Message - on que again! This is the proof that beleivers are unwilling and unable to reconcile with - that their belief's are not the same as they were. That their belief systems change and transition over time. Yes they influence cultures but so too does culture influence religions.

If what was right according to the Bible in the first place has the option of changing with time and culture, then it must be accepted that other changes can be effected WITHOUT causing harm to the basic tenants of that belief system - like God, caring, working together to create an equitable society in which every individual's needs are met and opportuntiy to seek happiness and a sense of purpose exists equally under ethical laws.

there are differences between old and new testament,, differences which were addressed when Jesus came

that is why it is important to read the bible IN CONTEXT, with an understanding of what was happening, what laws mankind was mandating, and what laws God , Jesus, and the disciples either reinforced or re evaluated.

Inconsistent with what – your beliefs vs law? Your beliefs vs interpretation of those beliefs? What?
I was showing and inconsistency between the statement that has been made:
>>>People are denied rights because of cultural values<<< vs. I am not responsible for cultural values.
Do you think you have any responsibility to the cultural values of the society you live in?


As opposed to a moral one? Do you believe any human is born ‘unequal’ regardless of what laws are in place? If no, then it would be logical to admit that laws can be changed when an inequality is discovered.


What is fleeting about sexual preference? Do you hold the same opinion about love –that it is fleeting? Do you think marriage – as defined by our laws including DOMA, is set in stone or is it fleeting and what guides your answer?


Yet religious beliefs are most often quoted as being the number one resource for our cultural beliefs. The fact is that change to marriage laws faces only one major opponent, Christian Americans and you are free to google the millions of oppositional reasons of which the far reaching and vast majority of responses refer to the Christian values supposedly pulled directly from the Bible. (old and new testament)


This is true because in a great portion of the world this is not an issue. Not marrying a within a particular portion of your blood line seems to be of great issue all over the world in almost every culture for thousands of years.

But the fallacy of your argument is that this has nothing to do with the law changes which would effectively give equal coverage under the law to a large portion of society.


And this was very important as populations migrated and formed Nation states, many governments even reward population growth. What do you think the your tax exemptions are or the child care credits? Of course you are right but there is a much broader picture your cognitive dissonance is blinding you from seeing. We are OVER-POPULATED. Over population creates greater aggression in protecting valuable resources and we are now a world divided by wars and genocide.

Perhaps this would be a good time to admit that procreation is out of control and at the current rate our natural resources and our aggression will destroy us and scar the environment, perhaps beyond repair.

A good time to consider same-sex love as a saving grace.



If I understand the context of the above quote you are questioning how it can be assumed that Christianity is the key to the discrimination that exists in our legal code.

For the past thirty years, Christians have been the influential force against homosexuality. In the recent attempts to change the law, it is Christians that stand between the law and equality. This is not opinion, it is such a prevalently documented reality that only cognitive dissonance combined with self-confirming bias could possible defend against it.



Whether or not the development of a fetus runs smoothly and a human is born capable of reproduction is not an indication of the value of that life. Whether or not individuals decide to procreate is not an indication of their value. If our laws suggest they are and we are made aware of this biased mistake IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILTIY REGARDLESS OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF to rectify the situation. That is the difference between a strong human ethics and a religiously defined morality.



So we are back to the pervasive question, if you believe your culture is wrongly supporting laws that are based on outdated views of morality do you have a responsibility to attempt to change the law and influence a moral and attitude change in the sector of society that most opposes the change?

The point is that we have so many LARGER issues, globally, to deal with, that if the small number or our Nation State, relative to the global community, cannot come to terms over simply human rights how will we proceed to influence change of the issues of human sustainability?

I don’t know that we could be a world without religion so the best thing we can accomplish is to modify belief systems to accommodate higher ethical standards of human rights. We have to understand that our rights cannot allow us to place demands on nature that our envirnment cannot support. Humans do not exsist independent of the closed system of the Earth.

As a global civilization we have advanced far beyond the religious ideologies which assume that humans cannot harm that which God has placed in our charge. We cannot continue to place insurmountable demands on nature and expect our environments to rebound from the effects.



Your quote exhibits part of the problem we face attempting to transition belief systems to align with a new world view. If people do not question beyond the belief system they adhere to; war and depletion of natural resources will be the response. If war continues, we will see mass destruction, greater pollution and not enough progress toward a sustainable existence. Everyone needs to question, and everyone must be able to put their beliefs in perspective with those questions. To gain perspective is not always as simple as the first question.

EXAMPLE: In spite of this depression and a failing world economy, many millions of dollars a year have been spent (for several years) in an effort to create equality under the law for homosexuals in this country. But if we had been united and equal, what might we have done with all that money and all that effort? With a united front, gay and straight Christians and people on both sides of the debate may have effected change together in more beneficial ways.

But it has to begin with questions and the answers must be viewed in the great scheme of things and not in the "fleeting" ideologies of religious beliefs.

msharmony wrote,



I do have opposing views regarding this post, but responding to them would make this post more about the great marriage debate than about the OP.

But I would like to say how much I have appreciated the exchange we have had in these posts, msharmony. I also want to make it clear to you and others, following these posts, that I have at times utilized your replies on a broader scale or exaggerated your ideas for the purpose of being more inclusive of Christian thought and less so of your personal views. I see the following post as a break from our banter so it seemed like a good time for me to change direction at this point as well, no sence becoming extreme or appearing as if we are enemies - we are not. Thanks. Redy

thank you, I am christian, but noone is my enemy. WE all have different perceptions and yours, although in disagreement with mine, are expressed maturely and respectfully.

btw,, I am bisexual(that is to say, I find myself attracted to both genders),,but I make the choice to live a heterosexual lifestyle (but thats just who I am, and not a judgment on anyone else).

In case anyone thinks Im bashing whom people are attracted to, Im not. I am just making a case on how far that attraction should be taken and whether that attraction should be enough to change the definition of marriage.

Really, truly impressive seeing people have a civil discourse with such opposing views on religion. I'm very impressed people.

we try,,,lol

Seriously!

<=== Fan of both MsHarmony and Redykulous

But seriously, ultimately religion is a harmful institution. If not directly evident amongst society (or young boys) than within the mind of the beholder. Opening yourself up to a mentality where you blindly follow an ideal so absurd that you're willing to bend your whole life, family, finances, etc. to it's beck and call. Yes, it's incredibly harmful.

For example, without religion you have child molesters and child rapist going to jail. With religion, you have the Pope sheltering those molesters and rapists so they can avoid jail time, and keep their victim count rising.

any obsession is unhealthy, whatever its base,,,,my life and family and finances are not bent by religion,, they are shaped by my values ,,good values in my opinion, which happen to be backed up by my religion...

Thomas3474 you have really done your research. I have much to digest.

Harmony, shaped not bent, huh? Difference?

Religions are the reasons for many many problems in this world we live in.

It makes people feel justified by an imaginary larger than life being to persecute and ostracize those that a man or men have determined
were unethical for whatever reason they determined and they wrote it a book and then said the book was from a god or gods.

Worse it makes falsely makes the determination of who is superior and who is worthy.

It creates the concept of non self responsibility because outside sources determine actions of humans.

The books are also written in ambiguous ways to leave room for dangerous interpretation by men in power to control others.

Most of the books are the greatest works of fearmongering ever written.

my values do not bend (a : to cause to turn from a straight course ) my life... it is as straight as anyone with values,,,,

but everyone has values which shape ( to give a particular form or shape to) their lives and decisions.

that my values coincide with the Bible makes them no less relevant or useful or purposeful than someone whose values coincide with the law books, or the constitution, or whatever source it is that guides them through their lives.....

I can respect the views of others,,but I have yet to be convinced that the nature of man is what is mans problem and that religion is the easy scapegoat for many to point to.

From my research, it seems that Jesus only got rid of the sacrificial laws. (i.e. The "original sin" and the other laws that had to with the "falling out") Not the other laws, like not working on the sabbath, and stoning unruly children, etc..

my readings never came across Jesus condoning the stoning of children and what I know of the Sabbath has more to do with having a day of rest than giving reverence to one weekday over another

You know, I get accused often of being "anti-religious" but actually I could give a flying rat's arse about what get's a person through their lives. And as John once said, "whatever gets you through your life...is allright"...how un-imposing that is right?...so here's the "other side", the majority religion in this country seems to want to impose their religion into everyone's lives....they have used and will use government to get ther way...that peeked in 2000 when the Dippic was elected with the thumper vote....and now here we are suffering from that vote...thanks!...and even the most recent talk of "Second Amendment solution" is in the air. What does that even mean? Sorry guys but Republicans, religionists, radical T-baggers? I see no real differences anymore.

I have recent real-life examples of the Christian in-your-face attitudes and their shilling for dollars.

1. The other day at work I was told that another worker heard I was a Satanist...lol. I had mentioned once that I am an atheists and from there I don't know what happened. Me a Satan guy? I don't believe in any of that sch*tt.

2. See my thread on What Would Jesus Drive.

3. A knock on my door! I was D3ing and it startled me because I wasn't expecting anyone. I open the door and for the second time in a month it's a local church group. I just told them that they were tresspassing (No solicitors allowed here) and slammed the door.

~~~

The religionists need to start respecting people's choices and stop voting their ideology over what's really best for our country and especially humanity. When I hear someone say "the US is a christian nation" I immediately hear a traitor to the Constitution. or maybe the person really is that ignorant? "God only knows".

ignorance is bliss...and there are a lot of really happy people out there.

Jesus specifically says not to stone children, we are to spare the rod. People stoned children before, a hand for a hand, all that kind of stuff because we were judged for our sins here on earth. We no longer judge anyone for anything, Jesus is the judge.