Donnie Ducati
Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 209
Mr. Traverse , are you struggling with homosexuality. Based upon your arguments I'm gathering you are. Forgive me if I'm wrong.
Respectfully,
Donnie
Homosexuality
- Thread starter TouchTestimony
- Start date
Mr. Traverse , are you struggling with homosexuality. Based upon your arguments I'm gathering you are. Forgive me if I'm wrong.
Respectfully,
Donnie
Mr. Traverse
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 53
I am a straight male, and happily married to a female.
Concluding that there is no secular argument that justifies restricting the rights of an individual purely based upon sexual preference does not necessitate homosexuality.
Respectfully,
Traverse
Donnie Ducati
Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 209
Again forgive me. :embarasse
^^^Human rights are one thing, which we ALL should have equally, but "special" rights to accommodate ones sexual preference is completely wrong.
B-A-C
Loyal
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2008
- Messages
- 11,081
I dunno, it sounds like you are just prejudiced against child molesters, sex slave traffickers, child pornographers, polygamists, sadists, adulterers and fornicators... I think you are denying them their human rights!!!
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ok... maybe that was a little over the top, but it does prove a point.
Just because someone has a sexual preference, doesn't make it a good thing. (I hope you know I agree with you here Donnie).
Some sex IS a good thing. The Bible gives rules about these things.
Hebrews 13:4, 1Cor 7, (practically the entire book of Song of Solomon) But some sex IS bad... the Bible specifically spells these rules out also
John 8:41, Acts 15:20, 29, 1Cor 6:9, Heb 13:4, etc...
You can either go with what the Bible says about these things or choose to ignore them, but if we choose to ignore the Bible.. where then do we get our morality from? (Not to mention salvation) Jesus isn't "a" way, he is "the" way.
Last edited:
Mr. Traverse
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 53
Do you consider marriage a human right? If so, why not extend that to homosexuals? If you don't, why have special rights for heterosexuals to accommodate their sexual preference?
Last edited:
Mr. Traverse
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 53
I don't know anyone advocating that every sexual preference is good, or all discrimination is bad. Some discrimination is good. A restaurant might discriminate against those who enter their business without shoes on for sanitary reasons, for example.
Respectfully,
Traverse
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 11,549
Discrimination? Name a government that doesn’t have it. Even Anarchy, requires the subjugation of the weak. The government can’t help it because man can’t help it. Man has polar opposite beliefs, on almost any subject under the sun. So we’re supposed to allow the majority to dictate what is preferred. One problem is that the courts have negated this and turned it on its head. The few will be allowed to choose and dictate what the majority want. It was bound to happen in this country as it slowly moved away from the Godly foundation which had a guiding hand in creating it (One I’m sure you don’t believe and which you would call discriminatory.) towards as you say a secular style government which means that inherently everything is accepted except God/Jesus Christ. Only Christianity Mr. Traverse. You think not? Wait until Sharia Law is allowed in certain jurisdictions. A judge in Florida has allowed for its use in a chase brought before it! I wonder if Christians will be afforded this same right?
Remember equality is not the ultimate goal of the gay life style. What they are searching for but will never receive from Christians who hold God's Word as being inerrant is an acceptance of their behavior. Since the change does not come willingly, then the tools (Government) are used to force this acceptance.
The government to be true to the nature it seems to have, cannot help it’s self, but continue down this path. By this I mean that whatever behavior you might find abhorrent, must in the end become acceptable. I won’t list them, since I’m sure if you thought about it, you’d be able to identify a few that you would find unacceptable to society at large. Everything that morality incomposes must eventually find its way to acceptability. In a society that is becoming more secular it is just a matter of time, before the abhorent becomes acceptable. Your worse nightmares become true. If you want a true secular government it has to beable to remove its self from making any moral decisions regardless of the side. Like the opening lines to the Constitution state “We the People”, the government should leave it to the people to decide for themselves. You and I know this will never be the case. Why? Because they know better.
Side note to believers who read this post:
In a truly secular government, there are no morals. Right and wrong is subjective, and will never be representative of its people, while there exists’ freedom to worship as you believe. Which means for it to truly become acceptable, this freedom of worship, must somehow be restricted, or the tenets so watered down, that it’s no longer reflection of their faith, but of their government. Pray my brothers & sisters, that this does not occurr, until all have heard the Gospel.
Who sets the policies of this country then? From where are they derived from? It’s funny in a sad sort of way, because we “kick against the goads” because the very thing you state should not be is the very thing that established this country. Without a strong moral and faith based character, the individuals who put everything on the line, would not have done so. I thank God for this country, because it has allowed the Gospel to continue to be spread throughout the world. Republic? Democracy? I put my faith in neither. What I long for is a Monarchy! My King is not here presently, but one day He will be. That’s one reason I wonder if Americans who profess to be Christians, really understand this and one day I hope you will be able to. I also mean this with love and no disrespect to your belief Mr. Traverse.
C4E
Donnie Ducati
Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 209
Not denying them there "human" rights, just denying there desire to infect the rest of society and or children's young minds with there satanic mind set and philosophies.
Heterosexuality is not a preference or a lifestyle. For a "Christian" , why would this even be up for debate ? No wonder our Counrty is going down the tubes....its following the Church.
Christians and Preachers no longer believe the Bible to be the infallible Word of God today on matters such as this. People like Rick Warren and Joel Osteen and a host of others have presented it as no more then just another "self help" book. The world no longer sees the Church as a place of reverence and hope for the lost and wayward, and why should they with lesbians and homosexuals dawning the pulpits. The only difference between them and us is the Crosses on the tops of the building...even those are being torn down as to not affend anyone.
Wow, just sad.
Mr. Traverse
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 53
Just because discrimination exists doesn't mean we should throw our hands up and say "oh well" when we witness it. Note: I'm not saying you yourself are giving up, otherwise I don't think you would be here stating your position so eloquently.
I suppose you and I will have to agree to disagree on what the founding principles of this nation are, and I know you respect that right. If, however, you are worried about Islam injecting Sharia Law into this nation, you should do all that is within your reasonable ability to strengthen the separation of church and state.
I can't speak on behalf of the entirety of those who support homosexual marriage and the removal of don't ask don't tell. I can however, speak as to my own position.
I have concluded there is no practical or reasonable secular argument that justifies restricting marriage between two consenting adults based solely upon sexual preference. That does not mean I wish to utilize the government to try and silence those who disagree with me, or force those who disagree with me into homosexual marriage. It just means I find no good reason to restrict marriage on this basis.
There is nothing in my position that I am aware of that would result in the restriction of your own personal freedoms, or force you to suddenly believe that homosexual marriage is moral. You are still free to disagree with it, and you are still free to disagree with it on religious grounds.
But creating laws based solely upon morality would be legislating morality. Our secular government needs more than that to rightly prohibit an action (like homosexual marriage), otherwise it is simply legislating morality.
If you don't want to legislate morality, and you don't want others to legislate morality, then there will inevitably be things that are allowed that you and I disagree with on moral grounds.
As an example: I don't have to accept or want homosexual marriage to argue that the government should not be allowed to prevent other people from marrying the same sex. I might find it morally wrong, but it would be legislating morality if my moral argument is the only one I can find to support prohibiting it.
Again, just because our laws can not be built from morality, (remember we don't want to legislate morality, right?), doesn't mean we can't be moral people.
If I find homosexual marriage immoral, but the government does not prohibit against it, I can still find it immoral. I'm not being restricted in any way.
Thank-you for your kind words.
I do have an issue with your statement, though. You want monarchy, but isn't that legislating your morality? And isn't that antithetical to the principles this free nation was founded upon?
What about when someone else decides they too want a monarchy, but they are Muslim? Why not argue in support of a system that attempts to maximize personal freedoms and allows everyone to worship or not, by not restricting its judicial and legislative system to one single religion?
Respectfully,
Traverse
Last edited:
Donnie Ducati
Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 209
The 10 Commandments is legislated morality. All moral law comes from the 10 Commandments.
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 11,549
The problem is not in strengthening the separation of church and state, which we both know is not something the Constitution recognizes or addresses. Rather it’s getting the government to allow expression of religious worship, which it does not, unless it discriminates against nobody. We know that religious worship will always offend someone, so the insulted ones attempt to prevent through the use of the courts to either suppress or change the ones who have slighted them from realizing their fundamental unalienable right of free expression.
Side note. You should do a search on the origins of the phrase “separation of church and state”. A site which I don’t usually check out, but provides a worthy backdrop on what the hopes, beliefs, faith of the founding fathers actually were is wallbuilders.com The main speaker is David Barton, who if you ever have an opportunity to listen to, is really educational. If you think my writing is eloquent, I fear when you read some of his material, you just might be left speechless! He has one of the largest private holdings of documents from that era. You might have to deal with a bit of the biblical references, but since many are just repeated references from the founding fathers themselves, you should be able to accept since it’s appropriate to the of separation of church and state and the introduction of Judeo/Christian ethics in government.
If the citizenry considers something wrong, does the government have the moral authority to make it otherwise, if it’s truly a representative government?
Marriage is a Church driven issue not a governmental one. States can allow for civil unions which would resolve any issues involving benefits. However, this is not what they want. They want as I’ve stated before acknowledgement that their behavior is acceptable and natural. It’s kind of like a 5ft person wanting to like the 6ft person, but instead of 1ft lifters in their shoes they instead want the 6ft person to have 1ft cut off of them, then they’ll be satisfied. Using the word Marriage is paramount to them because it has always been defined as being between a man and a woman. Someone who is secular doesn’t see the issue, since they don’t acknowledge a God in the first place, so marriage as a covenant between God and Man with Woman is foolishness at its highest. You might treat my words as prophetic here. As gay issues gain greater traction by being supported by the government, you’ll find that churches, who don’t accept marriages between same sex couples, will be deemed to be haters, and will be threatened with the removal of tax except status, and be taken to court which is another way of bankrupting them, because of the stance they take. The same separation of church and state you support will cease to exist because they’ll have become one. People who will be tired and are tired will flee mainline denominations into smaller house churches. Many are doing this because they have no other choice if they are to remain faithful to the written word found in scripture. Yet they’ll have to stay small, because once they come to the attention of the authorities, they’ll be so bound in regulations, ordinances, because they're a threat to the well being of a few. If you don’t believe it, think about “imminent domain”. Anything that the government gets a hold of has always been with the best of intentions, but winds up being oppressive to its citizenry.
Let me move on or I’ll be writing a book!
Yet creating laws allowing for let’s say homosexual marriage is making a moral decision. It’s just made a choice and is forcing the people to accept it or else! When the only recourse becomes the government to get your way, then all you will have is a forced moral decision made by the government placed upon an unwanting citizendary. That’s why I stated, the only way for the government to be secular, is to leave it to “We the people” to decide in their own backyards what is to be acceptable or not. It’s either morality by the choosing of people or morality being forced by the government.
The problem is none wants discrimination, but it exist and is done by all of us in one fashion or another as you’ve stated before. I’d rather leave it to us folks to decide what is to be morally acceptable and not a government whose sole purpose is to perpetuate its self.
Here is where we’ll separate and it is not meant to being insulting in anyway. Keep in mind that everyone has their own perspective on right and wrong. You already know the foundation of my morality (The Bible). What is the basis of your own?
It’s not about legislating it. It’s about either having a religion or not. A government will not work any other way. It cannot have an entity that is not governed by it. This was evident at the time of our founding fathers, but their inability to understand that freedom would cry out to all people, but under different religious banners of religious beliefs. The government created was one that adhered in and out of it to the norms of the day, which was Christianity. I don’t believe they realized that a representative people with Myriad beliefs encompassing the world, would not be converted to Christianity. It did not and it cannot co-exist, and because it cannot co-exist it has continued to erode the very foundation of Christianity in this country which they believed was natural state of affairs both in and out of government. Now, the government must control the myriad beliefs to insure that at least a semblance of it will still be available for its people. It must because man by their very nature desires to know their purpose. Why am I? Telling someone there is no purpose except for the one you create yourself, leaves no room for hope, and if there is no hope, then darkness is all that awaits any of us, so why be concerned? Paul in the Bible made a point that pretty much says it all. “if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die.” From all my searches of beliefs that are out there, it is Christianity that makes the most sense. I know hard to believe. Yet true. However, that is not my personal testimony, by which I believe as I believe. You’re welcome to read my testimony on my bio. Even though that hardly expresses what I experienced.
On a Monarchy, I believe “aqua” adequately defined what I meant by my use of Monarchy and my hope in its early arrival. However my hope and prayers are that the day of His arrival does not occur before you and many others might also be of like mind for His return!
As I’ve stated before no insult intended in any of what I’ve placed before you for your consideration.
C4E
Mr. Traverse
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 53
Mr. Traverse
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 53
I am not aware of anyone passing legislation that suppresses ones ability to worship, but I concede we may have a opposing grasps on the term "suppression" in this context. In any case, suppression of worship would be a violation of ones constitutionally protected rights, and thus unconstitutional, which would mean I, even as an atheist, would be protesting right along side you against such an infringement of rights.
From where I see it, the origins of the phrase have little merit on whether or not this is a principle within the constitution of this country (the Establishment Clause).
Not according to the document that outlines this nations governance.
If the majority of individuals in this country wanted to reestablish black slavery, for example, but attempted to do so while upholding the constitution, they would be constitutionally prevented from infringing upon the constitutionally protected rights of black Americans.
The fact that the institution of marriage bestows state and federal benefits is conclusive evidence that tells us it is not a religious institution.
If a religious individual wants a marriage with their significant other that is symbolically tied to their God, they can have a church sanctioned ceremony under the guidance of their Lord and Savior that bestows that to them. If the two individuals happen to be homosexual, I see no reason why the church should not have the right to deny them that marriage. The state sanctioned institution of marriage, however, is a completely separate institution that bestows over 1,000 state and federal rights.
So it makes little sense to inject a religious interpretation of marriage into a secular state sanctioned institution that bestows benefits in a way that does not necessitate any one singular religious belief. This is why Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, atheists can all get married regardless of their religious positions.
Even if this is what the majority of them do want, allowing homosexual marriage does not accomplish this. Allowing homosexual marriage does not force a single person to accept homosexual marriage if they don't want to.
It would be as if a woman you know very well started dating a man that you did not like very much. You thought, with all the best intentions, that she should not get married to him. But they both decide that they want to get married and do. You may not like the marriage, and you don't have to accept it, but you cannot legally deny them that right.
Marriage has not always been defined as between a man and a woman. It certainly wasn't always defined as it is today in the Bible, where things like age of consent and individual consent were not necessarily required.
If the church wants to offer state sanctioned marriage, it will have to follow the rules of the state sanctioned marriage.
Otherwise, the church can offer a church sanctioned marriage under their God that does not bestow the state and federal rights, and if the couple decides they want the state sanctioned marriage as well, then they can go to a venue that establishes such.
Removing the restriction of marriage on homosexual couples is not forcing anyone to accept it. You can continue to not accept homosexual marriage as well as not get married to the same sex. That's why it's the option that maximizes everyone's freedoms.
Laws are a set of rules to ensure that a society remains relatively safe and harmonious. They may align with ones morality but they also may not.
The government decides what laws to pass based on the principles of its founding document, the constitution, which detail ways the founding fathers thought best to govern and perpetuate a safe and harmonious society. The laws and a person's individual morality are separate things.
My foundation for my morality is myself and I also believe that everyone, not just me, dictates their own morality. It is the very reason you can agree with certain moral judgements within the Bible and others can disagree.
On the contrary, eternal afterlife makes this one sound rather inconsequential and bland. My realization that I likely have but one life to live brings me great hope and desire to strive to leave this place better than its condition upon my entering it.
I also find no reason to believe anyone has a purpose that is not largely influenced by themselves. I try and find purpose and meaning in everything that I do, but I refrain from extending that purpose or meaning to anything supernatural or religious.
I will take a gander at your testimony. Thank-you for that invitation and for publicly posting it.
Thank-you as well as Agua for the clarification on that. And nothing you've said to me has insulted me in any way. You've been very polite and I hope I have been the same.
Also, there were sections of your post that I cut out to save space, or that I deemed irrelevant to the portion of my answer it was tied to. I hope you don't feel I misrepresented your position, but if my answers demonstrate that please let me know.
Respectfully,
Traverse
Last edited:
Surely we cannot judge whether someone is "saved" or not, that is God's judgement not ours, we are all sinners and rely on God's Mercy and grace for our salvation,......... I know this is a thread on Homosexuality but given Christ's repeated condemnation of Wealth and those that possess it perhaps a more pertinent question for us in the rich world is can we be rich and be saved,....... think I'll post a new thread
John wrote that if we are born of God we do not sin. This seems like a contradiction because he also wrote if we claim we have no sin we are deceiving ourselves. The popular conclusion is if we habitually continue in a sinful lifestyle without repentance we are not saved.
Whether that be sexual or any other sin.
Whether that be sexual or any other sin.
Webster defines it very well.
Repentance
REPENT'ANCE, n.
1. Sorrow for any thing done or said; the pain or grief which a person experiences in consequence of the injury or inconvenience produced by his own conduct.
2. In theology, the pain, regret or affliction which a person feels on account of his past conduct, because it exposes him to punishment. This sorrow proceeding merely from the fear of punishment, is called legal repentance, as being excited by the terrors of legal penalties, and it may exist without an amendment of life.
3. Real penitence; sorrow or deep contrition for sin, as an offense and dishonor to God, a violation of his holy law, and the basest ingratitude towards a Being of infinite benevolence. This is called evangelical repentance, and is accompanied and followed by amendment of life.
Repentance is a change of mind, or a conversion from sin to God.
Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation. 2 Cor 7. Mat 3.
Repentance is the relinquishment of any practice, from conviction that it has offended God.
Repentance
REPENT'ANCE, n.
1. Sorrow for any thing done or said; the pain or grief which a person experiences in consequence of the injury or inconvenience produced by his own conduct.
2. In theology, the pain, regret or affliction which a person feels on account of his past conduct, because it exposes him to punishment. This sorrow proceeding merely from the fear of punishment, is called legal repentance, as being excited by the terrors of legal penalties, and it may exist without an amendment of life.
3. Real penitence; sorrow or deep contrition for sin, as an offense and dishonor to God, a violation of his holy law, and the basest ingratitude towards a Being of infinite benevolence. This is called evangelical repentance, and is accompanied and followed by amendment of life.
Repentance is a change of mind, or a conversion from sin to God.
Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation. 2 Cor 7. Mat 3.
Repentance is the relinquishment of any practice, from conviction that it has offended God.
Kit Carson
Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2010
- Messages
- 433
Satan and justification of sin. He is sneaky!
I look at these posts and see where I was also. I also would listen to all the justifications for homosexuality and turn the other cheek and to forgive , after all it is not so bad, if conducted in marriage and so on, what can it harm......you see Satan sneaks up on you and convinces you, sin is sin, all sin is sin, one is no worse than another.....but it is. It is a sin that will not allow you to find God, as you are against God. Just like Gods word says.....you will not enter the Kingdom of heaven. Yes you can be forgiven and turn from any sin......any sin but the rejection of the Holy spirit is forgiven if you ask and repent. This does not mean to try to justify things. The more you justify the more of a foot hold Satan gets, and one thing leads to the other. He is sneaky that way.
The word of God is very simply and very plain. Homosexuality to God is a terrible sin, he considers it very bad. It is against the very nature of the intent of the creation, God intended man and woman to couple and be one and to show the perfection of the creation, so by sinning against God with same sex relationships, you are hitting him in the face. You have corrupted the very perfection of the intent of the creation.
Our own nation is in trouble with this, the more we allow and the more we justify, the lower we fall. We see it in the way our children are now, the lack of discipline, the allowance of all things, the turning away of the natural to the corruption.
Homosexuality ruins the intent of the family structure, we now have homosexual teachers in our schools, and it gives a foothold for the teachings of all is ok, all is allowed, nothing is wrong, and all things are Good. God does not exist, who is he anyway?? I want to do this , so I will listen to men guided by Satan and justify my actions. Now I am comfortable with my way.
Well go on and be comfortable......God is going to smack you one. He is smacking our nation right now......if you do not believe me just look around, look at the political mess.......hang your head and cry, and tell God.....please save them.....I fear we are past that I think he is a bit upset.
Justify it anyway you like, morality against God is wrong, it is as simple a that.
Do not listen to men.....listen to God.....read the words of Jesus and cling to them.
Stay away from the words and justification of men......Satan is in the mix with them and wishes to catch you too.
Kit
I look at these posts and see where I was also. I also would listen to all the justifications for homosexuality and turn the other cheek and to forgive , after all it is not so bad, if conducted in marriage and so on, what can it harm......you see Satan sneaks up on you and convinces you, sin is sin, all sin is sin, one is no worse than another.....but it is. It is a sin that will not allow you to find God, as you are against God. Just like Gods word says.....you will not enter the Kingdom of heaven. Yes you can be forgiven and turn from any sin......any sin but the rejection of the Holy spirit is forgiven if you ask and repent. This does not mean to try to justify things. The more you justify the more of a foot hold Satan gets, and one thing leads to the other. He is sneaky that way.
The word of God is very simply and very plain. Homosexuality to God is a terrible sin, he considers it very bad. It is against the very nature of the intent of the creation, God intended man and woman to couple and be one and to show the perfection of the creation, so by sinning against God with same sex relationships, you are hitting him in the face. You have corrupted the very perfection of the intent of the creation.
Our own nation is in trouble with this, the more we allow and the more we justify, the lower we fall. We see it in the way our children are now, the lack of discipline, the allowance of all things, the turning away of the natural to the corruption.
Homosexuality ruins the intent of the family structure, we now have homosexual teachers in our schools, and it gives a foothold for the teachings of all is ok, all is allowed, nothing is wrong, and all things are Good. God does not exist, who is he anyway?? I want to do this , so I will listen to men guided by Satan and justify my actions. Now I am comfortable with my way.
Well go on and be comfortable......God is going to smack you one. He is smacking our nation right now......if you do not believe me just look around, look at the political mess.......hang your head and cry, and tell God.....please save them.....I fear we are past that I think he is a bit upset.
Justify it anyway you like, morality against God is wrong, it is as simple a that.
Do not listen to men.....listen to God.....read the words of Jesus and cling to them.
Stay away from the words and justification of men......Satan is in the mix with them and wishes to catch you too.
Kit
