Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against ...

Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?

There are 16101 comments on the news.yahoo.com story from Apr 27, 2009, titled Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?. In it, news.yahoo.com reports that:

The trouble they see is not just an America where general support for gay marriage will have driven a wedge between churches and the world, but between churches themselves.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at news.yahoo.com.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#6967 Feb 18, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
Umm..when did they stop slitting throats in the temple ceremonies??
According to pro and con of Mormonism on the web, 1990. Twenty-three years ago. What's up, haven't been keeping up with out dated Mormon practices? ;)P

“ ILKS r kewl ”

Since: Apr 09

Conch republic

#6968 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
God had the bible written. He didn't physically write it. You're so full of shit it's a wonder you can walk.
LMAO.. at least I CAN walk .. LMAO can you?
Speaking of 'full of fecal matter, has anyone changed you diapers today?
Sola Scriptura

Hansford, WV

#6969 Feb 18, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Just to toss in my 2 cents worth...:)
If you enjoyed sex with males as well as females and, you say you could have enjoyed a relationship with a male but you have chosen relationships with females, that defines you a bisexual.
Bisexuals have an attraction to both females and males for both sex and relationships. Thus they are able to do what heterosexuals and homosexuals can't do. They can choose which sexual orientation to follow and which to ignore. Or they can choose to be involved with both sexual orientations at once :)
On the other hand, a heterosexual will always choose relationships with the opposite sex and a homosexual will always choose relationships with the same sex. But some homosexuals and some heterosexuals can find it pleasurable to have sex with either orientation while having explicit relations with just one orientation.
Hope that helps the conversation?
Your two cents isn't worth two cents. I knew it was wrong and I also knew I could choose so I CHOSE girls. Nothing bi about it. I was forgiven and I have NO sexual feelings toward the same sex. Most gays today KNOW it is wrong but they choose to continue being gay. Why is there so much guilt and anxiety tied to being gay?

Now, are you going to say the sacrifice of Christ was capable of delivering me from homosexuality, or bi sexual?

I don't know if I said I actually ENJOYED it or not. Did I? Does a 12 yesar old know these things? Maybe, maybe not. I just know I am not bi.
Sola Scriptura

Hansford, WV

#6970 Feb 18, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Just to toss in my 2 cents worth...:)
If you enjoyed sex with males as well as females and, you say you could have enjoyed a relationship with a male but you have chosen relationships with females, that defines you a bisexual.
Bisexuals have an attraction to both females and males for both sex and relationships. Thus they are able to do what heterosexuals and homosexuals can't do. They can choose which sexual orientation to follow and which to ignore. Or they can choose to be involved with both sexual orientations at once :)
On the other hand, a heterosexual will always choose relationships with the opposite sex and a homosexual will always choose relationships with the same sex. But some homosexuals and some heterosexuals can find it pleasurable to have sex with either orientation while having explicit relations with just one orientation.
Hope that helps the conversation?
And please, no one "defines" me. Or YOU for that matter. Or should I define the whole Mormon religion? Want my two cents on that one?

“ ILKS r kewl ”

Since: Apr 09

Conch republic

#6971 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
I knew it was wrong
And thats why you wear diapers..

Enjoy!

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#6972 Feb 18, 2013
Sir Doctor wrote:
<quoted text>st because you are stupid does not mean that we buy your stupidity.
See "ego dystonic homosexuallity". The basis of all gay suicides are self hatred and homophobia.
You are a gay who has anal sex despite AIDS. Do you see how stupid that is.
The fact that you think that all gay support same sex marriage, means you are either lying or stupid.
In fact, there are a lot of gays and a lot of gay psychiatrists who know that homosexuality is a choice and that wish to have nothing to do with your same sex marriage attempts to fit in as straight. One such fella was Harry Hay. Yes, Harry.
Have you heard of Harry Hay? Well, he is the modern day gay rights leader who fought against all your attempts to lie about homosexuality being anything other than sexual freedom. He also said that you lying gays were just as bad as straight bigots, when you deny gay NAMBLA pedophile rights so you can fit in better.
I suggest you get educated, before the inevitable happens, suicide. You see, gay child, I have lesbian friends and gay acquaintances and they see lying gays like you as the enemy.
You have yet to make a coherent point. How would one distinguish between a self-loathing heterosexual and a heterosexual who supports same-sex marriage? For that matter, how would one distinguish between a self-loathing homosexual and heterosexual who opposes same-sex marriage?
Sola Scriptura

Hansford, WV

#6973 Feb 18, 2013
Troth for Leogere wrote:
<quoted text>Wow are you a dumb hillbilly..
Go learn ya sumpthin..
Do you have any idea how uneducated you idiotic statement makes you?
I didnt think so.. you're too dumb.
Well, you ARE gay.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#6974 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
Your two cents isn't worth two cents. I knew it was wrong and I also knew I could choose so I CHOSE girls. Nothing bi about it. I was forgiven and I have NO sexual feelings toward the same sex. Most gays today KNOW it is wrong but they choose to continue being gay. Why is there so much guilt and anxiety tied to being gay?
Now, are you going to say the sacrifice of Christ was capable of delivering me from homosexuality, or bi sexual?
I don't know if I said I actually ENJOYED it or not. Did I? Does a 12 yesar old know these things? Maybe, maybe not. I just know I am not bi.
You were forgiven? Great. Prove it.
Sola Scriptura

Hansford, WV

#6975 Feb 18, 2013
Troth for Leogere wrote:
<quoted text>And thats why you wear diapers..
Enjoy!
I knew being gay was wrong, it is STILL wrong and gays and supporters of them are hellbound. Enjoy!

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#6976 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
Nettie, the fake catholic shows her truecolrs again. How do catholics feel about Paul, Nettie? Or are you going to let a illiterate like Papa smurf throw doubt on your chosen faith? lol
But, the subject was you, Wayne.
And, when you say that someone who is 'unsaved' cannot read and understand the Bible, you are wrong. They can understand it just as well as you can.
Although taking into consideration the fact that the authors of the Bible drew from their own culture, their limited knowledge, and also from mythology at times should be taken into consideration as well as the fact that the whole Bible is not literal. And, that the authors "relate in simple and figurative language, adapted to the understanding of mankind at a lower stage of development."

BTW, Wayne:
Does the Bible contain errors? If those errors are scientific or historical, as opposed to matters of faith and morals, does it even matter?

These questions came up during the Second Vatican Council when some theologians asserted that Scripture indeed contained such errors. Cardinal Koenig of Vienna attempted to prove it using Mark 2:26, where David "went into the house of God when Abiathar was high priest and ate the bread of offering that only the priests could lawfully eat, and shared it with his companions." According to 1 Samuel 21:1, Abiathar was not the high priest, but rather his father, Ahimelech. This scriptural example on the surface appears to support his claim that the Bible contains historical errors.
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/is-...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#6977 Feb 18, 2013
His-truth wrote:
<quoted text>
um, the facts are what they are .. http://www.100abortionpictures.com/Aborted_Ba... .. deal w/ it
Women are to marry their rapists. Slavery is an acceptable practice, and you may enslave people from other places to be your property forever, AAAAND you may beat them so long as they don't die within a few days. Want to play the morality game? Let's.
Sola Scriptura

Hansford, WV

#6979 Feb 18, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You were forgiven? Great. Prove it.
Like you are somebody?
Sola Scriptura

Hansford, WV

#6980 Feb 18, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>But, the subject was you, Wayne.
And, when you say that someone who is 'unsaved' cannot read and understand the Bible, you are wrong. They can understand it just as well as you can.
Although taking into consideration the fact that the authors of the Bible drew from their own culture, their limited knowledge, and also from mythology at times should be taken into consideration as well as the fact that the whole Bible is not literal. And, that the authors "relate in simple and figurative language, adapted to the understanding of mankind at a lower stage of development."
BTW, Wayne:
Does the Bible contain errors? If those errors are scientific or historical, as opposed to matters of faith and morals, does it even matter?
These questions came up during the Second Vatican Council when some theologians asserted that Scripture indeed contained such errors. Cardinal Koenig of Vienna attempted to prove it using Mark 2:26, where David "went into the house of God when Abiathar was high priest and ate the bread of offering that only the priests could lawfully eat, and shared it with his companions." According to 1 Samuel 21:1, Abiathar was not the high priest, but rather his father, Ahimelech. This scriptural example on the surface appears to support his claim that the Bible contains historical errors.
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/is-...
Anything you say that is followed by a little blue link to a catholic site is duly noted and ignored.

And, the subject was not ME Nettie but whether or not Paul has any authority. Get your head out of your ass.

“ ILKS r kewl ”

Since: Apr 09

Conch republic

#6982 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
And please, no one "defines" me. Or YOU for that matter. Or should I define the whole Mormon religion? Want my two cents on that one?
no one wants you dirty diapers.. but they DO 'define' your existence!

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#6983 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
Anything you say that is followed by a little blue link to a catholic site is duly noted and ignored.
And, the subject was not ME Nettie but whether or not Paul has any authority. Get your head out of your ass.
The subject is you.
And, others might read it.
That is all that is important, not your little whinny questions about the Catholic faith.

“Game Over”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#6984 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
I knew being gay was wrong, it is STILL wrong and gays and supporters of them are hellbound. Enjoy!
You knew being gay was wrong...for you.

It's not a choice. It's not a "lifestyle".

It is what it is.

Wrap your head around it and Enjoy! getting over it.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#6985 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
Your two cents isn't worth two cents. I knew it was wrong and I also knew I could choose so I CHOSE girls. Nothing bi about it. I was forgiven and I have NO sexual feelings toward the same sex. Most gays today KNOW it is wrong but they choose to continue being gay. Why is there so much guilt and anxiety tied to being gay?
Now, are you going to say the sacrifice of Christ was capable of delivering me from homosexuality, or bi sexual?
I don't know if I said I actually ENJOYED it or not. Did I? Does a 12 yesar old know these things? Maybe, maybe not. I just know I am not bi.
The walk you take with Jesus is your own choice. I'm not disputing that.
But you see when you say you could choose of whom to be attracted to and whom not to be attracted to, a true homosexual or a true heterosexual cannot make that choice as you say you did.
See, a true homosexual is born with an attraction to the opposite sex. A true heterosexual is born with an attraction to the opposite sex. Either of these two through childhood to adulthood grow into their sexual orientation. And usually a few 'experimental sexual interactions' with the sex their not attracted to affirms to them their attraction and they grow with it and avoid interaction with the other. Understand?
But a person growing up as a child without a specific attraction, able to enjoy sex play and relationships with either sex, that person is a bisexual.
You stated you made "a choice" of whom to have sexual relationships with. A straight hetero or homosexual won't have that capacity to 'choose' as you stated it. Only a true bisexual can choose which orientation to ignore and which to be attracted to.
Understand further for a base to my conversation, I don't believe anyone is born hetero or homo or bi. I believe we are all born with specific attractions and that attraction, it defines us as we learn and discover it's meaning for ourselves and our sexuality and relationship needs from childhood to adulthood.
But your claiming to choose who to be attracted to and whom not to be attracted to would define you as A. a true bisexual or B. a heterosexual that can enjoy sex with both sexes.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#6986 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
And please, no one "defines" me. Or YOU for that matter. Or should I define the whole Mormon religion? Want my two cents on that one?
Sexually and relationship wise you have unknowingly defined yourself according to modern definitions of sexual orientations.
Sexual orientation definitions have a lot to be considered for I will even agree.
For example, how do you define a person that enjoys sex with males and females but tosses their cookies at the thought of having a romantic relationship with the opposite sex? How do you define a person that enjoys sex with males and females but tosses their cookies at the thought of having a romantic relationship with the same sex?
What about people that can turn on and off their attraction? What about those who are attracted sexually and relationship wise to both sexes and go for decades having sex and a relationship with a single individual? Is that real bisexuality?
What about people born without an attraction to either sex and prefer no sexual or relationship interactions with either sex and prefer to be single? How do you define them? Especially if this type person prefers sex with just the same or opposite or both sexes if they decide they want sex but never any romantic relationships? How do we define them?
Understand people like to define things and actions to explain those 'things and actions' so don't take offense :)
Sola Scriptura

Hansford, WV

#6987 Feb 18, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>The subject is you.
And, others might read it.
That is all that is important, not your little whinny questions about the Catholic faith.
No, the subject was whether Paul followed Christ or not. Not everyone lives in your little fantasy world of "Nettie Knows All."

The catholic faith is a heretical faith.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#6988 Feb 18, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the subject was whether Paul followed Christ or not. Not everyone lives in your little fantasy world of "Nettie Knows All."
The catholic faith is a heretical faith.
Well, I certainly agree with you there ! I'm guessing you're a Lutheran.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
A God Who Disagrees With The Data 14 min Blodewedd 449
News Religion, higher education and critical thinking (Aug '15) 18 min messianic114 9,550
Scientific Proof Of GOD(for dummies) 29 min Big Al 2,420
Why lie about the truth? Christian mistranslat... 34 min messianic114 330
BIBLE QUESTIONS to KAB 38 min janeebee 66
Cookie's Place (Oct '13) 1 hr I love Jesus 20,511
Design, Nowhere Evident 2 hr messianic114 496
PAUL OUR FATHER . 1Cor 4: 15 (Feb '16) 5 hr BARNS Bro 86
More from around the web