CFA part Deux (Page 7)

And how is that different than what you want?

Well, one is glorious, the other is evil.

Just to be clear, I do evil everyday. It's called sin.

Any sexual act outside of a marriage between one man and one woman is evil.
Call it immoral if that word has less punch.
This isn't limited to just persons with same sex attraction. 

Side note I find it funny all the different religious that all came after Jesus. Even today’s Jews are not the same as the ones at the time of Jesus who was a Jew. Funny how so many people can say they are the correct way when none of them were what the son of god followed himself. Just as a refresher it was the Romans that crucified Jesus correct? Where were the Romans from again and what current church is located there?

A union between two men or two women might be something,
but it is not marriage.

Calling it marriage doesn't change the fact that it isn't.

But I take your point.
If my belief is in fact evil, then go with that.

However, then you have the burden of proof of showing me why it's evil.
I'm open to that, because I don't want to do evil.
So if you're correct, then I'd want to know that. 

I never said it was evil, go back and look. I asked you to explain your views and how they matter in a state marriage and so far you haven’t given a case how they do.

For whatever reason, it does make the whole discussion sound less crazy. 

OK, given your description above, the state permitting same-sex marriage is not immoral, or evil.  If that's the case, why not let the same-sexers, who participate in these sexual acts, married or not, wallow in their own immorality and evilness?

Just a quick question.

On topic but not related to the recent line of discussion.

How come when "Million Mom's" boycotted JC Penny, Ellen Degeneress or DC Comics, etc it was freedom of speech but when gay right activists are protesting CFA they are violating that companys freedom of speech?

This one is easy, they aren't.

Hopefully, this will answer Cord's question as well.

There is a valid relationship between knowable morality,
as can be know for example through natural law,
and the state. 

The development of that relationship in fact is what now allows us to have this free and open debate right here.
The right to do this didn't spring out of nowhere.

Marriage and the family are the fundamental building blocks of society.
The attack on marriage and the family started a while back,
the gay rights agenda is just the most current one.

Let me just throw this out as an example to consider.
I'm not claiming that it's true, but it's worth thinking about because maybe it is.

Our country is up against an enormous crushing debt.
Some say it is because of the entitlement culture. 

If so, what caused the entitlement culture?

I'll suggest that it may have started with the sexual revolution.

I'd argue that the sexual revolution rather than helping to foster virtue and build character 
instead helped to form a culture that is: self centered, self absorbed, narcissistic.

With the old model the culture helped form you to live for other, especially in marriage.
The culture we have now instead helps form the young to live for self.

That's why this issue of marriage is so important,
and why on a macro level what you do in your bedroom actually does affect me and my family in the long run. 

Man, that's a wicked stretch.  It's easier for me to understand the they (or they're acts) are just evil argument.

Other than same-sex marriage, are their other things you feel we should ban that could help bring back the old model?

Sure:

Abortion
Abortifacients
No fault divorce 

However, I don't think of it as bringing back the "old model".
Rather, it's a new post post-modern model. 

OK, not sure what you mean here.  This post looks like it was typed on a smartphone, so I'll try to answer as best I can.  We're going way off topic, but Chicken-Gay Marriage-Christianity is off-topic as much as can be so here we go...

Judaism is the basis for Christianity.  Yes, the same Judaism that exists today.  The OT is Jewish Scripture.  Jews have added to those scriptures since AD 30 (30 CE for you sensitive types).  The first five books of the OT are called the Pentatuch and for Jews, it's called the Torah.  Christianity is the only religion based on the foundations and predictions from another established and still-existing religion.  Islam has only the Abraham story and then there are some mentions of stuff that you can find in scripture if you look, but it's not a book-by-book following.  But, if you pick-up the first 5 books of the Torah and the first-5 of the OT, it's the same.

Jesus was a Jew.  There were then as now many sects of Judaism based on teachings from earlier Rabbis.  The Rabbis from Jesus' time kept trying to pinpoint Jesus' sect by testing him.  He never fell for it.  He defined his own teachings.  The marriage passage from my earlier post was from Jesus being tested by the pharisees. It differed strongly from everything before.

Now, why is the Roman Catholic Church in Rome? You didn't take Western Civ where I did...

Why the chuch is now in Rom where Christians were fed to lions and where Nero fiddled while he burned the Christian parts of Rome so he could build his monuments to himself and debotchery...  Well, Rome was starving for faith when Saint Paul started traveling the Roman Empire teaching about Christ.  He was a Roman and died when Christianity began to take-on too much power.  It should be noted he was once persecuting Christians and killing them.  He even held the cloaks while Steven was stoned.  But Christ struck him blind and said stop persecuting me, now spread my message.  And immediately, he started teaching Christ's Message which he was not even around to learn from Christ. 

Rome destroyed the Jewish Temple and kicked the Jews out of Israel/Judea in AD 70 and named that land "Philistine" after the Jews' ancient enemies (Now Palestine).

Then, Constantine the Great rose to power and conquered all of the Western World after he had a vision of a cross and became a Christian.  He made Christianity the religion of the "Roman Empire". Then the church split (Eastern Orthodox/Roman Catholic).  Rome has been the capitol of Catholicism, Istanbul (or is it Constantinople?) is the capitol of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

There are also Coptic Catholics out there with a headquarters in Egypt.

So, your statement about not following the religion that the Son of God followed himself-  He wasn't a follower, he was a leader.  He gave his own teachings and that's what we follow.  He also affirmed certain teachings from the OT.  Jesus' life and death were predicted over 400 times in the OT by guys like Moses, Abraham, Samuel, David.  We do follow what Jesus followed.  Or we try to at least...

OK, now about why there's a pickle on the Chicken Club.  Really? A pickle?

Don't hand off to Don. You made the statement about what marriage has meant for thousands of years. You also used the Bible to support your stance on the definition of marriage. Seems reasonable to ask you to reconcile the conflicting Biblical representations of marriage.

"mr2tony- Seems you're of the belief that all good comes from religion and all bad comes from non-religion, then. People quoted from the Bible when they were endorsing slavery. So, technically, you could say that pro-slavery laws were based pretty much solely on religious beliefs as well. "

Again, there you go looking at the exact moment instead of the consequences of such a thing. 

How well did that whole using the bible to justify slavery thing turn out for the south?  Answer, the bloodiest war in the history of this country, Atlanta Burned, Columbia Burned, Richmond Burned, Charleston Bombarded (not burned because Sherman liked Charleston), poverty for the south for decades afterward.  Look at the Rest of the Story.

As for the freedom of speech thing.  Both sides have every right to say stuff.  That's in the constitution. 

The complaint conservatives have is that Chicago says "because of your personal belief system being spoken publicly, we will deny your use permits to land you have rights to and for which you would otherwise be entitled to use if you believed what the mayor believes." 

It's a lot like the Mosque debate in-reverse. 

If their argument is that Cathy should be allowed to voice his opinion.  Yep, and then he has the freedom to suffer the consequences of free speech being yelled at him.  Note that Cathy has not said the protesters are bad.  He said they're free to come-in and get a cup of water.  Yesterday, Chic-Fil-A had a record-take.

"mrbbrad-Don't hand off to Don. You made the statement about what marriage has meant for thousands of years. You also used the Bible to support your stance on the definition of marriage. Seems reasonable to ask you to reconcile the conflicting Biblical representations of marriage."

I did.  Go back and look. I explained it pretty thoroughly.  If you want Scoob specifically to do it, that's fine.  But I think I answered this for him.

how are any two people in a loving, committed relationship, not living for each other just as much as i live for my husband?  what role does gender even play in that? 

homosexuality did not create a sexual revolution, or result from it.  it has ALWAYS been around.  yes, the sexual revolution caused problems in society, i agree 100% with that.  but straight people are JUST as guilty of sexual immorality/entitlement/etc.  and being gay doesn't mean that you ARE any of these things.

and marriage doesn't create families.  sex does.  look at the number of unwed parents out there.  you don't need to marry to procreate.  plain and simple.

You mean basing our current beliefs on a family structure on a thousands of year old proverb that were for a farming community in another county won't work for us now? Odd.