Gay Marriage Debate - Fairbanks, AK

Discuss the national Gay Marriage debate in Fairbanks, AK.

Do you support gay marriage?

Fairbanks opposes
Oppose
 
52
Support
 
40

Vote now in Fairbanks:

First Prev
of 11
Next Last
Kayla

Anchorage, AK

#1 Aug 3, 2010
Marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#2 Aug 4, 2010
Kayla, I suppose that "Marriage should only be between a man and a woman" because its traditional? Lets talk about this. First of all, traditional is so ambiguous considering that history records the Catholic Church having had a service of sorts for men; "rite of adelphopoesis, or brother-making, which he calls an early form of religious same-sex marriage."

http://wapedia.mo bi/en/Religious_views_on_same- sex_marriage

And then there is that little known fact that the Christian Bible does not define what a marriage is nor what constitutes a marriage. And for that matter, the ancient Hebrew language did not have a word for either wife or marriage. Women were considered property, not wives. And lets not forget that men had many wives and concubines in the OT patriarchal world. Genesis starts off with the creation story and the most important aspect of this epic tale is that it says that man is made after God's image. What is that image if not something that man can categorically describe with our language, any language for our languages are expressive of what we can see, touch and hear. That leaves us subjecting God, our perception of God to another world, say heavenly and/ or to the spirit world. God is by all accounts something that we can not describe. If we are created in the image of God, God's Spirit, then our lives are relational. That is that we are capable of extending ethical and moral compassion to our fellow human beings. God command mankind as well as animals to populate the earth. The difference is that animals are not considered, relational. Genesis does not say that animals were created in God's image. So procreation is not mandatory nor is it solely the purpose of sex. Well, it probably is with animals because they are not relational. But we are and so it is that since God did not design marriage in Genesis, Israel set up the Mosaic Code; civil law as it pertained to the establishment a unique and sacred (separate) country. Follow the rules and you belong to this country Israel. Well, not even the Torah had rules that defined marriage or what constituted marriage. All references to marriage in the Bible are concerning relational aspects of marriage; if you could call it marriage then. It wasn't until the Talmud was established that the Jewish community defined and established marriage. The same is true about the Catholic Church; The Council of Trent. Of all the Christian denominations, only the Catholic Church recognizes marriage as a sacrament.

If same-sex marriage is not but relational, comprising of two loving individuals, some of which have children they raise then the issue of loving, nuturing families is not the issue. Nor is it that they are asking for special privileges. In this country we thrive on our nationality representative of equality. Is that not what the Bible teaches too. Or is it that Christianity, for the most part, that "Old Time Religion," screams the loudest that what they say is the truth, the absolute truth; because God spoke to them; that they read the Word of God? Some of us Christians don't agree with such nonsense. Some of us believe that the Word of God is not the literal reading of the Bible, but is a critical reading of the Bible. I guess my point is this: Who then holds that truth if Christians cannot agree on the meaning of the Bible?

Traditional marriage is ambiguous.
Ken Pruitt

Anchorage, AK

#3 Aug 9, 2010
Until late in last century homosexuality was a crime. The reason it was a crime is because it was a sin. It is still a sin and should still be a crime.
amy Hickn

Anchorage, AK

#4 Aug 9, 2010
It's their own damn decision! Let it go, guys!

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#5 Aug 9, 2010
Ken Pruitt wrote:
Until late in last century homosexuality was a crime. The reason it was a crime is because it was a sin. It is still a sin and should still be a crime.
Ken, Good Day to You.

“God is not bound by social and cultural standards.”“So Paul's treatment of male and female gender roles is an exact parallel of Jewish/Gentile relationships.” Paul says in Romans 1:24 that “God acts in ways that are para physin [atypical] to describe matters of gender and sexual behaviors.”

Galatians 2:15; “We are Jews by birth, not sinners of Gentile origin.” NAB.

Romans 2:27; “If a man who is uncircumcised keeps the law, he will pass judgment on you who, with your written law and circumcision, break it.” NAB.

Jews by birth is not a Jew by nature. That is to say that one's birthright is not the natural order of things, or the law of nature. The nature of a circumcised Jew is not the natural order of things either. Paul speaks of the nature of the Jews and of the Gentiles as being atypical. Meaning that is just how the Jewish religious rites are and if one is Jewish then one can expect the Jewish religion to require its people to follow the law.

Paul could care less about homosexuality. He is interested in establishing that the sexual practices were outside the normal cultic practices but in no way were they against God or contrary to the divine order of creation or in conflict with the natural order of things.

What God Really Says About Homosexuality, Daniel A. Helminiak, Ph.D., p. 78,79,82.

Paul was addressing the Christian community, a community split between Jews and Gentiles. The Jews needed a lesson about their Laws and the Gentiles needed to learn a lesson, as did the Judeo-Christian, a lesson of fidelity.

After all, what is so sinful or wrong about homosexuality? If it is not condemned in the NT or the OT then what is Paul's point?

The reason homosexuality was a crime was because ecclesiastical law failed to represent the basic definition of sin. No homosexuality was not a sin. It was a moralistic sense of a Christian denomination. And whether it was all denominations of Christianity does not diminish this fact. Early Christians did not see homosexuality as a sin. Jesus never said it was a sin. No where in the Bible does it say homosexuality is a sin. You cannot read the Bible literally without putting your own interpretation. The correct interpretation is from a critical reading of the Bible. Homosexuality was coined in the late 1800's and not used in modern translations until around 1950's. Translations have changed over the years. And as with the issue of homosexuality and what the Bible now says about its condemnation, said translation is an influence of society and religion.

Sin is idolatry.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#6 Aug 9, 2010
amy Hickn wrote:
It's their own damn decision! Let it go, guys!
Hi Amy, this is more than an issue on homosexuality. This issue has split many a Christian denomination regarding what the Bible really says. It is about those that claim to be Christians; who claim to speak God's Word; about those that would determine what morality is and what is acceptable in a country that prides itself, first on freedom, then on being anti-discriminatory. Church and State do not mix well. Constitutional issues are not to be dictated by a wannabe theocracy. This issue goes to identifying what America wants.

As a Christian, I oppose all fundamentalist's attempt to define Christianity and American ideals.
Mike Sampson

Fairbanks, AK

#7 Aug 11, 2010
Call it something else and move on. Don't you dare degrade what I have had with my wife for 25 years

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#8 Aug 11, 2010
Mike Sampson wrote:
Call it something else and move on. Don't you dare degrade what I have had with my wife for 25 years
Same-sex marriage does not degrade what you have as a marriage. I trump your marriage by seven years. I am also Christian. And I submit what you understand about marriage is your opinion. If my opinion is opposite of yours, we are both Christian, then our opinions are of equal validity. I suspect that your belief stems from a literalist's point of view. Suffice it to say that mine is of a critical view point. Until Christians come to agree on all issues of faith, no Christian can claim the truth, the absolute truth.

There was no word for marriage or wife in the ancient Hebrew language. Just because modern translations of the Bible use marriage, and theword wife does not mean that there was an original reference to what constitutes marriage or that the Bible defined marriage. Fact is you cannot come up with anything but an after thought on marriage. Women were the property of men in the OT; as well as their daughters. Adultery was not a sexual sin. It was a reference to stealing another man's property. The Ten Commandments were not Ten but Seven originally; changing somewhere between Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and if you look closely there is a resemblance to coveting another man's property and his women. The overall sin, as in religious sin, is about stealing. Any reference to marriage, from the modern translation of the Bible, is inferring marriage. This inference is doctrine, as is any reference to sin, religious sin. Sin is not defined by sex nor is sex defined by sin. Man's created image is that of God. That image is of God's Spirit. Any reference to God's Spirit, or goodness, or what God does as being good, is our reference to our life, our spirit, our morality, ethics. All of the Bible is relational; as in our relation with God. Since this topic of same-sex marriage is in relation to homosexuality, let it be understood that homosexuality is neither condemned nor supported in the Bible. And with that statement, I am prepared to addresss any rebuke regarding the sin of homosexuality. I will address the symbolism that literalist's use to validate symbolic words such as; abomination, pervert, natural as well as any use of the Holiness Code.

I welcome any such discussion. Fairbanks is as good of a place to debate such an issue. Just be sure to respect any differences that may arise. Keep it civil.
Louis

Anchorage, AK

#9 Aug 14, 2010
Bible neither condemns nor supports homosexuality.
alternative

Anchorage, AK

#11 Apr 10, 2011
As an American, I expect that all diversity finds the freedom to be as they choose. Equality is the cornerstone of this country's freedom. Besides, this country is not about anyone religion. Freedom of religion does not mean certain religions dictate this country's laws. Marriage is a civil issue and it has always been civil, not religious.
alternative

Anchorage, AK

#12 Apr 10, 2011
Ken Pruitt wrote:
Until late in last century homosexuality was a crime. The reason it was a crime is because it was a sin. It is still a sin and should still be a crime.
Homosexuality was not even a word until the late 1800's. I challenge you, Ken, to come up with Scripture that states that homosexuality is a sin. And I caution you to define how abomination is defined by Scripture. I will accept the Scripture that you present as proof that homosexuality is a sin if you can Scripturally define it as such.
alternative

Anchorage, AK

#13 Apr 10, 2011
Louis wrote:
Bible neither condemns nor supports homosexuality.
Louis, this is a very good point to make regarding homosexuality. Thanks.
allie

Fairbanks, AK

#14 Apr 11, 2011
i love the gays i think they should have the right to marry its the heart that counts not the outside and this is comin from some one who is a bi sexual
Bill Holland

Anchorage, AK

#15 Apr 21, 2011
Marriage is a religious term. Also divorce. I do support gay rights. Everyone is the same in Gods eyes.
True Alaskan

Anchorage, AK

#16 Apr 22, 2011
Ken Pruitt wrote:
Until late in last century homosexuality was a crime. The reason it was a crime is because it was a sin. It is still a sin and should still be a crime.
Hey Ken, did your house fall into the Tanana yet? I'm keeping my fingers crossed. Idiot!
abc

Anonymous Proxy

#17 Apr 22, 2011
yeah

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#18 Apr 22, 2011
Ken Pruitt wrote:
Until late in last century homosexuality was a crime. The reason it was a crime is because it was a sin. It is still a sin and should still be a crime.
I guess that settles it. Last century or even two centuries ago is when that "Old Time Religion" sprouted up with all its evil doings. Actually, what religious principles you follow have not been around all that long.

“Come and get it! ”

Since: Jan 09

Traverse City

#19 Apr 23, 2011
Dudes marrying dudes?! What's next, dudes marrying trees?

You liberal knuckleheads keep throwing this country's traditions out the window every chance you get and continue to wonder why we're so screwed up?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#20 Apr 23, 2011
Sneaky Pete wrote:
Dudes marrying dudes?! What's next, dudes marrying trees?
You liberal knuckleheads keep throwing this country's traditions out the window every chance you get and continue to wonder why we're so screwed up?
Sneaky Pete, maybe this country is so screwed up because people are stuck in their old ways. Change is good and when that change is about freedom and equality then old ways must go. Just like the subsistence issue. What is about equal access is the issue. What Alaska's constitution calls for is equality. This is Alaska's landmark constitution that is heralded as the best of State constitutions. Coghill amending our constitution that says one man one woman is a marriage was unconstitutional and he did it because of his religious beliefs. Unacceptable.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#21 Apr 26, 2011
The issues surround public, secular laws, not biblical laws. No one at any time will ever tell you to change your mind, your beliefs, your heart, or which biblical interpretation to use and follow. Things like that cannot be dictated by laws in America.
We're all assured the same equal and fair treatment under the laws in these United States - we're assured of this in the 14th amendment, just as we're all assured of due process.
To deny these assurances to a segment of the populace is to create a second class citizen - which is in defiance of the Constitution's strongly held comments regarding everyone being equal under the laws of this nation.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 11
Next Last

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.

Fairbanks Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Russia to follow Denmark with Arctic shelf clai... Dec 23 hmmm 1
Clemson is Claiming Santa Claus As An Alumnus Dec 22 Polar Express 1
Good neighbor policy, not sanctions, works for ... Dec 8 Paul 2
Advice for someone thinking about moving to Ala... Dec 1 Alaura7 1
North Pole Music Emporium (Oct '12) Nov 29 Musikologist 13
theft at joy elementary school Nov '14 RavenzRedRozez 2
ANSEP tripling enrollment in middle school program Nov '14 JuliathePoet 1
Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]