//HUSBAND: “… Basically, you're discussing rape - of animals or children.”//
Not at all. Bestiality need not include force, coercion, or even penetration. And my example stipulated loving mutuality.
You’re going to great lengths to not answer the question.
If you prefer a different example, address the two women in a loving, sexual relationship who happen to be biological sisters. Is there anything inherent there that would keep them from loving God and wholeheartedly following Jesus? Why shouldn’t marriage be redefined to sanction and include their relationship?
Panthera
October 3, 2009 10:35 AM
Artboy and IsYouBigoted,
By now it should be plain to both of you that we simply are not going to play that game.
A very great number of Christians in the US agree with you in rejecting our status as Christians, indeed as humans.
A very great number of Christians and non-Christians in the US disagree with you and feel we are both human and capable of worshiping God as Christians.
All we are asking is that you and your fellow Christians who don't see us as fellow Christians or even entitled to basic human rights get out of the way of our secular rights.
You can worship, without let or hindrance in your hateful churches. Fine. Let us worship in our inclusive churches, let us marry civilly. The only time we need have any contact at all is when the 10% of your young who are gay and the roughly one in one thousand of your young who are transsexual or intersexed or otherwise do not fall into your stereotypical world of male-female bi-polarity get kicked out of your hateful world. Then, we will welcome them and do our best to heal the grievous wounds you have inflected on them in the name of our Lord.
If you haven't driven them to suicide, first.
Husband
October 8, 2009 3:15 PM
YN,
"God means what He says and says what He means...It's not difficult to figure out...stop trying to make it what you want"
So you believe that gay people "shall surely be put to death" then? As should disobedient children, and the victims of rape. That eating lobster is "an abomination", and that we should deny communion to the disabled?
God's Word sez we should. Or do you make it what you want?
Husband
October 8, 2009 3:26 PM
"IsYouBigoted
September 28, 2009 5:29 PM
What's wrong with incest? What's wrong with marrying two or more spouses? What's wrong with interspecies sex?
Why can't gays like T. Jones be more tolerant of other people's sexual preferences for a change? I'm always shocked to see such bigotry spouted by gays towards other people who have unusual yet love-filled sex preferences."
1. Yes, you is bigoted.
2. Bewing gay (or str8) is not a "preference. It is an orientation.
3. Marriage creates legal familial relationships where none existed before. Therefor, incestuous marriages are unnecessary.
4. Polygamy is widely accepted around the world. I think it abhorrent because of it's inherent unequal relationship status (as in marriage means - or should - "I choose you, not a buncha people.") Does anyone know if legally polygamously married persons (eg. from Indonesia or Saudia Arabia) can immigrate to America? After all, "President" George W. Bush welcomed the polygamously married Crown Prince (now King) of SA into the Rose Garden!
5. Interspecies sex involves lack of consent (which, in legal terms, is rape, which is not what is under discussion). You wanna screw your pooch, be my guest. But I think you'd have a difficult time convincing a Justice of the Peace to solemnize any 'vows', since animals can't make them.
Do you have any more 'intelligent' questions you need answered, Yes U Is Bigoted?
Husband
October 8, 2009 3:42 PM
Artboy,
//HUSBAND: “… Basically, you're discussing rape - of animals or children.”//
"Not at all. Bestiality need not include force, coercion, or even penetration. And my example stipulated loving mutuality.
You’re going to great lengths to not answer the question."
In your dreams, Artboy. The essence of rape is non-consent. Neither animals nor children can give consent, regardless of lack of force or coercion or even penetration. IOW, it lacks the very "mutuality" you raise. Poor you with your poor logic, eh?
"If you prefer a different example, address the two women in a loving, sexual relationship who happen to be biological sisters."
I already did. They have no need of marriage since they're already related.
"Is there anything inherent there that would keep them from loving God and wholeheartedly following Jesus?"
Not at all, but, as has been pointed out, they're already related, so have no need of marriage.
" Why shouldn’t marriage be redefined to sanction and include their relationship?"
Because their relationship doesn't have to be included in marriage since they're already related. Clearly you fail to catch the connection between 'relationship' and being 'related'.
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.
//HUSBAND: “… Basically, you're discussing rape - of animals or children.”//
Not at all. Bestiality need not include force, coercion, or even penetration. And my example stipulated loving mutuality.
You’re going to great lengths to not answer the question.
If you prefer a different example, address the two women in a loving, sexual relationship who happen to be biological sisters. Is there anything inherent there that would keep them from loving God and wholeheartedly following Jesus? Why shouldn’t marriage be redefined to sanction and include their relationship?
Artboy and IsYouBigoted,
By now it should be plain to both of you that we simply are not going to play that game.
A very great number of Christians in the US agree with you in rejecting our status as Christians, indeed as humans.
A very great number of Christians and non-Christians in the US disagree with you and feel we are both human and capable of worshiping God as Christians.
All we are asking is that you and your fellow Christians who don't see us as fellow Christians or even entitled to basic human rights get out of the way of our secular rights.
You can worship, without let or hindrance in your hateful churches. Fine. Let us worship in our inclusive churches, let us marry civilly. The only time we need have any contact at all is when the 10% of your young who are gay and the roughly one in one thousand of your young who are transsexual or intersexed or otherwise do not fall into your stereotypical world of male-female bi-polarity get kicked out of your hateful world. Then, we will welcome them and do our best to heal the grievous wounds you have inflected on them in the name of our Lord.
If you haven't driven them to suicide, first.
YN,
"God means what He says and says what He means...It's not difficult to figure out...stop trying to make it what you want"
So you believe that gay people "shall surely be put to death" then? As should disobedient children, and the victims of rape. That eating lobster is "an abomination", and that we should deny communion to the disabled?
God's Word sez we should. Or do you make it what you want?
"IsYouBigoted
September 28, 2009 5:29 PM
What's wrong with incest? What's wrong with marrying two or more spouses? What's wrong with interspecies sex?
Why can't gays like T. Jones be more tolerant of other people's sexual preferences for a change? I'm always shocked to see such bigotry spouted by gays towards other people who have unusual yet love-filled sex preferences."
1. Yes, you is bigoted.
2. Bewing gay (or str8) is not a "preference. It is an orientation.
3. Marriage creates legal familial relationships where none existed before. Therefor, incestuous marriages are unnecessary.
4. Polygamy is widely accepted around the world. I think it abhorrent because of it's inherent unequal relationship status (as in marriage means - or should - "I choose you, not a buncha people.") Does anyone know if legally polygamously married persons (eg. from Indonesia or Saudia Arabia) can immigrate to America? After all, "President" George W. Bush welcomed the polygamously married Crown Prince (now King) of SA into the Rose Garden!
5. Interspecies sex involves lack of consent (which, in legal terms, is rape, which is not what is under discussion). You wanna screw your pooch, be my guest. But I think you'd have a difficult time convincing a Justice of the Peace to solemnize any 'vows', since animals can't make them.
Do you have any more 'intelligent' questions you need answered, Yes U Is Bigoted?
Artboy,
//HUSBAND: “… Basically, you're discussing rape - of animals or children.”//
"Not at all. Bestiality need not include force, coercion, or even penetration. And my example stipulated loving mutuality.
You’re going to great lengths to not answer the question."
In your dreams, Artboy. The essence of rape is non-consent. Neither animals nor children can give consent, regardless of lack of force or coercion or even penetration. IOW, it lacks the very "mutuality" you raise. Poor you with your poor logic, eh?
"If you prefer a different example, address the two women in a loving, sexual relationship who happen to be biological sisters."
I already did. They have no need of marriage since they're already related.
"Is there anything inherent there that would keep them from loving God and wholeheartedly following Jesus?"
Not at all, but, as has been pointed out, they're already related, so have no need of marriage.
" Why shouldn’t marriage be redefined to sanction and include their relationship?"
Because their relationship doesn't have to be included in marriage since they're already related. Clearly you fail to catch the connection between 'relationship' and being 'related'.
Feel free to try again, but DO BETTER!
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.