Whoah I agree with the vatican!

Interesting.. Is the guy that writes Bush's speaches christian because you often detect some undertones there and i dont credit that to Bush himself..

sorry for the anti USA statement..lol
 
I think that Bush is genuine to. I totaly agree with this statement by the Vatican And i Pray for the succses of this initiative, and that all christians will support it.

God Bless
Rand NobleBlade
Paladin
 
I dunno...I'm not a big taker to Bush being hugely Christian. I know we shouldn't make judgements about a person on a single action, but the whole episode where he privately called that reporter a "major-league ***hole" sort of made me think. Publicly, Christian. Privately, who knows? Please don't spam me...lol...just my thoughts.
 
I think Bob Dylan said it best, "The Times They are A-Changin'". America, and the world is becoming more tolerant as time goes on. Blacks were given equal rights, women were given equal rights, and homosexuals will soon be given equal rights as well. Conservatives opposed the 14th and 15th amendments at the time (abolishing slavery and giving the right to vote to blacks), conservatives opposed Women's sufferege at the time, and conservatives are opposing giving equal legal treatment to homosexuals in the form of marriage. I suggest you try tolerance and acceptance now, fighting it wont do any good.
 
True Mustard, but then the bible doesnt have anything to say about blacks and women....lol

I dont think that we should sit back and let things like this take us over. We are called to love the homosexuals as everyone else, but that doesnt make what they do right. Just as your church should take in ppl from any walk of life so it should be equal for them. But i really think christians should stand up against the practice of homosexuality.
 
Regarding Bush swearing...my goodness we're all not perfect and I even catch myself swearing when I am furious. Does that mean I am not Christian? Let our actions speak louder than our words.

Regarding blacks, Moses wife was black.
 
hmm...

how can you relate homosexuals to the color of someone's skin? There is no relation. Yes, people bought and sold blacks like property. We stopped, we're contrite about it, let it go already, it's been over a hundred years. And your comment about conservatives of the time is slightly wrong. Most liberals, especially the ones in power were not concerned about ending slavery. In fact the ONLY way that the amendment to abolish slavery was passed was that it was a requirement to endorse it to return to the union for the southern states, even though the 'Free' states had enough votes to pass it without the Southern States. That wonderful emancipation (sp) proclamation, it freed no slave anywhere. The document said that it frees slaves in those states that are currently rebelling against the US Government. I.E those states that were no longer a part of the United States. It's like Bush telling the British they no longer have to pay their TV Tax. Ah well, let's forgo the history lesson...
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (CCGR @ Aug. 01 2003,1:45)]Regarding Bush swearing...my goodness we're all not perfect and I even catch myself swearing when I am furious. Does that mean I am not Christian?  Let our actions speak louder than our words.

Regarding blacks, Moses wife was black.
Click to expand...
Well, the swearing was just a specific incident that came to mind.  The point I was trying to make is that I can't be totally sure that he's a solid Christian.  Yes, he stands up for Christian ideas; but a lot of non-Christians stand up for those too.  I basically just feel weird whenever he talks about God....I'm sorry I can't explain in any more depth, but I'm just trying to be honest.
 
I agree with rizz, the church needs to start taking a unified stand agianst these issues. The church kinda sat quietly by as Roe V. Wade was passed. And we didnt Shout out when they took prayer out of our schools. We need to fight this. This argument is not derected at homosexuals themselves but the act and lifestyle of homosexuality. We must acept the gay comunity with loving arms and show them the love of Christ. But that dosn't mean that we need to support thier lifestyle.

Take care and God Bless
Rand NobleBlade
Paladin
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]In fact the ONLY way that the amendment to abolish slavery was passed was that it was a requirement to endorse it to return to the union for the southern states, even though the 'Free' states had enough votes to pass it without the Southern States. That wonderful emancipation (sp) proclamation, it freed no slave anywhere. The document said that it frees slaves in those states that are currently rebelling against the US Government. I.E those states that were no longer a part of the United States. It's like Bush telling the British they no longer have to pay their TV Tax.
Click to expand...
Well you're right about the emancipation proclimation, the 14th amendment and the Emancipation Proclimation are totally seperate though. The amendments to the constitution weren't made until after the war.

And yes it is different than the situation with homosexuals today, though it is also similar in alot of ways. You oppose homosexuality purely on religious grounds, and if they don't subscribe to your religion then the fact that you oppose their lifestyle is irrelevant. This is a secular country, we don't make laws based on religious arguments. Gay marriages are already allowed in some states, it doesn't mean everyone has to approve and it doesn't mean you as private citizens have to accept the gay lifestyle. Just realize that civil rights, once given, are rarely ever taken away in this country.
 
I have to argue this point. I am strongly against gay marriage, and the statistics show that gay people do not live as long as married couples, and they also contract AIDs.

I do not hate the homosexuals; I love them the same way I do everyone else. I against them, I am against their lifestyle.

I am also opposed to the homosexual rights leaders, coming into the classrooms of this nation and teaching young students (5 year olds)that the lifestyle is ok.

Do 5-year olds fully grasp the concept of sex at that age?! I don't think so.
 
I am against homosexuality, but I dont oppose it in law because, simply put, this world is going to hell in a handbasket. What I do oppose is clergy being forced to marry homosexuals. That I will not tolerate.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I am strongly against gay marriage, and the statistics show that gay people do not live as long as married couples, and they also contract AIDs.
Click to expand...
I've never seen anything that indicates that. The AIDS thing used to have a little truth in the 70's and early 80's, now it's just a stereotype. Cite a specific unbiased statistic and your argument would hold water.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I am against homosexuality, but I dont oppose it in law because, simply put, this world is going to hell in a handbasket. What I do oppose is clergy being forced to marry homosexuals. That I will not tolerate.
Click to expand...
I agree, freedom of religion should protect pastors from performing this ceremony if it defies their religion. It would be similar to making a Rabbi eat pork. You don't need a religious leader to do the ceremony, and I would guess that very few homosexuals getting married would even want a pastor to perform the ceremony. Most would probably choose to have someone like a judge do it.
 
Sniff...ahh, glory! What be this...a new ambrosia, a temptation of Aphrodite? No...it has a familiar odor...yes...I'm placing it...sniff...Ah? What's this? Conflict? Medium rare? I feed!

Ahem. I have a question first off: if you're a homosexual couple's child, and they have those school forms you fill out...do you cross out the word 'Mother' if you have two dads, and 'Father' if you have two moms? Or do you just write the names down, like: Jack Merridew, under 'Mother', and Chris Kattan under 'Father'...and would you write Shirley Maclaine for Mother' and Lizzy Walker under 'Father'?
Complications in the everyday school life of a gay couple's child...

Okay seriously. The Vatican's right this time! Imagine it...well, these are also the guys who hemmed and hawed and finally saw Christianity in Harry Potter...and gave me their blessing to read it. Also this is the same people who feasted on the amassed wealth of the poor in the Middle Ages...well.
And I believe President Bush to be a Christian...and I privately call people a lot worse stuff than that. Am I or am I not a Christian? They also said Bill Clinton was a Southern Baptist...is he? Affairs and lies and backstabbing...so? Nobody's "bad." We're all just lesser degrees of "good" than other people are...really, Dahmer wasn't so bad, as, say, Gacy...was he?

Why would the clergy be FORCED to? I did not see that in the article (as if Fox would report that if it was true)...where do you guys get the forcing from?
I pose this question: if I were gay and lisped my rights to freedom of sexuality, who would hear me? Other limpwrists (sorry...let's be relative for a moment: it's just another term for homosexuals, much like gay and queer and one hand on the maypole) and sympathetic straights...liberals, really. If I were a straight protesting for my sexuality amidst a bunch of gays, who would hear me? Why, sympathetic gays and fellow deviants (straights).

There are some things called traditional values, and Revisionists, despite their sick attempts to, cannot refute them. We have something here: a longstanding ground founded by a monotheistic religion that worships a deity that demands none of his creation be homsexual...now being fought against.
It is something that has been, and currently is being fought so that in the future it will not be. It is something right and holy (straight marriage and straight union). Homosexuality is a perversion of that. Total perversion. How do I know? Well. Let's see.
1. Gays can't make kids. I hate to break it to you, but unless I see spontaneous sperm production in females and spontaneous ovule production in males, I ain't buying it, and neither should you. I will however mention that this chick in my school is adopted by two lesbians and is straight...makes one wonder (choice, choice, choide, choice) what makes them be straight when they're brought up with gays?
2. What can you hope to accomplish through any sexual union other than that of heterosexual? Let me put something down for you weaklings you like to shy from what is: straights have other sex, as well. It's weird, and I believe it's wrong, but it happens. Mouth, arse, hands, et cetera. Anything but the norm. Homos do the same, except the norm.
3. Gay marriages are vastly different than straight marriages: firstly, it's two of the same sex together, secondly, there can be no benefit from their union, if anything, only and only harm. Trust me. Your arse is really dirty. Like really. Same thing for your mouth. And, get this: for some reason, virgins who marry each other seem to have far and few in between sex-related probs! Amazing, right? It's just bizarre how studies prove what that God guy told us about a long time ago, though he gave no reasons why, and didn't need to.
4. There is no 4. I hear gays and straights alike tell each other they love each other...I can't verify either point as truth or not, as I have never received a clear definition of love.

If you take the age-old grounds of straight marriages, and all of a sudden wash away that with a flock of gay marriages, you upset and turn imbalanced the scales of what was, is and should be. You create a whacked-up relativist world. Imagine the kids growing up: "Hey...gays and straights alike. Which one's right?" That's the society you get: yet another win for so-called moral relativism. It doesn't work. One of them is right and the other wrong. The world can't judge which is which UNLESS it looks to a moral guide for help, and THE ONLY moral guide that sticks it through is the Bible, and the only MORAL provider (absolutely no sciences have been able to explain the origins of morality) is God. Humans can't decide right from wrong except by the heart, and even then they need backup on what they're doing is right or wrong. Deep down, we know that gay marriages and gay union is wrong, just dead wrong, but we don't say anything about it because we can't prove it because we don't believe in God...

So we're stuck at an impasse now. Like the theory of evolution, I don't expect gay marriages to be popular much longer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top