23 votes

Millionaire gays sue church to perform gay "wedding"

"Oh, come on, you're such a bigot. That kind of thing will never happen."

Further proof that the gay "rights" movement is not about rights, it's about forcing everyone to not only tolerate, but actively support, their choices.

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/millionaire-gay-couple-sui...

I would also like to remind everyone that a gay person can literally do everything a straight person can do. There is not a single right they don't have - they want to, instead, FORCE people to accept their "lifestyle," at the expense of freedom of religion and freedom of speech if need be.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Considering

how many people use I corthians 7 to say christians shouldnt marry I find your post really weird.

I dont know what version you are using but the next two verses say
1Co 7:37 Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.
1Co 7:38 So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.

Let's put a hypothetical on this ...

What are we talking about here:

"I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord."

Are we not talking about a man who strives to do what is right to the Lord? Fathers witness puppy love of their daughters all the time. They know it is a phase that will pass but for young lovers ... well Hollywood puts out movies romanticizing it all the time.

Does not this passage convey to a man striving to be good that he need not lose his daughter to do right before the Lord? Perhaps many fathers can reason with daughters who want to run away for puppy love. However sometimes it is strong puppy love where a daughter will hate her father for his prohibition. Does not this passage speak to such a father?

Earlier in the chapter it states:

" ... for it is better to marry than to burn with passion."

A father commits no sin yielding to any daughter burning with passion by letting her marry if she is past her youth (ie. puberty).

Getting back to the original comment I responded to ... if we are talking about 13-14 year old girls getting married a lot of people are going to find that distasteful evidenced by underage sex laws supported by a majority.

Sorry there is no short answer but I will do my best.

I corinthians 7 needs to be understood in the light of the book of corinthians. In I corinthians 5:1 we find a man sleeping with his fathers wife. In I corinthians 3:1 we find Paul calling the entire church of corinth carnal, and babies. Simply put this church has some issues.

Now when we get to I corinthians 7 we find Paul dealing with their relationships. He tells the singles to stay single several times, the married to stay married, the divorced to stay divorced. And he also says that its not a sin to marry.
In verse 26 he uses the phrase the present distress basiclly he is giving the advise he is in I corinthians 7 due to the carnal, and immature nature of the church in corenth, he is saying that now is not the time to move on in your relationship.
That said there would have without a doubt been single people in romantic relationships so in I corinthians 7:9 paul said that if you can not contain your lust its better to marry than to burn (the word burn here refers to lust, not hell or fire). See the Bible always wants to protect the sanctity of the marriage bed.
Basiclly the verses you bring up 1Co 7:35 And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.
1Co 7:36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.
1Co 7:37 Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.
1Co 7:38 So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.
All these verses come back down to Paul dealing with an immature church. There were some young people of marriageable age who were in a relationship who should get married immediately and others that should wait, the decision was a judgement call they had to make.

That said the laws on the books already say its okay for 13, 14 year olds to have sex as long as they do it with someone that is near their age. Abortion without parental permission or notification. What is distasteful is a full grown adult taking advantage of young people. At least thats what the current laws of our country appears to show.

Did you say something new?

Yet your comment is prefaced with "I corinthians 7 needs to be understood in the light of the book of corinthians."

RE: "That said the laws on the books already say its okay for 13, 14 year olds to have sex as long as they do it with someone that is near their age"

I find that comment absurd:

Rockdale girl, 16, accused of statutory rape of boy, 14

"When school officials questioned the teens, both admitted to having consensual sex on the bathroom floor, authorities said.

...

According to Georgia state statute, a person commits statutory rape if the victim is at least 14 years old but less than 16 and the suspect is 18 years of age or younger and is no more than four years older than the victim."

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/rockdale-girl-16-accused-of-sta...

and yet

girls can get birth control medication without parental notification, and abortions with our parental notification at the age of 14.

if the government did not approve of 14 year olds having sex why then allow 14 year olds the means to cover up their sex act with medication and abortions?

Isnt it odd that on one hand the government allows thise girls to do all this without parental notification and yet has the statutory rape laws? Heck I know a guy who took a girl to six flags without her parents permission who got charged with something because they were ticked (dont remember what the charge was).

Better question is why the contradiction? With Christians their is no contradiction. Be a virgin when you get married. The guy and girl must be old enough to legally make the decision, and its their decision no one else's.

If we are going to discuss Christianity ...

I could agree, with Christians there ought not be any contradiction but it is not "be a virgin when you get married" or "be old enough legally to make the decision" as if Christians live under law. It may very well be good to be a virgin or of legal age when you get married. It may very well be good to teach children to be a virgin when you get married or be of legal age. However, all fall short of the glory. If you fall short in your own life, like all do at some point, do not despair, repent in your heart and seek to do what is good using your own free will. Remember when others trespass against you that when you fell short you did not have to despair about your wrong doing because you were forgiven as it is also good to forgive.

For instance:

If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

... and several of the passages before it.

Yet, there is a blaring contradiction with Christians generally. It is a belief in law which is the opposite of grace and mercy.

following the law

brings about a state called innocence. Once the law is broken you have a need for mercy and grace, which brings along a state called justified. Because of my sins Christ had to face the horrible cross, not to ignore the law but to fulfill it. Man went from a state of innocence, to a state of sin, but because of Christ paying for that sin on the cross we can be justified through him.
Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Rom 7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
Rom 7:10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
Rom 7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

I love the law. Once the law of God was freely given to all men to know europe left the dark ages. In fact I believe a big part of liberty is knowing the laws of the land, as the government is constantly filled with men who wish to break the law that they themselves wrote. As I understand it a republic is a country ruled not by man but by the law.

RE: Justified

"You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace."

" ... break the law that they themselves wrote. As I understand it a republic is a country ruled not by man but by the law."

Laws written by men. What have you received by works of man's law to love it so?

weird double post, sorry!

weird double post, sorry!

I am unsure what pedophilia sanctioned by church you refer to?

This is the KJV, usually a better example.

36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

Notice this one does not say daughter at all. It DOES say "His virgin" This is a betrothed term. In Jewish culture, consummation would not occur for about a year after the girl came to live with him and his family. Also, girls must be "passed the flower of her age".

Simply put, she must have gone through puberty. Since this girl was meant to be his anyway, as long as he married her(and she is of age), he has not sinned against her or against Christ(as each of us are Christs bride).

I believe that women are "of age" when they are,

1:Passed puberty
2:Know and understand the consequences of their actions

Honestly, I would rate the age of consent around 13-14. However there are girls today that do not hit puberty until 16+. As such i believe each case should be looked at independently.

This is just my opinion.

I doubt you are going to get very far on the 5 O'clock news

with a view that 13 year old girls passed puberty are free to marry. I do hold a different view that is likely just as unpopular. In my opinion an element of consent is not being dependent on the charity of others ... as far as I am concerned if a 10 year old has their own job, pays their own bills, etc. they can do whatever any other adult can.

Your Observation is incorrect

What does this mean "if she is past her youth" or are you just being a dickhead .. WHY not just stand up for Freedom,instead of a A-hole Christian HAter

TwelveOhOne's picture

Might want to watch your words

I let http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/3362866 pass by without commenting, but you repeated your transgression so I will point out that you are violating rules #1 and #7 of http://dailypaul.com/guide

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)

COME on

Really dude ... and you don't think the other guy violated any of the rules ...come on

TwelveOhOne's picture

First:what other guy; second: so that's how your morality works?

I'm not a moderator. I don't point out every transgression. Sorry if you think that's my job. I did see two transgressions, by one author, in separate comments attached to the same post.

So I pointed it out.

You can behave however you like. I must point out though, that the moderators might not warn; they might just make you walk the plank.

So feel free to carry on, if you choose.

My comment about your morality in the subject, is because your response seemed to be along the lines of: "this other person violated a rule and nobody said anything, why are you selectively enforcing this against me???" Instead, what I would have expected was something like "Yes, you are correct, thank you for letting me know before someone with real power on this site did, In Liberty, cheesewhiz".

And if, by "the other guy" you meant His American Majesty? I see him misquoting a book on mythology; I don't see him personally attacking other members, or using profanity. So, regardless of what other rules you think HAM might have violated, he didn't violate #1 or #7 (AFAICT).

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)

Oh sorry

I miss quoted .. both of you are and seem to be divisive,but i guess you want me to tolerate you but you won't tolerate me, go figure this is where i throw out the Azzhat of the year award to both of you

TwelveOhOne's picture

By the way,

are you posting impaired? Because you clearly misunderstood me. You took me to be saying that you mis-quoted, when in fact I clearly said that His American Majesty had mis-quoted. Might be better to respond to me when sober?

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)

TwelveOhOne's picture

YEAH!

(Yelled like Howard Dean.)

I'm not sure where you're getting that I am choosing not to tolerate you. I'm trying to help you. But, whatever; you will get what's coming to you. Or you won't, because the moderators don't read every comment, either. Really, they don't, and really, I'm trying to help, but you can keep swearing at me if it'll make you feel better.

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)

The church (generally speaking) in America set the stage

for this same thing to happen here when it decided to try to use the law to define who can and can not call their relationship marriage. The unintended result was a reinforcement of the idea that the government has the right to dictate and enforce morality. This is all well and good for the church as long as public opinion is on their side. But, when public opinion shifts, the church (generally speaking) will find that it has relinquished all moral justification for being outraged at a homosexual attempt to use the law to define who can and can not get married in one of their buildings.

So it's ok

to use the state to harm others if others tried to use the state to harm you?

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

So now you are blaming the

So now you are blaming the victim. Like when a rape victim gets blamed because she was a "whore".

It is hardly analogous to rape ...

It is gay people using the same legal system and laws all men and women are supposedly equal under created/condoned/endorsed by christian hypocrites, in an alleged nation having a christian majority, intended to elevate heterosexual couples above gays by creating special privileges for heterosexuals.

However, if any Christian hypocrite victim hired someone to rape someone else I could care less if they get raped out of revenge. Eye for an eye is the law and if you are setting aside the doctrines of grace, mercy, or forgiveness to seek justice in law because you believe in the old testament ways of law more than grace, mercy, or forgiveness ... payback is a bitch.

COME on

The reason the government came up with marriage was because of slavery, they didn't want white people marrying black people ... you are just an A-hole

Plus it is called private property rights, so can a non-smoker sue a bar because they allow smoking .. I mean what are you even on this site for, i guess to be a Christian hating d-head

If it is as you say ...

I may be an A-hole. Unfortunately for you 1) I don't claim to be righteous, and 2) I am not ignorant of the Bible. If anything I write makes some good ol righteous, upstanding Christian folk uncomfortable ... good.

Just considering your claim about whites marrying blacks, here is my response. Any nation of so called Christian people begging the guns of government to prohibit any of God's children from marrying each other over something petty as race, deserve to have their churches sued. If I was suing, I would probably also sue for fraud, false advertising, or something along those lines.

Do you understand English

I agree about God's children marrying .. but i am trying to figure out what you are doing here ... A private company or church should be able to discriminate based on whatever they want,and your whinny little butt shouldn't be able to sue .. I mean do you listen to Ron Paul

And Whinny little people like you shouldn't use the guns of government to force Church's to marry people they don't want to ... if you don't like it start your own Gay Church and get married there

Apparently,

like I stated in a comment above ... a vast majority of this Christian nation wants the civil rights act. So if you are operating a public place irregardless of any activities occurring at said place, do not discriminate based on age, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

Do I think it is right and just for some Christians to eat any political civil rights cake they have baked because they do not believe in private property rights? Yes. I wholly endorse any Christian hypocrites being sued in any Christian nation that could care less about private property rights clearly demonstrated by their own political actions.

P.S. You can take all the personal comments you keep insinuating in this thread and shove em up your tailpipe.

Don't be hateful or you may

Don't be hateful or you may have an unintended backlash.

Do unto others as you want them to do unto you.

No point in moaning when others start doing unto you in kind.

How about when sued for your shirt offer them your coat too. Did the church do that?

Jeez

What a bunch of friggen idiots!

scawarren's picture

I believe the last line sums

I believe the last line sums these two up...
“As much as people are saying this is a good thing, I am still not getting what I want.”

It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. – Mark Twain