Wouldn't ignoring the bible completely make a lot of issues much simpler?
Isn't the bible a book everyone should follow to get in heaven? So if you want to get in heaven, and you see a homosexual who had sex with an individual of the same gender, you have to kill him?
Not exactly. The New Testiment does not contradict or make the Old Testiment meaningless but it rather frees us from the Law and of the intentionally unattainable perfection that it demanded. The Old Testiment describes the problem and the New Testiment describes the answer.
The Bible teaches that no actions will get you into Heaven. I could give all my money to the poor and live a life of good deeds and still go to Hell because of my unbelief. So no, according to the Bible, killing a gay person will not get you into Heaven.
And why shouldn't I generalize Christianity?
They generalize gays, abortionists, scientists, rock bands, Dungeons & Dragons, Muslims, Jews, athiests, Wiccans, and anyone who doesn't brown-nose their priest. Yes, indeed - they generalize them as Satanists. Troll warning! - sen
You are screaming "ACEPTANCE, TOLERANCE, UNDERSTANDING!!!" but you show none of that in your half hearted, hate filled, and ignorant attempt to understand and explain Christains. Saying that all Christains are this way is outrageous and obviously wrong: I am a Christian and I don't generalize all those groups as Satanists (and i've played D&D though I didn't really get into it, and I love Magic: The Gathering).
Please spare us your generalizations of those who so wrongfully generalize.
There is more to Christendom than the Southern Baptist Convention.
Hehe, I'm a born, raised, and practicing Southern Baptist. I identify myself more as a follower of Christ but Southern Baptist Churches are the ones I feel led to and the most at home at.
Its kinda funny how Southern Baptists get the blunt end of all of the "crazy Christian" stuff.
I'm surprised by the amount of Christian players here :|
Last Christian player I knew had all his cards burnt to ashes by his mother.
Hmm... That bugs me too. Some Christians are so ignorant and hauty that they can't see beyond their own piety. They separate themselves from everyone and everything that is not Holy and has a pretty white bow on top of it. Then there are Christians who live their lives just as the world does. Niether of these is Christianity. They give a bad name to people who are true, honest and living Christians.
So far, so good. I can accept that pastors don't pair off homosexual couples. I don't want to interfere with the laws of the Church.
Still, there is discrimination left. In our society, married couples have several benefits in insurance and treatment. If we don't allow homosexual couples to reach a similar status, we are clearly discriminating them outside the Church. You don't have to call it marriage. Find a concept for a registered relationship between man and man (or woman and woman) and give the couples the same rights as the married ones.
I have no problem with the Church not allowing "gay marriage". Still, you have to see that our society is based on the concept of marriage and - in contrast to Church - society, should advance this way.
I am for civil unions but not for gay marriage. The government should not impose purely religious laws and banning gays from legal rights would be one of them. I see the institution of marriage as supported by the Church and then the legal rights of a married couple comming from the government. If you take the Church out of the picture your left with the legal rights and a civil union. Civil unions in my opinion is the best choice that leaves the sactity of marraige in tact for Christians and gives homosexual couples all the liberties that straight couples enjoy.
The bible is actually very clear about homosexuality. I don't believe you can say "times have changed" about it, because of the clarity. God gives a list of everything that is sexually immoral which you should never do, and homosexuality is listed.
Heres is the verse that is "quoted" from the Lord of what is detestable, so you can't use the arguement that it wasn't Gods word, and that it was dictated by man.
Also, the bible makes a list of who don't go to heaven:
I agree. Those are some of the only verses that I have ever found in the bible speaking against homosexuality. God set up the institution of marriage to symbolize the union of Christ and His Church and to allow for us to have a meaningful relationship that has the chance to produce humans. The bible does not say that we should hate, descriminate, or kill homosexual but rather love them. We are not called to accept what they do though.
About the Old and New Testiments: The Old Testiment holds the Law to show us that we cannot live a perfect life and live up to the Holy and Pure God of creation. The New Testiment chronicles the New Covenant of freedom from the Law, that we cannot abide by, through the life and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Basically the first half shows us the fall and the law that shows us why we need the second half, while the second half shows us the savior from the law and the fall.
I would like to own a large mountain ranch that encompases a large mountain and a large lake where I can live in a nice sized house with my wife. I dont think thats much to ask, but then again, thats a crapload to ask.
The main problem I see with minimum wage is that it does not automatically increase year by year along with inflation. In terms of real income, people make less and less each year.
What we really need is a living wage. Start it off at $10.00 and make it increase along with inflation.
Personally, I favor extending a living wage across the globe. Making products produced under conditions not meeting that living wage standard illegal for sale in the US. It'd bring some of our manufacturing back and would make cheap foreign labor extinct.
There are some problems with this...If minimum wage were moved up to 10-15$ then many unskilled workers will loose their jobs. Employers only have so much money to spend on employees and so that money will distributed among fewer people (higher unemployment with inflation...not good)
Living wage accross the wage would be nearly impossible to accomplish due to fluctuating echange rates. A constant level global wage is not possible.
Is anyone interested in joining the Secular Humanist Party of the United States? It was just created. Uh, by me. And I can't vote. But, I will be running for President in 2024 if anyone is interested. I have the party website. On, um, Tripod. It's under construction. So yeah. Fantastic.
What are the planks of your new party?
I'm thinking it may be pretty different from my own Conservative Libertarian views.
According to supply and demand of labor, minimum wage lowers the amount of jobs available but pays the workers more who have jobs. So it basically means unskilled laborers with jobs will make more but there will be more unemployed unskilled laborers. I honestly don't know which is better. More jobs or higher wages for those who are employed.
Yeah, they're doing that in Israel too. Last I heard they're getting **** for it. No, we're better than slamming the door in the face of people who want to work.
Israel is getting crap for it because the Palisinians hate Israel no matter what they do. If given the chance I'll bet they would kill every single Israeli. Mexicans dont hate us. They are hardworking decent people but so were my German ancestors who came to this country legally or my Mexican friend here at Purdue who came to this country legally and is contributing to this country and paying taxes and eventually more taxes from his pharmicist salary. I want people to come here, but they need to do it legally.
I think that hiring illegals should be made a severe crime as to reduce the demand for illegals. We should allow any illegal in the country now to become a citizen as long as they can prove they have a job or can aquire one in the next six months or some other span of time. We should also create a bolstered border patrol with troops returning from around the world over the next few years. A fence might be nice though.
Biasing opinions much? And to say it is 'right' to protect yourself at the expense of 19 other lives is an extremely questionable line to take.
Assuming that the other 19 would survive (else the whole argument is moot anyway), A is clearly the choice. 19 lives are more important than my not wanting to shoot someone.
I'm sorry that I wasnt clear. What I meant by right was the fact that most everyone would say shooting and killing someone was wrong, not that it necicarily is wrong in this case.
You have been summoned by a absolute dictator who happens to like you for some reason (ie you are in absolutely no danger). The dictator provides a wonderful meal and some nice music and dancing for you to enjoy. After dinner he informs you that there will be one final piece of entertainment and shows you 20 political prisoners. He tells you that you may shot and kill one of the prisoners and he will spare the other 19, we'll call that [Choice A], or you can refuse and he will kill them all himself, we'll call that [Choice B]. Basically would you do the evil act of killing one person to save the other and thereby focusing on the consequences only...or choose to do what is right no matter the circumstances.
Not exactly. The New Testiment does not contradict or make the Old Testiment meaningless but it rather frees us from the Law and of the intentionally unattainable perfection that it demanded. The Old Testiment describes the problem and the New Testiment describes the answer.
The Bible teaches that no actions will get you into Heaven. I could give all my money to the poor and live a life of good deeds and still go to Hell because of my unbelief. So no, according to the Bible, killing a gay person will not get you into Heaven.
You are screaming "ACEPTANCE, TOLERANCE, UNDERSTANDING!!!" but you show none of that in your half hearted, hate filled, and ignorant attempt to understand and explain Christains. Saying that all Christains are this way is outrageous and obviously wrong: I am a Christian and I don't generalize all those groups as Satanists (and i've played D&D though I didn't really get into it, and I love Magic: The Gathering).
Please spare us your generalizations of those who so wrongfully generalize.
Hehe, I'm a born, raised, and practicing Southern Baptist. I identify myself more as a follower of Christ but Southern Baptist Churches are the ones I feel led to and the most at home at.
Its kinda funny how Southern Baptists get the blunt end of all of the "crazy Christian" stuff.
Hmm... That bugs me too. Some Christians are so ignorant and hauty that they can't see beyond their own piety. They separate themselves from everyone and everything that is not Holy and has a pretty white bow on top of it. Then there are Christians who live their lives just as the world does. Niether of these is Christianity. They give a bad name to people who are true, honest and living Christians.
I am for civil unions but not for gay marriage. The government should not impose purely religious laws and banning gays from legal rights would be one of them. I see the institution of marriage as supported by the Church and then the legal rights of a married couple comming from the government. If you take the Church out of the picture your left with the legal rights and a civil union. Civil unions in my opinion is the best choice that leaves the sactity of marraige in tact for Christians and gives homosexual couples all the liberties that straight couples enjoy.
I agree. Those are some of the only verses that I have ever found in the bible speaking against homosexuality. God set up the institution of marriage to symbolize the union of Christ and His Church and to allow for us to have a meaningful relationship that has the chance to produce humans. The bible does not say that we should hate, descriminate, or kill homosexual but rather love them. We are not called to accept what they do though.
About the Old and New Testiments: The Old Testiment holds the Law to show us that we cannot live a perfect life and live up to the Holy and Pure God of creation. The New Testiment chronicles the New Covenant of freedom from the Law, that we cannot abide by, through the life and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Basically the first half shows us the fall and the law that shows us why we need the second half, while the second half shows us the savior from the law and the fall.
There are some problems with this...If minimum wage were moved up to 10-15$ then many unskilled workers will loose their jobs. Employers only have so much money to spend on employees and so that money will distributed among fewer people (higher unemployment with inflation...not good)
Living wage accross the wage would be nearly impossible to accomplish due to fluctuating echange rates. A constant level global wage is not possible.
What are the planks of your new party?
I'm thinking it may be pretty different from my own Conservative Libertarian views.
Israel is getting crap for it because the Palisinians hate Israel no matter what they do. If given the chance I'll bet they would kill every single Israeli. Mexicans dont hate us. They are hardworking decent people but so were my German ancestors who came to this country legally or my Mexican friend here at Purdue who came to this country legally and is contributing to this country and paying taxes and eventually more taxes from his pharmicist salary. I want people to come here, but they need to do it legally.
I'm sorry that I wasnt clear. What I meant by right was the fact that most everyone would say shooting and killing someone was wrong, not that it necicarily is wrong in this case.
You have been summoned by a absolute dictator who happens to like you for some reason (ie you are in absolutely no danger). The dictator provides a wonderful meal and some nice music and dancing for you to enjoy. After dinner he informs you that there will be one final piece of entertainment and shows you 20 political prisoners. He tells you that you may shot and kill one of the prisoners and he will spare the other 19, we'll call that [Choice A], or you can refuse and he will kill them all himself, we'll call that [Choice B]. Basically would you do the evil act of killing one person to save the other and thereby focusing on the consequences only...or choose to do what is right no matter the circumstances.
What would you do?