Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

[LuLu Ford]

Brian_G wrote:

The majority is wrong; changing the definition of marriage harms everyone.

I helps same-sex families and couples.

You lied Brian.

[NorCal Native]

Brian_G wrote:

The majority is wrong; changing the definition of marriage harms everyone.

Sorry Brian, but it doesn't harm everyone......just people like you and even then, it doesn't harm you......you just don't like it!!!

And now, you sound just like Brian Brown, Tony Perkins and the other anti-gay bigots......whining about how they lost!!!

[Mona Lott]

Brian_G wrote:

The majority is wrong; changing the definition of marriage harms everyone.

You have FAILED to prove your case, Brian. Probably because you have no evidence.

[iamcuriousnow]

Quest wrote:

<quoted text>
Why does anyone have to carry anyone else over a threshold? And, who is required to have "jitters", or not have them?
Are there rules like that for straight couples? Who enforces them? The Marriage Police?

because a marriage(union between male and female) the groom(the male) carries the bride(the female) across the threshold and then the groom(the male) wants to have sex with the bride(the female) and the groom(the male)gets all nervous...that's the wedding night jitters.

[WasteWater]

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
You have FAILED to prove your case, Brian. Probably because you have no evidence.

Nothing new about that. The Prop 8 plaintiffs also lacked evidence.

[DaveinMass]

iamcuriousnow wrote:

because a marriage(union between male and female) the groom(the male) carries the bride(the female) across the threshold and then the groom(the male) wants to have sex with the bride(the female) and the groom(the male)gets all nervous...that's the wedding night jitters.

Which state/jurisdiction has those rules built into its marriage laws? Never heard of any of those as being required.

[NorCal Native]

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
Nothing new about that. The Prop 8 plaintiffs also lacked evidence.

You mean the Prop 8 proponents, right? The Plaintiffs were represented by Olson and Boies:-)

[WasteWater]

NorCal Native wrote:

<quoted text>
You mean the Prop 8 proponents, right? The Plaintiffs were represented by Olson and Boies:-)

Sorry. Of course. Ooops At least someone reads my posts.

Kudos.

[soapmann]

youtube.com/watch... ……… FM I doubt that Black Churchs will do such,,,,Gay isnt a big important issue

[NoQ]

NoQ wrote:

<quoted text>
According to you fking Fa$$ots, everyone but HO:MOS are trolls. You Fa$$ots are ASSTROLLS.

WTF?

U R a babbling idiot

[NorCal Native]

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry. Of course. Ooops At least someone reads my posts.
Kudos.

Isn't it good to know that our posts get read......lol!!!

I knew what ya meant....but these other idiots might get the wrong idea.......lol!!!

[Inquiring Mind]

Why not simply call such a church that doesn't really care about what its holy book says about anything about is a law unto itself what it reallly is? A ridiclous travesty.

[Inquiring Mind]

....and is a law unto itself...

[nhjeff]

Why not call a mind incapable of thinking for itself what it really is: a travesty.

[Quest]

iamcuriousnow wrote:

<quoted text>
because a marriage(union between male and female) the groom(the male) carries the bride(the female) across the threshold and then the groom(the male) wants to have sex with the bride(the female) and the groom(the male)gets all nervous...that's the wedding night jitters.

How odd. I've never heard of the "bride carrying" wedding requirement. What states have laws governing that?

And, since most brides and grooms have been having sex long before the wedding, I wonder why those jitters are required.

You have some strange ideas, or perhaps just immature ones.

I'm thinking perhaps you are a bit to young to understand how weddings work, true?

[Quest]

Inquiring Mind wrote:

Why not simply call such a church that doesn't really care about what its holy book says about anything about is a law unto itself what it reallly is? A ridiclous travesty.

All Christian churches value the Bible. But who gets to decide which verses are cherry-picked or ignored by any given denomination? You?

What is your level of Biblical education and scholarship, for you to have the ability to decide the focus and beliefs of ALL Christian denominations?

[Brainiac2]

If what a holy book or relgion says about a certain behavior is unnacceptable to us, it makes far more sense for us to rejecct to

1. write our own holy book,

2. join another religion,

3. or invent our own

than to strive might and main to change it by trying to force our moral preferences on it.

IMHO

[Brainiac2]

If what a holy book or relgion says about a certain behavior is unnacceptable to us, it makes far more sense for us to reject it by

1. writing our own holy book,

2. joining another religion,

3. or inventing our own religion

than to fanatically strive might and main to change it by trying to force our moral preferences on it.

IMHO

[Not Yet Equal]

Brainiac2 wrote:

If what a holy book or relgion says about a certain behavior is unnacceptable to us, it makes far more sense for us to reject it by
1. writing our own holy book,
2. joining another religion,
3. or inventing our own religion
than to fanatically strive might and main to change it by trying to force our moral preferences on it.
IMHO

While some take those options, others have changed the translations and interpretations of the bible from early on and throughout history. The modern English translation includes the prejudices of the translators:

"The primarily sexual meaning of the word sodomia for Christians did not evolve before the 6th century AD. Roman Emperor Justinian I, in his novels no. 77 (dating 538) and no. 141 (dating 559) amended to his Corpus iuris civilis, and declared that Sodom's sin had been specifically same-sex activities and desire for them. He also linked "famines, earthquakes, and pestilences" upon cities as being due to "such crimes", during a time of recent earthquakes and other disasters." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy

"Jesus and five Old Testament prophets all speak of the sins that led to the destruction of Sodom -- and not one of them mentions homosexuality.

Alleged references to homosexuality in I Corinthians and I Timothy are the inventions of anti-gay translators. They are not in the original Greek texts." (Rev. Dr. Mel White)

"Several books already exist attempting to demonstrate that the Christian Bible does not, in fact, condemn consenting-adult homosexuality. But God is Not a Homophobe has a unique perspective in that the author has a lifetime of experience in pastoring hard-core fundamentalist churches. His former bitter opposition to all forms of homosexuality has given way to a rational, unbiased acceptance that the Bible says hardly anything about homosexuality, and what it does say cannot honestly be used to condemn consenting same-sex unions." "God is not a Homophobe: An unbiased look at Homosexuality in the Bible" by Philo Thelos
http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/view-item...

"What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality" by Daniel Helminiask, PH.D., was ordained as a Catholic priest in 1967 and is incardinated in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. From 1981-1985 was Assoc Prof for Systematic Theology at Oblate School of Theology and earlier completed his Ph.D. in systematic theology at Boston College and Andover Newton Theological School. He concludes the Bible says absolutely nothing about homosexuality being sinful when you examine the actual Hebrew/Greek texts."

[LuLu Ford]

Not Yet Equal wrote:

<quoted text>
While some take those options, others have changed the translations and interpretations of the bible from early on and throughout history. The modern English translation includes the prejudices of the translators:
"The primarily sexual meaning of the word sodomia for Christians did not evolve before the 6th century AD. Roman Emperor Justinian I, in his novels no. 77 (dating 538) and no. 141 (dating 559) amended to his Corpus iuris civilis, and declared that Sodom's sin had been specifically same-sex activities and desire for them. He also linked "famines, earthquakes, and pestilences" upon cities as being due to "such crimes", during a time of recent earthquakes and other disasters." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy
"Jesus and five Old Testament prophets all speak of the sins that led to the destruction of Sodom -- and not one of them mentions homosexuality.
Alleged references to homosexuality in I Corinthians and I Timothy are the inventions of anti-gay translators. They are not in the original Greek texts." (Rev. Dr. Mel White)
"Several books already exist attempting to demonstrate that the Christian Bible does not, in fact, condemn consenting-adult homosexuality. But God is Not a Homophobe has a unique perspective in that the author has a lifetime of experience in pastoring hard-core fundamentalist churches. His former bitter opposition to all forms of homosexuality has given way to a rational, unbiased acceptance that the Bible says hardly anything about homosexuality, and what it does say cannot honestly be used to condemn consenting same-sex unions." "God is not a Homophobe: An unbiased look at Homosexuality in the Bible" by Philo Thelos
http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/view-item...
"What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality" by Daniel Helminiask, PH.D., was ordained as a Catholic priest in 1967 and is incardinated in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. From 1981-1985 was Assoc Prof for Systematic Theology at Oblate School of Theology and earlier completed his Ph.D. in systematic theology at Boston College and Andover Newton Theological School. He concludes the Bible says absolutely nothing about homosexuality being sinful when you examine the actual Hebrew/Greek texts."

Others leave the church where they find rejection and marginalization and go toward something more fulfilling.