“If you think God does not approve, then i’m sure God will sort it out when he judges them. However, God reserves that right for himself, and not you, I, or anyone on this planet.” — and you don’t think Christians don’t understand this? I keep saying ’til I’m as blue in the face as the interface frames of the Advertiser 2.0, you bet your @$$ that at the gate most Christian’s’ll readily admit that they didn’t throw stones at homosexuals or didn’t burn the fat off meat . . . and any Christian should fear for their soul if they have to admit to Him that they did everything they could to support gay marriage as much as it means the bond between a man and a woman. Jesus’s first miracle was at a marriage between a man and a woman.

You and others, JPObvious, can go on this forever if you want. I know my stance.

Maybe it ain’t just Judeo-Christian values that doesn’t value gay marriage. I mean, you telling me that no (you telling me the MAJORITY OF PARENTS?) parents who don’t have ANY religious affliation might not feel a sting if their child(ren) comes home with someone of the same gender and says, “hi, folks, I’d like you to meet _______, my new boyfriend” in the case of a son, or “hi folks, I’d like you to meet ________, my new girlfriend” in the case of a daughter. Pfrrffft. Please. You just fooling yourself if that’s what you think.

Because their last line of such parents’ hope for that child in that case is, “oh, I hope they won’t get married. I hope our [son/daughter] will just snap out of this.” You know it’s true.

Some Christians, it seems yourself included, choose to cherry-pick what they will and will not believe in from the old-testament.

“It doesn’t mean we stop believing in crucial epithets and rules (like being against the same sex lying down with each other)”

My entire point is, such “crucial epithets” as a crusade against homosexual practices being central to Christian belief have been cherry-picked out of the old-testament by man, in his interpretation of the Bible. Moreover, large segments of Christians have begun to dismiss anti-same-sex marriage beliefs just as they have dismissed God’s call to stone them to death. For example, the entire Episcopal branch of the church.

“Judgement will be made is how I read it.”

Just as you leave judgement of homosexuals to God by not killing them yourself, Christians must leave judgement of their lifestyles to God just the same, and cannot punish them, or any others, themselves. After all, “let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” Thus, Christians have no business interfering with the lives of others even when those lifestyles run counter to mainstream Christian beliefs, and have no business preventing homosexuals from marrying if they so choose. If you think God does not approve, then i’m sure God will sort it out when he judges them. However, God reserves that right for himself, and not you, I, or anyone on this planet.

More importantly, Christians or any other religious group have no business trying to change the laws of our free nation to reflect and impose their own religion on the rest of us as stated in the very first amendment of the Constitution.

So, what, JPObvious — do you WANT me to stone homosexuals? I refuse to do it and I wouldn’t have any reservations telling God Himself that I wasn’t inclined to do it in my time in the flesh, on Earth. I don’t have to and it’s against the law based on Judeo-Christian values. I also won’t have to worry about telling Him that I supported homosexual marriage because I don’t. If you think just using the Bible without some interpretation (like how you’re only directly quoting from it, now), then, maybe you should go to Church. And if you already are, pay more attention during the sermon. Things change and Churches know it, and they know they have bad historical pasts and current pasts. It doesn’t mean we stop believing in crucial epithets and rules (like being against the same sex lying down with each other), but, if you’re expecting Christians to do wanton harm in all cases? Then, man, maybe I shouldn’t respect your opinion, like how I mentioned before.

Your “they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them,” doesn’t specify WHO will be putting them to death, does it ain’t gonna be me. Ain’t gonna be a lot of Christians. Judgement will be made is how I read it. You think the Old Testament is dead to Christians or something?

Your problem, JPObvious, is that you think you can convince me. I ain’t being stubborn and I ain’t an idiot. What you’re addressing I’ve seen before. Yawn, you know? I’m beyond all that.

Bottom line, I think I’ve been objective enough in saying the gay marriage lobby needs a better game plan (yay, pat on the back to me, right? Prffft). They ain’t convincing most of us to OK gay marriage through vote. Highly unlikely they’ll ever convince me, espeically how it stand now.

Christians will stand against this. Deal with it. You will not convince me, JPObvious, and I ain’t alone. You may have your private e-mails or conversations on this very board, “Chicken Grease, that stubbborn, whatever . . .” with others and convince yourself that you’re right. Go right ahead, because I’ll still be against this gay marriage thing, and I am not alone either.

1.”Mmm, JPObvious, “facts, figures, history.” There are those who have rebutted you on your references here on this topic.”

Well lets see. There have been 10 people who have responded since my first post. Of them, 7 agreed with me that Same-Sex marriage is okay, 1 whose comment “blech” is indistinguishable, and then just you and “Brotherlove” who responded negatively.

“Brotherlove” said that “JP your stats on the voters against same sex marriage in hawaii is flawed AND YOU KNOW IT which means you are perpetuating a fraud. The truth is 69% voted “no” to same sex marriage in hawaii.”

Of course as it turns out the numbers I provided from the Hawaii Office of Elections show that only 285k people voted “no” to same-sex marriage in Hawaii, which was in fact only 22% of Hawaii’s residents for whom the issue rose was important enough to take a stand on.

He also didn’t understand the difference between protected rights and general liberties, and didn’t understand how majority rule works in this democratic republic. Since his claims were dissected and put to rest, who else rebutted me on the “facts, figures and history” I keep providing?

2. “In this day and age, the same sexes marrying each other, well, being against that as a Chrisitan is clear. In this day and age, stoning a homosexual? With a real stone? In THIS day and age? That’s not the same as way back when and YOU KNOW IT.”

Well, consider that the Christian basis that homosexuality is a sin comes from Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” And, in the very next page 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”

Sounds like the bible is pretty clear about homosexual relations being a sin, and at the same time very clear on what people should do about it. So just how is it you can choose to dismiss the word of God in one passage, yet decide to honor it in the other? Who are you to interpret such things for other people?

Now I’ll go worry about more important things. Like the weeds in my yard. Take a hike, StraightToThePoint. Wrong on all points, you are.

In addition, your comment about Buddhist Nations is a diversion from the issue at hand. I am speaking as an American who happens to be Buddhist and is concerned over the blurring line between church and state in this country. As an American Buddhist, I believe in affirming the rights of all people regardless of difference. We should never govern through fear, hatred or intolerance. Members of minority religions and other groups should not have their voices and rights diminished by the majority. Our government represents ALL of us and should not impose the tenants of any particular religion (or interpretation of that religion) as public policy.

Tell you, though, I don’t think I’ll ever have to admit “I’m wrong on this issue”; at least while I’m alive. It’s gonna be A LONG time (if not ever) ’til same-sex marriage is legalized in this country. Too bad it has become a political issue the same way other hot topics that’ll never be resolved such as abortion, gun-control, etc. in this country. The topic of same-sex marriage’s become a tool for election year, come to think of it.

Sad.

JPObvious at May 19th, 2008 at 9:07 am United States is a Christian nation because the Passion of the Christ did so well here. I suppose this must also mean that most of us believe in magic since four of the Harry Potter movies are right up there with the Passion of the Christ in all-time high grosses.

Man, this logic is so flawed. # 1, people can believe in magic if they want (I understand that in the U.K. there’s a Jedi belief and followers and all). I dunno what either opinion is regarding same-sex marriage. I don’t think they have one — you find it, lemme know, I’d love to read it. The Christians have a view on it, though.

JPObvious at May 19th, 2008 at 9:07 am:
Now, you claim to speak for the tenets that Christians SHOULD adhere to. Who are you to tell other people what and how their religion should be practiced?

And what did you miss about me saying, what’ll be their REAL point-of-view when reminded of Christianity’s teachings? In this day and age, the same sexes marrying each other, well, being against that as a Chrisitan is clear. In this day and age, stoning a homosexual? With a real stone? In THIS day and age? That’s not the same as way back when and YOU KNOW IT. I don’t burn the fat off meat, and I’d admit that to God and my priest in an instant. It ain’t the same as a Christian believing in same-sex marriage and needing to do an about face when confronted by their church priest, pastor, whatever or God Himself. I think you know THAT, too.

Mass never ends with the priest saying, “now go out, all of you, and pray that same-sex marriage is legalized” or “go out and stone a homosexual with REAL STONES, OK?” What you believe in Mass is the same thing Christians better believe outside of Sunday. They know it.

I don’t tell ANY fellow Catholic what to believe — they should know.

JPObvious at May 19th, 2008 at 9:07 am: The United States could only be born when social philosophers such as Hobbes, Locke, Kant and Montesquieu began to write theories focusing on life in this world, and when our intelligent group of founding fathers put aside religious influence and adopted these secular, humanist theories and built them into the fabric of a new kind of government; not by god or king, but by the people themselves.

The same kind of “people” who don’t want same-sex marriage in THIS country. Not enough care enough to say, “ah, let ‘em do what they like, who cares if they get married or not.”

I understand: 1 that the same sex marriage lobby needs a better game plan than the one they’re employing if they REALLY want same-sex marriage; 2) that if same-sex marriage is SO right, then, it sure is being this day’s Sisyphus and Promethean story. I said that before you started posting here on this topic, and I’ve seen no rebuttle to that analogy, so, I guess you agree with that comparison as well. I said previously that it’s sad that it’s like this. Sad to see this thing passing, then failing, then not being recognized.

You can do all the referencing you want. I got the real answer here. And I ain’t alone. The day same-sex marriage is legalized as much as marriage between a man and a woman is here in this country? THAT’s the day I’ll say “I’m wrong.” You go do all referencing you want and see how far that gets with this issue.

I think Juh’s comment was not an insult, but rather pointed out that while i’ve responded to your arguments with facts, data, and history, you’ve largely ignored it all and simply tried to come up with some new claim such as this last one that the United States is a Christian nation because the Passion of the Christ did so well here. I suppose this must also mean that most of us believe in magic since four of the Harry Potter movies are right up there with the Passion of the Christ in all-time high grosses.

Even if by some logic a film’s grosses could be accurately correlated to the demographic makeup of the entire nation, it still paints a picture of our nation only today, and says nothing of its composition at its founding.

Even more importantly, however, is that it doesn’t matter what the religious makeup of the nation was at its founding, as what matters is what was purposely enshrined in the Constitution that founded our Country, and just as importantly, what was left out of it, and for what reason. Religious freedom, and the role the government would take as a secular institution such that it would never be able to infringe on the religious rights of any individuals or groups was paramount, and that was made very clear. If Christians at the time wanted to make this a Christian nation, they could have written that right into our founding documents.

Now, you claim to speak for the tenets that Christians SHOULD adhere to. Who are you to tell other people what and how their religion should be practiced? How do you know that you have interpreted the religion, and the Bible (a document written by man let’s not forget) correctly? Because out there are numerous Christian groups and countless millions of individuals who absolutely stand up and support same-sex marriage.

What if I tell you that I think you aren’t a proper devout Christian because you aren’t following God’s teaching in the Bible. I haven’t seen you stone a homosexual lately. Who are you to pick and choose what parts of “Gods word” you are going to follow, and what you are going to ignore?

Finally, you can’t logically or rationally talk about reasons our government should change our laws and the very foundation that this nation was built upon, while insisting that the discussion ignore “laws, edicts, and precedent” because you’re “beyond all that.” Especially when all the “laws, edicts and precedent” cited here have specifically showed that the United States was not founded on Christian principles or the religon. I think it’s clear, based on your eagerness to ignore it, and the completely irrelevant OJ Simpson case, that you don’t understand this law or history, and especially not Constitutional law, on which this entire debate centers.

In short- the basic principles our government was founded on run counter to “judeo-christian values.” Our nation was founded on principles central to political thought of the age which was based on the Enlightenment. The Magna Carta, John Locke’s political theory, Montesquei’s separation of powers, etc. Central to this era of thought was the celebration of reason, by which people seek to understand their universe and improve their own condition through logic and rational thought. Yes, our founding fathers were a mix of religions, catholic, protestant, agnostic, deist and even athiest. But they were all raised in the 18th century age of political and social enlightenment whose basic philosophy was wholly incompatible with traditional Judeo-Christian thought.

Judeo-Christian philosophy is, by definition, unconcerned with earthly existence. Its focus is on another world attainable only through death. While Europe lived under the power of the Church and judeo-Christian thought in the Dark and Middle Ages, the result was centuries of terrible social hierarchy, poverty, exploitation and no real social education or advancement.

Only after the Reformation, the Renniasance and the Enlightenment ultimately split the Church and broke its hold as the center of social power did individuals, people, have the chance to improve their own lives not in heaven, but here on Earth.

The United States could only be born when social philosophers such as Hobbes, Locke, Kant and Montesquieu began to write theories focusing on life in this world, and when our intelligent group of founding fathers put aside religious influence and adopted these secular, humanist theories and built them into the fabric of a new kind of government; not by god or king, but by the people themselves. The result was the first government founded for the specific purpose of furthering and bettering the lives of its citizens here on Earth. Thus we have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, born entirely out of enlightened political and philosophical theory of the day, in direct contradiction with centuries of traditional Judeo-Christian thought.