Comments on Strange Bedfellows

Go to Separation Of Church and State? - Add a comment - Go to Strange Bedfellows

The Only Thing...

I have ever agreed with empty handed painter with is found in his last comment. If a man can stand another wife. HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

Now that's funny! You must be a man of experince in this field. I get it. I understand what you are saying and above all I FEEL YOUR PAIN BROTHER!!!!

posted by RedStatesMan on April 7, 2005 at 2:02 PM | link to this | reply

proscription against polygamy

is a mainstream Christian issue.
They were aghast that a Christian sect would practice such.
I think a requirement for Utah's admission as a state was outlawing polygamy. This is truly a religious bias issue. I think the issue should be readdressed.
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all were polygamists.
It is only those who aspire to the ministry that "should be the husband of one wife", in Paul's writing to Timothy. To my mind, one wife is enough -- but if someone can stand more than one, more power to him.
As far as same-sex unions, a lot has yet to be worked out.
Many, such as yourself, do not see it. Others do. I think it is in your experience as to how you perceive the issue.
Scripture is only solid if rendered in King James and other interpretations.
The original language, particularly of the New Testament, does not uphold the KJV.

posted by Xeno-x on April 7, 2005 at 9:42 AM | link to this | reply

Homosexuals and marrage

Steelerman61

You may find "Gays and Black Civil rights" blogit listed under U.S. catagory interesting.

posted by moderate on December 12, 2004 at 6:27 PM | link to this | reply

Well, golly gee...let's see, I'm all for people choosing what they choose

to choose, without me or government interfering.  I think homosexuality is wrong, but I leave the judging to God.  As for the guy with all those wives, dang...they did that in the Old Testament, so you can't use the Bible to condemn it, can you?

Let me know when I can have more than one husband, you hear???

posted by Ariala on December 2, 2004 at 3:30 PM | link to this | reply

I figure

If Abraham and Isaac and Jacob had multiple wives, as did Kings David and Solomon -- and there really is nothing if the New Testament that says you can't have more than one -- except for Bishops -- then I don't have a problem with it.

Actually the problems begin when they're all together -- then we h ave problems.

But multiple wives -- it's just wrong in the eyes of the civil authorities that's all.

posted by Xeno-x on December 2, 2004 at 3:23 PM | link to this | reply

I don't hate the name of God. I believe God exists, I just have a different interpretation of the Bible to yourself. Is that so hard to understand? I don't know where you get the idea that because I believe in seperation of church and state I somehow "hate" God. It's a ridiculous notion, and an unfair conclusion to jump to. I do not believe that the state should be run along any religious lines. How would you like it if you lived in an Islamic state run on Muslim beliefs? It's not the state's job to promote one religion over another, no matter what principles you believe your state to be founded upon. Just because something is traditional does not make it right - just take slavery or the oppression of women. Your state was founded on these principles as well don't forget, so do you think that they should be re-introduced?

posted by tomcopley on November 24, 2004 at 5:32 AM | link to this | reply

Let Denmark...

jump into the lake of fire; that doesn't mean we have to do the same. Either you believe in the Bible and God or you don't. Tom, you obviously do not. Whether you like it or not, this great nation was founded on the principles of God. I know people who share your philosophy hate to hear the name of God and religion but it is a fact no matter how much you fight it.

posted by RedStatesMan on November 23, 2004 at 7:25 PM | link to this | reply

Ridiculous

I've never understood how you can compare the issue of gay marriage to polygamy or any of the other things that conservatives compare it to. The principle of marriage should surely be one human being to another human being, as this excellent post puts it:



Denmark has allowed gay marriage since 1989. A report years later into the results of this concluded that:

"Since 1989, gay marriage has been a reality in Scandinavia. And in Scandinavia, just as is happening now in the U.S., many members of the religious right predicted `terrible consequences' for the institution of marriage, and for society in general, as a result. Yet now, 15 years after the first of these countries (Denmark) legalized gay marriage in the form of registered partnerships, the results are in: Not only has gay marriage worked flawlessly in Scandinavia, the institution of marriage may have benefited as a result. Indeed, we now see that the main `consequences' of allowing gays and lesbians to marry have been to create safety and security for same-sex couples who have chosen to live their lives together. Of course, the fact that gay marriage has been a positive force in Scandinavian society, and has been accepted by the public at large, is something that the right-wing in the U.S. doesn't want to hear, and refuses to believe."

I have never had a conservative give a logical reason why two men or two women shouldn't be allowed to marry. I don't accept religious reasons because of the seperation of church and state. It is not the state's job to promote a specific religious viewpoint.

posted by tomcopley on November 23, 2004 at 9:13 AM | link to this | reply

Awesome Post: God is our creator, that is that! He created perfection in match of man and woman, we are just a bit short sighted in getting into our perfection. Any sexual preference outside that intention is like using a 110 plug in a 220 outlet!

posted by Justi on October 6, 2004 at 9:23 PM | link to this | reply

HOORAH!!!

good post

posted by PastorB on October 6, 2004 at 9:18 PM | link to this | reply