I do Lula ... but your truth all comes from a Bronze Age black book ... anything BUT science and absolutely improvable. Please do not respond to my posts as they are not intended to apply to you because you already know everything there is to know. I just don’t do bigotry well at all … and that is all you seem to do … well.

ATHEIST - ONE WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE IN THE EXISTANCE OF ANY GOD ... and that certainly has nothing to do with HOMOSEXUALITY. This really is not a mindboggling concept, nor is it the calamity religious folk always try to make it out to be? However with that being said; the enemy of my enemy is a 'friend' ... wow, I can do aphorisms too. The problem with the RCC Inc. is that they have purposefully made the world and everyone on it (un-catholic) their enemy by self-proclamation and they refer to everyone and everything external to the Church as atheistic which gives the word no real usable meaning. They seem to do this simply because THEY want to ensure that the discussion (every discussion) is manipulated to seem to be about their chosen god which I (we) of course don’t believe in.

Ya, the numbers game. BT asserted that homosexuality has been around alot longer than Christianity as if that actually means something.    

With marriage, it's about truth. That's why I said, "truth is.....". God's Marriage = 1 man + 1 woman..husband and wife. 

You know I've asked the same question of the homosexualists. Why don't homosexualists leave over 2,000 years of God's Marriage alone? 

 

Actually, in this case my truth comes from medical science. I already know the answer to my question, do you? It's science...have at it. What does the medical scientific truth tell us about the consequences of homosexual sex? 

  

Belief in a deity of some form has been around since the beginning of recorded history, as if that actually means something. (be careful here, you can't have your cake and eat it too!)



Why is it God's Marriage?
Does he have propitiatory ownership of all matrimonial events? For thousands of years marriage had no religious connotations. It was only the Romans, the architects of Christianity, that deemed a marriage be approved by a bishop.
Why is it that you felt the need to say "god's marriage" Is it simply indoctrination?

Again, everything is subjective according to your own point of view. Many millions of people around the world do not consider matrimony to have any need of being in accordance to a deity.

The act of marriage is not God's to own. I am legally married as recognized by law, and there is not one mention of religion or a divine being anywhere in my marriage certificate, or was there at the ceremony.

It has always been my belief that in order to get married, you need unconditional love for your partner.
Unconditional love. Nothing else required. No qualifying chromosomes or beliefs in the afterlife.

Your assertion of marriage being god's marriage only works within the constructs of the church. For those that do not follow your beliefs, it is simply marriage.


Would it interest you to know that in many legal structures around the world, that marriage is not defined as a man and a women.

What i do find curious is that you take offense (by your posts i assume offence is taken, though i am late to the thread and may be incorrect) to two gay people getting married. I ask you, how does a gay couple publicly affirming their love for one and other and committing themselves to each other affect you or your faith in your chosen religion?

I'd like to ask another question, but i understand if you'd rather not answer. Are you homophobic, and if so, is it for any other reason other than the bible or religion teaches you it's wrong?

I can never fathom the unwavering steadfast belief in many Christians eyes, that they are right, with no exception. I mean, wasn't God wrong once?

In any case, this few posts show clearly why i seldom take part in these debates. None of us will change your, or anybody elses mind when it comes to religion or God, and the reverse is also true, and you know what, that's fine.

My wife my kids and myself could care less that you would deem us to be destined for hell. My gay married mates could care less that their union is not a real marriage, since that is deemed by God to be the exclusivity of men and women. And since none of our lives interacts with yours, you could care less too........Oh wait, doesn't work like that...

I don't want to change your perceptions and beliefs, your entitled to them. What does bother me is that folks with such a focused, intolerance, for anything or anyone that lives outside the rules and laws that you deem to be right, and the only right, end up making the laws and starting the wars.

Thats a cold hard fact that will never be changed.

You should have followed your own advice (glad you didn't though). You will not run into a more blithely obsessed and self-destructive zealot here on JU … unless maybe if they are wearing a turban and yelling "Allah Akbar" … maybe.

Hahaha ... just remember you were warned!!!

Good one.    It's called natural religion and it does mean something.

Natural religion is simply the religion a man would be obliged to practice even if he never received a revelation from God. Man could know by reason alone that there is a God and by obedience to the natural moral law as manifested by conscience. 

NEILO posts:

LULA posts:

Yes. Almighty God does have ownership over Marriage. 

Marriage stems from human nature and thus its existence precedes both Church and State. That's why no Church can change it, why no State can change it and why homosexualists can't change or redefine it.

 

Marriage is a gift to us from God; Marriage is His institution that He's given to all of humanity.  

We are created male and female for a reason...to naturally compliment each other...in Natural Marriage..both are necessary for the procreation and education of children...and thus the Natural Family.

Natural Marriage, a husband and wife are to be regarded as a single organism for that is what the words "one flesh" means. The husband, the male, the wife, the female, the  2 halves were made to be combined in pairs not simply on the sexual level, but totally combined. While two, they are one flesh, and this is the greatest mystery that only happens in heterosexuality.   

Same sex couples devalue humanity becasue they proclaim that one part of humanity is unnecessary.

Same sex couples deny the unity of male and female in one flesh. They say it's not necessary. 

God's Marriage or Natural Marriage is a reality. There is no such thing as homosexual "marriage". If it's same-sex; it's not Marriage. If it's Marriage, it's not same sex.  Now, justices or legislators may rule that it is and people may vote to redefine marriage to include homosexual couples, but none of that can change essential reality. Imitations are not the real thing. Counterfeit money is not real money, and same-sex or counterfeit "marraige" is not real Marriage.  

Again, God's Marriage or Natural Marriage is the coupling of a male and a female, two who are different and complimentary, not two who are the same. 

So again I ask, Why don't homosexualists leave over 2,000 years of God's Marriage alone? 

 

 

 

Such strange ideas you have about Christianity. 

Actually it was Christ, a Jew, and the Apostles and disciples most of whom are Jews who are, as you say, the "architects" of Christianity. 

Authentic historical, Apostolic Christianity is ancient Hebraic Judaism fulfilled and full blossomed, sort of like the development of an acorn to the oak tree. 

It was Christ who restored and elevated Marriage to a Sacrament. Marriage is a contract, a covenant and a conjugal union of man and woman.

But I do agree with you at the time of Christ, marriage among all nations, including the Roman Empire, had lost its essential and original characteristics of unity, indissolubility and sanctity. 

 

Ya, if you live under what His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI calls "the dictatorship of relativism."

I know that. 

I've just explained why I believe it is. 

Marriage is God's to own because whether you like it or not, believe it or not, accept it or not, God created each one of us in His image and likeness and wrote the Natural law in our heart.  

 

God is still involved in your marriage by virtue of the fact that He created you, your wife and established Marriage and the Family. The deepest thing in man is written in his heart..it's called the Natural Law of God. 

There are 3 distinct societies, domestic (the Family), civil (Government) and religious (Church) that answer to the particular needs of man. The Family was instituted by God when He proclaimed this law: "Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall be two in one flesh." 

The family is therefore a natural society and is necessary by reason of its end, which is the generation and the education of mankind. The family has its root and foundation in Marriage which creates, sustains and gives life to the family. 

You can ignore God, mock Him or be a God-denier, but that doesn't change a thing about God or His Marriage.

 

What about if one has unconditional love for a sister, or an aunt, or a dog? Should the definition of marriage be changed, shouldn't they be qualified to get "married" if all it takes is unconditional love? 

Two people love each other all the time, but we can't call that Marriage. There are lots of loving unconsidtional committments that are not marriage.

Another problem is that homosexual love is not and can never be conjugal love since a conjugal relationship requires physical complimentarity and can only exist between opposite sexes.

Again, the Family is the foundation of society and God's or Natural Marriage is the condition that gives rise to the Family. Homosexuality undermines Marriage by usurping its rights: conjugal relationships are only possible between a man and a woman.

    

 

Again, nature is narrow in its definition of Marriage. God's or Natural Marriage is the contract, covenant or sacred bond uniting a man and a woman. Marriage entails selfless dedication, devotion and sacrifice. Marriage and the Family are sacred institutions that foster the common good of all society.  

Therefore, homosexual "marriage" cannot coexist side by side with God's or Natural Marriage because homosexual "marriage" destroys the integrity of God's Marriage by turning God's Marriage into a "species" within Marriage.  

Society loses and is bad for people as it is no longer fulfilling the common good when Marriage and Family is redefined for whatever form the individual wants. It says the husband and wife, mother and father are optional. It says male and female are meaningless. 

God's or Natural Marriage is the very best way to bring up children but Homosexualists say none of this matters and they are willing to change forever what has been the foundation of society for all civilizations. 

Oh please, more games...this time word games. "Homophobic" is a homosexualist construct, an invention of the homosexual sophists. And the illogic of "homophobia" is blatant. Originally, "homophobia" was psychological jargon invented to describe a person's fear of homosexual inclination in him or herself. Homosexual activists took the term and redefined it as "hate and/or fear of homosexuals".

"Homophobia" is used as a rhetorical weapon that serves to define anyone who opposes liegitimization of homosexuality as a hate-filled bigot. It includes everyone who believes homosexuality is abnormal or wrong.

Please tell me the difference between "homophobia" and "non-homophobic" opposition to homosexuality.

I neither hate nor fear homosexuals. Homosexuals are people who are confused about their sexuality and even possibly addicted to it.

 

Homosexuality is a high risk, not genetic, changeable sexual behavior. 

I look at homosexuality as a moral, ethical, economic societal issue relating to the common good of all. I oppose homosexuality because of my Faith, logic, common sense, and a simple knowledge of human anatomy...the body parts don't fit. 

The Homosexual Agenda is promoted with the assistance of academia which indoctrinates, the media which promotes and the political which protects it. 

What do you mean wasn't God wrong once? 

 

There is no reasoning with you i see. No need for me to quote everything you said, i can sum it up briefly.
I reject your view on life.

Your dead right mate, next time, i'll just continue to lurk and laugh.

---

For a contrasting opinion, i linked this thread to a friend of mine and we debated it to some length. His opinion and comment went something like this.
"that lula guy is what we refer to as a western extremeist...it's guys like that who kill and torture us for the crime of only beleiving something that they think is misguided and wrong. When you are strong, you can make the world beleive anything....just imagine if 300 years ago, America was founded, not by christians, but by muslims, then this guy would be singing the praises of Muhammad and Allah."

My friend is an Iraqi Muslim who fled Iraq in 2005. Perspective is everything i would say.

 

I was brought up to believe that all men are born as equals ... but the truth of the matter will be determined later in life depending on where and who we are brainwashed by, what we are willing to learn on our own and our personal constitution. All I will say before I bid you good luck is this: Their one god supposedly gifted mankind with a free will ... but that doesn't seem to apply to religious folk who gift their own children with no such thing ... nor is it even allowed for the rest of humanity either. You can do all kinds of things with a rock ... but you cannot teach it right from wrong or good from bad ... and that brings Lula to mind. I have two brothers; one is gay and the other is a Christian thumper (go figure)  ... I do not get along with either of them and for the same reason. They just operate from opposite sides of the spectrum but they take personal offense at everything and view any disagreement as an attack on their very existence. Life is just too short for this shit is all.

 

I suppose the argument of "it's god will that we don't believe in him" is forthcoming?

Some years ago when i first got a tattoo, i read a poster in the parlor that said "The difference between those with a tattoo and those that don't is that those with tattoo's, don't care that you don't have one."

Iv'e always felt it applied to religious zealots as well (and often all Christianity), in that we don't care that they believe in a God, yet the reverse can hardly be said.

I can hear the reply now, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread.

"Why is it that Athiests only seem to attack Christianity?"

Well, why is it that only Christians seem to care that i am not one of them. I have many friends that are Muslim and Hindu, and not once have any of them tried to tell me how wrong anything i do in my life is, yet the list of just family members alone who are Christians, that proceed to admonish my evil thoughts, would make the 10 commandments look like a shopping list for Walmart!

Or perhaps its better put this way, the squeaky well gets the most grease.

I enjoy Pictionary too!

So I went to the horses mouth and here is what it said.

The First Church of Atheism states:

Atheism is the belief there is no god the word atheism originated from the Greek (atheos), meaning “without god”. Atheists tend to be sceptical of supernatural claims, citing a lack of empirical evidence. And the best explanation so far for why the natural world looks the way it does is the theory of evolution first put forward by Charles Darwin

Evolution is the process by which a population or species change over time to better there survival in an environment, this is a fundamental part of biological studies. Some critics say Darwin’s studies were only a theory and have no creditability. When people refer to the theory in this way they suggest is only a guess. Evolutionary studies are not guess work but scientifically proven study. Some argue with the lack of a missing link disproves man evolution. Even though fossils have been found some religion say man was created by intelligent design. The alternate explanation to this is what if a race of intergalactic genetic engineers visited earth and decided it would benefit for a race of logical and problem solving mammals and genetically alter some of the primate species to create what we are today if enough people believed that then you have an alternative religion. Even with the lack of evidence and same theory can be applied to man was created in gods image (imago dei).

thanks

Reverend mark taylor
Middlesbrough
England

 

That is according to reverend Mark Taylor.  Go ahead and send all your reasons BoobzTwo why his Atheist faith is not a real religion but masquerades as one.  What do you think should be done to this church as you don't believe Atheism is a faith?

 

Depends where you are. In many nations around the world you will be targeted or if you go to the once great Atheist bastion, the Soviet Union, you'll find non Atheist religions were targeted quite aggressively especially Christianity, as in life and death.

Why would I be inclined to do this. I could care less what he does or claims to represent. As far as I can see anyone can claim to be whatever they want and build whatever seems useful to them … do you really give a shit, because I don’t. Just because you have difficulty understand a dictionary … well that is not my problem either.

How can you pretend to be so knowledgeable and yet seem perplexed by the a simple word like a scientific 'theory'. As a believer in evolution ... why would the opinions of critics be meaningful to me? Do you seek the council of your critics when you are building a case … if not, why should I??? Darwin was the first to formulate scientific arguments true ... but the concept proposing that one type of animal could descend from an animal of another type goes back to some of the first pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander and Empedocles (pre-Christendom). Try reading the Koran … it discusses evolution and that somewhat predated Darwin too. I think you just went to the wrong end of the horse is all, hahaha.

Where I am is here ... and here is where and what I am interested in most. Do you really need to venture around the world to find an example or two to misrepresent as meaningful? It is easy to disagree with something by pronouncement but that of itself is meaningless unless you can back up a counter claim. Simply stated, proving something is wrong or in error … doesn’t prove anything else is true or error free. Doesn’t work for me and doesn’t work for you either.

PS: Personally I am hoping for little green men if evolution is one day proved to be in error.