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.
I'm not speaking in generalities, I'm referring to a specific instance where the traumatized student was seeking comfort and reassurance and was allowing a teacher to join her in prayer between the two of them in a deserted hallway. That some observer felt the need to 'report' it as though some major crime had taken place seems heartless and intolerant to say the least. The circumstances were quite different than those you've described.
The deserted hallway is still within school grounds. Similarly, it is improper for couples to make love in a an empty church.
I'm not speaking in generalities, I'm referring to a specific instance where the traumatized student was seeking comfort and reassurance and was allowing a teacher to join her in prayer between the two of them in a deserted hallway. That some observer felt the need to 'report' it as though some major crime had taken place seems heartless and intolerant to say the least. The circumstances were quite different than those you've described.
Yes, you are right they were and I looked every where for that article; even went into my archived bookmarks, hoping I'd have a link --- there's no record of what happened after the initial article that I read --- fellow student died in a car crash.
In that moment shared by teacher and student --- nothing indicates a malice of intent upon that teacher, just a pure opposite of consoling a distraught pupil. Some one saw it and took an issue with it --- it has been a wild ride since 1963.
Much has changed in the students taking part in their freedoms --- without that decision though, the right to fight idiocracy would never have been thought about as a thing to do.
I was raised in that era and had plenty of time to think about what happened and I thought, wow, neither Madalyn nor the Justices understood --- tell a child that they can not do something, that is the very thing they will fight, to be able to do. And they have with attempts to right a wrong. And they have succeeded.
Prayer groups on campus
See you at the flag poll
And more --- it is as it should be; that's how laws change and that is how people change with them
Here is the difference. If I want to know Jesus instruction in an area, I will go to Jesus word contained in the bible. I referenced that instruction along with chapter and verse as to where to find them. I asked you to do the same to support your views. What you supplied was a book by a gay author, and another by a self described revisionist author who promoted traditional teaching of the bible until his son came out as gay.
(I guess that changed the word somehow)
So the question is, who is trying to change religion. The traditionalist who is still using biblical teachings as a guide, or the revisionists, who are writing books to conform with their own opinions? If your going to make an argument about who Jesus is and what He does, you might consider staying with the book containing his words. It's there should you ever be so inclined.
The bible is a collection of Christian texts that is the result of refinement by men who thought they were led by God to discern his teachings. The early Christian world was diverse and everyone had a different take on the Gospel of Jesus. These disagreements were “settled” in the large Councils of high ranking priests. That being said, show me in the Gospels where he speaks against homosexuality? He talks of love, tolerance and acceptance. Discriminating against people simply because they are gay is contrary to his message.
Every business should be able to choose what products they produce for any reason whatsoever. So if their product list only includes traditional marriages, that's fine with me.
The bible is a collection of Christian texts that is the result of refinement by men who thought they were led by God to discern his teachings. The early Christian world was diverse and everyone had a different take on the Gospel of Jesus. These disagreements were “settled” in the large Councils of high ranking priests.
The bible is a collection of works that has carried the same new testament message for over 2000 years. It is also one that you reference, including this post, as supporting your ideas. So, what is your point?
Quote:
That being said, show me in the Gospels where he speaks against homosexuality? He talks of love, tolerance and acceptance.
Show you?? I have asked for references you seem to think contradict his statement concerning marriage. You have shown me none. Now you wish to change the subject to homosexuality. While certainly under no obligation to do so, I will address your query.
Jesus himself did not comment on homosexuality, the apostle did. Here is what Jesus taught. The Bible prohibits all kinds of sexual promiscuity – heterosexual as well as homosexual. Logical consistency demands that individuals and groups who want to reinterpret Scripture to sanction free sexual expression among homosexuals should extend the same concession to heterosexual singles; and, in fact, some have already taken this next step. But none of this can alter the facts: there is simply no scriptural support for endorsing sexual immorality (i.e., sexual activity outside the bond of heterosexual marriage) for anyone, no matter what his or her personal sexual feelings may be.
Personally, homosexuals to me are just another face in the crowd. I don't care what they do behind closed doors. I neither condone or condemn them. Even though I don't agree with same sex marriage for reasons already discussed, if they have a marriage ceremony of which I am not asked to participate, that's up to those involved. I'm sure there have been many same sex ceremonies I'm not aware of and of course have raised no objections too. I do have a problem when a gay couple attempts to force a Christian business which doesn't choose to participate because of the religious convictions we have discussed, to bow to their demands through lawsuits and attempts to close down their business rather than find another business known to provide the service. That is an agenda I only will not support, but will fight against.
Quote:
Discriminating against people simply because they are gay is contrary to his message.
As we have covered and you have yet to refute, gay marriage is contrary to his message. As a reminder, gay marriage is the topic, not homosexuality.
The bible is a collection of works that has carried the same new testament message for over 2000 years. It is also one that you reference, including this post, as supporting your ideas. So, what is your point?Show you?? I have asked for references you seem to think contradict his statement concerning marriage. You have shown me none. Now you wish to change the subject to homosexuality. While certainly under no obligation to do so, I will address your query.
Jesus himself did not comment on homosexuality, the apostle did. Here is what Jesus taught. The Bible prohibits all kinds of sexual promiscuity – heterosexual as well as homosexual. Logical consistency demands that individuals and groups who want to reinterpret Scripture to sanction free sexual expression among homosexuals should extend the same concession to heterosexual singles; and, in fact, some have already taken this next step. But none of this can alter the facts: there is simply no scriptural support for endorsing sexual immorality (i.e., sexual activity outside the bond of heterosexual marriage) for anyone, no matter what his or her personal sexual feelings may be.
Personally, homosexuals to me are just another face in the crowd. I don't care what they do behind closed doors. I neither condone or condemn them. Even though I don't agree with same sex marriage for reasons already discussed, if they have a marriage ceremony of which I am not asked to participate, that's up to those involved. I'm sure there have been many same sex ceremonies I'm not aware of and of course have raised no objections too. I do have a problem when a gay couple attempts to force a Christian business which doesn't choose to participate because of the religious convictions we have discussed, to bow to their demands through lawsuits and attempts to close down their business rather than find another business known to provide the service. That is an agenda I only will not support, but will fight against.As we have covered and you have yet to refute, gay marriage is contrary to his message. As a reminder, gay marriage is the topic, not homosexuality.
The text didn't change, the people did.
Salt anyone?
The bible is a collection of works that has carried the same new testament message for over 2000 years. It is also one that you reference, including this post, as supporting your ideas. So, what is your point?Show you?? I have asked for references you seem to think contradict his statement concerning marriage. You have shown me none. Now you wish to change the subject to homosexuality. While certainly under no obligation to do so, I will address your query.
Jesus himself did not comment on homosexuality, the apostle did. Here is what Jesus taught. The Bible prohibits all kinds of sexual promiscuity – heterosexual as well as homosexual. Logical consistency demands that individuals and groups who want to reinterpret Scripture to sanction free sexual expression among homosexuals should extend the same concession to heterosexual singles; and, in fact, some have already taken this next step. But none of this can alter the facts: there is simply no scriptural support for endorsing sexual immorality (i.e., sexual activity outside the bond of heterosexual marriage) for anyone, no matter what his or her personal sexual feelings may be.
Personally, homosexuals to me are just another face in the crowd. I don't care what they do behind closed doors. I neither condone or condemn them. Even though I don't agree with same sex marriage for reasons already discussed, if they have a marriage ceremony of which I am not asked to participate, that's up to those involved. I'm sure there have been many same sex ceremonies I'm not aware of and of course have raised no objections too. I do have a problem when a gay couple attempts to force a Christian business which doesn't choose to participate because of the religious convictions we have discussed, to bow to their demands through lawsuits and attempts to close down their business rather than find another business known to provide the service. That is an agenda I only will not support, but will fight against.As we have covered and you have yet to refute, gay marriage is contrary to his message. As a reminder, gay marriage is the topic, not homosexuality.
Reinterpret scripture? I though you said you derived your meaning from your own reading? You use that term like there is only one ‘correct’ view and any contrary view is somehow less valid. Just because Jesus approves of heterosexual marriage, it doesn’t mean he condemns homosexual marriage. Under that logical fallacy, does that mean he condemns those who don’t get married? You are being tested. Maybe someday you will see the light and understand his real message about love, tolerance and acceptance.
yep. and technically the verse states that man should not lie with "mankind" as they do with "womankind". no mention of two women hooking up so..... the venue should be good with them.
‘You must spread some reputation around Before giving it to wrecking ball again”.
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.
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.
