(no subject)

[liliaeth]

Just something I responded to this post:

http://www.livejournal.com/community/ljchristians/278878.html

 

You do realize how stupid that kind of statement you're trying to make,makes you sound right?

Marriage is a sacred union of love, no matter what form that love takes, as long as it is between two (or more) consenting adults.

My brother is gay, he has a physical relationship to express his love for his boyfriend. That is beautiful. To see them together is beautiful. And seeing as how we live in Belgium, if my brother feels the time is ripe, he and his boyfriend have the legal right to get married.(it's a constitutional right even) And if they did, I'd support them with all my heart. Because they love one another.

I'm a godfearing christian.
I studied to become a highschool religion teacher and if any of my students had asked about it, I'd tell them that love is gift from God. That there is nothing wrong with love, in any of its forms, even the sexual forms of it (as long as it happens between two or more consenting adults)

Don't make a fool of yourself and stop this bigotry.
Marriage is love.

 

Is that out of line?

Comments

[elke-tanzer.livejournal.com]

I just got the following via one of my mailing lists, from someone named Jane. I wish I knew which progressive site she was talking about...



From a progressive christian site comes this compilation of biblical source material:

In defense of Biblical marriage

The Presidential Prayer Team is currently urging us to: "Pray for
the President as he seeks wisdom on how to legally codify the
definition of marriage…." So here, in support of the Prayer Team's
admirable goals, is a proposed Constitutional Amendment
codifying marriage entirely on biblical principles:

A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between
one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)

B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in
addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron
11:21)

C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a
virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut
22:13-21)

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be
forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the
constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be
construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry
the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or
deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one
shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law.
(Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

G. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your
town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with
him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men
young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of
course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

[liliaeth]

lol
Very interesting.

Re:

[elke-tanzer.livejournal.com]

Isn't that bizarre? I'm kind of glad I don't get into religious discussions with my extended family any more...

Re:

[liliaeth]

Not all that bizarre, considering the timeperiod that the bible was written in.
It's one of the reasons why I personally feel that we shouldn't take the bible literal.
Hell, if you take the literal interpretation for modernday purposes, then fathers are allowed to sell their daughters into slavery...hey, it is in the bible...

Might be just here, but when we were studying religion at highschool, one of the things we learned was to take the book and look at it in a time and area related context.
Religion was an official subject at school, so what was taught in it, was officially controlled.
Something I tend to be real happy about.

[redwolfoz.livejournal.com]

As far as I know this was just an e-mail doing the rounds. It's archived over at the Pagan Prattle. It's been kicking around for so long that nobody can trace it back to its originator, but James Randi did add and few things a pass it on again.

[elke-tanzer.livejournal.com]

And I meant to say this first... no, I don't think you're out of line.

[rowanheart24.livejournal.com]

Love is a beautiful thing in all its forms. You are not out of line at all.
Love is a true blessing and sometimes there isn't enough in this world.

[hellsbells.livejournal.com]

Is that out of line?

Not at all. Whilst we're all entitled to our own opinions and beliefs, the crap that some people spout is just destructive.

I don't want to offend *anyone*, but I'm not religious (I'm Catholic but it really means nothing to me). I can't commit to a religion where I have too many questions and disagree with too much.

I had an argument with my mother-in-law years ago about gay relationships. At that time she said that gay people needed help etc. It got quite heated, needless to say we never discussed it again!

Marriage *is* love. I don't agree with arranged marriages, but at the same time I understand that it's not my place to question them.
If only more people realised they don't have the right to question what two people do with their lives.

[redwolfoz.livejournal.com]

Your comment is wonderful and not out of order. And considering what I read of some of the other comments, you'll be in fine company.

But, the moron who kicked off this little I am a bigotted homophobic arsehole, watch me drool rant is a zealot who is locked into his own little universe and will not escape his tunnel vision until something personal, like his own child announcing that they are gay, lobs up on his doorstep and serves him a well deserved cluebat.

You cannot argue with zealots, you can point and laugh and make them look like even bigger fools, but they'll never even notice they are a laughing stock.

[ladycat713.livejournal.com]

Not out of line at all. Beautifully said , in fact. My brother is gay and happens to live in San Francisco. For all I know he could be one of the men getting married.

He doesn't exactly keep in touched due to the screwed up nature of our family. I live with our mother and if he wants to talk to me , she would probably answer the phone first.Also my sister who lives just over the state line got religion after getting off drugs and thinks homosexuality is wrong. My mother is just selfish, paranoid,controlling and a severe drama queen. She also used to be violent.(Thankfully she's now visiting relatives) I don't blame him in the slightest for moving all the way to CA and not leaving a forwarding address.

I've gotten off the subject though. If Jimmy (calls himself Jeff now , though he hates his name because he was a junior)gets married, I wish him and his husband every happiness and better success at marriage than the others in our family. I wish that he finds someone to love and who loves him back. How can people try to outlaw an public declaration of that love and commitment?