Jump to content

Church Street: Nashville's "Gay District?"


ariesjow

Recommended Posts

Any reason why you feel it takes unprotected sex with "multiple partners of the opposite sex" to get an STD, but just "one person of the same sex"? This logic seems to imply that every homosexual person must be carrying an STD... Is that really what you meant?

No, I'm not saying anyone who experiments with homosexuality gets a disease immediately, but like getting pregnant, it only takes 1 time.

Heckles, I'm impresed by your response. Most of the time gay people tell straight people we should be tolerant of them, but then gays aren't tolerant of us. Seems like you understand both sides of the issues.

I am a bible believing Christian. God has shown throughout history that he loves all humans, and his only desire is for us to live as his creation. If the bible says homosexuality is wrong, then I believe that. The bible also gives you free choice to ignore God's will, but you also ignore the blessings he gives. And I'm not saying homosexuality is the only sin in the world today; that's just the topic at hand.

I believe banning gay marriage is more important from a moral standpoint. If our government says it's ok for gays to marry, then we are sending a message to soceity, even children, that homosexuality is acceptable practice. Most people don't agree that it is (based on prevuis passage of gay marriage bans). What you choose to do behind close doors is between you and God, and I am simply here to "spread the gospel."

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

No, I'm not saying anyone who experiments with homosexuality gets a disease immediately, but like getting pregnant, it only takes 1 time.

Heckles, I'm impresed by your response. Most of the time gay people tell straight people we should be tolerant of them, but then gays aren't tolerant of us. Seems like you understand both sides of the issues.

I am a bible believing Christian. God has shown throughout history that he loves all humans, and his only desire is for us to live as his creation. If the bible says homosexuality is wrong, then I believe that. The bible also gives you free choice to ignore God's will, but you also ignore the blessings he gives. And I'm not saying homosexuality is the only sin in the world today; that's just the topic at hand.

I believe banning gay marriage is more important from a moral standpoint. If our government says it's ok for gays to marry, then we are sending a message to soceity, even children, that homosexuality is acceptable practice. Most people don't agree that it is (based on prevuis passage of gay marriage bans). What you choose to do behind close doors is between you and God, and I am simply here to "spread the gospel."

how are homosexuals not tolerant of heterosexuals? I don't understand.

Seriously..

does that sentence make any sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I think rocky top took my comments a little too friendly. I think if you oppose gay rights that you are intolerant. I just believe that in a free society you are free to have an opinion, even if I think its wrong and intolerant.

Again, I said it before, I'll say it again.

If gay marriage were passed it would not keep anyone as an individual from believing as they see fit, and it would not keep them from raising their kids as they see fit.

At the VERY LEAST I hope people like rocky top come around and support civic unions or domestic partnerships. Domestic partnerships are not marriage, its the legal union between two entities (the right can be given to two males or two females) that allows for legal transferrable rights of marriage. I.E. hospital rights and visitation, child care, etc.

The rights are the ultimate goal. We all deserve rights, and I would hope even the most staunch conservative Christian can eventually come around and support domestic partnership laws even if we never get gay marriage.

As it stands today in U.S. law, a corporation has more rights to transfer property, payments, and assets as a legal entity than a gay couple. Just think abotu that: is it very "christian" to give a non-human entity more rights than human beings in a consensual relationship?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me the one of the root causes of staunch opposition to gay unions has nothing to do with legal rights, nothing to do with commitment and nothing really to do with beliefs. It seems to me in this day of "invent-a-word", adding dozens and dozens of new words to our vocabulary, that gay American would have done a true service to the desired outcome if the word "marriage" wasn't used. Marriage, even to me, a gay man, means something. It means to me what it means to most people, a man and a woman joined in love and commitment to one another. That is one of the most basic of my early beliefs and I can't seem to shake it.

Sure, I'll vote No on No. 1 because of the rights it should grant to those commited couples who I feel deserve the rights to protections under the law. A little creativity in coming up with a name for the cause other than one that runs afoul with a great majority of the American public would probably have done the cause much good and create much less confrontation. This shouldn't be a confrontation, this shouldn't have to bring beliefs into the mix, this should be a legal matter that doesn't step on the toes of those who use the term marriage in the holiest of context. As stated before, the legalities for the most part can be accomplished with a little paperwork. I would like to see that avoided in order to extend the same rights to all commited couples, unhindered by the fact that it just might be two men or two women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it stands today in U.S. law, a corporation has more rights to transfer property, payments, and assets as a legal entity than a gay couple. Just think abotu that: is it very "christian" to give a non-human entity more rights than human beings in a consensual relationship?

Agreed. It's funny how homosexuality has become an "ultimate sin" in our society while it is perfectly acceptable for a corporation(an intangible entity) to lie, rape, kill and steal from it's best costumers. So I guess that CEO's shouldn't be held to the same standards as REAL PEOPLE! Thanks, Sam Walton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ The reasons behind the prominence of the issue are different for different people. For me the rise of homosexuality coupled with the growing acceptance of it as good behavior signal (along with other types of prominent sin) a turning away from God in America. It is not the ultimate sin, but it is sin nonetheless, and sin causes us to fall short of God's glory. Also, unlike many other types of sin it is often paraded in front of us (sometimes quite literally) in many public arenas. A lot of times it also comes down to what is taught as acceptable behavior to our nation's children in school.

I don't claim to have special intelligence, but neither am I surprised that many would consider me unintelligent for my belief in the things of God, as the Bible warned me that would be the case. I hope that my take on the issue will help you understand why for me the issue is of such great importance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will probably be moved to the Coffee House...

As I enter the (suprising civil) discourse regarding Gay marriage it will suprise no one that I am swayed by both sides but IJD'd comes the closest what I think will eventually pass.

I think most American's are fair minded people and a strong case can be made that legal status in the eyes of the law is reasonable. But neither extreme element wants it confined to this because each is trying to push an agenda. As a Catholic it is fairly obvious what my personal beliefs are but I do not feel inclined to force those on any other individuals. On the other had the powerful LGTB lobby is just as at fault at some of the extreme religious elements by overreaching and trying to force 'marriage' down the country's collective throats.

An issue that I have not totally resolved that will result from passage of either is how will the subject be addressed in education after it becomes 'legal'. I do not have an answer for that but I believe it will be an even more devisive issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its already in the coffee house :P

the way i see it..

i grew up to having religion shoved down my throat..

catholic, pentacostal, baptist, i was all of those..

but how do you tell me that God doesn't accept gays..

WHEN YOUR OWN CHURCHES don't accept each other?

its all hypocritcal..

some churches believe the others are wrong..

your religion is based on hypocracy..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ But the ideas of sin are totally subject to debate since we haven't truely got the original text of the Bible, but rather second hand information in the current form. I think it's entirely possible for most "Christians" to be misled by a Church Doctorine moreso than devoting their lives to the honest work of God. Most Christians in today's society are too judgmental and way too intolerant of their neighbors. I find that offensive and rather non-christian like. This coming from a preachers kid and a Christian mind you. Christians need to butt out of everyone else's business and just worry about getting themselves through the Pearly Gates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lexy, you're starting to sound like a libertarian. :) In all seriousness though, I believe that standing for the Word of God and standing against sin is the honest work of God. You're talking about being intolerant of people (and perhaps many Christians are) I'm talking about being intolerant of sin. This is not a "holier-than-thou" attitude on my part, for I am a terrible sinner. What we're talking about here is a cultural battle in which homosexual sex is being called good, when in fact it is sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lexy, your words to "butt out of everyone else's business and just worry about getting themselves through the Pearly Gates" are completely against Christian teaching. We are all here to be disciples of Christ, ie to spread the word of christ.

The historical accuracy of the english translated bible has been proven accurate and reliable. Only when taken out of context or mis-quoted is the bible wrong.

RJ, couldn't have said it better myself. We are all sinners and Christian's should love sinners. But we should hate sin, including our own.

How about we all make a deal. If you all get the Gay's off Church street, we'll get the churches off of Gay street! :) Good idea, right???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its about Love

Not sex.

Homosexuals love.

Just like Heterosexuals love.

Marriage is to show that you love for someone.

To commit.

this has gone way off topic..

if you want to argue about Gay Marriage.. make a new topic..

don't discuss it in a positive thread about the growth of gay culture in the multi cultural city we live in.

:) Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tot Pack, I agree that my comments have not been on the topic of the thread, but that's the direction the thread has headed. It's a little unfair of you to respond to my arguments with your own and then demand that I make a new topic to continue this discussion.

I will concede that you view it as an issue of love, but I view it as an issue of calling something that is bad good and perverting the institution of marriage into something that it is not. Perhaps the real question of the day is: should the government have a hand in marriage at all? That would be an interesting question to pursue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:) I though I was in the Nashville forum...that explains the topic.

Tot Pack - I agree that many faiths differ but that IS what makes choice so great. I would think that most anyone can find a place of faith if they wanted to seek it out. Humans are not perfect beings, thus we each must live by our own interpretation of faith (if any). If a Universalist Church wants to marry all flavors and members believe that is what their faith calls for then great for them but it does not mean that the state must recognize the occasion. Same goes for those faiths that do not allow for homosexual behavior. I honestly do not see the big deal either was EXCEPT for how the educational system teaches the issue after any legal recognition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this discussion is on topic, we're talking about a gay district, and gay rights go hand in hand because someone mentioned the cultural implications of having a gay district.

I don't like having someone interpret what is on topic or not for me and moving my discussions around. If that's going to be the case, why should I even be back on this forum? There are less restrictive places out there to have discussions if its going to be the case...

Some of you can't stand the idea of gay men and women being accepted in society and given equal rights.

You cannot differentiate intolerance and keeping people from rights from this so-called "intolerance of sin" because the person deserves rights regardless of what your personal beliefs are.

Even people who are just now coming around to the fact that we are treating millions of Americans as second class citizens still say things like "the GLBT community is trying to shove its agenda down everyone's throats" instead of realizing we're not asking to change anyone else's lifestyles or behavior.

All we're asking for is the ability to form legal unions, have protections in the workplace and in housing, and to have public schools teach the science of the matter: that homosexuality is not something to be feared and that picking on kids who are gay is not right.

No where in there does the "gay agenda" say you must accept our sexual orientation. It is about us being able to transfer benefits without having to go through extra legal hoopla that we many times don't pay attention to, its about not being denied housing or jobs, and its about not having to be told in public schools that homosexuality is a sin.

That is the job of an individual free thinking CHURCH to teach that if they see fit. NOT the public school system.

By contrary, the Conservative Christian Agenda (and I emphasize CONSERVATIVE Christians, because in Toronto where gay marriage was first legalized in North America it was liberal Churches that began gay marriage and helped make it legal there) is a REAL agenda. Conservative Christians are trying to alter the constitution of the United States - a document that hasn't been edited even 30 times yet since the 1700's - to fit their agenda. They are the real activists here, trying to force everyone to believe their agenda of Christian belief. Even though it flies in the face of all American tradition, individuality, and personal freedom. Conservative Christians want us to put freedom up to a vote. That's not done very often in our democratic republic. Some things shouldn't be put up to a vote, and personal freedom is one of those things.

Gay men and women aren't asking for special rights. Its the Christian Conservatives who want their message to have authority over science in the classroom. Its the Christian Conservative movement that wants their moral code taught in the classroom and protected.

Who really is looking for special rights?

Its the Conservative Christian community who feels like they need their message placed in public view from childhood going forward in order to have power over the gay population.

Gay rights groups have an agenda of freedom and individuality. Change the law to include us, but we're just asking for laws to change for US. No one else.

If you're against gay marriage, don't have a gay marriage. Marry a woman if you're a man and marry a man if you're a woman and dont' like gay marriage.

Simple enough! Problem solved...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and one more thing, this slippery slope of "special rights" has already been demonstrated to fail in the corporate world. Its not special rights at all, and no one in the gay community has been treated in a "special" way from the policies of Corporate America.

Corporate America is ahead of the U.S. government. Virtually every major Fortune 500 company has anti-discrimination rules in the rulebook and corporate by-laws. Verizon and SunTrust - my two previous employers - both allow for health benefits to be transferred. None of the major corporations that employ most Americans have had a problem implementing their policies. First off, they affect such a small number of people that it by nature hasn't been a major deal.

The fact is its not special rights.

Why not extend these rights to everyone in the country as federal law instead of having company X doing the right thing and company Y still discriminating?

What I think is funny is how revolutionary and changing gay rights laws would be in the minds of Conservative Christians. Wake up, do you not realize we're already over 50% there? Most major corporations offer benefits - albeit not with the federal backing of a law allowing full rights - and it hasn't changed the world for evil.

The Iraq war is more important to world destabalization than whether or not two loving people have rights. Conservative Christians keep thinking to themselves that its going to be some revolutionary change when its really not going to change much at all.

Canada is a great example to look at. You'll hear all kinds of myths from special conservative groups, but if you look at the facts there are more successful straight marriages in Ontario than in an average southeastern US state where conservative Christianity is so popular here. The only US state with legal gay marriage is Massachusetts. Its also the state with the lowest divorce rate. Why is this? Its because marriage, personal religiousity, and gay rights are all individual issues and have nothing to do with forcing a conservative Christian belief system down everyone's throats will not make marriage more attractive or more enduring. Its an individual thing, always has, and always will be.

Gay marriage is going to happen either soon or later, but within my lifetime I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lexy, your words to "butt out of everyone else's business and just worry about getting themselves through the Pearly Gates" are completely against Christian teaching. We are all here to be disciples of Christ, ie to spread the word of christ.

The historical accuracy of the english translated bible has been proven accurate and reliable. Only when taken out of context or mis-quoted is the bible wrong.

It's the Christian's job to pray for that sinners soul and pray that God convicts them to turn his way and follow him. It is not the Christians job to tell them they are wrong and should turn away from their ways. That is where 3/4 of the Christians in this area are wrong. It's God's job to convince them, not a Christians. Too many Christians set on their high horses and preach from the mountain tops that we are all sinning if we don't show up at church every time the doors are open, but yet they will go out to eat at a restaurant on Sunday AFTER CHURCH. It's the hypocricy and the double standard of today's Christianity that has me troubled. So many chiefs in the church, but there ain't a indian to be found out of them. It's time for Christians to worry more about themselves and let God do the convicting. There isn't one single thing that could be said by a Christian that would make me (if I was a non-believer) turn to God. Only his patience and his power would get me to the cross. Ministry to the world, ministry to the world!!!!!! No, minister to yourself and your family and let the world find God's way with God's help. Everyone has a choice, but yet so many Christians are anxious to make it for them, and everyone else, now days.

And you cannot defintaly prove many of the things in the bible because a number of the events are just wrote about and there is very little physical evidence of them occuring the way KING JAMES said they did. Being passed down through thousands of years and all. Remember how stories at work get blown out of proportion??? It goes from, "It started raining earlier today" to, "It just poured down rain today" in just a matter of minutes. Many passages of the bible are wrote as stories and the truth's are exxagerated slightly. Just because Paul and Jan Crouch says it's true, doesn't mean it's true. LOL!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts on the eating after church is this. You need to make a living. Sometimes, you have to work on Sunday in order to do that. That isn't a sin. To me, keeping the Sabbath holy doesn't mean that you can't do any work on Sundays. If you have to work, you have to work. But don't ignore God. Spend time with Him after you work, or on another day when you don't have to work. Just because everyone else keeps Sunday holy doesn't mean it will work best for you.

Also, I have a problem with your ideas about telling gays their lifestyles are wrong. I think that there has to be a way for them to know. God won't appear to them and tell them that what they do is wrong. That is why he sends us here to do that. However, don't get me wrong. I don't think we should go and say "YOU ARE A SINNER. UNLESS YOU CHANGE RIGHT NOW, YOU WILL GO TO HELL!" That is wrong, and will just make them hate Christians that much more. But I do believe that it is our job to do the convicting.

And about gay marriage. In the Bible, it only says that the acts are wrong. So that could be interpreted several ways. It could be taken to one extreme, where every thought of an action is a sin, or it could be taken literally, and that it is only a sin once you commit an act, and each of those acts is forgivable. I don't know. But technically, you could say that gay marriage isn't wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.