Where does the bible say you gays can't marry

[DanieltheDragon]

The title says it all folks. Where does the bible say 1.) gays can't marry 2.)you can't particpate in gay weddings 3.) you can't preside over a gay marriage(as a magistrate of the court) 4.) you can't support gay marriage.


Instead I find the bible specifically states none of the above. Instead it simplifies things.

"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Leviticus 20:13

If one is not arguing that LGBT individuals should be put to death they cannot complain about any of the above. After all Romans 13 states the following

13 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

The bible specifically states to subject yourselves to governing authorities. If the law of the land is that if you offer sales to the public and are not to discriminate then you cannot discriminate. If the law of the land is that as a public magistrate you are to preside over LGBT weddings then you must preside over LGBT weddings.

The only argument based off of the biblical literature in regards to LGBT individuals is whether or not to kill them. Marriage has nothing to do with it.

[JLB32168]

And I don't know anyone that believes that either. Again, irrelevant to the discussion. A decision had to be made. 8 years old to drive? 12? 15? 18? 30? The decision again was not arbitrary.

What scientific data said that the magical age of majority should be at eighteen?? The mind has not matured until the age of twenty-five. It was that way two thousand years ago and it is that way now. No data can say that the age of maturity is at eighteen when clearly biology says it isn’t – unless one is going to say that the brain changed significantly from whenever the age of eighteen was picked.

You yourself have already given evidence that we DO change laws based on new evidence.

And yet, there’s no movement to move the age of majority from eighteen to twenty-five, which would directly affect the age where one may legally marry.
I can understand that new data would move us to adopt the idea of heliocentricity and evolution over their former theories but to suggest that new data changed the way people viewed the mind of teens and early twenty-year olds seems bizarre. I never recall a time when people said that the majority of twenty-year olds acted like mature adults – they don’t. They act like older teens in the eyes of most people and this idea hardly jibes with the time period that the age of majority was set at eighteen. That is why A) the drinking age (after being moved to nineteen amid much protest) was subsequently changed back, and B) the voting age was twenty-one (some people say it should be moved back since most eighteen year olds can’t articulate a logical reason for why they’re voting for N.___).

But that's exactly what we did. Data from science was consulted.

What science said that eighteen was a good age to set children’s majority? Did children’s minds mature seven years earlier two hundred years ago? As I already mentioned, new data suggests that the earth isn’t another planet, that the earth goes around the sun, and that all galaxies are moving away and expanding outwards. What data determined once upon a time that eighteen was when the mind matured – especially since I’ve never heard anyone comment that, for example, eighteen year old “men� were anything other than children with hair on their face?

And yet all you have provided is your unsupported opinion - which ignores the facts.

That you are in possession of them seems to be what we’re debating.

Leviticus 20 covers these sexual sins. It ends at verse 27, which does not say what you have claimed.

You are most likely quoting an English translation of a Hebrew text – not that it really matters. The Hebrew text certainly does allow for the interpretation that incest is a capital offense. The text I’ve cited is the English translation of the Greek Septuagint, which is was the translation used by Greek speaking Jews. It clearly clarifies “[the incestuous brother and sister] shall be cut off in the sight of their people. [. . .]. He shall bear his guilt,� as “they shall be destroyed before the children of their family; he has uncovered his sister’s nakedness, they shall bear their sin.�
Clearly incest is punishable by Death as is Adultery; therefore, there is no arbitrary inconsistency. Sexual impropriety is a capital offense.

This State Senator from Kentucky wants his bill passed. It would pay students $2500 for spying on and reporting any transgender using the 'wrong' restroom.

The “ACT relating to student privacy� does says nothing about rewarding students $2500 for spying on transgender students using restrooms. You have misrepresented the law. The law says that every school restroom, locker room, and shower room, where students might be in various stages of undress, would at the same time shall be designated for and used by male students only or female students only. There is no stipulation that students be mandated reporters. There is no mention of monetary compensation for violation of the law. The law is designed to accommodate, for example, girls in the locker room who don’t wish to dress out in front of boy or their male counterparts who don’t wish to walk around in their underwear in front of a girl. I'm a father. My children don't want to be forced to shower with, dress out in front of, or share a restroom with boys with make-up and clothes commonly regarded as typical for women.

No sir. Subjective and Arbitrary are not synonyms.

I would invite you to take this issue up with the publisher of Roget’s Thesaurus and inform them of their error.

And the only decisions you continue to point to for your claim to being arbitrary are those promulgated by religion.

So you take issue with religious people who speak and vote.

Which is both all that is needed under the Constitution - and fully and finally - not arbitrary.

The Constitution says what we want it to say and not vice versa. Seventy years ago it said that segregation was okay. In 1954 it said something differently. It's as arbitrary as any other law.