First Ever Republican Senator Rob Reverses Stance, Comes Out in Favor of Gay Marriage

[AlpsStranger]

Nah, it's cool. For what it's worth I'm glad there are Christians like Cake who are fighting to make things better from the inside.

An obdurate sin-crazed unbeliever like myself sure can't do much to change the faith.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

At least get rid of the legal benefits of being married.

I mean, think about it. Those legal benefits are intended to encourage people starting a family, and with 7 billion people about, the LAST thing we need are more of us bastards!

Wouldn't abolishing or discouraging marriage tend to lead to more of us being born as bastards?

 

[classical_hero]

I am a christian myself. This is how I see it:

First of all, Jesus Christ himself made it clear that 'may the first one that hasn't sinned throw the rock on the woman'. A woman was accused of adultery (if I remember correctly) and Jesus's point was you are all hypocrites to throw stones at her because everyone on earth is a sinner just like she is.

That in mind, we are in no position to judge homosexuals because we all sin regardless. I hold grudges for example, something the bible says you shouldn't do. Some members of my church are even aware of these grudges because I'm quite vocal about them. Does this mean they should deny me the right to get married just because there is something 'unchristian' about me? As I've said myself we even have a gay couple in our church that we welcome as one of our own. That's because everyone sins in some way, and we as mortals do not know which sins are the worst. God decides who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, not us.

Link to video.

You are so wrong in stating that it is wrong for us to judge. The very fact in the situation of the woman caught in Adultery, Jesus judged the hypocrisy of the religious leaders with what he said. They knew they were judging hypocritically and thus they knew they should have been where the woman was. The woman was already guilty of the sin all she was waiting for was execution of the judgement, but Jesus came here to save sinners, not condemn them, which why he told the woman to "go and sin no more". He didn't excuse her sin, he forgave her sin and told her to live a changed life.

 

[Farm Boy]

But what you're incentivizing doesn't need an incentive. If these parents could be in good relationships, they already would be. Instead I think you're creating a Perverse Incentive that's only encouraging people stay in bad relationships - be they with abusive spouses, irresponsible parents, or just people they don't like. Not being in a relationship is not the kind of behavior us 'lib-tards' think should be sin-taxed.

Well, I think you are probably attributing too much of yourself into the behavior of others. I do that too. Lets look at it this way. "If these parents could be in good relationships, they already would be." I think this probably isn't as true as it reads. I dare say that there are more than a couple baby-mommas and baby-daddies, as El Mac puts it, out there who have made their life decisions based almost entirely around what they want to do for themselves, not what they need to do, and not what is best for their spawn. A Perverse Incentive for staying with "people they just don't like" eh? These people have created a kid or kids. I would put the priority of what is generally shown to be better for them as the optimal thing for society to incentivize rather than what makes the parents feel more self actualized. No-I have zero issues with society attempting to corral people with a velvet leash to take better care of children they create.

Ok, "lib-tards?" Is that a caricature of my point? Is that really how it reads to you? When have I called somebody a *******, or a teabagger, or a repuglican, or an Obummer, or whatever moronic phrase is bouncing around at the moment? You don't need to like my points, eviscerate them as you see fit. But I am not calling anyone a re-re. The fact that people identify so closely with idiotic conservative/liberal labels is the problem. You make a point about a typically "liberal" school of thought and people jump up and down thinking you are attacking them, or their intelligence, or whatever. I'm not, I'm trying to make a point and sort out the world as best I can. I generally assume you are doing the same. I'll be a broken record. Strong ideology is a sign of a dead mind.

 

[AlpsStranger]

He didn't excuse her sin, he forgave her sin and told her to live a changed life.

If Jesus would've caught her at it again he would've kicked her square in the mouth.

Jokes aside, isn't the authenticity of this part of the Bible one of the most hotly disputed? I've met Christians who don't think this event actually occurred.

 

[caketastydelish]

It's in the bible. Conservapedia tried making their own bible taking that part out as well as others because of the 'liberal bias' it had.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

You are so wrong in stating that it is wrong for us to judge. The very fact in the situation of the woman caught in Adultery, Jesus judged the hypocrisy of the religious leaders with what he said. They knew they were judging hypocritically and thus they knew they should have been where the woman was.

Not unlike judging homosexuals for their homosexuality by a fellow sinner like you isn't it?

Or do you deem yourself as worthy as Jesus when it comes to judging?

 

[Leifmk]

It's in the bible. Conservapedia tried making their own bible taking that part out as well as others because of the 'liberal bias' it had.

I have it on good authority that the Devil is dead; he laughed so hard at Conservapedia that he had a heart attack.

 

[AlpsStranger]

It's in the bible. Conservapedia tried making their own bible taking that part out as well as others because of the 'liberal bias' it had.

While there can be no doubt that the "conservative Bible project" was one of the most pathetic things I've ever witnessed spewed out across cyberspace, the issue with the adulteress event is not unique to Conservapedia. I didn't even know what Conservapedia was the first time I heard someone bring it up.

Nobody denies that it is in the Bible. The question revolved around whether or not it should be in the Bible.