the traction marriage equality continues to gain in every community," HRC president Joe Solmonese said in a statement.

      November 9, 2012 at 10:35 am |
    • YeahRight

      "Gays were offered civil unions with all the rights and that was not good enough. "

      This is how stupid this poster is and how much they don't understand about history, which is why they take things so literally. They tried to do separate but equal with African Americans and it didn't work and it was NOT equal. What an idiot. Marriage was defined by the US Supreme Court as a civil right. Recognized federal civil rights law in the United States is grounded in the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. By this standard, marriage has long been established as a civil right.

      The operative constitutional text is section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868. The relevant passages read as follows:

      No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

      November 9, 2012 at 10:39 am |
    • myweightinwords

      Hi Bob,

      Marriage is not a civil right just as being a doc is not.

      According to the Supreme Court of the United states, marriage IS in fact a civil right. See the Loving decision. And what? How is getting married even related to being a doctor? One is a simple act of joining two lives together, the other is a job that requires years and years of study. You're trying to compare apples and space ships.

      It is a inst-itu-tion made by God with certain criteria that all who want to get married aspire to.

      Not here in the United States. It is a civil right that should not be denied to any human being.

      It is not like freespeech which is a civil right but is a inst-itu-tion with laws and has restrictions and is more like a business agreement.

      And yet, the Supreme Court still says that it is a civil right here in the United States. Yes, there are laws and restrictions (some of which currently violate that right) that have changed a great deal over the course of time we have been a country. It is a contract between two people.

      It is not a automatic in the conveyance of citizenship.

      Did anyone say it was?

      The easiest description is a man and woman joined in marriage for life.

      No, the easiest description is two people joined in marriage. Gender is just window dressing.

      Open marriages are two people who cannot find enough in each other to satisfy them and their lusts, don't have God in the relationship so they look to others to satisfy that need.z

      I disagree. An open marriage is two people confident enough in one another and loving each other enough to help them find happiness and explore sexual needs and desires in a safe and loving manner. It isn't for everyone, just as monogamy is not for everyone.

      They are married as defined by law but fall short of Gods description and actually have their own description which actually by Gods standards is more sin but how the world defines it is open.

      And yet, in god's view biblically, most men in the OT had a sort of open relationship, in that they had multiple wives. How is one okay, but the other isn't?

      Why would anyone want to admit I am cheating my wife knows and participates we cant fulfill this intimacy between us and let our lust go where it wants.

      For starters, those in open marriages don't consider it cheating, as long as all parties obey the rules established for that relationship. And in my experience a marriage relies more on emotional intimacy than physical. Therein lies the difference.

      This goes for every type of relationship that people make efforts to categorize relationships that are not marriage.

      Marriage is what we make it to be. Always has been. Marriage has been many, many, many things over the millenia. We are only moving in the logical direction once more.

      The atheists are trying to take God out of the US by declaring separation of church and state and if you do that then the courts do not have a way to say that it is established by God.

      Atheists are not doing that. Our founding fathers did that. It's written in our constituition. All any of us are doing are making sure it's enforced.

      So if not God then what, well mans ideas then, while it is still man and woman and a contract but it does not recognize God and therefore all think they can bend the ideas and terms of marriage.

      God does not define marriage for the United States. The people of the United States do, and we are all faiths and no faith and we have begun to see the tide turning as people realize that denying a basic civil right to anyone is wrong.

      So then we see gay marriage and heck why would you have marriage at all who cares in a name but somehow this name of marriage seems important doesn't it. Gays were offered civil unions with all the rights and that was not good enough.

      Separate but equal is NEVER equal. Why would I agree to a status that marks me as a second class citizen? Marriage is what it is. Two lives joined together in love. Civil Unions do NOT convey the same status, therefor they are not the same.

      This is why we see atheists here they could care less for gay marriage in reality but they want the moral confines of Gods definitions and how things were patterned taken out of the US and other countries. This applies for anywhere Gods moral laws apply. This then opens the door for anything goes as with the supposed new definition of marriage.

      Marriage has been redefined over and over and over again. It is nothing new. Today's marriages are not biblical. None of them.

      Even to the ranting and raving and trying to change the Bible we see here and all over. It will NEVER CHANGE it is the Word of God.

      Most of the folks posting with regard to the bible are Christians. They just disagree with you.

      I like alot of others have no malice against gays and relationships

      I would like to invite you to really examine this statement and your heart. Your words belay this.

      these types of relationships have been established for centuries all kinds of relationships but it is that badge of marriage that still is sought after.

      Yes, because two people in love should be able to join their lives together. Period.

      Recap the atheists take God out of the gov then the gov becomes mans laws then we can bend them anyway we want then consequences then the fall. There is no new way this has been the downfall of every civilization on earth and man does not have the ability to keep a moral standard.

      God has never been IN our government. The demographics of our country are shifting, and while Christians still hold the 'majority, the minorities are larger than they've ever been. They have a voice. They are holding up the Constitution of the United States and pointing out the flaws in the execution of law. The morality is fine. We are in no danger of becoming a society of evil, murdering psychopaths.

      November 9, 2012 at 11:06 am |
    • Bob

      The NAACP is of no relevance

      November 9, 2012 at 11:08 am |
    • Bob

      Weight everything you said confirms what I said gays and atheists in taking God out of the US want to define marriage and create it in their own design, image or whatever you want to call it but that is not marriage.

      November 9, 2012 at 11:21 am |
    • Brent

      "but that is not marriage."
      The term “traditional marriage” is a term employed by anti-gay religious groups and individuals to promote bigotry, prejudice, hostility and discrimination toward gay and lesbian citizens.

      The term is used to justify a social injustice both in terms of denying gay and lesbian individuals equal treatment guaranteed by our Constitution and also denying them human dignity. The use of the term is an action that promotes constitutional unfairness and human indignity and therefore one which is morally wrong.

      If a person of faith agrees that a practice that promotes looking upon a segment of society as inferior, unworthy and undeserving of that which we find as good in our lives, the use of the term “traditional marriage” therefore also must be sinful.

      Regardless of their particular faith, the person would be hard-pressed to say that love, compassion and wanting what is best in our lives for others around us are not the core principles of most religions. When a person of faith stands opposed to those principles, their attitude and actions stand opposed to the principles which they strive to uphold in the everyday interactions with those around them.

      There is also deceit involved in the use of the term “traditional marriage” because those who employ the term attempt to perpetrate an untruth and ulterior motives of hostility and prejudice.

      The untruth comes when “traditional marriage” is offered up as a term that defines a religious concept of a God-blessed union of a young man and woman who fall in love, get married with no prior sexual experience, have children and remain together into old age. They are implying that this is how God ordains marriage.

      If it is, it took him until just 50 years ago to arrive at that conclusion because the definition of a God-ordained tradition of marriage has never been constant rather it has evolved.

      November 9, 2012 at 11:43 am |
    • mama k

      " . .minorities are larger than they've ever been. They have a voice. They are holding up the Constitution of the United States and pointing out the flaws in the execution of law."

      Bob scuffs at the NAACP. But re-read this last part of what myweight wrote above. This is where you are going to fail, Bob. States are starting to progress on the issue – but rest assured, besides being a plain civil rights issue – it is as much one of separation of church and state. Don't be surprised when it is argued as such before the SC for those of us who are not willing to wait any longer for public opinion to bring some sensibility to the deluded and bigoted religious right.

      November 10, 2012 at 10:25 am |
  19. 250 Ministers Proclamation

    As Christian clergy we proclaim the Good News concerning Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) persons and publicly apologize where we have been silent. As disciples of Jesus, who assures us that the truth sets us free, we recognize that the debate is over. The verdict is in. Homosexuality is not a sickness, not a choice, and not a sin. We find no rational biblical or theological basis to condemn or deny the rights of any person based on sexual orientation. Silence by many has allowed political and religious rhetoric to monopolize public perception, creating the impression that there is only one Christian perspective on this issue. Yet we recognize and celebrate that we are far from alone, as Christians, in affirming that LGBT persons are distinctive, holy, and precious gifts to all who struggle to become the family of God.

    In repentance and obedience to the Holy Spirit, we stand in solidarity as those who are committed to work and pray for full acceptance and inclusion of LGBT persons in our churches and in our world. We lament that LGBT persons are condemned and excluded by individuals and institutions, political and religious, who claim to be speaking the truth of Christian teaching. This leads directly and indirectly to intolerance, discrimination, suffering, and even death. The Holy Spirit compels us:

    -to affirm that the essence of Christian life is not focused on sexual orientation, but how one lives by grace in relationship with God, with compassion toward humanity;

    –to embrace the full inclusion of our LGBT brothers and sisters in all areas of church life, including leadership;

    –to declare that the violence must stop. Christ’s love moves us to work for the healing of wounded souls who are victims of abuse often propagated in the name of Christ;

    –to celebrate the prophetic witness of all people who have refused to let the voice of intolerance and violence speak for Christianity, especially LGBT persons, who have met hatred with love;

    Therefore we call for an end to all religious and civil discrimination against any person based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. All laws must include and protect the freedoms, rights, and equal legal standing of all persons, in and outside the church. Amen.

    November 8, 2012 at 10:17 am |
    • Bob

      Yeah cant stop reposting but it was found out that the 250 ministers are the gay ones preaching from a distorted point of view. Of course he doesn't tell you about the thousands that say gay marriage is not approved of in the Bible. Marriage is not tradition so its not man made its God made and ordained between a man and a woman that's it. There is no approval for gay marriage in the Bible.

      November 8, 2012 at 10:48 am |
    • myweightinwords

      Good morning Bob,

      Out of curiousity, do you oppose marriage between Muslims? Jews? Hindus? Atheists? None of them share your definition of marriage, yet you do not speak out against allowing them to be married.

      And yes, marriage is a man made tradition that has varied greatly over the expanse of human history. In some cultures wives were bought, in others, fathers bought husbands for their wives. In some places and times, girls as young as 13 were given as brides. In some cultures, men had multiple wives. Or had one wife and several concubines. In some cultures same gender unions were given special places of honor within the tribe/village.

      The definition and tradition of marriage is an evolving, changing part of human society. We will see same gender marriage fully legal and recognized in the US in the next ten years, if it takes that long. And ten years after that we will look back on this time when people fought so hard to deny basic human rights to a group of people as a disgrace, the same as we do with regard to slavery and inter racial marriage.

      November 8, 2012 at 10:55 am |
    • YeahRight

      "Yeah cant stop reposting but it was found out that the 250 ministers are the gay ones preaching from a distorted point of view."

      More lies from Bob as usual..Come on Bob, cite your source liar. Oh...that's right you can't. This is why you can't believe any of the crap Bob posts they can't even follow one of the basic commandments in the Bible, they are NOT a christian but a homophobic prejudice troll.

      November 8, 2012 at 11:51 am |
    • YeahRight

      "There is no approval for gay marriage in the Bible."

      Bob, the point is there is NO mention of gay marriage in the bible at all, because it's a modern day concept, just like the new knowledge that being gay is not a choice, it's not a mental illness, and it can't be voluntarily changed.

      November 8, 2012 at 11:54 am |
    • judy

      The Bible isn't an authority on anything but contradiction and myth used to control mindless idiots like Bob here.

      November 9, 2012 at 9:47 am |
    • Lorraine

      judy, i suggest you call 1-773-874-0325, with any of your questions, and dates of history of this book, if your pride will allow it. As i've said before, you can't have it both ways, using these truths in the american history, then deny it from this book, look it up, then connect the dots people. Here's one for you, king Jehoiakim, with Jeremiah 26, now do your homework children. praise YHWH.

      November 10, 2012 at 6:44 am |
  20. Brent

    " their marrige still a sham, govement did not invent nor did it come up with marriage so"

    The term “traditional marriage” is a term employed by anti-gay religious groups and individuals to promote bigotry, prejudice, hostility and discrimination toward gay and lesbian citizens.

    The term is used to justify a social injustice both in terms of denying gay and lesbian individuals equal treatment guaranteed by our Constitution and also denying them human dignity. The use of the term is an action that promotes constitutional unfairness and human indignity and therefore one which is morally wrong.

    If a person of faith agrees that a practice that promotes looking upon a segment of society as inferior, unworthy and undeserving of that which we find as good in our lives, the use of the term “traditional marriage” therefore also must be sinful.

    Regardless of their particular faith, the person would be hard-pressed to say that love, compassion and wanting what is best in our lives for others around us are not the core principles of most religions. When a person of faith stands opposed to those principles, their attitude and actions stand opposed to the principles which they strive to uphold in the everyday interactions with those around them.

    There is also deceit involved in the use of the term “traditional marriage” because those who employ the term attempt to perpetrate an untruth and ulterior motives of hostility and prejudice.

    The untruth comes when “traditional marriage” is offered up as a term that defines a religious concept of a God-blessed union of a young man and woman who fall in love, get married with no prior sexual experience, have children and remain together into old age. They are implying that this is how God ordains marriage.

    If it is, it took him until just 50 years ago to arrive at that conclusion.

    November 8, 2012 at 9:55 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.