Glad to hear all is well; everything here is great, just busy as usual!
“I realize it wasn’t your original intent to discuss this topic from a “religious” perspective but I think that is what it really comes down to in the end.”
Actually, I kind of anticipated this because I think it really is a religious perspective. Every person has the right to their religious perspective, which is why we can’t legislate one of them. Obviously, some Christian groups accept homosexuality as we are seeing gay and lesbian leaders in various denominations, so the idea isn’t even universal within the religion. I completely understand and respect your position on the issue, but as it comes from your religion, I don’t think we should create laws about it.
“I cannot convince them that homosexuality is sinful because they do not believe in sin and probably do not believe in God either.”
I don’t know about that. Most people in this country have some belief in a deity; Atheists are definitely the minority (Eastern countries are different).
“It is very rare that a society, whether God-fearing or not, to not have some kind of moral standards, common sense, or their own sense of right and wrong.”
I don’t think you could find any society that didn’t have an ethical sense of some sort or another; even the most primitive tribal cultures have a sense of morality. The Kwaio people of the Solomon Islands, for example, believe the spirits of their ancestors, the adalo, watch over them and give rewards and punishments based on whether their actions have offended or pleased their ancestors. They don’t have any belief in a deity, per se, just that the spirit goes on after the body dies and then it sits and watches/interacts with those still alive.
“First, people reject God; next, they make up their own ideas of what a god should be and do; then they fall into every kind of wickedness: greed, hate, envy, murder, fighting, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip.”
You know what I think would be the hardest part about being a Christian, or a theist at all, is wondering if I was projecting my own morality on God, rather than the other way around (or making up one’s own ideas of what a god or God should be and do), which is exactly what many religious people do. God or god’s often become shadowy reflections of the individuals who believe in them rather than those who believe in them becoming reflections of the god’s or God. The reason for this may be that God becomes justification for the things that people do when God is a reflection of them. Verily, all throughout history, and still today, people claim their god, whichever one they believe in, says, “I don’t like them (insert group/race/etc.). They need to be destroyed.” Now, is this God? No, this is that person or group using God to justify the manifestations of their own ideologies; projecting their morals on to God.
If we look at this site, we can find many divergent views among Christians (my all time favorite, here and abroad, is the faith/works road to heaven factions). If we look at these two ideas independent of scripture, we can identify two distinct personality types that would seem to support each one. Next time you experience a discussion regarding this, take a look at the groups of people supporting each viewpoint and look at their everyday lives: do they seem like ‘works’ type of people, or ‘faiths’ type of people. You may be surprised at what you see.
Remember, Christians and Atheists both think parts of the Bible are metaphorical (parables – which parts and how much seems to be the difference). I think it would be difficult to determine whether or not the interpretation I make is a projection of me and/or my personality, or from the Bible (God) it/himself. Especially if I was promoting my ideas about it to others; if I’m wrong, I’ve not only sinned, but lead others to sin as well- a deceiver.
Additionally, when we look at the moral corruption in many of the higher levels of early Christianity, of those that compiled and guarded the Bible for centuries, it doesn’t seem like a stretch to think they may have projected their own morality on to God, and into the Bible itself. These people wanted wealth and power, and were ready to do anything to get it. Now, obviously, they do not represent all of Christianity, but it is something to think about.
“As far as the homosexual marriages, it’s against the law in the majority of our nation. Is it right for them and the officials to break the laws of our country to make a political statement?”
Do I condone breaking the law? No. However, it is the court’s responsibility to identify if a law is unjust or if it violates the constitution (like slavery or segregation- both of which had religious foundations). Was it wrong for Rosa Parks to sit where she wanted? No. Was it wrong for Bill and Ted to get married? No.
“And that’s what it really is about, making a political, rebellious stance against the norm of our nation and at its core of morals and values.”
Hmm, sounds exactly like what Jesus did. I know you’re not trying to tell me that he was wrong too, are you?
“The political groups like GLADD are forcefully pushing “acceptance” of this abnormal lifestyle. “You didn’t pay attention to us before but now you going to have to.”
As if Christianity hasn’t been forcefully pushing “acceptance” of it since the beginning. Double standards, 2nd.
“Bypassing the lawmakers because they know the majority of BOTH parties disagreement and disapprove of this lifestyle.”
The constitutionality of something isn’t a matter of public opinion. Good thing too.
“They are taking their “fight” to liberal Judges who legislate law from the bench instead of interpreting the law from the bench. And these Judges use their political influence and high position to legislate their own liberal, left-winged agendas.”
Oh, and no conservative judge would ever do that? Should I remind you of that judge in Alabama who got a little crazy enforcing his own laws regarding the rights of people, the one who abused his position, and got what he deserved for it. The difference between this former judge and the judges in the 9th Circuit, is that he broke the law, they are challenging it after finding it unconstitutional.
“I do sincerely hope as in many states have taken the incentive that President Bush signs a new Federal law protecting a marriage between a man and woman.”
Man and woman can’t even protect a marriage between a man and a woman, at least they can’t stay in one, so I don’t know what Bush is going to do. All I have to say about Mr. Bush is, “Get that man some Charmin, so he can leave the Constitution alone.”
“And I have signed petitions and sent letters to my Congressman and Senators urging them to support it.”
As have I in support of my position, in addition to other mediums one can use to back an idea.
As always 2nd, have a great night!