Our nation took another step away from freedom in the name of tolerance. The Supreme Court said that states had no ability to define marriage. Gay marriage is now ok.
Here's the problem. The Federal Government doesn't issue marriage liscences. Marriage is 100% a state issue. I know. I've performed weddings in four states.
This is just one more case of the liberals in Washington stripping away our rights, especially the first amendment. This isn't equality. In truth, in everything that is right, the government should recognize "civil unions" for hetero or homo. Marriage should be left where it started, in the church, ordained by God.
Showing posts with label Homosexuality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Homosexuality. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Who's the Hater?
So people keep calling Bible-believing Christians haters. They say we hate people not like us. Let me make a few clarifications.
1) Westboro Baptist Church do not count as Bible-believing. In fact, Peter warned about them in the Bible. 2 Peter 3:15-16 (NIV) "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction." They don't speak for us, because they are "ignorant and unstable."
2) There is an old saying in the Christian Church: "Love the sinner; hate the sin." If I truly believe the Bible, (that all people are sinners (Romans 3:23), that God loves everyone (John 3:16) and sent his Son Jesus to take the punishment for our sin (Romans 6:23), that we are all equally guilt (James 2:10), and God wants to save everyone (2 Peter 3:9),) then I have a responsibility. If we all either have to accept God's forgiveness by changing our ways and being obedient to him, or we have to suffer the punishment for our sins. We are all the same. One person described the way we Christians should be as "One beggar telling another beggar where to find bread." Others have described it as throwing a life preserver to a drowning man. This is our job, to love our fellow sinners enough to storm the very gates of hell itself to tell them of the same chance for rescue that we have.
The reason I point these things out is because I'm sick of being falsely labled. But I also have something else to ask.
Are WE the ones that hate?
My sister was recently attacked for taking her infant daughter to get lunch and take it to "Dada." Why was she attacked? The lunch was chicken. She was called ever foul thing these people could think of. They should be embarrassed at their behavior. And all just because her baby missed her daddy.
But the reason I particularly write this today is because of the news yesterday. In our nation's capital, a man walked into a Christian organization and opened fire. Why? Because of their stance on family values.
A few in the media are defending the man, who is likely to be charged with domestic terrorism. They're calling this Christian organization a "hate group."
I'm sorry, but who had the gun? Who was the one trying to kill people? Why are THEY being accused of hate? It seems to any reasonable person that the gunman is the hater.
Here's an idea. Instead of trying to defend his actions to support a political agenda, why not just call him a madman and be done with it.
1) Westboro Baptist Church do not count as Bible-believing. In fact, Peter warned about them in the Bible. 2 Peter 3:15-16 (NIV) "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction." They don't speak for us, because they are "ignorant and unstable."
2) There is an old saying in the Christian Church: "Love the sinner; hate the sin." If I truly believe the Bible, (that all people are sinners (Romans 3:23), that God loves everyone (John 3:16) and sent his Son Jesus to take the punishment for our sin (Romans 6:23), that we are all equally guilt (James 2:10), and God wants to save everyone (2 Peter 3:9),) then I have a responsibility. If we all either have to accept God's forgiveness by changing our ways and being obedient to him, or we have to suffer the punishment for our sins. We are all the same. One person described the way we Christians should be as "One beggar telling another beggar where to find bread." Others have described it as throwing a life preserver to a drowning man. This is our job, to love our fellow sinners enough to storm the very gates of hell itself to tell them of the same chance for rescue that we have.
The reason I point these things out is because I'm sick of being falsely labled. But I also have something else to ask.
Are WE the ones that hate?
My sister was recently attacked for taking her infant daughter to get lunch and take it to "Dada." Why was she attacked? The lunch was chicken. She was called ever foul thing these people could think of. They should be embarrassed at their behavior. And all just because her baby missed her daddy.
But the reason I particularly write this today is because of the news yesterday. In our nation's capital, a man walked into a Christian organization and opened fire. Why? Because of their stance on family values.
A few in the media are defending the man, who is likely to be charged with domestic terrorism. They're calling this Christian organization a "hate group."
I'm sorry, but who had the gun? Who was the one trying to kill people? Why are THEY being accused of hate? It seems to any reasonable person that the gunman is the hater.
Here's an idea. Instead of trying to defend his actions to support a political agenda, why not just call him a madman and be done with it.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
8-1-12 and the First Amendment. Win, lose, or draw?
Social Media has been active lately, all revolving around chicken. Well, not really chicken. About religious beliefs and whether people have a right to them. If a private citizen was asked about his religion by a religious magazine, can you hold an entire company accountable?
Some organized boycotts. I'm fine with that. I've long said that. If you don't agree with a company, don't go there. If you don't like how Wal-Mart, for example, does business, don't write your congressman. Just shop elsewhere. Because it doesn't matter what you say about a company. They are going to watch their bottom line. So I love the fact that people are boycotting.
Others, to show their support, organized a day to do so. Yesterday, people bought chicken. We have three Chick-Fil-As locally. At least one ran out of Waffle fries! I have friends across the country who reported what theirs looked like. A friend in Maryland went to one, and had to go to the Wendy's across the street, because they only give him and hour for lunch. Wendy's, he said, was also slammed because of the overflow. Someone in Louisville, KY said that local news reports were advising people to detour around every one of them in the city, because they were so packed that cars were blocking traffic in a several block radius of them.
I wanted to see for myself. I didn't want media bias or others propaganda. I drove by the least busy of the three in my city. Cars were wrapped around the block for the drive through. Those going inside took up the parking lot of the restaurant. And the McDonalds next door. And the strip mall behind it. And that end of the Target Parking lot. And that end of the parking area of a kids' play place. I know because I watched people walking to and from their cars. I know because as I drove around, I looked in the window and saw that many could not even fit inside the fast-food place. I've never seen so many people in such a small place. I myself did not go in. I couldn't have gotten inside.
As you know, I often report on the loss of freedoms, especially First Amendment rights. This was a day for either side to make themselves heard.
And yet, this was also a day to watch religious freedom vanish. Under ObamaCare, 8-1 was a day when religious associated charities and medical services are now forced to violate their religious freedom. Catholics in particular object to birth control in all forms as a religious belief. Now they are not just forced to distribute, but pay for something that violates their religion. But this goes beyond just the Catholic Church. According to the ObamaCare definition of birth control, this includes the so called "Morning After" or "Abortion" pill, RU486. That's right. Pro-lifers now have to pay for abortions.
My question is why? Yesterday, people were allowed to buy or boycott chicken, based on their belief. But they are forced to purchase and distribute something that destroys a human being. What's worse, this wasn't covered on the news because of chicken.
So Freedom of Speech and Freedom to Assembly were upheld yesterday. But Freedom of Religion and the Right to Life were not. Hm...
So what do you think? Win? Lose? Draw? I'm a natural pessimist, and I tend to value the unborn over waffle fries, so I'm leaning toward loss. But please leave a comment letting me know what you think. Start with any of the three options, then explain why.
Some organized boycotts. I'm fine with that. I've long said that. If you don't agree with a company, don't go there. If you don't like how Wal-Mart, for example, does business, don't write your congressman. Just shop elsewhere. Because it doesn't matter what you say about a company. They are going to watch their bottom line. So I love the fact that people are boycotting.
Others, to show their support, organized a day to do so. Yesterday, people bought chicken. We have three Chick-Fil-As locally. At least one ran out of Waffle fries! I have friends across the country who reported what theirs looked like. A friend in Maryland went to one, and had to go to the Wendy's across the street, because they only give him and hour for lunch. Wendy's, he said, was also slammed because of the overflow. Someone in Louisville, KY said that local news reports were advising people to detour around every one of them in the city, because they were so packed that cars were blocking traffic in a several block radius of them.
I wanted to see for myself. I didn't want media bias or others propaganda. I drove by the least busy of the three in my city. Cars were wrapped around the block for the drive through. Those going inside took up the parking lot of the restaurant. And the McDonalds next door. And the strip mall behind it. And that end of the Target Parking lot. And that end of the parking area of a kids' play place. I know because I watched people walking to and from their cars. I know because as I drove around, I looked in the window and saw that many could not even fit inside the fast-food place. I've never seen so many people in such a small place. I myself did not go in. I couldn't have gotten inside.
As you know, I often report on the loss of freedoms, especially First Amendment rights. This was a day for either side to make themselves heard.
And yet, this was also a day to watch religious freedom vanish. Under ObamaCare, 8-1 was a day when religious associated charities and medical services are now forced to violate their religious freedom. Catholics in particular object to birth control in all forms as a religious belief. Now they are not just forced to distribute, but pay for something that violates their religion. But this goes beyond just the Catholic Church. According to the ObamaCare definition of birth control, this includes the so called "Morning After" or "Abortion" pill, RU486. That's right. Pro-lifers now have to pay for abortions.
My question is why? Yesterday, people were allowed to buy or boycott chicken, based on their belief. But they are forced to purchase and distribute something that destroys a human being. What's worse, this wasn't covered on the news because of chicken.
So Freedom of Speech and Freedom to Assembly were upheld yesterday. But Freedom of Religion and the Right to Life were not. Hm...
So what do you think? Win? Lose? Draw? I'm a natural pessimist, and I tend to value the unborn over waffle fries, so I'm leaning toward loss. But please leave a comment letting me know what you think. Start with any of the three options, then explain why.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Boy Scouts of America
So, I have to rant about something. Someone I know is accusing the Boy Scouts of human rights violations. Why? Are they molesting boys? No. Using biological/chemical weapons on civilians? No.
They affirmed their religion.
That's right. A Christian-based organization decided to remain Christian. Yes, that's right. They still refuse to allow homosexual leaders.
"That's intolerant!"
So? That's not a human rights violation. No where do you have "Life, liberty, and the boy scouts" in any document put forth by the founding fathers.
"We should boycott them! We should burn their manuals and camps!"
Yes, because arsen is always a way to show peace and acceptance. Ever stop to think that YOU are the one being intoleratant of THEM and their religious beliefs? I hate to tell you, but in other countries they execute homosexuals. THAT is the human rights violation.
If you don't like the fact that a faith-based organization is faith-based, then you're an idiot.
By the way, the same person is boycotting chic-fil-A because the founder, a Christian who founded the company on Christian principles and refuses to be open Sundays, also said he believes homosexuality is sin.
So threaten his life.* And the lives of Boy Scouts.* That will show.
(FYI, if you can't tell sarcasm and actually threaten anyone or accuse me of doing so, you're a moron and should lose the right to read. I believe in peace and love for people, even those you disagree with. I just can't stand these hypocrits who say things like "You're intolerant so I'm going to kill you.")
They affirmed their religion.
That's right. A Christian-based organization decided to remain Christian. Yes, that's right. They still refuse to allow homosexual leaders.
"That's intolerant!"
So? That's not a human rights violation. No where do you have "Life, liberty, and the boy scouts" in any document put forth by the founding fathers.
"We should boycott them! We should burn their manuals and camps!"
Yes, because arsen is always a way to show peace and acceptance. Ever stop to think that YOU are the one being intoleratant of THEM and their religious beliefs? I hate to tell you, but in other countries they execute homosexuals. THAT is the human rights violation.
If you don't like the fact that a faith-based organization is faith-based, then you're an idiot.
By the way, the same person is boycotting chic-fil-A because the founder, a Christian who founded the company on Christian principles and refuses to be open Sundays, also said he believes homosexuality is sin.
So threaten his life.* And the lives of Boy Scouts.* That will show.
(FYI, if you can't tell sarcasm and actually threaten anyone or accuse me of doing so, you're a moron and should lose the right to read. I believe in peace and love for people, even those you disagree with. I just can't stand these hypocrits who say things like "You're intolerant so I'm going to kill you.")
Friday, August 13, 2010
The Big One
Ok, I've delayed this for a while. This is the one I shouldn't write. But I'm going to anyway. I am going to talk about that one thing that makes people about more hostile than anything.
Homosexuality.
Before you get on your high horse of your preconcieved notions, let's stop to look. There are mostly extremes, with few in between. Mostly there are "pro gay" people who believe it is normal and natural, and "anti gay" people who believe it is an abomination and that homosexuals will burn forever in hell.
The latter sometimes go as far to march with "God hates fags" signs or go beyond biggotted slurs to ream out, threaten, or even beat or kill homosexuals. This is a trajedy. These people are filled with a darkness and hatred for others that they take out on others. Its the same for the KKK. They hate others in order to ignore their problem. It makes them feel righteous or superior, or something like that. They make me sick.
Homosexuals are made in the image of God. He loves them. Jesus died for them. Jesus would rather die than to live in heaven without them. That is fact. They are not predestined for hell. They are in fact people.
Homosexuality is sin, but homosexuals are not depraved, at least no more than you or me. Temptation does not make them evil. Sure, homosexual acts are sin, but the desire is no more than temptation. I would recommend counseling, but I would recommend the same for porn or sex addicts of any kind. I would recommend it for alcoholism, drug use, abuse, anger issues, and a hoard of other issues.
Homosexuality.
Before you get on your high horse of your preconcieved notions, let's stop to look. There are mostly extremes, with few in between. Mostly there are "pro gay" people who believe it is normal and natural, and "anti gay" people who believe it is an abomination and that homosexuals will burn forever in hell.
The latter sometimes go as far to march with "God hates fags" signs or go beyond biggotted slurs to ream out, threaten, or even beat or kill homosexuals. This is a trajedy. These people are filled with a darkness and hatred for others that they take out on others. Its the same for the KKK. They hate others in order to ignore their problem. It makes them feel righteous or superior, or something like that. They make me sick.
Homosexuals are made in the image of God. He loves them. Jesus died for them. Jesus would rather die than to live in heaven without them. That is fact. They are not predestined for hell. They are in fact people.
Homosexuality is sin, but homosexuals are not depraved, at least no more than you or me. Temptation does not make them evil. Sure, homosexual acts are sin, but the desire is no more than temptation. I would recommend counseling, but I would recommend the same for porn or sex addicts of any kind. I would recommend it for alcoholism, drug use, abuse, anger issues, and a hoard of other issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)