Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Hate the sin but love the person...except when voting?
ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 348 of 391 (597587)
12-22-2010 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 346 by bluescat48
12-22-2010 3:16 PM


Re: No one can give a reason
bluescat writes:
Might I ask whatsoever does this have to do with hating the sin but loving the person.
It seems pretty obvious I must have been responding to a comment Crashfrog made in an earlier post. And what it has to do with the thread is establishing the fact that homosexuality is actually listed as a sin in the bible which makes it relevant to the premise.
IC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 346 by bluescat48, posted 12-22-2010 3:16 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 349 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 3:52 PM ICdesign has replied
 Message 350 by Coragyps, posted 12-22-2010 3:55 PM ICdesign has not replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 352 of 391 (597595)
12-22-2010 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 349 by jar
12-22-2010 3:52 PM


Re: marriage not sin is the topic
jar writes:
What valid reason can you provide for denying the legal contract known as marriage to a subset of US citizens?
My valid reason is that homosexuality is a perversion. That is my opinion. We as a society should not validate perverted behavior or give benefits to this lifestyle. Many laws revolve around decency. This is why you are not allowed to run through the mall naked or have sex with children under 18. This is also why bestiality is outlawed. We as a society need guidelines defined by decency and (in my opinion) homosexuality crosses that line.
I don't see animals living as homosexuals. It is unnatural.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 3:52 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 353 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 4:42 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 354 by Theodoric, posted 12-22-2010 4:42 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 355 by Taq, posted 12-22-2010 4:46 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 356 by onifre, posted 12-22-2010 4:52 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 357 by Coragyps, posted 12-22-2010 5:04 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 358 by Granny Magda, posted 12-22-2010 5:07 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 361 by bluescat48, posted 12-22-2010 5:25 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 374 by Theodoric, posted 12-22-2010 7:38 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 378 by frako, posted 12-22-2010 7:58 PM ICdesign has replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 363 of 391 (597611)
12-22-2010 6:11 PM


I don't trust even for one second this horsecrap about homosexual animals. A picture of a couple birds with ruffled feathers doesn't prove a single thing. I noticed the article said this type of behavior wasn't even acknowledged before the 90s. This is a major red flag all by its self for me.
You go right ahead and believe it but I know the real explanation is something other than homosexual animals.
Besides all that I have had special bonds that are unexplainable with other men that had nothing to do whatsoever with a sexual connection. There are lots of different explanations for lots of different things going on around this planet.
I stand behind everything I said in my previous post,
IC

Replies to this message:
 Message 364 by crashfrog, posted 12-22-2010 6:20 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 365 by Coragyps, posted 12-22-2010 6:21 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 366 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 6:23 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 368 by Omnivorous, posted 12-22-2010 6:30 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 370 by ringo, posted 12-22-2010 6:34 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 371 by frako, posted 12-22-2010 6:51 PM ICdesign has replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 372 of 391 (597625)
12-22-2010 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 360 by crashfrog
12-22-2010 5:21 PM


Re: No one can give a reason
crashfrog writes:
Only if you interpret the Bible as saying no one will go to Heaven. Obviously, it doesn't mean that, so clearly it doesn't mean that gay men and women are barred from Heaven.
You should quit trying to act like you understand the bible because you obviously don't have the slightest clue how to interpret scripture. I hear you flapping your lips all over the place about what the bible doesn't mean but never explaining what it does mean.
Homosexual acts are not named specifically;
show me where I said acts were named
everybody realizes those attributions are just legends. Nobody knows who actually wrote the epistles.
You are 100% wrong. ...Oh that's right. Crashfrog said it so that makes it true. I forgot that principle.
Indeed. Yet sinners go to Heaven, do they not?
Or are you literally saying that absolutely no one goes to Heaven? Surely that's not the case?
I thought you understood the bible? The bible clearly states no sinner will enter heaven yet people do go to heaven, so how can that be?
Homosexual acts are not named specifically; they're given the same treatment as liars, as fornicators,...... In other words - sins, but not specifically disqualifying for Heaven.
Show me where it says these sins are not specifically disqualifying for heaven
Being rich, on the other hand, and exploiting the downtrodden and oppressed? Specifically barred from Heaven.
Look at the account of the rich man in Mark 10:21-27.....They were even more astonished and said to him "then who can be saved?" ..."With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible."
Does it sound like Jesus is saying rich people are barred from heaven to you?
I'm not having it both ways. Like I said:
No one can earn entry into the kingdom of God, IC. You can only disqualify yourself from the grace of Christ by not being Christlike.
Yes this is having it both ways. You said not being Christlike will disqualify you. How is that not earning?
You make Clinton look like an honest man.
IC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 360 by crashfrog, posted 12-22-2010 5:21 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 377 by Theodoric, posted 12-22-2010 7:54 PM ICdesign has not replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 373 of 391 (597628)
12-22-2010 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 371 by frako
12-22-2010 6:51 PM


I have a picture of a moose humping a buffalo statue that I can't figure how to transfer to here.
Would that be statuetory rape or a moosedemeanor?
I have dogs hump my leg all the time. Is that humanallity?
Animals have instinct driven impulses that they aren't sure how to express when the urges are powerful. To associate this drive with human homosexuality is a mistake in my opinion.
Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by frako, posted 12-22-2010 6:51 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 7:43 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 376 by frako, posted 12-22-2010 7:50 PM ICdesign has not replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 380 of 391 (597638)
12-22-2010 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 378 by frako
12-22-2010 7:58 PM


Re: marriage not sin is the topic
Definition: perversion (from websters dictionary)
Noun
2. An aberrant sexual practice;.
3. The action of perverting something (turning it to a wrong use); "it was a perversion of justice".
4. The act of perverting, or the state of being perverted; a turning from truth or right; a diverting from the true intent or object; a change to something worse; a turning or applying to a wrong end or use
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
franko writes:
So "interacial" marriges are also "perverted" and should not be allowed
Some people have a thing for "little people" they should not marry them because it is perverted only people of the same hight should marry.
All the people who marry young husbands or wives while they are old are also perverted and should not be allowed to marry?
How are any of these things perverted franko?
why all the fuss about the pedophile priests there is nothing about pedophilia being perverted in the bible.
Oh really? Try reading the warning Jesus gave in Matthew 18:6...Whoever causes one of these little ones...to stumble, it would be better for him if a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea".
Do you think molesting a child might cause a child to stumble?
Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 378 by frako, posted 12-22-2010 7:58 PM frako has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 381 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 8:35 PM ICdesign has replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 382 of 391 (597644)
12-22-2010 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 381 by jar
12-22-2010 8:35 PM


Re: marriage not sin is the topic
jar writes:
Well, according to the Bible knocking up little (likely maybe 12 years old) virgins is okay. Mary, Mary...
I can't help but wonder if God will let me sit on the front row with a party favor when your turn in front of the throne comes up...
...oh, in case you haven't noticed after for times now, I don't care what you think about the law.
Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.
Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 8:35 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 383 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 9:22 PM ICdesign has not replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 4828 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 387 of 391 (597674)
12-23-2010 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by Dogmafood
12-23-2010 8:38 AM


Re: "I never engaged in this kind of thing before..."
It has been shown that being contra gay marriage is neither hating the sin nor loving the sinner.
I disagree. I think it has been clearly shown I can be against gay marriage without hating a single person. I further think it has been clearly shown that the "Golden Rule" cannot apply in the voting booth.
I do agree this subject is way past done. I apologize for straying so far off the OP path.
May I sincerely wish each and every one of you a very Merry Christmas !!!
ICdesign
Edited by ICdesign, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Dogmafood, posted 12-23-2010 8:38 AM Dogmafood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 388 by Theodoric, posted 12-23-2010 9:28 AM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 389 by Dogmafood, posted 12-23-2010 4:25 PM ICdesign has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024