FILE - Sept. 9, 2011 image of President Barack Obama (AP Photo/Eva Russo - Richmond Times Dispatch)
Obama spoke to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender guests during a White House reception marking LGBT Pride Month. He touted his administration's work on gay rights issues, including repealing the military's ban on openly gay service members. He said even though it may have taken more time than they would like, gays and lesbians have seen progress and lasting change under his administration.
The president also referenced his recent public embrace of gay marriage. He said that while some Americans may still be evolving on same-sex marriage, he and wife, Michelle, "have made up our minds on this issue." The remark drew extended applause.
In fact, Jefferson did not believe in God in the traditional Christian concept. He was more of a Deist, and, while believing in a Creator, he believed in God more as a broader, natural, construct. In fact, Jefferson was widely criticized by religious leaders when he ran for President over these very beliefs.
Some relevant quotes from Jefferson:
"But it does me no injury for my neigbhor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg".
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than blindfolded fear."
He made it clear in his biography that when drafting the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom they specifically struck out a proposed reference to Jesus Christ to make certain that Jews, Muslims, Hindu and Atheists were protected.
And an particularly appropriate quote which I believe is relevant to some posting here:
"I concur with you strictly in your opinion of the comparative merits of atheism and demonism, and really see nothing but the latter in the being worshipped my many who think themselves Christians."
I know these quotes use big words and require you to focus, but enough of this self generated BS about our forefathers creating a Christian country. That was not their intent--in fact it was SPECIFICALLY NOT their intent.
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others."
Please explain to me how gay people getting married is injurious to others? I think the Supreme Court is about to face this same question this Autumn. I don't think "but my God says its a sin" is going to prove to be a winning argument that its injurious to YOU. If (by some crazy stretch of reaons) you are actually right, it might prove injurious to gays getting married--but they aren't dragging you to Hell with them.
If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay. Its that simple.
If a gay man or woman marries a person they love, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. I'll side with Jefferson.
The Gay marriage thing is just a contest of words. If marriage is a Biblical term for the union of a man and woman, that is fine, so what is the problem with a civil union. We used to have common law marriages in Georgia just because a couple lived together for an extended period of time. That never made sense to me, and I am glad that was done away during Zell Miller's administration.
Imaging if there were civil unions for the gay population. It could actually add to economic development on a different level. It would mean that much more business flowing through the wedding industry. It would also allow additional monies into the insurance industry, as gay couples could enjoy employment and spousal benefits together.
Does it really hurt you and me if gays are married or unionized? If it offends you from a religious perspective, still let God sort all that out. It's not our jobs to pass judgement or convince someone is wrong if their heart tells them where they need to be and they are comfortable with their life decisions.
As Christians, we should understand sinners, as that is what we are. To sit there and criticize a lifestyle you disagree with serves no purpose except your venting.
Gay or straight, God will sort out the good from the bad. It is not the job of the church to sort that out, it is their job to show what is good, and why people should follow God. "Judge not lest ye be judged." Don't be a hypocrite. Love as Jesus loved, and Jesus loved the sinners. He associated with them and took the sinners under his wing, not the hypocrites.
I believe the accepted internet term is "troll".
Conservatives are also chastised for using irony to illustrate the absurdity of the Left's position on this issue, even though that irony illustrates that absurdity clearly and well.
Well, it's a sad state of affairs. I suppose I will wait for my rebuke now.
While I appreciate the respectful tone of your post, I disagree with the theme of it, which appears to be that you believe it is OK to treat a group of people differently because they are in the minority. What percentage of Americans are gay is not the issue. The issue is how we, the majority, choose to treat them.
Personally, I choose to treat the homosexual friends and family members I have with the same respect I would any other person and I hope one day they will enjoy the same rights that I do.
Again, what percentage of Americans are gay is irrelevant. Would your views on homosexuals change if all of a sudden half of America came out of the closet?
For the sake of argument, only 13% of Americans are black. Should we deny them the right to marry whites or use white schools because so few Americans are black? It's only 13% of the population, after all. Well, of course not. And I honestly don't believe you think so, either. It's silly to suggest that it's OK to deny a group rights because there are less of them than us.
Lastly, I'm asking this board politely to stop comparing homosexuality with pedophilia. Homosexuality is between consenting adults. Pedophilia is not. Pedophilia is rape. Just like us heterosexuals are attracted to adults of the opposite gender, homosexuals like adults of their own gender. If a person was attracted to adults of their own gender, they wouldn't be a pedophile because they'd be wanting to have sex with adults, not kids. Pedophilia is a sickness and when acted upon becomes the rape of a child. Surely you can see the difference between a gay man and a pedophile and stop equating the two.
Moving on to the issue of treating gays with respect, I certainly concur. However, the simple act of disagreement doesn't equal disrespect. It simply means that as a Christian, I have a belief that the behavior is sinful.
I have also stated before that even though that is my belief, it doesn't prohibit me from treating those who happen to exhibit this behavior with respect. I simply disagree with their belief that it is appropriate for this abnormal behavior to be given legitimacy by legalizing same-sex marriage.
I have further stated in the past that most of the opposition on this issue would disappear if another term besides marriage were substituted; perhaps the term "civil union," or "commitment ceremony." This would preserve the sanctity of the traditional marriage and offers a compromise.
Now if those of you who are constantly promoting the term "tolerance" truly believe in tolerance, then what better way to show your tolerance of our views than getting behind such a compromise.
Also, discontinuing the false accusations of hatred and bigotry would be a good start toward reaching a compromise that all could say respects both viewpoints on this issue.
Whether homosexuality is a choice or not, I doubt I can convince you of anything other than what you already believe. But let's assume for a moment that you're right and people can choose to be straight or gay. Have you seen how horribly gay people are treated in America? Who would chose to go through that if heterosexuality were just as valid an option for them?
As for the sanctity of marriage, I believe straight people have defiled it quite well enough thanks to the frequency of adultery and divorce among us. Please don't pretend we as a nation sanctify marriage. I don't know whether you are married or not, but if you are and your marriage is unharmed by the 70 day Kardashian wedding, I think it can handle George and Harold's betrothal.
Jesus wept.
"I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain." -James Baldwin
I apprieciate all of your comments, the world would be a better place with more of you! and less of ............well, you know what I mean!
There are basically three solutions to this problem: 1) continue to use the "marriage" term to denote a legal union of two consenting adults, no matter their race or sexual orientation; 2) create a new thing (perhaps "civil union") that ALL couples consisting of consenting adults must obtain in order to get those benefits from the state (leaving "marriage" to be reserved for the religious ceremony only, not the legal contract); or 3) stop giving ALL civil benefits for marriage (i.e. get the state out of the "marriage" business altogether).
Option 1 is the most efficient; the problem with option 2 is that everyone will still use the term "marriage" to apply to both the religious and legal unions, because it's easier, so the problem people have with using marriage to refer only to the kind of union they like will not go away. Option 3 is radical, but would end the argument once and for all.
Thank you, for your comment, WWrome.
And the sad thing is, most gays would probably vote Republican on fiscal policy issues had the Republican party not been high jacked during the Reagan years by right wing Evangelicals with hateful views like yours.
Obama will do anything to try and hold onto the Presidency. He's already sold his soul to the devil. Next the White House will be a coven for witches and warlocks.
"Double, double, toil and trouble, fire burn and cauldron bubble."