Obama/Biden versus Romney/Ryan?

Barbara!

New Member
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
1,457
Likes
0
Points
0
Something I always find interesting -- and telling -- in our political threads is how they always take a turn for the religious.

Since we're a pretty good cross-section of the public, I have to think that our politics are a whole lot more intertwined with religion than we want to believe.
Of course. Because most religious base their morality off of their religion and non-religious base their morality from themselves. And of course their morality comes into play in politics because they want their morals passed as law... It's a never ending circle.
 

RBark

Got Floof?
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
961
Likes
0
Points
16
I'm not going to try and convince someone who thinks their religion finds homosexuality a sin that they're wrong. As long as they understand that their belief stems from their religion and don't use that to try and push for laws based off that religious belief then I'm completely cool with them.

I would like to think that people who are religious would have enough respect for their religious freedom that they would fight for freedom from religion in the law.
+1

:cool:
 

RBark

Got Floof?
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
961
Likes
0
Points
16
Well... I guess we will just disagree then. The language used there tells me something different than it tells you.

"Unnatural and shameful" is pretty clear to me.

Also, i've read all your links and watched your videos. How about you return the favor? See the case from my point of view.

http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/homosex.htm
The person you linked uses the Old Testament as a basis for homosexuality being a sin. Which is irrelevant, because in which case, just about everyone in the world (and likely the author himself) is damned to hell.

So the answer to things like that is a simple "get off your high horse until you're good enough to mount it."

Simply asking for forgiveness is not enough, one must change, and strive to do so. Which, while I am most definitely not advocating you to take such an action, for as long as you are remarried, you have no basis for what you say.

So no, it's not clear to you. You're merely picking and choosing what you want to follow and believe.
 

Barbara!

New Member
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
1,457
Likes
0
Points
0
The person you linked uses the Old Testament as a basis for homosexuality being a sin. Which is irrelevant, because in which case, just about everyone in the world (and likely the author himself) is damned to hell.

So the answer to things like that is a simple "get off your high horse until you're good enough to mount it."

Simply asking for forgiveness is not enough, one must change, and strive to do so. Which, while I am most definitely not advocating you to take such an action, for as long as you are remarried, you have no basis for what you say.

So no, it's not clear to you. You're merely picking and choosing what you want to follow and believe.
Good post.
 

sparks19

I'd rather be at Disney
Joined
Jul 7, 2005
Messages
28,563
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
42
Location
Lancaster, PA
The person you linked uses the Old Testament as a basis for homosexuality being a sin. Which is irrelevant, because in which case, just about everyone in the world (and likely the author himself) is damned to hell.

So the answer to things like that is a simple "get off your high horse until you're good enough to mount it."

Simply asking for forgiveness is not enough, one must change, and strive to do so. Which, while I am most definitely not advocating you to take such an action, for as long as you are remarried, you have no basis for what you say.

So no, it's not clear to you. You're merely picking and choosing what you want to follow and believe.
But he can't DIVORCE me :) so... he's stuck with me forever.

if it came to be that we couldn't be married anymore he would still always be my very best friend
 

RBark

Got Floof?
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
961
Likes
0
Points
16
I'll just post something that was written by someone I know.

Biblically, there is nothing wrong with homosexuality anyway. It's not a concept or subject that is covered. Every verse used as evidence is taken out of context.

The most quoted verse is Leviticus 18:22, "..man lie with another man is abomination." But nobody quotes 18:21 to get the context. 21 speaks about child sacrifice and mentions somebody named Molech. Seems like a rather odd lead-in to condemn homosexuality, huh? However, if you know the actual history here, Molech was a Canaanite god that many of the Israelites kept going back to worship.

His fertility ritual included a parent sacrificing one of their children, and then having ritual sex with a temple prostitute. Since many of these shrine prostitutes were men, the father would have anal sex with them. Indeed, the word 'abomination' used there is the Hebrew tow`ebah, which means a detestable thing, but has heavy implications of idolatry. It doesn't make sense to say that homosexuality is idolatry, but it does to say taking part in a fertility ritual to worship Molech is idolatry.

Another popular verse is Romans 1, where it mentions that man had become so wicked that God gave the people over to depravity, to where they abandoned their natural desires for unnatural ones. Also, there is the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. I mention these both because they are actually related.

Take Romans in context... here Paul is giving the Romans a history lesson, of how mankind back in the beginning turned against God and worshiped other spirits and became depraved. This is going all the way back to when God first turning against mankind with the great flood during Noah's time. Now go back and read Genesis 6 to see what lead up to the flood. It speaks of mankind's wickedness, but it specifically mentions something else... that the "Sons of God" lusted after the "daughters of men." This is referring to angels procreating with humans, creating the race of giants, the half-angelic/demonic race known as the Nephilim.

Now let's look at the story of Lot's guests while he was staying in Sodom, used to say that Sodom's sin was homosexuality. Two messengers from God come to visit Lot to deliver a warning. While there, some men outside demand that Lot turn these men over to them so they can have sex with them. Lot refuses, because it is a big taboo in Hebrew culture to dishonor your guests, so he gives the mob his daughters to rape instead (what a great dad!) Those who are anti-gay say that the men wanted to have sex with Lot's male guests therefore they were gay, but that doesn't make sense because they happily raped his daughters instead. Others try to defend homosexuality and say the issue was that they wanted to rape somebody. The real truth, however, is that Lot's guests were ANGELS. God doesn't really care about homosexuality (or sadly, rape for that matter, a few shekels will cover that) but he does get really pissed when humans have sex with angels. Pissed enough to flood the entire world.

Now, is this a fluke that I'm making a huge leap to connect, or is there some other evidence to show that I'm correct in asserting that this is the actual context, and both these are linked? Well, if you look at the apocryphal book known as the Testament of Naphtali, it says:

"25 The Gentiles went astray, and forsook the Lord, and charged their order, and obeyed stocks and stones, spirits of deceit.

26 But ye shall not be so, my children, recognizing in the firmament, in the earth, and in the sea, and in all created things, the Lord who made all things, that ye become not as Sodom, which changed the order of nature.

27 In like manner the Watchers also changed the order of their nature, whom the Lord cursed at the flood, on whose account He made the earth without inhabitants and fruitless."

Again, we have the same language Paul used in Romans 1, how mankind turned against God and worshiped spirits and idols. Then it uses the same language of 'changing the order of nature', and it specifically links the events of Sodom and the flood. 'Watchers' here refers to angels. Both men and angels changed the natural order by lusting after each other. So, this isn't a modern interpretation of linking these events, but rather something that made sense to the people back when Romans was written.

So, to recap:

1) God hates idolatry. This is one of the most common themes in the Bible.

2) God also apparently hates interspecies sex between men and angelic beings.
Maybe we need a godhatesnephilim.com?
Diablo 3 is an abomination! (Not specifically because of the demon stuff, because of the main character being a halfbreed!)

3) God doesn't seem to care about homosexuality (or masturbation for that matter) enough to really write about either one. Knock yourselves out!
Oh, and later...

I did mention the hospitality aspect, but the Naphtali text does link the Nephilim issue to Sodom, and the guests were angels, so I think it fits.

Still, your main point is right when it comes to Lot's character. The idea of handing over your daughters actually being the moral thing to do, or that passing on the family line at any cost - including incest - is considering the best choice, or that even having to worry about sexing an angel... all of these come from a culture and a morality that are so very far removed from out modern culture.

There are some timeless lessons in the Bible that are still great, but trying to use every single part as a guide for living today is just insane.
 
Last edited:

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
RBARK,

I have to admit, that is some stuff I have not seen before. You are making me do some homework. :) I promise to do my best to offer a thoughtful responce to it.

I appreciate the challenging stuff. Is there a link to the entire work you posted parts of?
 

RBark

Got Floof?
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
961
Likes
0
Points
16
That is the entire work, so to speak. This person is highly educated in such matters, and he posted those as a response. So it's not a part of a whole, but rather, they are both responses to people who were quoting short verses as proof.

EDIT: I should note, I do have permission to share her comments posted above, but she would very much rather stay out of this issue. She did not respond because she wanted to involve herself in the subject of homosexuality being OK or not.

However, despite the harshness of what she wrote, and how it portrays the Bible in a poor light, she is a believer in God and while I do not speak for her, my impression has always been that she is more concerned about the message, not the details.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
The person you linked uses the Old Testament as a basis for homosexuality being a sin. Which is irrelevant, because in which case, just about everyone in the world (and likely the author himself) is damned to hell.

So the answer to things like that is a simple "get off your high horse until you're good enough to mount it."

Simply asking for forgiveness is not enough, one must change, and strive to do so. Which, while I am most definitely not advocating you to take such an action, for as long as you are remarried, you have no basis for what you say.

So no, it's not clear to you. You're merely picking and choosing what you want to follow and believe.
So this is what it feels like? (Inside joke)

Did you miss or ignore the section about The New Testament confirming the teachings of the old?

I agree that just simply asking for forgivness is not enough. I have changed, because of Christ's work on the cross. A new covenant came with his death and resurrection. Something, by His grace, I strive to be worthy of. I'm not perfect.

My first marriage was an act of rebellion, I know that now. MANY obstacles were placed in my way that I should have heeded. But I didn't. I suffered for it. I came back to Christ, admitted I needed salvation and asked to be forgiven. Because of His grace, I was. Now I move forward, tying my best to live the way He shows us.

Talking down to people never wins anybody over to your side. Lord KNOWS I learned that lesson. LOL
 

RBark

Got Floof?
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
961
Likes
0
Points
16
So this is what it feels like? (Inside joke)

Did you miss or ignore the section about The New Testament confirming the teachings of the old?

I agree that just simply asking for forgivness is not enough. I have changed, because of Christ's work on the cross. A new covenant came with his death and resurrection. Something, by His grace, I strive to be worthy of. I'm not perfect.

My first marriage was an act of rebellion, I know that now. MANY obstacles were placed in my way that I should have heeded. But I didn't. I suffered for it. I came back to Christ, admitted I needed salvation and asked to be forgiven. Because of His grace, I was. Now I move forward, tying my best to live the way He shows us.

Talking down to people never wins anybody over to your side. Lord KNOWS I learned that lesson. LOL
No, I know that many do believe that the New Testament says that all the rules in the Old Testament applies. Many do not, as well, but that is an entirely another debate.

My point was, and is, that if one is going to cite the Old Testament as a basis that homosexuality is a sin (there are a LOT of compelling arguments that even the Old Testament doesn't particularly care about homosexuality, but that is besides the point here.)

Anyway, if it is the basis for homosexuality being a sin, then you must first explain all the other sins you are committing without remorse. See the picture Fran posted earlier in the thread.


In regards to this;

My first marriage was an act of rebellion, I know that now. MANY obstacles were placed in my way that I should have heeded. But I didn't. I suffered for it. I came back to Christ, admitted I needed salvation and asked to be forgiven. Because of His grace, I was. Now I move forward, tying my best to live the way He shows us.
That's all fine and good, however how is that any different than a person saying, with just one word replaced;

My homosexuality was an act of rebellion, I know that now. MANY obstacles were placed in my way that I should have heeded. But I didn't. I suffered for it. I came back to Christ, admitted I needed salvation and asked to be forgiven. Because of His grace, I was. Now I move forward, tying my best to live the way He shows us.
How, then, would that be any different? In both cases, you and the homosexual person are continuing your sin, even if it was forgiven.

Talking down to people never wins anybody over to your side. Lord KNOWS I learned that lesson. LOL
And this quote here, is an even more strange thing to say from where you are standing. You are speaking here, condemning a large group of people (possibly myself included, depending on how my relationship with my SO fits in) to eternal suffering in Hell, in the name of God... and you're concerned whether I am talking down to you?

I mean, that's kind of really backwards logic. Every single post you've made here is the very definition of talking down to people. It is difficult for me to understand how you would not see that, if you're so concerned with treating people respectably while pondering their eternal suffering.
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
Does one have to be religious to be anti abortion? Do I have to be religious to be against .gov sponsored marriage, straight or homosexual?
Im against both and I may be a believer but I am not religious.
Romney is going to win AK so I still feel comfortable voting third party.

I believe Romney will be more friendly to make energy cheaper instead of more expensive. High cost of energy hinders progress.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
RBARK - I want to start by, again, thanking you for this challenge. Its been very good for me.

Anyway, if it is the basis for homosexuality being a sin, then you must first explain all the other sins you are committing without remorse. See the picture Fran posted earlier in the thread.
The Old Testament is not the only reason for my beliefs on the subject. The Mosaic law was given to the Jews. As I understand it, to show them how to live among pagans, atone for their sins and how to live in ways pleasing to God. Then came Christ, His resurrection and a New Covenant. As such, we are no longer bound to the Mosaic Law. (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15) This does not mean that the OT law is not good advice.

So, yes... Yes my first 'marriage' was a HUGE sin and mistake. We could analyze Gods definition of marriage and come to the conclusion that my first marriage was not real because it had nothing to do with what God commands marriage to be. Somehow I don't think that would do much good here. LOL

But to answer your question here... Thank God for His grace. I'm not sure what else I can say. Because of my real marriage, (and a ton of other reasons) one that we do our best to live the way He shows us is a big reason why my faith was renewed. If you knew the story about how we met and can not see Gods hand in it, you do not want to.


God's Grace and a heart willing to accept it. The End.

And this quote here, is an even more strange thing to say from where you are standing. You are speaking here, condemning a large group of people (possibly myself included, depending on how my relationship with my SO fits in) to eternal suffering in Hell, in the name of God... and you're concerned whether I am talking down to you?

I mean, that's kind of really backwards logic. Every single post you've made here is the very definition of talking down to people. It is difficult for me to understand how you would not see that, if you're so concerned with treating people respectably while pondering their eternal suffering.

Now this is quite a stretch and one that you are purposely using to put me on the defensive. (I took debate in school too, I just was not very good at it. LOL) I am NOT damning you to hell. I have no such power. That is a matter for you and God. I have nothing to do with it.

I am simply sharing what I believe. I've got no power (or desire) to force anything on you. All I have is my vote, just like you.
 

RBark

Got Floof?
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
961
Likes
0
Points
16
I never said you were personally damning anyone to hell.

It is simply a consideration of what you are saying. For instance, the main theme of the Bible is to love your neighbor and be a decent person, regardless of who the other is. To lead by example, not through fear and control.

So here in this thread you were presented a highly educated and thorough, convincing argument that being in a loving homosexual relationship is not a sin. At this point there is a choice someone can make, many of them. One of which is conceding that the Bible is not as simple as you thought, and take the opportunity to do more research to revise your opinion.

Instead, here, you dug in your heels, called my post a "challenge," and decided to research more to give my post a fitting response. But what is the challenge I presented? I did not challenge the Bible because it is what it is. The only thing I challenged, if one could call it that, is your belief that homosexuality is a sin. The key words here being *your belief* not the Bible's belief.

So your basic response to evidence that homosexuality is not a sin, and therefore a happy thing that means millions of gay people who are christian can breathe easier in their lives and their belief in their relationship with God... is to start digging for evidence to the contrary that would **** them to hell, again not by you personally, but in the name of God.

You say I am putting you on the defensive. I am not. I am presenting the possibility that you need to revise how you are approaching this subject. You are putting what you believe, and the desire for it to be the correct belief, above the truth.

I am not particularly Christian. I only say that in the sense that I do not worship any one thing in particular. I am spiritual, however. I am more concerned with the whole aspect of being a good and honest person than I am in trying to use my vote to control other people's choices. The choice / nonchoice I made to be with my SO is between myself and whatever higher being is out there. It is not between you and I. Just as I, and others do not infringe on your marriage, I expect the same respect back.
 
M

MyHorseMyRules

Guest
I think my question got missed, so I'm going to ask again. And again, I'm not trying to be snarky or put you on the defensive here. I'm genuinely trying to understand.

In regards to homosexuality, you think that they should seek God's forgiveness and do their best not to continue sinning. So what are you saying they should do? Leave the person they love and try to form a heterosexual relationship? Abstain from sex altogether?

And if that's the case, what about your own marriage? According to the bible, you're both committing adultery because you were married previously. And by staying together, you would continue to commit adultery. I obviously don't think you should leave your wife... lol I'm just trying to understand your reasoning.
 

Fran101

Resident fainting goat
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
12,546
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Boston
I never said you were personally damning anyone to hell.

It is simply a consideration of what you are saying. For instance, the main theme of the Bible is to love your neighbor and be a decent person, regardless of who the other is. To lead by example, not through fear and control.

So here in this thread you were presented a highly educated and thorough, convincing argument that being in a loving homosexual relationship is not a sin. At this point there is a choice someone can make, many of them. One of which is conceding that the Bible is not as simple as you thought, and take the opportunity to do more research to revise your opinion.

Instead, here, you dug in your heels, called my post a "challenge," and decided to research more to give my post a fitting response. But what is the challenge I presented? I did not challenge the Bible because it is what it is. The only thing I challenged, if one could call it that, is your belief that homosexuality is a sin. The key words here being *your belief* not the Bible's belief.

So your basic response to evidence that homosexuality is not a sin, and therefore a happy thing that means millions of gay people who are christian can breathe easier in their lives and their belief in their relationship with God... is to start digging for evidence to the contrary that would **** them to hell, again not by you personally, but in the name of God.

You say I am putting you on the defensive. I am not. I am presenting the possibility that you need to revise how you are approaching this subject. You are putting what you believe, and the desire for it to be the correct belief, above the truth.

I am not particularly Christian. I only say that in the sense that I do not worship any one thing in particular. I am spiritual, however. I am more concerned with the whole aspect of being a good and honest person than I am in trying to use my vote to control other people's choices. The choice / nonchoice I made to be with my SO is between myself and whatever higher being is out there. It is not between you and I. Just as I, and others do not infringe on your marriage, I expect the same respect back.
I just really agree with all of this. Actually, with all your posts on this topic in general.

I had this long post written out but at this point, what's the point. People will believe what they would like to believe and cherry pick what suits them. I just wish, to quote this, that people would use their votes and lead by example and kindess, not fear and control.
Not to agree with something or believe in it is one thing.. I don't care what people believe, your religion can believe that the world is controlled by elves and that nobody should chew gum on tuesdays and that people shouldn't marry before age 35 for all I care.. but to try vote to stop gay people from getting married is not religious freedom, it's religious oppression.

separation of church and state.

As for the tradition of marriage.

Things change. People fight it. Freak out. Religion gets tossed in where it doesn't belong.. but it usually changes for the better.
 

JacksonsMom

Active Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
8,694
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Maryland
I haven't totally caught up in this thread but read over the past few pages and found it very interesting. I'm learning a lot, so plan to read more.

I consider myself mostly conservative. However I'm not religious at all. I'm pretty much opposite. I do believe in a God, but I really have no special belief "system" nor do I consider myself to belong to any sector of Christianity. I guess I'm more spiritual than anything.

I do not believe in abortion, but do think certain circumstances should be allowed. However if I had to choose a yes or no answer I would choose no I don't like or support abortion. I don't judge people who have had them, and it's... whatever. But I personally am against it mostly.

However I do support gay marriage. I do not think religious-based reasons for being against it validate anything to me. Separation of church and state and all. I just don't think it's a valid reason/excuse to not allow them to get married. For many of the reasons already listed... I don't personally take the Bible literally. I don't think/believe we should base our entire life choices off of a book that was written in a very very very different time. And to be honest... I've personally seen sooo many marriages crumble around me in my short 22 years that I've lost a lot of hope and faith in traditional marriage anyways, why not the gay people be miserable too? :rolleyes: Just kidding. But seriously, just don't see the big issue.

While I think it's important, I don't think it should be a MAIN issue in regards to who you're voting for. I think there are so many other important factors to take in and I think often a lot of people just look at social issues, which is great and all... but there is sooo much more to running this country than deciding on gay marriage! I'm not taking away the importance from it, and obviously it's important to those directly involved, but I'm just saying... we need to get this country out of debt, and just... so many other things!

And these debates have done nothing but show me that the people running our country seemingly have no idea what they're doing. Sorry, but it's how I feel. I went in pretty much completely unbiased -- I didn't like either candidates, and to be honest, they're both still not MY personal picks. But I cannot see how Obama and Biden have been running this country for the last 4 years. And I'm pretty sure I now know who my vote is going to, and it's actually shocking me! It's sooo not even Democrat vs. Republican for me. It's who I think can better run this country, and I'm now sure Obama is not it.

And I don't particularly like extremists on either side. I think a lot of people often sound (not in this thread that I've seen) very closed-minded on both sides and it drives me nuts. The people who "can't even watch Obama" or "he's not MY president..." and things of the sort. I had a conversation with a women a bit older at my workplace the other day who is a democrat and all she could come up with is "well I already know I won't vote for Romney because he's Mormon." And gave me all this stuff about how Mormons are all close minded and shun all other people/religions/etc. Woah, way to stereotype much. Yet if I would have said to her "Well I'm not voting for Obama because he's part black"... I'm sure THAT wouldn't have gone over well. I could honestly care less about the president's religion or whatever. As long as they are doing a good job at running this country.
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
Dropping this off here as well.

During this evening’s vice presidential debate, Vice President Joe Biden stated that Ryan, as a member of Congress, had voted for a blank check for two wars.

But, of course, Joe Biden, as a member of Senate, voted for both the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan. Biden has been lying fluently throughout this debate; that was merely the most obvious example.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...campaign=Feed:+BigGovernment+(Big+Government)
 

Fran101

Resident fainting goat
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
12,546
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Boston
Oh and speaking of I just got my voter registration thing today.

This will be my first time voting :) pretty exciting!
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top