Why Do Christians Dwell on Anti-Gay Bible Verses but Ignore Other Enumerated Sins?

Do those Christians push for banning marriage between divorcees or other legal restrictions on those "sins" as vehemently as they do with gays?

 

I think there's a difference in that divorce is legal in the U.S. whereas gay marriage is not, and there are too many who would like to keep it that way - and people are more vocal about keeping the status quo than they are about changing laws. So I think that's a factor. At the same time, there are many religious people who are judgmental of divorced people, unmarried people living together, pre-marital sex (they are quite vocally against sex education in the schools), abortion, etc.

Whether or not gay marriage should be made legal is a timely topic, so there's going to be more vocalization about it for that reason alone.

There is, of course, hypocrisy involved too - as there so often is in such matters.

 

Do you not know how footballs are made?

wut?

Not anymore thanks to a RADICAL LEFTIST who filed suit in opposition to Texas' sodomy law.

LOOK OUT IT'S THE PC BOOGEYMAN

I don't think you got my point. My point was that liberals were reacting to conservatives limiting the rights of gays. You on the other hand believe that conservatives are merely reacting to liberals who are advocating gay rights in response to nothing.

 

Why should gay marriage be illegal and divorce legal when divorce is more roundly condemned by the Bible?

The obvious position is that religious dogma should have zero business being the sole justification for laws.

 

Your point is a figment of your imagination, as there is no limitation upon homosexuality. Conservatives are merely reacting to the liberal obsession of creating out of thin air unqualified privileges to homosexuals.

 

Gays can't marry in some states. How does that not restrict homosexuals?

 

As I said, divorce is already legal, so the question of gay marriage is in a different category at this time. I don't know what the church/religious people had to say about divorce at the time it was a legal issue, but I'm thinking that's a reason why we don't hear about it as much as we hear about gay marriage. As I said, legalizing gay marriage would be changing the status quo, and there's always more vocalization involved and more discussion and more media coverage when that's the case; people tend to dwell on a timely topic more.

Agreed. We have separation of church and state, so the reason gay marriage isn't legal isn't based on religious grounds. That may be the grounds for many who object, but it's not the reason it's illegal. Again, many Christians support gay marriage and not all who object are Christians.

I would say that the poster(s) who have said that men find it 'icky' are onto something; I believe that is a factor, as the focus is almost always on gay men, not lesbians; and that, of course, has nothing to do with religion. Religion is always a good smoke screen to hide behind, though, as it gives the illusion of adding validity to one's biases - and one can therefore believe that they are not biased and/or prejudiced.

 

How does the lack or a marriage license restrict a homosexual from engaging in homosexuality?

 

Nobody argued that homosexuality is restricted. So is this your way of admitting that homosexuals are restricted? Or will you attempt to move the goalposts again?

 

Because its custom you ignore verses you don't like and focus on ones you like, face it if Christians really lived as Jesus said its damned hard to do it seems.

1. If someone asks you for something your supposed to give it up.

2. Turn the other cheek (Pacifism).

3. Live in communes that is what the earliest church people did after the Pentacost.

4. Men and women are equal.

5. Don't divorce.

6. Obey the ten commandments.

7. Don't care about wealth.

8. Don't get involved in politics its worldly in some interpretations of the give unto Caesar event.

etc.

Picking on abortion and gays is easier than doing these things.

 

If maintaining the status quo and not fighting against laws on the books actually mattered, then you wouldn't see Christians fighting Roe v Wade.

 

the LEVITIVAL LAWS were written to a given people in a given area for a given time.

the admonition not to touch the carcasss of a pig was what we once called COMMON SENSE

thousands of years later "science" discovered that eating raw pork products cause VERY serious health issues...

few people are ADVOCATIONG eating Raw Pork prodcuct in 2013 as opposed to the minions heralding so called "gay marriage"

this stuff aint rocket science

whats the most POPULARLY talked about SIN in 2013? .Phil Roberston mentioned it some days ago

any questions?

 

I didn't move the goalposts, you just don't seem to like where they are placed.

 

Saying that homosexuality isn't restricted is moving the goalposts because nobody ever argued that. Homosexuals are restricted. Nobody in here is arguing that homosexuality is currently restricted.

 

As I said, people tend to dwell more on issues that would change the status quo; I didn't say they never fight against laws that are on the books, but there is still gray area regarding abortion laws - it's a more timely issue than divorce is.

Edited to add: I would say, though, that same as everyone else, the vocal Christians tend to be more vocal about the areas that they feel more strongly about.

 

Funny how just recently Liberals have this thing about gays when for most of this country's history, gay acts was not only condemned by Christians, Muslims and others
, but there was also laws on the books against it. It's not just limited to religious people. I am sure there are many atheist against it. Now all of a sudden we are suppose to be (open minded) about it, Even President Obama was against gay marriage until he realized how many more votes it could get him. That seemed to open the door to all his Liberal followers that just now can't understand this opposition to gays and gay marriage. Why can't we just except it like they have? Would they be so open if Obama was still against gay marriage? I think not.

Sodomy laws in the United States

Sodomy laws in the United States, which outlawed a variety of sexual acts, were historically universal. While they often targeted sexual acts between persons of the same sex, many statutes employed definitions broad enough to outlaw certain sexual acts between persons of different sexes as well, sometimes even acts between married persons.

Through the 20th century, the gradual liberalization of American sexual morals led to the elimination of sodomy laws in most states. During this time, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws in Bowers v. Hardwick in 1986. However, in 2003 the Supreme Court reversed the decision with Lawrence v. Texas, invalidating sodomy laws in the remaining 14 states (Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Virginia).

state laws against homosexuality

 

Absolutely there are examples as you note above- what I am speaking of specifically are the posters here on PF.

 

There were also laws against mixed race marriages and relations until about 50 years ago. Now we are all of the sudden supposed to be open minded about it.

Do you get where I am going here?

In general, as a liberal, I think what consenting adults do with each other in private should not be a crime. In general, I think that two consenting adults should be able to be married.

I realize how uncomfortable many people are with seeing two men holding hands or kissing- but I can remember back to when I first saw a mixed race couple kissing- and I had the same type of reaction. Just because it is something that some people find 'icky' isn't a rational reason to make something illegal, or even to encourage discrimination.

 

you're confusing the commandments of the faith with the law of the land.. Judea was its own state, and in the old testament is a recording of the laws it practiced as well as the amounts its citizens were taxed... these passages are relevant to no one except the Jews as a part of their nation's history

just within the time the old testament was written, the code of law in Judea went through multiple changes, just like any other law system it was confined to a certain time and location (these passages were not relevant to a Jew of that era living outside of Jedea.. equally so, they are not relevant to anyone who is alive today.. outside of being a recording of Judea's history) . There were however pharisees of the second temple era who looked to maintain the old laws recorded in the old testament, however since the destruction of the second temple in 70AD there have been no pharisees in the Jewish culture

..and in regards to Christianity, there has never been pharisees, nor has there ever been a Christian nation who practiced the code of law/laws recorded in the old testament


hope this clears some things up for you

 

If I recall Jesus as a Rabbi supported the Jewish customs, traditions and laws in general unless doing some holy work healing a blind man on the Sabbath comes to mind and his parents would support this so why would he oppose the laws of the Jewish people for all who follow him. Paul did change this but he was a preacher not even a disciple of Jesus his disciples insisted Gentiles covert and go through the customs of the Jews. And this was as far as I can tell all of the ones who wrote books in the NT.

I would argue Christians cannot ignore Leviticus just because its convenient of one wished to be like Jesus as the founder of the cult.

 

Homophobia is best discribed as the belief that homosexual sins are more grevious than heterosexual sins.

They are not.

 

by the time Jesus was born Judea was a conquered nation living under Roman rule/law, it was actually the pharisees who had him persecuted, they were in fact the men who challenged Jesus to stone the women who had committed adultery... so right there he did not practice the old law of the Torah that the pharisees themselves wished to maintain (not to say he wished to overrule the commandment against adultery)

again, the code of law in the old testament was the law of the land, not the commandment of the Jewish faith.. there is nothing in the bible that says the law of the land cannot be changed, the code of law in Judea in fact went through multiple changes just within the time the bible was written.... those laws today are as relevant to modern day Jews as the passages in the bible that mention the amount that the citizens of Judea were taxed

 

I pondered this the other day. White Christians follow the verse I will bless those who bless Israel but ignore the part of the bible that says for whites to populate the earth and not use birth control methods.

 

Exactly what Bible says that?

 

The Christian.