1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lynne, Dick Cheney Differ on Gay Marriage

Discussion in 'The OT' started by F Sanderson, Jul 12, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    The short answer to your question is yes. There were many tribes in which male homosexuality and/or lesbianism was common. In fact the french settlers had a separate word to refer to Homosexual Native Americans. And yet another one for transvestite Native Americans which iin several tribes was not in any way associated with homosexuality as it it generally is today.

    An equally intriguing question is whether a reservation could choose to recognize gay marriages. In some ways the tribes are sovereign but in a number of ways they are not. We could for instance ban non natives from our reservations altogether. But assuming that you are let on many of the laws of the reservation do not apply. We cannot for instance stop you from hunting or fishing on the reservation. But why does that not really surpise me? You guys never sis listen to us when it came to gun titin'.
     
  2. SAEMike

    SAEMike Banned User

    2,596
    0
    May 29, 2004
    Probably most like you pick and choose what laws you are going to observe, for instance you probably don't murder people, but you may have gotten up to 70 on the highway.
     
  3. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Why do you say that about Bogy? I understand why he said what he said but why do you think he may drive over 70 MPH?
     
  4. SAEMike

    SAEMike Banned User

    2,596
    0
    May 29, 2004

    My point was that some laws are more important than others. Going five miles over the speed limit is much different than murding somebody. Just as wearing a hat in church is much different than marrying gay couples.
     
  5. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    What do you think Bogy's point was?
     
  6. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Mike, the point you are missing is that I fully admit I am a liberal, a "progressive Christian" if you will. I can explain why certain teachings of Paul no longer apply. You are the one who claims to be "religiously" following the Word of God. But you are also picking and choosing which teachings you want to follow. I can offer explanations as to why what Paul had to say about homosexuality are no longer any more valid than what he had to say about head coverings for women. You want the right to pick and choose, but you don't want to allow me, as a fellow believer the same right.
     
  7. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    He's a "Cafeteria Christian". :D
     
  8. pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    3,939
    0
    Jul 17, 2003
    :nono2:
    Ok, I was not planning on posting on this, but I can't let that one slide. Paul did advise believers of that day and area to "remain single", but only if they could control themselves (with the help of the Holy Spirit). BUT no where (and in fact to the contrary) does he advise married couples to abstain from sex with each other!

    If you want to take to explaining away or rewriting the Bible, ... well Ok. But the Author of the Bible may take exception to you doing such. I'm sure you're also aware that God holds ministers more accountable than the rest of us.
     
  9. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Who is re-writing anything? Paul wrote that he wished everyone else could be like he was, celebate. He only condoned marriage so that Christians wouldn't "burn."
     
  10. RichW

    RichW Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    6,526
    0
    Mar 29, 2002
    In fact, as a Catholic, I was taught that we were born in "original sin" as a result of our parents procreative efforts. The Catholic sacrament of Infant Baptism takes away this original sin.
     
  11. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    A Catholic mason. No wonder you had problems with a former frequent poster. Just kidding Rich.
     
  12. pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    3,939
    0
    Jul 17, 2003
    He made a case that a celebate, single lifestyle was preferable, especially for the people he addressed the letter to as they were on the verge of severe persecution by the Romans. And families would be attacked/killed - as painfull as it is to suffer, to watch one's wife and kids suffer too is greater. BUT he said ONLY some, he recognized it was better for a man to have a wife in general, so that they stay out of sexual sin. I took particular issue with your statement that Paul advised husband and wife to not have sex with each other. The scriptures say in fact that he told them to Not withhold sex with each other, unless both agree and then only for an agreed upon time. Some members of the church at that time were going to extremes and trying to live celebate lives as a married couple thinking it made them more spiritual. Paul in fact condemned that practice. So your statement was in error - and if that was a simple error on your part, I apologize (although the factual statement of the scripture needed to be made).
     
  13. RichW

    RichW Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    6,526
    0
    Mar 29, 2002
    No offense taken, Chief. Yes my own life is a juxtaposition. (And if you were refering to Rage/Roger, I never really had problems with him. I enjoyed sparring wiht him. It was like calling into to an Art Bell program to argue wiht the host.)

    I no longer consider myself a Catholic, and am now a card-carrying member of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (who don't care for Masons either).
    The reason I left the Catholic Church is directly related to Baptism dogma. Whe my first daughter was born, we went to arrange her baptism with the local priest. Since I was new ot the parrish and my wife was not Catholic (she was raised in a nominal Amish family), the priest wouldn't agree to baptize my daughter until, we, as a family atended Mass regularly and pledged a tithe to his parish fund. These conditions seemed to go against everything I was taught as a Catholic... that infant baptism was essential as soon as the child was able, that his/her "soul" was in jeopardy until baptism. This hypocrisy was too much for me to remain a Catholic.
     
  14. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    I find it very interesting that you use the context of Paul's letter to the Roman Christians when it suits your purpose, but completely ignore that same context in regards to homosexuals. By that I mean that Paul was chastising those early Christians for continuing to practice some of the pagan rituals common then, one of which was heterosexuals having multiple sex partners, male and female, during ritualistic orgies. Paul made no statements at all about homosexuals themselves.

    Again we see some people pick and choose what they want to believe.
     
  15. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    I probably overstated what Paul said on the subject, but he certainly didn't embrace sexuality as the gift I believe it to be. Celibacy is NOT in my makeup. :D
     
  16. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    I don't blame you for reacting negatively to that Rich.
     
  17. RichW

    RichW Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    6,526
    0
    Mar 29, 2002
    Quite frankly, I am not so fond of some of Paul's writings. Some of his zealotry comes through with a bit of the same lack of compassion he had when he was persecuting followers of Jesus. He adds a bit of legalism to a New Testament that runs counter to the Gospels. On hte whole I think of him as a good disciple, but one whose personal flaws sometimes ran counter to Christ's teachings.
     
  18. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    I've often thought that some people who call themselves "Christian" should more correctly call themselves "Paulists" since they seem to hold Paul up as the example far more than Jesus.
     
  19. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Not only Christ's teachings, but Jewish theology, exchanging much of it for Greek philosophy in his mission work with Gentiles.
     
  20. SAEMike

    SAEMike Banned User

    2,596
    0
    May 29, 2004

    You could, but you'd be at odds with the vast majority of the Christian world. But, of course, I know you'd be right, and they'd all be wrong. You are the one who knows all the insights to God, not the rest of the Christian world. I'm certainly glad God sent you alone down with all the answers.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page