Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:48 AM
 
17,291 posts, read 29,411,909 times
Reputation: 8691

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oleg Bach View Post
Just making a point and being extreme to get it across.. The point is that Christians do not want to be oppressed- and they will be and are oppressed by liberal elite...as for the portal...don't worry- I was the only one to get through. There are no others.

Oppressors can always expect "push back" from those they oppress.

Here, at least, the "push back" is justified. It's not like gay people are asking for anything but what they are entitled to as free, tax paying citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Metro DC area
4,520 posts, read 4,210,521 times
Reputation: 1289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo View Post
I'm not listening to an hour long podcast for an answer to one simple question. Nobody here has been able to answer the question and I don't expect whoever these podcasters are to answer it either. My initial question is more or less rhetorical. I know why christians think the way they think, I just want one to address the inherent contradications in that thought process. Again, none ever touches these. Maybe you'd like to take a shot?
You have yet to provide any proof of any type of contradiction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Metro DC area
4,520 posts, read 4,210,521 times
Reputation: 1289
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
Here's the problem: Your "understanding" and "definition" of marriage is personal to you. Nobody is asking religious people to ever PERSONALLY accept gay marriage within the confines of their religious beliefs (be they truly "scripture based" or not).

Some people won't ever respect an interracial marriage, or plural marriage, or any combination that they don't personally agree with for whatever reason. Some people don't accept marriage that isn't in a church... or interfaith marriage. But that's OK. The GOVERNMENT definition of marriage, however, should not consider what the dominant religion thinks is "the best" way.
I agree with you on this, so you're preaching to the choir. I believe that the government should get out of the marriage business entirely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,492,759 times
Reputation: 9618
let's see

LIBERAL North carolina voted to DEFINE marriage as between one man and one woman..siad NOTHING about gay

and LIBERAL blacks voted 2-1 for the ammendment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:52 AM
 
17,291 posts, read 29,411,909 times
Reputation: 8691
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
Why is that odd? In essence, you're saying that although I support it, unless I agree with it, I'm wrong. How....tolerant.

If I'm a Christian and believe God's word on marriage, then of course, this is a spiritual dilemma for me. That's common sense.


A different perspective. Consider the following, which relates to whether or not interest should be charged by people who lend money:

Exodus 22: 24-25, "If you lend money to one of your poor neighbors among my people, you shall not act like an extortioner toward him by demanding interest from him." This prohibition is repeated 22 times in the Old Testament.

Psalm 15 says, "Yahweh, who can find a home in your tent, who can dwell on your holy mountain? Whoever lives blamelessly, who acts uprightly, who speaks the truth from the heart, ... who asks no interest on loans, who takes no bribe to harm the innocent. No one who so acts can ever be shaken."

Deuteronomy 15:1-11 orders the cancellation of all debts at the end of every seventh year.



Now we KNOW that Christians do not follow these biblical usury laws, despite it being black and white IN THE BIBLE.

Is it a "spiritual dilemma" for you that banks are allowed to charge interest if they want to? Does the fact that banks can charge interest and NOT discharge the debt after 7 years force YOU to go against God's will and charge interest on a personal loan you make to a friend?

Would you think that the public should be able to vote based on the Bible and enact usury laws that adopt the biblical terms of loan law?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:52 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,827,269 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
let's see

LIBERAL North carolina voted to DEFINE marriage as between one man and one woman..siad NOTHING about gay

and LIBERAL blacks voted 2-1 for the ammendment
So, anybody who supports the way this went down, is a liberal? And those of us who are disgusted, are conservatives.

I knew it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:53 AM
 
Location: Metro DC area
4,520 posts, read 4,210,521 times
Reputation: 1289
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
But that's the point.

Your version of the Bible may just be YOUR particular religious branch's interpretation of the same book that OTHER branches of the SAME religion have different definitions for.
Yes, but provide an interpretation, along with a translation, so that we can have a meaningful discussion.

I do not subscribe to a denomination. I am Christian, no qualifier necessary. I have the KJ, NKJ, NIV and Living Translation versions of the Bible. None of them provide contradictory viewpoints on anything related to homosexuality and/or immortal sexual acts. If someone has a printed Bible that highlights a direct contradiction to the Bible's stance on homosexuality, please post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
2,401 posts, read 4,351,502 times
Reputation: 1464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo View Post
LOL...In fact, you can barely get a table in Red Lobster on a Sunday afternoon because of all the church folk.
This (and the other issues you asked about in your originial question) were asked and answered in the podcast I linked to in my last comment. You don't want to listen, so you obviously dont' really want to understand.

Again...it doesnt' mean it will change your viewpoint, but now you are commenting from a point of ignorance.

Let me give you a clue. Christian's AREN"T told not to eat shellfish (so your joke is now really idiotic (i.e...not funny) to anyone that understand basic Biblical history). Shellfish was prohibited in the Old Testament and related strickly to to God's chosen people, the Jews.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,827,269 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
Yes, but provide an interpretation, along with a translation, so that we can have a meaningful discussion.
Leviticus 18:22, or 19:28?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2012, 10:57 AM
 
17,291 posts, read 29,411,909 times
Reputation: 8691
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
let's see

LIBERAL North carolina voted to DEFINE marriage as between one man and one woman..siad NOTHING about gay

and LIBERAL blacks voted 2-1 for the ammendment

North Carolina = liberal? Since when?! It's deep south all the way. It flipped for Obama merely because of black people... who are NOT known for being socially liberal. They are by and large economically liberal, but side by side a white social conservative and black person will share far more social beliefs outside the "race" realm!


There's an interesting map going around the web. Counties with college educated people voted against the amendment. (The liberals).



The liberals are simply outnumbered, but prove that with education, comes social liberal perspective. Might be why republicans and religions seek to keep people stupid, so they can control them easier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:19 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top