Maine's Question 1

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

so, 47% of Maine is morally retrobate...sad news

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

This is almost as good as last year's California: "Keep it straight...YES on 8!"

so, 47% of Maine is morally retrobate...sad news

Need I say that the pair of you are utter disgraces, a fact that cannot be overemphasised.

Rom 1:21-32
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

 24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

 26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

 28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.


Psa 1:1-3
 1 Blessed is the man
       who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked
       or stand in the way of sinners
       or sit in the seat of mockers.

 2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD,
       and on his law he meditates day and night.

 3 He is like a tree planted by streams of water,
       which yields its fruit in season
       and whose leaf does not wither.
       Whatever he does prospers.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

1 No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry
   whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods,
   nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief.

oh, I am not going to stop you from doing what you what.  go ahead and marry ten men...just don't ask me to recognize it

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No one's asking you to recognize it, in fact no one cares that you recognize anything cause you're irrelevant. This is about the state recognizing the marriages. And now I'm awaiting that you reply to me by quoting at least 10 Bible verses.

the state is an extension of the people, the people are an extension of the individual.  Sodom and Gomorrah is not just historical, it is also prophetical, which is why Jesus used it to describe the end times.  Your side will get their way, but only for a season, until Christ returns.  As for me, I will choose to hold to God's word.  I will not join with those who believe the lie and are condemned.  So, let the chips fall where they may.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

May I simply note that Jmfcst and his ilk do not speak for all of us Christians. Such selective reliance on handpicked portions of scripture---particularly the Levitican priestly codes---to justify his personal social mores, while ignoring Christ's unambiguous message throughout the Gospels of unqualified unreserved love for all his children, well, shall we nicely say "misses the point entirely"?

JSojourner/Badger

That is an extremely BLIND argument that makes a TOTAL MOCKERY out of the bible.  God’s love brings freedom, but does God’s love give us a license to do whatever we please?  I think NOT!

Gal 5:13 “But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature.”

God’s love gives us freedom FROM sin, not freedom TO sin!  Therefore, sin is NOT defined by God’s love, rather it is defined by God requirements.  And in the case of sexual immorality, the question becomes “What is the context God established for human sexual activity?”

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Can you all take the religion pissing contest to general discussion? I for one have no interest in reading this crap here.

then maybe this thread should stop attempting to crucify those that oppose gay marriage and it wouldn't turn into such

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I was hoping you'd chime in on this JSojourner ol' pal. ;-)

well, when it come to JSJ, when the going gets tough, JSJ deserts the bible so that he can retain the favor of the world, using the sole excuse of, "I can not accept..."...and even though the bible goes to great lengths to define the proper context for sex, to JSJ, there is no biblical defined context for sex, instead it's anything goes and the love of Jesus will cover it all.  In which case, might as well take a Magic Marker and black out all the references to sex in the bible, for, apparently, the bible doesn't teach the proper setting for sex.

It is obvious to anyone that the bible gives the proper context for sex, but homosexuality proponents will NEVER use that argument because they know they would lose that argument hands down.  So, instead they've made a conscience choice to ignore that context and appeal to the love of God....but, that is pure idolatry because God's love is NEVER an excuse for condoning wrong doing.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

You'd be lucky if you were half the man JS is, jmfcst.

Please don't mock jmfcst for standing up for the truth that is the Bible that is God's Word.

I'm not mocking him, Bushie, I'm saying his criticism of JS is a crock of sh**t.

Well, don’t take it as if I was singling him out by any means.  All I am saying is that we been through this long enough that it simply comes down to: a) whether or not the bible sets boundaries on sexual behavior, and b) whether it provides a context within which those boundaries are not violated, so that a) and b) are in agreement.  It’s an extremely logic and simple premise, one that is totally ignored by JSJ and the like.

Sure, JSJ is a nice guy, as are many who share his viewpoint, but I'm not giving him a hard time about being nice.