homosexuality is man made!!!!

by Guest Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:09 pm

First topic message reminder :

and i guess woman made too...

by Ben Reilly Mon Jun 08, 2015 3:52 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Vicar of Dibley wrote:
Eilzel wrote:

Churches aren't forced, so there is no problem is there.

^HF, why do you want to deny me the right to marry my partner?

I know but with the things we are seeing in the news lately such as the B&B abd Christian cake shop being targeted it just makes me think that the next target will be for the churches to approached .

Equality should be for everyone .

Totally different, the B&B and cake shop are businesses catering to the public and shouldn't be allowed to discriminate.

Churches and other religious institutions have their own doctrines and rules and it is for them to decide who can and cannot be married in their premises. This is enshrined in law explicitly, so no problem right.

They don't understand the difference because they see the world so differently than we do. They want to force their beliefs on others and don't understand how we're not trying to do the same thing.

Just to help them out a bit -- if Group A wants to live one way and Group B wants to live a different way, that doesn't mean that one group has to "win" and force the other group to live by its values.

It's just as acceptable for Group A to live the way it wants and Group B to live the way it wants.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 3:56 pm

If gay people don't marry in church, it's not really a religious thing, so why would God mind?

by Eilzel Mon Jun 08, 2015 3:59 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:If gay people don't marry in church, it's not really a religious thing, so why would God mind?

Exactly. Some people think marriage should only be religious I guess. Perhaps HF can tell us why he wants to stop gay people marrying.

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 4:01 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:If gay people don't marry in church, it's not really a religious thing, so why would God mind?

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 08, 2015 4:38 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:If gay people don't marry in church, it's not really a religious thing, so why would God mind?

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

But it could be said that marriage is just a legal union which give two people rights on each other's property. Laughing

by Guest Mon Jun 08, 2015 4:44 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

But it could be said that marriage is just a legal union which give two people rights on each other's property.

lol that's very true..

by veya_victaous Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:16 pm

also the Christian god doesn't define marriage

Osiris and Isis are married and far older than Abrahamism, 1000's of years before Moses was born there were gods of Marriage and that were married themselves.

Hera is explicitly the Goddess of marital bliss.

by Ben Reilly Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:06 am

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:If gay people don't marry in church, it's not really a religious thing, so why would God mind?

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

There are already churches that voluntarily perform gay marriages and welcome gay members into their congregations. Because love.

homosexuality is man made!!!! - Page 4 4bd4e430bbd289acb0d8a19f7c47474a

homosexuality is man made!!!! - Page 4 4bd4e430bbd289acb0d8a19f7c47474a

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:12 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

There are already churches that voluntarily perform gay marriages and welcome gay members into their congregations. Because love.

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:20 am

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:If gay people don't marry in church, it's not really a religious thing, so why would God mind?

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

please stop calling gay people "queers" I find that very offensive and bigoted

by Lurker Tue Jun 09, 2015 3:55 am

HFA, you "stand with Israel" but you also believe that all Jews are going to hell if they aren't saved and converted to Christianity. Doesn't that make you a hypocrite?

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:31 am

Some Jews are saved they have accpeted Jesus .

by Eilzel Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:33 am

What about Jews who have not accepted Jesus (ie: most of Israel)?

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:33 am

Lurker wrote:HFA, you "stand with Israel" but you also believe that all Jews are going to hell if they aren't saved and converted to Christianity. Doesn't that make you a hypocrite?

no not at all...

they are still God's chosen and who is too say if or when they will accept Jesus as many have...

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:35 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

There are already churches that voluntarily perform gay marriages and welcome gay members into their congregations. Because love.

because they compromise the word of God, that's a dangerous road....

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:42 am

ant that's why they hate the word of God .

by Eilzel Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:24 pm

They don't hate it they just interpret it differently to how you do. They see god as loving human love no matter what gender two people may be; and you see him as judgemental against gay love, that's all.

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:49 pm

Eilzel wrote:They don't hate it they just interpret it differently to how you do. They see god as loving human love no matter what gender two people may be; and you see him as judgemental against gay love, that's all.

God is love and loves everyone but he is also a righteous Judge and must judge one day, he gives us all a chance to reconcile ourselves ith him so come that judgement we ill be saved..

by Eilzel Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:53 pm

I'm not debating what your god is, I know all that. I was just countering the idea that those other people hate the word of god, that is not true.

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:05 pm

Eilzel wrote:What about Jews who have not accepted Jesus (ie: most of Israel)?

I know its tough , but i believe God will give us all the chance to accept Jesus even in the last moment of life .

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:06 pm

Eilzel wrote:I'm not debating what your god is, I know all that. I was just countering the idea that those other people hate the word of god, that is not true.

If they are not adhering to the word of God they cannot love the word especially if they are prepared to change it...

they might as well make up another God and forget the bible..

the mormons, j'w's and the koran have their on versions of Jesus but none conform to the Jesus of the bible...

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:11 pm

korban dallas wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..
please stop calling gay people "queers" I find that very offensive and bigoted

im not keen on the word but there is a gay rights campaign group QueerSpace.

by Eilzel Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:21 pm

Again HF its just your word against theirs. From a non believers pov the hundreds of different versions of Christianity is one thing that makes it all the more hard to take seriously.

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:45 pm

Eilzel wrote:Again HF its just your word against theirs. From a non believers pov the hundreds of different versions of Christianity is one thing that makes it all the more hard to take seriously.

the bible is quite clear on it, it is not down to points of view, if they wish to omit words from the bible they are not following the bible at all...

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:19 pm

that's true HF so because we believe the bible the other changed versions are not relevant to us so what we say we believe cannot be wrong to us , if someone such as Lez is discussing the bible from a mormon religion they would discuss it differently .

Not being arrogant here but the bible we read is the KJV and we believe it is the closest to the original text .

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:25 pm

Vicar of Dibley wrote:that's true HF so because we believe the bible the other changed versions are not relevant to us so what we say we believe cannot be wrong to us , if someone such as Lez is discussing the bible from a mormon religion they would discuss it differently .

Not being arrogant here but the bible we read is the KJV and we believe it is the closest to the original text .

amen x

by Eilzel Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:32 pm

Vicar of Dibley wrote:that's true HF so because we believe the bible the other changed versions are not relevant to us so what we say we believe cannot be wrong to us , if someone such as Lez is discussing the bible from a mormon religion they would discuss it differently .

Not being arrogant here but the bible we read is the KJV and we believe it is the closest to the original text .

The KJV is a translation of a translation of a translation of translations- so it would be astonishing if that book was closest to the original text.

That isn't the point however, of course to you you are right; to a Methodist, Unitarian, Catholic etc etc, they are right. Doubtless the first Christians would be appalled to hear some of the things you accept as gospel now, but you wouldn't agree. To me you are all equally as wrong as each other.

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:37 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Vicar of Dibley wrote:that's true HF so because we believe the bible the other changed versions are not relevant to us so what we say we believe cannot be wrong to us , if someone such as Lez is discussing the bible from a mormon religion they would discuss it differently .

Not being arrogant here but the bible we read is the KJV and we believe it is the closest to the original text .

The KJV is a translation of a translation of a translation of translations- so it would be astonishing if that book was closest to the original text.

That isn't the point however, of course to you you are right; to a Methodist, Unitarian, Catholic etc etc, they are right. Doubtless the first Christians would be appalled to hear some of the things you accept as gospel now, but you wouldn't agree. To me you are all equally as wrong as each other.

actually the kjv is incredibly accurate.... the fact that in a relatively short period of time that there has been so many translations is actually a strength as errors show up much more quickly...

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 3:29 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Vicar of Dibley wrote:that's true HF so because we believe the bible the other changed versions are not relevant to us so what we say we believe cannot be wrong to us , if someone such as Lez is discussing the bible from a mormon religion they would discuss it differently .

Not being arrogant here but the bible we read is the KJV and we believe it is the closest to the original text .

The KJV is a translation of a translation of a translation of translations- so it would be astonishing if that book was closest to the original text.

That isn't the point however, of course to you you are right; to a Methodist, Unitarian, Catholic etc etc, they are right. Doubtless the first Christians would be appalled to hear some of the things you accept as gospel now, but you wouldn't agree. To me you are all equally as wrong as each other.

Most of my family in Malta are Catholic but they are really beginning to see that grace is the truth and they talk more of Jesus now than Mary which is the centre of being a Catholic , but more and more it is Jesus .

by Eilzel Tue Jun 09, 2015 3:40 pm

That doesn't really alter what I said.

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 3:45 pm

I think the word remains what it is truth..

by Original Quill Tue Jun 09, 2015 5:20 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

it is an unnatural union. that is why I think God would mind, his word defines marriage..

I'm just waiting for the first church or fellowship to be approached by militant queers to either marry them or use the building, it will happen and then the rot will really set in..

But it could be said that marriage is just a legal union which give two people rights on each other's property.

A bit cynical, but essentially correct. Marriage actually gives legal status, not only with regard to rights to each others property, but with regard to government and civil relations.

The problem for you Brits is you mix church and state. The Crown is not only head of state--which today is a fiction--but head of the church. By mixing church and state you taint the secular form. For us, there is no creed issue.

by Guest Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:18 pm

Eilzel wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

queers don't want equality... love you baby xx

You see VoD, he can't help but use offensive language, even when I'm not- its his nature, but defend away...

HF, why do you want to deny me the right to marry my partner?

I've yet to see anyone come up with a reason on any of the forums I've posted on to deny gay marriage that isn't homophobic. There simply isn't one homosexuality is man made!!!! - Page 4 No_no_10

homosexuality is man made!!!! - Page 4 No_no_10

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:21 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

But it could be said that marriage is just a legal union which give two people rights on each other's property.

A bit cynical, but essentially correct. Marriage actually gives legal status, not only with regard to rights to each others property, but with regard to government and civil relations.

The problem for you Brits is you mix church and state. The Crown is not only head of state--which today is a fiction--but head of the church. By mixing church and state you taint the secular form. For us, there is no creed issue.

We do have register office marriages you know.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:39 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

A bit cynical, but essentially correct. Marriage actually gives legal status, not only with regard to rights to each others property, but with regard to government and civil relations.

The problem for you Brits is you mix church and state. The Crown is not only head of state--which today is a fiction--but head of the church. By mixing church and state you taint the secular form. For us, there is no creed issue.

We do have register office marriages you know.

But isn't it interesting that you have to go out of your way to note that?

In the US, marriage is a purely civil/legal matter. The fact that a Church is involved is merely symbolic...rather like a nativity scenes they put up on lawns around Christmas time.

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:41 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

We do have register office marriages you know.

But isn't it interesting that you have to go out of your way to note that?

In the US, marriage is a purely civil/legal matter. The fact that a Church is involved is merely symbolic...rather like a nativity scenes they put up on lawns around Christmas time.

What do you mean go out of my way?

by Original Quill Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:45 pm

No offense. Merely that it is anomalous to have to mention that. In the US, it is automatically recognized that marriage is a legal status, not a religious one. First Amendment guarantees it.

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:51 pm

Original Quill wrote:No offense. Merely that it is anomalous to have to mention that. In the US, it is automatically recognized that marriage is a legal status, not a religious one. First Amendment guarantees it.

It's the same here. The status is the same whether you marry in a church or a register office.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:57 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:No offense. Merely that it is anomalous to have to mention that. In the US, it is automatically recognized that marriage is a legal status, not a religious one. First Amendment guarantees it.

It's the same here. The status is the same whether you marry in a church or a register office.

Yes, I know. It's more a matter of expectations. By eliminating the church/state connection, it's just one less mental leap that we in the US have to make.

Make no mistake, Southern Baptists try to make religion an issue in gay marriage debates over here. It's just that it is more readily ignored by us. I see a lot more fuss and concern about that among UK posters.

by Eilzel Wed Jun 10, 2015 1:35 am

Among a vocal few posters Quill, truth is next to no one in the UK makes it a concern away from 'loud' internet users. I don't know a single person in all my friends, family and colleagues who opposes gay marriage on any grounds let alone religious- including many Christians who also see no problem in it Smile

by Guest Wed Jun 10, 2015 9:47 am

The bible speaks against homosexuality, how any Christian could deny that I will never know..

the pressure will eventually mount for churches to be forced to marry gays and that is wrong...

by Eilzel Wed Jun 10, 2015 9:50 am

No it wont, until it does you are complaining over nothing and building false bogeymen. There is no push for it anyway.

by Guest Wed Jun 10, 2015 12:45 pm

Eilzel wrote:No it wont, until it does you are complaining over nothing and building false bogeymen. There is no push for it anyway.

as i said the b&b , the cake shop these are just test cases for the gays, the militants will push the agenda..

by Guest Wed Jun 10, 2015 12:47 pm

I bet the B&B owners and the Christian cake shop didn't see that coming either so as Christians i think it is something to keep in mind Les .

by Eilzel Wed Jun 10, 2015 1:14 pm

The law was already against discrimination so those businesses simply fell by defying equality laws. The law protects religious institutions, so unless you just don't understand law then you can't compare them.

by eddie Wed Jun 10, 2015 1:51 pm

Why does every single thread end up being about religion????

by Lurker Wed Jun 10, 2015 2:30 pm

eddie wrote:Why does every single thread end up being about religion????

Because HFA's simple mind can't think about anything else.

by Guest Wed Jun 10, 2015 5:16 pm

laws change, the law will not protect anyone from the militant gays....

you have to wonder why the gay agenda is being supported though, perhaps it is because of the lower life expectancy of gays and they are trying to kill more people off, that would be strange...

perhaps it is because so many famous people even important people are involved in the peado rings and they want it to be more open and legal, who as it who wanted the age for gay sex lowered to 12 i forget...

by Eilzel Wed Jun 10, 2015 5:21 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:laws change, the law will not protect anyone from the militant gays....

you have to wonder why the gay agenda is being supported though, perhaps it is because of the lower life expectancy of gays and they are trying to kill more people off, that would be strange...

perhaps it is because so many famous people even important people are involved in the peado rings and they want it to be more open and legal, who as it who wanted the age for gay sex lowered to 12 i forget...

And so the attempts to link homosexuality and paedophilia returns...

There is nothing civil about you, you are deliberately hateful. A shame your love of Jesus doesn't translate into common decency.

by Guest Wed Jun 10, 2015 5:26 pm

Eilzel wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:laws change, the law will not protect anyone from the militant gays....

you have to wonder why the gay agenda is being supported though, perhaps it is because of the lower life expectancy of gays and they are trying to kill more people off, that would be strange...

perhaps it is because so many famous people even important people are involved in the peado rings and they want it to be more open and legal, who as it who wanted the age for gay sex lowered to 12 i forget...

And so the attempts to link homosexuality and paedophilia returns...

There is nothing civil about you, you are deliberately hateful. A shame your love of Jesus doesn't translate into common decency.

there are gay peado's i am not creating a link it exists... I'm sorry if you cannot handle the world as it is...

who was it who wanted the age reducing to 12 for gay sex??