Let the Joyous news be spread: New Jersey votes yes on Gay civil union!

Mrs Husker · November 4, 2006

These are my opinions and I am in no way trying to hurt, malign, anger, argue or agree with anyone.

Let me start by prefacing that I am in no way an expert on the bible. I do not believe in organized religion but I am a Christian and I believe that Christ did die for me. I do not believe that people chose to be gay. Would any of us choose to be something that is so ridiculed and shunned? I do not believe that anyone chooses whom they fall in love with. In an earlier post I said that if the word “marriage” was dropped, then some would not have a problem with it. By no means does that mean the only heterosexual couples keep “marriage” sacred. I work with a woman who has had three affairs that I know of in the two years that she has been here. I was divorced (but since he had an affair, according to MY translation of the bible, I did not committed adultery when I re-married).

“Marriage” as defined by:

Webster Dictionary 1828 as “The act of uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and woman for life. Marriage is a contract both civil and religious, by which the parties engage to live together in mutual affection and fidelity, till death shall separate them. Marriage was instituted by God himself for the purpose of preventing the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes, for promoting domestic felicity, and for securing the maintenance and education of children”.

Webster Dictionary, 1913 is “The act of marrying, or the state of being married; legal union of a man and a woman for life, as husband and wife; wedlock; matrimony”.

Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary 10th edition as “1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage”.

The definition of marriage has changed over the years. Some people agree with it, some don’t. If this was a perfect world where everyone agreed on everything, it would sure be boring.

Do I judge people? Yes. But I try to judge them only by their actions. If they are cruel, I judge them to be cruel. If they are mean, I judge them to be mean. If they are ignorant, I will give them the benefit of doubt that they might not know better. I will not judge a person’s “worthiness” in the eyes of God. I believe that is arrogant. Seeing as how I believe in him, I think he is perfectly capable of that himself. I will not judge a persons character without first meeting and talking to them. I will not condemn a person without all the facts.

I realize that there are many interpretation of the bible. Here are a few of them of Romans 14:13-14. After reading them, please take away with you whatever your heart tells you see.Also remember, if you believe in God or not, you and I walk by faith everyday. Faith in ourselves, faith in others, faith in things, or faith in God.

Do I believe that gay people should be allowed to be married? I think I will keep my opinionto myself.

Romans 14:13-14 (King James Version)

13Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

14I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Romans 14:13-14 (New King James Version)

13</SPAN> Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.

14</SPAN> I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Romans 14:13-14 (New American Standard Bible)

13Therefore let us not (A)judge one another anymore, but rather determine this--(B)not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way.

14I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that (C)nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who (D)thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Romans 14:13-14 (Darby Translation)

13Let us no longer therefore judge one another; but judge ye this rather, not to put a stumbling-block or a fall-trap before his brother.

14I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself; except to him who reckons anything to be unclean, to that man [it is] unclean.

Romans 14:13-14 (21st Century King James Version)

13Let us not therefore judge one another any more, but judge this rather: that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

14I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him that regardeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Romans 14:13-14 (Today's New International Version)

13</SPAN> Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. 14 I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean.

Romans 14:13-14 (Young's Literal Translation)

13no longer, therefore, may we judge one another, but this judge ye rather, not to put a stumbling-stone before the brother, or an offence.

14I have known, and am persuaded, in the Lord Jesus, that nothing [is] unclean of itself, except to him who is reckoning anything to be unclean -- to that one [it is] unclean;

leatha_g · November 5, 2006

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

BJean · November 5, 2006

Seems to me that a lot of this discussion involves semantics. And faith. And how is an argument based on those things ever going to be resolved? It has given a forum to those who wish to make their points, and that's a good thing. But feelings and thoughts and ideas about religion are so very deep-rooted and based on so many life experiences, how can we all be on one page unless we all shared the same background and life experiences?

I honestly have appreciated hearing all the sides to these questions that ya'll have offered up. And if these posts have helped people - even just to reaffirm their own convictions, then it has been a good thing!

HunnyBun · November 5, 2006

I believe in God, but I don't believe we all have a personal relationship with God.

When I hear people saying that God saved them from an accident, or helped them come out of problems etc, I think that they are blind.

Yeah God helped some woman come out of a bad car crash, but let hundreds of thousands of people die during the tsunami. He saved a child from drowning, but let all the other children be kidnapped, raped, and murdered brutally. He helped you pay mortgage last month, but allowed thousands of women be brutally beaten by their husbands. He did all these miracles for certain individuals, but somehow overlooked all the people who are beat, cut, raped, murdered, killed and buried under houses (John Wayne Gacy), and whatever else.

If we are all children of God, does he love his praying Christians more than all the other people who experience real pain and tragedy?

I believe in God, the creator of earth and life, but I don't believe he is there for us. I think he made our world, made us, gave us the gift of free will, and said "Here you go!" and that was it.

Prayer is powerful, in my opinion, but its just something we do to make ourselves feel better. I don't think he can hear us.

How can I think God can hear a prayer when a child is stolen from his parents and later found raped and dead in a river. I can only imagine how much parents of missing children pray. Being a parent myself, that is truly the worst pain a parent can feel.

Carlene · November 5, 2006

The Bible instructed through God. That would be NKJ,NIV,American Standard,KJ,ones with old and new testaments in them.

Carol....please explain how you know these are the Bibles "instructed by God". Does it say so on the Bible itself? Did God give you a list? Are you saying that MY Bible is not God-approved?

Carlene · November 5, 2006

Which bible do you mean? There are several. King James wanted a divorce from his wife because she couldn't have a son....he knocked up one of the handmaids and she had a son....so he had the bible rewritten ...so that he could marry her.....hence the King James Verson....and I don't really care either way....I am just curious when someone says "the bible" ...which one??
So many people don't agree with what is supposed to be the original bible, that they go off and make their own religion......hard to know which is accurate. (esp since the orig bible was written many many years after the incidents written in it)

I am not trying to cause grief....it just facinates me. I think we should all be multi-denominational.....but that is just my own opinion

Actually, although it is often referred to as the King James Version, the only active part King James took in the translation was lifting the criminal (death) penalty attached to its translation and setting very reasonable guidelines for the translation process (such as prohibiting partisan scholarship and footnotes.)

Betsyjane · November 5, 2006

I believe God whispers and I believe God winks...and I believe we have free will. I agree with Carol that I'd rather have a government of leaders who have God in their hearts that a gov't run by the Bible. For me, having humans run the government according to the Bible just gives humans one more way to mess it up...and Royally, with delusions of greater power than their offices already have. Better a pure heart than rhetoric.....

Well, actually, better a pure gay heart than a straight right winger.....

HunnyBun · November 5, 2006

Well, actually, better a pure gay heart than a straight right winger.....

You mean to tell me that someone who is gay can still have a pure heart? I thought gay people were sinners.

obviously that's sarcasm

leatha_g · November 5, 2006

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

gadgetlady · November 5, 2006

But it's your place to prohibit them from entering into a CIVIL (not religious) union for the sole purpose of protecting each of them in terms of inheritance, workers/survivors benefits, community property, etc?

Is it your place to ALLOW them to enter a CIVIL (not religious) union (. . . blah blah blah)? What I'm saying is that we all draw the line somewhere, and at some point a decision has to be made about where to draw that line. I have my opinion, you have yours, and the job of the government is to codify where that arbitrary line falls. There is no "inalienable right to marry".

Would you ALLOW a redefinition of CIVIL unions to include polygamy? Or the woman who marries a dolphin? I'm not being ridiculous here (see http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/woman-marries-dolphin/2006/01/01/1136050339590.html or various others through a web search). I'm not saying she shouldn't be able to have a ceremony where she says some nice words and commits her life to a dolphin. I'm asking if you would include that ceremony in a definition of legal marriage for the purpose of protecting each of them in terms of things like medical insurance? There is such a thing as pet insurance, so it is a legitimate question.

Betsyjane · November 5, 2006

There's a Golden Retriever in Autralia who performs marriages. Maybe he'll join them.

Got his credentials by applying online to the Universal Life Church to be a pastor.

Betsyjane · November 5, 2006

Sorry. That was AUSTRALIA

gadgetlady · November 5, 2006

According to the Associated Press, sodomy laws remained on the books in 13 states as of the middle of 2003. "Sodomy" was illegal for everyone -- gay and straight -- in Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia. In addition, four contiguous states, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas, criminalized certain forms of private, consensual sexual behavior between persons of the same gender, but permitted them if performed by a man and woman.
During the first half of 2003, the U.S. Supreme court studied the constitutionality of sodomy legislation. In the Lawrence v. Texas case, they reviewed a Texas law. It criminalized certain sexual behavior by same-sex couples even though the same activities are quite legal if done by opposite-sex couples. In a ground-breaking decision, the Court decided on 2003-JUN-26 that adults are free to engage in private consensual sex without government oppression. They placed limits on the ability by governments to legislate sexual morality. The sodomy laws in Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas, were declared unconstitutional. Legal experts believe that the sodomy laws in the nine other states are now also null and void. Laws in a few states which criminalize fornication (sexual intercourse by unmarried persons) adultery, and other behaviors may also be overturned by this ruling.

I'm well aware of the law. However, there is a difference between decriminalizing sodomy and legalizing gay marriage. Decriminalizing sodomy affirms personal autonomy, which I believe is the correct interpretation of the founding fathers' intent (as vs. privacy, a made-up "right" that isn't anywhere in the intent or verbiage of the founding fathers).

gadgetlady · November 5, 2006

It's my turn to Lector tonight at Mass. Fortunately the reading is from Deuteronomy.

Carlene, have you ever had to read Leviticus 18:22 at a Mass? Or Psalm 139:12-24? I'm just wondering if/how you would get those words out in front of the congregation if you don't believe them. If you haven't had to, how would you handle it if asked (or assigned) to do it? I'm not being snide here; I'm really curious.

Penni60 · November 5, 2006

I would personally like the GOVERNMENT to stay the hell out of my bedroom. What gives them the right to say who I can marry? What gives them the right to make a law stating what the definition of marriage means? Isn't there this thing called separation of church and state? Or did I miss that day in school?

I am not married, I live with my sweetie, John. I have been in this relationship for 8 years now. How would you define my relationship? You don't have to answer that you know.

I believe that GOD has blessed my relationship. It is no different than same sex relationships. My sweetie and I have taken steps to protect each other in cases of medical emergency and have wills set up. In same sex relationships it is difficult for the same protection to take place. This screams of discrimination.

The Government should stay out of it. It ain't their business.