New Posts  All Forums:
 

I voted NO! - Page 3

post #41 of 74
9/6/03 at 4:49am

Can someone delete my first response

Well, AOL disconnected the first time! Sorry, I do not know who to ask. Or you can just ignore the incomplete one!! It is too early in the morning. ACKK!
Sponsored Links
post #42 of 74
9/6/03 at 5:03am
I deleted it.
post #43 of 74
9/6/03 at 5:31am
The Honolulu paper today ran a really interesting column today by a local minister. He said that he has always found it a bit odd that simply by virtue of having become a minister the state has made him their agent and allow him to file papers that are legally binding to other people. He is of the belief that we shoudl follow the example of some other countries (France was mentioned) and totally seperate legal marriage from religios ceremonies celebrating same. Get the legal stuff taken care of at the courthouse and then go to church for teh celebration with all your loved one. He also mentions in all this that he thinks churches should be more active about performing religious ceremonies for those who may not want or may be ineligible for a legal marriage. (Here he cites the senior citizen romance where they can't legally marry without losing significant income but want the blessings of their church on the union.)

I think it's a GREAT idea!
post #44 of 74
9/6/03 at 5:35am
Quote:
the shellfish thing. That is OT law, laws the jewish people had to follow to be "clean" enough to get into heaven. When Jesus died for us He fulfilled the law, we are no longer bound by that law, but can still learn by it.
This is interesting! (Given that it is not an accurate statement about the Jewish faith.) However, it is yet another religious justification of bigotry toward lesbian/gay/bi/trans people. So, the poster is saying they are not rules that have to be followed (thanks to Jesus because I do love scallops) however, I can "learn" from them. Aparently "learning" here means picking just what you want.
Quote:
I can't believe how so many got on gardenmommy's case for the simple fact that she stated her opinion....(oh well maybe I can ) Its happened to me numerous times.
NM~ I agree that we shouldn't make personal comments about someone based on their opinions & that's what Abimommy posted in to remind us. However, I think most of the posts in response to GM's & your posts have been debating the substance of the opinions & the OP, not "getting on your case" in a personal way. I'm appears to me that you are simply outnumbered on this thread by opinions different from your own.

BTW, I'm a no voter, I don't mind marriage being defined as between 2 people, instead of between a man & woman. However, I also don't mind if we want to leave the word "marriage" out of it & create "civil unions" which bestow the same legal rights as marraige. also, this is what they have in Vermont thanks to Governor Dean, I believe.
post #45 of 74
9/6/03 at 9:59am
Um,

Christians are not bound by all the Levitican laws because we do not have the same covenant with God. As the Chosen People of God they have a covenant with him that we do not. Christians are bound by different laws. Some of them are the same yes, but not all of them.

I don't want to get into those cause it would make this thread even **MORE** OT. *cough*

If the shellfish discussion keeps up I am moving this to Good Eating.
post #46 of 74
9/6/03 at 12:12pm
Yes, and a couple people have here stated this is a discussion in the Spirituality forum. Actually, if you look at the top of the page, you will see we are in Activism.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm

Conservative Christian theologians generally: Believe that the Bible was written by authors who were directly inspired by God. Thus their writings are seen as inerrant -- completely free of error as originally written.
The Bible is regarded as the actual Word of God. Thus whenever the Bible and science disagree, the former must be right.
Most interpret the Garden of Eden story in the book of Genesis as indicating the fall of humanity into sin. They view homosexual behavior as one evidence of that sin.
When they study the Bible for guidance on homosexuality, they generally look for proof texts -- passages that clearly and directly deal with the topic.

Liberal Christian theologians tend to: Interpret the Bible as having been written by authors who were intent on promoting their own religious and spiritual beliefs. The writers lived in a pre-scientific age, which treated slavery, genocide, mass murder, and the oppression of women as acceptable.
Since the scientific study of sexual orientation did not begin until circa 1950 CE, biblical authors had no awareness of the topic. When the Bible and science disagree, we have to give greater weight to the recent findings of human sexuality researchers.
Most rely heavily on the findings of human sexuality researchers to help them interpret biblical passages.
When theologians study the Bible for guidance on homosexuality, they generally look for applicable biblical themes, like those advocating justice, love, monogamy, caring, etc.


Since the two groups approach the Bible with different assumptions, and look for different content, one can expect that their conclusions will be very different. They are.
post #47 of 74
9/6/03 at 1:05pm
Quote:
Originally posted by abimommy

If the shellfish discussion keeps up I am moving this to Good Eating.
post #48 of 74
9/6/03 at 1:11pm
Quote:
Originally posted by abimommy
If the shellfish discussion keeps up I am moving this to Good Eating.
:LOL :LOL :LOL :LOL Feeling feisty?
post #49 of 74
9/6/03 at 1:22pm
Here is another valuable link to How to be True to the Bible and say "Yes" to Same-Sex Unions, by an Anglican Bishop:

http://members.aol.com/DrSwiney/bennett.html

...one of the reasons for the general wideness of the Anglican embrace is our history of avoiding a fundamentalist handling of the Bible as an inerrant record of God’s dictation to human scribes. To think of St. Paul as a "passive stenographer" for the Holy Spirit is utterly absurd. He is a creative genius -- a writer of profoundly personal and sharply controversial color. His writing reveals a steadily maturing and occasionally changing emphasis...

The Bible will always be definitive for the Church’s faith, but in the Anglican tradition Holy Scripture is open to what scholars call "hermeneutical" treatment. Hermeneutics means "informed and reasoned interpretation". In other words, the Bible is not self-authenticating. It needs to be seen in all the light that every new era of history and scholarship can provide...
post #50 of 74
9/6/03 at 3:12pm
Quote:
a couple people have here stated this is a discussion in the Spirituality forum
I thought this meant the thread was started in spirit. & moved to activism by mods~ ??
post #51 of 74
9/6/03 at 7:59pm
No, it was started in Activism. Maybe they mean it *should* be in Spirituality.

We are going to leave it here though even though I threatened to move it to the Good Eating board..I was just joking about that.
post #52 of 74
9/7/03 at 10:24am
Oddly, Nursing Mother, it seems quite few Christians and garden variety atheists do not know that Christians are not required to follow the 613 laws of the Torah. So some Xtians do quote "OT" laws against homosexuality (and eating shellfish) as being binding to all, when in fact, they aren't, per se.

OTOH, according to the Talmud, the Jewish rabbis have long ago decreed non-Jews (aka Gentiles) are only required by God to follow the 7 Noachide Laws. There are many ways to interpret these laws, as Biblical interpretation can be extremely complex, difficult and it seems no one agrees! I make no claims here to have the final answer. Sorry if this goes a little OT.

In no particular order, the Noachide Laws:

1. Idolatry is forbidden. (Crosses and icons would be out.)

2. Incestuous and adulterous relations are forbidden. (Non-married and homosexual sex would be out.)

3. Murder is forbidden.

4. Cursing the name of G-d is forbidden. (Blasphemy is included. As most Christians believe Yeshua (Jesus the Christ) is an aspect of God under the Trinity, and in the Jewish Scriptures, God declares himself the only God [in Isaiah and elsewhere], believing Yeshua is the Messiah and also [part of] God would be blasphemy, therefore would break this law. As I understand it, many Jews think Yeshua broke far too many of the Laws to qualify as Messiah.)

5. Theft is forbidden.

6. Eating the flesh of a living animal is forbidden. (Eating blood is part of this. Therefore, if a Gentile eats non-kosher meat, that would break this law. Now that I think on it, perhaps eating of raw clams and oysters would also break this law? Well, there you go!)

7. Mankind is commanded to establish courts of justice and a just social order to enforce the first six laws and enact any other useful laws or customs.

To bring this back on topic, I put these laws before you as an example of how strongly people still live their lives based on ancient laws they believe came from God. Obviously, the Noachide laws bear a strong resemblance to the infinitely more popular 10 Commandments, not to mention lists of rules from almost every world culture. Changing the US law against same sex civil unions will have a lot of resistance against it from devout Christians and Orthodox Jews alike.

edited for more clarity and no doubt boring detail
post #53 of 74
9/7/03 at 12:06pm
Quote:
6. Eating the flesh of a living animal is forbidden. (Eating blood is part of this. Therefore, if a Gentile eats non-kosher meat, that would break this law. Now that I think on it, perhaps eating of raw clams and oysters would also break this law? Well, there you go!)
Eating the flesh off of a live animal is forbidden according to the seven noahide laws- not flesh of an animal, not blood. Seeing a sheep with a juicy, muscular leg, chomping clovers in the feild and going over to it and ripping that leg off to eat it- while the animal is breathing and alive. I think you agree this would be an exesively cruel practice, but one that in some groups may have been acceptable.

There are other things that I disagree with in your telling of the seven laws, but as they are not as wholely misleading as the above I will leave them alone.

-BelovedBird
post #54 of 74
9/7/03 at 1:36pm
NM

in every thread you pop in and state something to the tune of "I can't believe that so and so is being flamed for simply stating their views."

I don't see a lot of flames here. And if her views disturb us, are we not allowed to discuss them with her? Perhaps she might sway one of us to her side of the glory hole? Who knows?
post #55 of 74
9/7/03 at 1:46pm
Offtopic momentarily...

Quote:
Originally posted by pie
...glory hole?
Glory hole. Bwahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhahaaahahah aha.
post #56 of 74
9/7/03 at 4:52pm
DaryLLL are the things in parenthesis your words?

Your explanation for #2 is incorrect. Incest is having sex with your sibling or parent and adultry is having an affair while you are married.

Fornication is having sex while you are not married.

I don't really agree with #4 either.

Some Christians (me included) use the commandment "Thou shalt not talk the name of the Lord in vain." as also "Don't do something in the name of God the he doesn't ask you to do in his name" and also "don't put words in God's mouth"

For instance "God hates X" unless God says "Ya know X? I really hate X" or "God says I must raise $50,000 or I am going to be taken up to heaven." I believe doing this is a sin, as well as saying you are talking to God when you are not and faking spiritual gifts.

I think these results of doing these things is painfully obvious to many of us.
post #57 of 74
9/7/03 at 6:21pm
most threads, maybe not every thread.

Which religions don't eat blood?

Hey, how do you eat some steak without eating any blood? I always see some blood in my dead meats when I grill them, I see some extra blood. I thought blood was the juice so how could you eat no blood?
post #58 of 74
9/7/03 at 6:35pm
There have been extensive explainations of Kosher laws offered in the Spirituality forum by our Jewish sisters. Perhaps you would like to look there for this information rather than further derailing this discussion... the topic of which is... uh... wait a minute, it'll come to me. GAY MARRIAGE!!! That's it. Whew!
post #59 of 74
9/7/03 at 6:35pm
Quote:
Originally posted by dh2Carmen


Which religions don't eat blood?

Hey, how do you eat some steak without eating any blood? I always see some blood in my dead meats when I grill them, I see some extra blood. I thought blood was the juice so how could you eat no blood?
Jews, who keep kosher, do not eat any blood. The kashering process for meat is long and a bit complicated. It consists of various washings, rinsings and salting, all done within specific time parameters. What is left after the salt draws out the blood and it is washed is juice, and not blood according to halacha (jewish law).

HTH

-BelovedBird
post #60 of 74
9/7/03 at 6:36pm
thanks "Big Bird"!!!

I got some learning to do.
New Posts  All Forums:
 
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Activism Archives