Hate the sin but love the person...except when voting?

I know, not another gay topic! That's sooo gay!But the off-topic discussion between Taz and ICDESIGN in the No webpage found at provided URL: Deconversion thread gave me a chance to reflect on the Christian hypocrisy of "Hate the sin but love the person."Here's the exchange for those who haven't read it. From this I gather that, if a christian was to judge another person and hate them in the process for the lifestyle that he/she may choose to live, then it is the christian who is the sinner.Ok, I got that so far.Taz then asks: To which ICDESIGN responds: And here's where I see the hypocrisy.I believe that voting to stop homosexuals from getting married is NOT hating the sin, but in fact hating the "sinner." The denial of marriage ONLY affects the lives of those who want to get married. So by denying that right to someone, you are taking it out on the "sinner."In fact, the ONLY way to hate the sin is really by just personally hating the sin. Any action taken shifts the hate onto the person it affects.Taz makes this point: The jist of which I feel (Taz you can correct me if I'm wrong) is that, even though we may hate some one's ideology (or lifestyle), we would not vote against them living a life and enjoying the freedoms awarded to everyone else.ICDESIGN should agree with this since he/she did say: "I would just like to say that any Christian who hates another person because of their lifestyle is wrong and walking in sin."So, to conclude this post, either ICDESIGN is him/herself commiting a sin by infringing on a gay persons right to living a life with the same freedom awarded to everyone else...-OR-ICDESIGN is a hypocrite who feels that only some people who sin should be loved and allowed to live and enjoy the freedom awarded to everyone else.Opinions, anyone...?- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

---

"I am sure all of your friends are charmed by your flavored words, but they hardly are of any use in a discussion among gentlemen. ~ JBR

Yeah, off and on. I'm actually on a plane now heading to Atlanta for a weekend shows, if anyhone is in that area message me. This plane wifi is pretty fucking cool. Well my premise was that the denial of marriage affected only those who wanted to get married.But sure, allowing them to get married affects society, but on that point who gives a shit? Everything affects society, that doesn't stop us from doing it.I just meant denying them only affects them. Wouldn't the non-bias thing be to be against ALL marriage? Why only gay marriage?- Oni

No it doesn't. I know what you're saying you're just wrong in saying it. Denial of marriage leaves things as is, it only affects those who can't get married. Denying them marriage is business as usual, no change positive or negatively. Nothing happened. Right, the society of gay people affected by it. And only them. Everyone else is unaffected since nothing happened. So your hypothetical involves people who right now are furious at the high insurance prices from all the hetero's married, and the addition of gays is just too much to handle? Really? Ok...I'll have to accept it, even though it is completely bogus.- Oni

Always, nigga. This is true.There could be some person who is against gay marriage simply because they want insurance prices to stay high. And while very very unlikely, it does get around my absolute statement.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

That depends where you're talking about. Marriage is different throughout the world. But fundamentally, it is the union of two people.If that helps clarify.- Oni

Also very true. That's why I called his argument bogus.But then again, I didn't foresee those minuscule loopholes, so I think my overall point still reflex the majority.Which is all we can hope for.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

...and that's where your entire point falls apart.This is about "marriage," the beahvior you find offensive in this case would have to be marriage. No one is asking you whether gay people should continue to act in a gay manner. You are simply being asked whether they can marry. What you disagree with is two people of the same sex being sexually active with one another. Marriage of these two people should not involve their sex life though. So your point continues to be misapplied. The fact that you didn't use girls shows that you are just being homophobic. Scared of gay dudes. On their behalf I'll say, you're probably not someone they are into. So loosen your sphincter. If by normal behavior you mean, two people who love each other want to get married, then you are voting against that. Remember, this is not a vote about whether or not you approve of gay sex. You don't get it, we already approve of marriage. It has nothing to do with being gay, more so, it has to do with two people of the same sex getting married.Having gay sex is not what we are voting on, that is legal whether you like it or not. But two people of the same sex forming a union IS what the vote is about. So that is the question, "Do you think two people of the same sex should get married?" If not, why not?And again, like CS made the mistake of confusing it, denying them that right ONLY hurts thems. It is not a strike against gay sex. That will continue regardless of whether they are allowed to get married.So it is ONLY hurting the sinner.- Oni

Doesn't it happen naturally in nature? We're not genetically creating gay people. They are a by-product of biological reproduction, just like hetero's , bi's, and everything else on down the line. They're human, what's so abnormal about them?- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

That's exactly the point of the thread, and thanks for pointing it out again, jar.It seems like those who are against gay marriage are really just against homosexual behavior.Which, sorry to say, can't be stoppped by just voting "No" on same sex marriage. - Oni

No, I'm describing humans born naturally from a male and female. Yes, I got that but I don't find that to be correct. "Normality" is anything naturally created by nature.Your worldview or my worldview become irrelevant, as they should, because nature trumps our individual ideologies. In this sense, there are no true abnormalities, just by-products of a not-so-perfect reproduction process where each individual is normal (as in, human) yet unique at the same time.By excluding our individual worldview/s, we make it fair for everyone to have equal rights. And by denying any one specific group rights on the basis of YOUR worldview, you show your prejudice on that group. Something that I pointed out in the OP was not Christian-like. And according to your Bible, it too is a sin.So you are commiting a sin by judging, and you are ONLY hurting the sinner when denying them equal rights.- Oni

Whether there is a god or not, organisms reproduce naturally, yes?And the by-product of the reproduction process is a naturally born organism, yes?Their presense on Earth is natural, yes?The only thing unnatural here is their behavior, in your opinion obviously. But they themselves, the human being, is natural, yes? You have not addressed the point in any case.Even if you find the sexual behavior of a few humans abnormal, when you vote against these people getting married, it doesn't affect their behavior. They will continue regardless of your vote.The ONLY one affected when you deny rights, is the person, the sinner. And that is hating the sinner and not the sin. That is acting to hurt the sinner and not to act against the sin.It continues to expose the Christian hypocrisy.- Oni

Again, the question is not, "Do you think people of the same sex should have sex with one another?"Sexual perversions exist just the same in the hetero community, but what happens in the bedroom between two concenting adults is not in question here. That is, as always, left private. Do you see any animals using Viagra or penis pumps? Have you ever seen animals artificially inseminate themselves?Yet straight couples do this all the time. It is unnatural. But would you deny a man the right to marry a woman because he needs the help of Viagra or a penis pump?Would you deny a couple the right to marry because they need artificial insemination?Of course you wouldn't, and we don't deny them the right to marry. Even though what they are doing is completely unnatural.Just be honest and say you personally find it disgusting and don't want to see it. It is clear you are a hypocrite, at least be honest about it.- Oni