Christian marriage is man and woman/husband and wife.

[99percentatheism]

There is no secular or theological challenge to be made that a "Christian marriage" isn't immutably a man and woman/husband and wife. Therefore, it should be a criminal act under current hate crimes laws, to accuse a Christian of hate, bigotry, or irrational . . ., if they assert the immutability of the structure of marriage as man and woman/husband and wife.

As Jesus proclaimed it in the Gospels and the writings reaffirm and define it so.

Why would anyone, religious or secularist, NOT support and affirm Christians adhering to the consistent and immutable Biblical teaching that a marriage is a man/husband and woman/wife?

[99percentatheism]

ElCodeMonkey

But, since I am such a nice guy, I'll show you something quite striking from an oft-told tale.:

“Get out of our way,� they replied. “This fellow came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge!"

"We’ll treat you worse than them.�

Now, the men quoted were going to anally rape a couple of other men that were new to their town. And when a nice imigrant tried to ask them not to rape the visitors these homosexual rapists got even more upset.

Now, they saw something even worse than homosexual sex (sodomy) being meted out on their "judgmental" opposition.

It's just as judgmental to call someone judgmental. If someone told you that you're a terrible person because of something you wrote in a post, you'd likely immediately reciprocate by finding something terrible they said. It's human nature. Stupid human nature, but human nature none the less. This story gives no useful anecdotes to anything. Except showing your relation of homosexuality to rape which is unfounded. There's a big difference between consent and no consent.

As for the rest of your previous post that was not responded to, nobody forces marriage to be done in a church and nobody is requiring a priest/rabbi or anything to do the marriage. It's called a civil union and can be done in a backyard by a person who spent $100 on a marriage license. It can be done in a court-house as well. So yes, we'd probably support moving of the pig roast out of the Islamic Center, but this has nothing to do with anything.

Your entire post, however, seems to think the hate is coming from they homosexuals and toward the Christians. I see more eye-rolling toward Christians than I see hate. Your entire demeanor of your post seems to uplift lack of emotional restraint. The hate is obviously the opposite direction.

As for Men are male and Women are female, do you not know that there exists a condition where men are born with a vulva and women with a penis? A man is XY and a woman is XX. The genitals do not always match for whatever reason. And some people even end up with both! So what do you do for them? Are they just a monster that should be killed or never experience love or marriage? It's not nonsense to be accepting of such people. What's nonsense is lack of acceptance of a person who is doing you no harm in any way shape or form.

What are the percentages of people born with these physical deformities/abnormalities?

And if that is the case, we should "judge" people by their normally formed genitalia should we not? A man with normal male genitalia is a man and "his" genitals are designed for the fit of a normal woman's genitalia. And we can simply trash the idea of hate towards the opposition of the celebration of normal people engaging in homosexual sex acts.

We allow the deformed people to tell us what direction they want to head in with their birth defects and we simply place the deviants in the position they fit.

I'm cool with your logic.

[ElCodeMonkey]

In the end I think it's extremely important to realize that it's a religious belief that marriage should only be between man and woman. Thus it should not be law simply based on that belief. Laws are made by public opinion, not religion.

Are you now saying that Christians and other people of religions cannot be part of a Democracy? Certainly, with no real doubt about it, the United States of America was founded by majority Christians implementing their public opinion of government.

If the mass majority of people believe we should each be given one free murder to use at our discretion, then by golly it should become a law that we can.

Hmm, I think I could agree with that on a purely secular level. Unfortunately, I don't get that luxury offered to me by Jesus.

That's the whole point of a democracy as opposed to a Theocracy. On the other hand, the Christians should rightfully be condemning other Christians for gay marriage since that is within the confines of their religion. Christians lord over Christians and Government lords over the people based upon the majority of the people's desires. (granted, it doesn't always happen that way but that's not the point I'm making.

So you ARE saying that Christians are eliminatewd from a Democracy? Unless of course they relinguish their worldview and vote as an atheist?

Is that what your position is?

Seems rather totalitarian does it not?

Laws are not made based on what Christians believe is evil. If they were, we'd be a Theocracy which is exactly why our forefathers instantiated a separation of church and state.

Can you prove that? There is no such actual declaration anywhere in the history of the United States that the founders instituted a seperation of Church and State in the Constitution or in their political endeavors. In fact, prayer to God was ubiquitous throughout the founding and running of the United States in all of its founding.

Take it to vote. If the majority thinks it's fine, then that's law whether we ALL agree or not. Religion has (or should have) nothing to do with our laws.

So then you really are eliminating Christians (Jews, Muslims, Hindu's and all other people of religions) from the political process . . . and that ONLY atheists can vote in a Democracy.

That's is perfectly opposite to the founders of the United States of America.

But I do believe it fits Communist Russia and China perfectly right?

My position does not eliminate Christians from voting at all. By all means, if Christians think that homosexuality is wrong then vote that it's wrong. You can vote based upon your religion and Christians can vote just like anybody else. Just realize that it requires a majority.

Demanding, requiring, and being hateful of the "wrong-doers" on the other hand is wrong in itself. I'm sure you do plenty of things wrong in your life. I'm willing to bet a bazillion dollars that there is at least one gay person who is a nicer person than you and does more to support humanity and peace than you. So then, who are you to judge one thing wrong when you'd be worse in so many other regards? I don't mean that just for you since clearly I have my own issues as well and I bet there are many people better than myself. You can't hate a person just because they do something you conceive as wrong. Especially when that thing harms nobody. Prove that it's harmful to society and maybe you can convince atheists to take up your position that it is wrong. Atheists generally go by the collective good, not by an authority figure.

And if that is the case, we should "judge" people by their normally formed genitalia should we not? A man with normal male genitalia is a man and "his" genitals are designed for the fit of a normal woman's genitalia. And we can simply trash the idea of hate towards the opposition of the celebration of normal people engaging in homosexual sex acts.

We allow the deformed people to tell us what direction they want to head in with their birth defects and we simply place the deviants in the position they fit. [\quote]

That's a bit too short-sighted though. Imagine you were one of those people born with the opposite genitalia as a defect but your genes remained the same. You'd be the same person you are right this second but with the opposite genitalia. Do you think you'd suddenly have the urge to have sex with those of your current sex? A genetic male with female parts will most often have desire for a female and vice versa. If you can say right now that you'd be kool with changing your persuasion if your parts dictated otherwise despite your genes, then you're no better than a gay person. If you say you cannot, then you'd have to be fine with someone in that predicament engaging with another of the same genitalia. BTW, you might want to fix your quote in your last post since you appear to be saying everything that you were trying to quote me saying.

[ElCodeMonkey]

What are the percentages of people born with these physical deformities/abnormalities?

Does it matter? It could be just 1 person. It simply raises new moral questions.

[Clownboat]

What are the percentages of people born with these physical deformities/abnormalities?

Does it matter? It could be just 1 person. It simply raises new moral questions.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/do ... 497556.htm

She looks like a woman, acts like a woman and got married as a wife. But she couldn't bear children because she is actually a man.

A Jiangsu native who always thought she was a woman - and so did everybody else - actually had two hidden testicles, no ovaries and no uterus, devastating her life.

Her congenital anomaly was surgically removed, but she cannot bear children and a chromosome examination confirmed that "she" is actually a "he."

The case is one in 10,000.

The patient underwent successful surgery at the Shanghai Consonancy Hospital this month.

The 27-year-old woman, identified only as Zhang, was married three years ago to her colleague in a middle school. Since she was unable to become pregnant, she visited Shanghai Consonancy after consulting the Internet.

An ultrasound check found she had no ovaries and no uterus but two small testicles hidden in the abdominal cavity. A chromosome examination, however, confirmed Zhang is actually a male.

Since Zhang has a vagina, it was not until the ultrasound exam that the couple learned "she" was a "he."

Zhang only has testicles but no other male organs, such as a penis, and other male characteristics.

She has female external genitalia and was reared as a girl.

[Danmark]

What are the percentages of people born with these physical deformities/abnormalities?

According to the CDC "About one in every 33 babies (about 3%) is born with a birth defect."
http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/data.html

The 3% figure is interesting in light of the percentage of people who have a 'gay, lesbian or bisexual' orientation. The numbers re: GLB folk are very hard to ascertain. They run from about 3% to 15%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographi ... rientation

I understand that despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, many religious fundamentalists insist sexual orientation is a 'choice.' It isn't in most cases, but this is admittedly a difficult statistic to pin down. But even taking the low number, 3%, as an accurate representation of those who are truly 'born' gay, it's odd that this 'birth defect' occurs at the same rate as birth defects in general. [I am most definitely NOT calling homosexuality a 'defect,' but I AM suggesting it is something that for AT LEAST 3% of the population is something they have no control over.

My favorite way to argue this is to ask, "When did you 'decide' to be heterosexual?"

At any rate, those who believe in a creating God have to contend with the fact that 3% of the people are born with a birth defect caused by their 'god' and at least another 3% are homosexual because that's what this creative 'god' wants.

If God made them homosexual, why would God not love them and want them to love him and have the same opportunities that everyone else has?

[Joab]

My favorite way to argue this is to ask, "When did you 'decide' to be heterosexual?"

I have asked that on many forums, the homobash crew evade like a gazelle.

[Joab]

@Keith

Keith:
@99% -

I point out the in the OP you wrote 'There is no secular or theological challenge...'. Do you concede that the secular element is not justified by your arguments?

No more so than the reaction of secular liberals and progressives to a demand by a group of people holding a Barbeque Contest of a pig roast being held at a rented out hall or field at an Islamic Center.

The secular (liberal and progressive) cry against that would be thunderous !!!

I expect the a secularist that calls themself an honest person, would agree that labeling Christians as hate mongers and guilty of discrimination and hate crimes for not celebrating and supporting homosexuals and homosexuality . . . is itself a hate crime. THAT, is why Christians decry ENDA being passed as well as any other number of pro-homosexuality "laws" throughout the land. We KNOW that we are targets of those that hate us and they can and will and do use "anti-discrimination laws" to force us to submit to their private depravity.being celebrated "in public" by us.

I should expect more support from well-thinking atheists and other secularists of support for the Evangelical "Bible-believing" Christians on this subject.

But alas . . . sigh

Notice, at no time is there the slightest hint in my positions that you or any other "non" Christian be forced to believe in Christian marriage as the New Testament dictates. I really, actually, do not care what you believe in AS LONG AS you don't judge me or Christian values by your godless measuring stick.

The premise of the OP is simple and should be agreed to by any honest person. Marriage IS immutably man and woman/husband and wife to a Christian. No differently than the demands for gender nuetral declarations by the LGBT agenda too. Men are male. Women are female. Is that also a hate crime and religious bigotry? Or sanity? Yet, the LGBT activists use the term "heterosexism" and someone how get away with that nonsense.

This thread is about honesty, not political correctness. It should have been over with a resounding YES from each person posting but alas . . .


. . . The world and its ways.

We KNOW that we are targets of those that hate us and they can and will and do use "anti-discrimination laws" to force us to submit to their private depravity.being celebrated "in public" by us.

This part of your post seems to be expressing your fears that someone or something is going to force you to become homosexual. Is this an accurate appraisal?

Is there some reason you decided not to address my entire post and its positions and asked a wierd question instead? To which I answer no. By the way. It's more insidious than being raped by a homosexual or somehow being convinced by one that my penis in another guys body is physically, emotionally and spritually enjoyable.

But, since I am such a nice guy, I'll show you something quite striking from an oft-told tale.:

“Get out of our way,� they replied. “This fellow came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge!"

"We’ll treat you worse than them.�

Now, the men quoted were going to anally rape a couple of other men that were new to their town. And when a nice imigrant tried to ask them not to rape the visitors these homosexual rapists got even more upset.

Now, they saw something even worse than homosexual sex (sodomy) being meted out on their "judgmental" opposition.

Isn't that interesting?

You can find the story retold in the Torah at Genesis 19.

The bold looks suspiciously like confirmation of my appraisal, just saying.

I think you may need to read that story again, you got your retelling of it quite wrong.

[99percentatheism]

My favorite way to argue this is to ask, "When did you 'decide' to be heterosexual?"

I have asked that on many forums, the homobash crew evade like a gazelle.

The Homobash Crew is nothing compared to the Christian Attack Squad. The Homobash Crew is a propaganda tactic. A label of neologism by the anti-Christian fanatic. Christians have to watch what they do and say or else they get sued and screwed by the forces arrayed against them.

Now when does a person decide to live like a Christian?

That is the real question for this thread.

For a Christian, marriage is man and woman/husband and wife. And Homosexual Culture, gay and lesbian and most certainly Bi-Sexual, are choices made that are outside the Christian faith.

Simple.

[99percentatheism]

@Keith

Keith:
@99% -

I point out the in the OP you wrote 'There is no secular or theological challenge...'. Do you concede that the secular element is not justified by your arguments?

No more so than the reaction of secular liberals and progressives to a demand by a group of people holding a Barbeque Contest of a pig roast being held at a rented out hall or field at an Islamic Center.

The secular (liberal and progressive) cry against that would be thunderous !!!

I expect the a secularist that calls themself an honest person, would agree that labeling Christians as hate mongers and guilty of discrimination and hate crimes for not celebrating and supporting homosexuals and homosexuality . . . is itself a hate crime. THAT, is why Christians decry ENDA being passed as well as any other number of pro-homosexuality "laws" throughout the land. We KNOW that we are targets of those that hate us and they can and will and do use "anti-discrimination laws" to force us to submit to their private depravity.being celebrated "in public" by us.

I should expect more support from well-thinking atheists and other secularists of support for the Evangelical "Bible-believing" Christians on this subject.

But alas . . . sigh

Notice, at no time is there the slightest hint in my positions that you or any other "non" Christian be forced to believe in Christian marriage as the New Testament dictates. I really, actually, do not care what you believe in AS LONG AS you don't judge me or Christian values by your godless measuring stick.

The premise of the OP is simple and should be agreed to by any honest person. Marriage IS immutably man and woman/husband and wife to a Christian. No differently than the demands for gender nuetral declarations by the LGBT agenda too. Men are male. Women are female. Is that also a hate crime and religious bigotry? Or sanity? Yet, the LGBT activists use the term "heterosexism" and someone how get away with that nonsense.

This thread is about honesty, not political correctness. It should have been over with a resounding YES from each person posting but alas . . .


. . . The world and its ways.

We KNOW that we are targets of those that hate us and they can and will and do use "anti-discrimination laws" to force us to submit to their private depravity.being celebrated "in public" by us.

This part of your post seems to be expressing your fears that someone or something is going to force you to become homosexual. Is this an accurate appraisal?

Is there some reason you decided not to address my entire post and its positions and asked a wierd question instead? To which I answer no. By the way. It's more insidious than being raped by a homosexual or somehow being convinced by one that my penis in another guys body is physically, emotionally and spritually enjoyable.

But, since I am such a nice guy, I'll show you something quite striking from an oft-told tale.:

“Get out of our way,� they replied. “This fellow came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge!"

"We’ll treat you worse than them.�

Now, the men quoted were going to anally rape a couple of other men that were new to their town. And when a nice imigrant tried to ask them not to rape the visitors these homosexual rapists got even more upset.

Now, they saw something even worse than homosexual sex (sodomy) being meted out on their "judgmental" opposition.

Isn't that interesting?

You can find the story retold in the Torah at Genesis 19.

The bold looks suspiciously like confirmation of my appraisal, just saying.

I think you may need to read that story again, you got your retelling of it quite wrong.

Oh really? Prove that.

[99percentatheism]

What are the percentages of people born with these physical deformities/abnormalities?

Does it matter? It could be just 1 person. It simply raises new moral questions.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/do ... 497556.htm

She looks like a woman, acts like a woman and got married as a wife. But she couldn't bear children because she is actually a man.

A Jiangsu native who always thought she was a woman - and so did everybody else - actually had two hidden testicles, no ovaries and no uterus, devastating her life.

Her congenital anomaly was surgically removed, but she cannot bear children and a chromosome examination confirmed that "she" is actually a "he."

The case is one in 10,000.

The patient underwent successful surgery at the Shanghai Consonancy Hospital this month.

The 27-year-old woman, identified only as Zhang, was married three years ago to her colleague in a middle school. Since she was unable to become pregnant, she visited Shanghai Consonancy after consulting the Internet.

An ultrasound check found she had no ovaries and no uterus but two small testicles hidden in the abdominal cavity. A chromosome examination, however, confirmed Zhang is actually a male.

Since Zhang has a vagina, it was not until the ultrasound exam that the couple learned "she" was a "he."

Zhang only has testicles but no other male organs, such as a penis, and other male characteristics.

She has female external genitalia and was reared as a girl.

6-billion people on this planet and one person born with a birth defect is an example to justify The Church adopting a lie that marriage can be redefined a a man and man or woman and woman?

Your example is quite ridiculous don't you think?