Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Frank Pastore :: Townhall.com Columnist
Sex and the Lutheran Youth Group
by Frank Pastore
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



How do they do it?

I mean, how can the leadership of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA) tell their kids with a straight face not to be sexually active outside of marriage when they’ve just voted last Saturday to no longer enforce the celibacy requirement for their unmarried staff—both straight and gay?

The ELCA and other pro-gay denominations have been ordaining gays for decades. That’s nothing new. What’s new is that now staff can openly have lovers while on the job and there will be no disciplinary action for violating the celibacy requirement.

The message to the kids is loud and clear: We can have sex with our boyfriends and girlfriends, but you can’t.

What hypocrisy.

This is what happens when sin and the Bible collide: either the Bible will change the sin or the sin will change the Bible.

In this case, it’s homosexual passion that’s changing the Bible.

Not only have they decided, essentially, to rewrite the Bible and declare homosexuality no longer a sin, but now they’ve gone beyond that to include fornication too. Adultery can’t be far behind.

Look for other liberal denominations to follow suit.

So, this means an unmarried youth pastor can openly discuss the sex life he has with his boyfriend without fear of losing his job, while at the same time supposedly providing spiritual leadership to teenagers and counseling them to “wait until marriage?”

Maybe Lutheran parents should be a little more concerned when their kids come home and say they want to be just like the youth pastor. Perhaps they should be a little more suspicious when their kids display a sudden new zeal to attend Lutheran youth camp.

Or, maybe they’re not concerned at all about their kids being sexually active with the church’s tacit permission.

Maybe they—like the entire denomination—have just given up on the whole “try-not-to-sin” thing.

Our kids are going to do it anyway … we can’t stop them … all we can do is be “responsible” and try to prevent them from getting AIDS or getting pregnant … what we really need to do is provide them condoms—just like we do with our adults.

Who needs moral purity when you can have such tolerance and understanding?

It used to be that girls were sometimes deterred from being sexually promiscuous in high school out of fear of getting a bad “reputation.”

Now an entire denomination has a well-deserved bad reputation.

I looked around on the official ELCA Web site for what they teach their children about sexuality. Here’s what I found on a page entitled, “Sexuality: Some Common Convictions.”

• Under “Responsible procreation and parenting” I found the following:

Youth need the support and guidance of the church to resist cultural and peer pressures that encourage sexual intercourse prior to marriage. Open and honest discussion of sexual questions is to be encouraged, in ways that communicate God's guidance, forgiveness, and ongoing care. As a church, we affirm the importance of education about sexuality that emphasizes respect, mutuality, responsibility, and abstinence outside of marriage.

But, why should you try to “resist the cultural and peer pressures that encourage sexual intercourse prior to marriage” and value “abstinence outside of marriage” when your leadership doesn’t? Furthermore, does this statement imply anything short of intercourse is acceptable?

• Under “Promiscuity” I found:

Having casual sexual relations is sinful because this does not proceed from or contribute to respect, intimacy, and care of the other. Promiscuity is inconsistent with our identity as Christians (1 Cor. 6:12-20). Being sexually active in order to be popular or only to gratify sexual desire is morally wrong.

And, for what purpose do you think ELCA staff members are sexually active if not to “gratify sexual desire?” I’m sure ELCA editors are already working on new copy for the Web page that will bring what’s posted on the Web in line with what they actually believe—i.e., that it’s not “morally wrong.”

• And, under “Practices that spread sexually-transmitted diseases” there’s this:

Irresponsible, unprotected sexual contact can expose sexual partners to incurable and fatal sexually-transmitted diseases. Sexual practices that result in physical harm to another are sinful and must be countered. Education about sexuality should emphasize monogamy, abstinence, and responsible sexual behavior, as well as practices intended to prevent the transmission of disease during sexual intercourse. This church supports efforts to prevent, cure, and care for those afflicted with such diseases.

Let me translate. “For all our teens and adults, whether single or married, straight or gay, or laity or leadership, when you are sexually active we want you to always wear a condom.”

Apparently, that’s the new ELCA standard for moral purity. Enough of those archaic notions of monogamy, fidelity and abstinence. It’s simply been reduced to “be responsible—wear a condom.”

Thank God that at the Missouri Synod there are still Lutherans who are also faithfully Christian.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
The Frank Pastore Show is heard in Los Angeles weekday afternoons on 99.5 KKLA and on the web at kkla.com, and is the winner of the 2006 National Religious Broadcasters Talk Show of the Year. Frank is a former major league pitcher with graduate degrees in both philosophy of religion and political philosophy.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Frank Pastore's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
What about other's RIGHTS
Why is it now OK for the LUTHERANS to recognize Gay RIGHTS and not PEDOPHILE or BESTIALITY RIGHTS?

If judges can change laws of society SODOMY, MARRIAGE, ADOPTION for GAY RIGHTS then why can't they change CONSENT (the definition of ADULT) AGE and SPECIES for PEDOPHILE and BESTIALITY RIGHTS..?

How long must these 2 oppressed groups in our society suffer under the discrimination they receive from not just the CHURCH but SOCIETY...?
GAY RIGHTS now has thier day in the SUN and Judges in our courts made this happen,,, It is HIGH time that JUDGES recognized all groups RIGHTS and protect the PEDOPHILES and BESTIALS.

When the JUDGES finally do recognize these RIGHTS and change laws society has set up,,, then YOU will be powerless to stop it.... JUST LIKE GAY RIGHTS....

If on the other hand you want SOCIETY to decide the RIGHTS and not JUDGES then oppose the Process of the CURRENT GAY LOBBY...

LETS VOTE....

US
Righteousness exalts a nation. To whom much is given, much is required.

God will have the last word and I believe great judgement is on the way. It is truly depressing to see what has become of our once great country. How much the "church" has decayed even over the last few years. We are truly seeing the birth of the apostate church.

I see end times events shaping up. Judgement may be just what is required to bring about revival before the end of the church age.

We left the ELCA long ago exactly
because of what the "leadership" has determined is the "right way" to believe by changing the Bible and teachings of Martin Luther to be whatever the ELCA wants it to be (pretty convenient, yes?) We firmly believe that the only reason the ELCA suddenly decided to accept homosexuality as normal was because the ELCA realized how much money was to be found among unchurched homosexuals.

It is sad that so many "sheep" continue to follow these church synods that have been hijacked by the "religious left." Good article, Mr. Pastore.

The new Lutheran church
Martin Luther is rolling over in his grave indeed. This church, ladies and gentleman, has God's permission to re-write the Bible. Also, after commissioning an 8 year study on human sexuality, it appears they also know more than God. Sorry God, that Romans stuff was for someone else. All that no sex before marriage stuff, lets throw it out.

This church is not even lukewarm...

Shameful, indeed.
I was a voting member representing my ELCA church at the most recent South Eastern Synod Convention in Atlanta. About 350 attended as voting members.

The subject above was under question in a number of resolutions, etc to be voted upon.

Each and every question was railroaded and voting prevented under The Rules of Parliamentary Procedure. Time and again -- at least four times -- all discussion of homosexual activity within the clergy was either stopped or prevented. Each question was passed to the next higher authority unchanged, undiscussed, and un-voted upon.

Yes, it is shamefully admitted that those procedures were allowed by popular vote -- they just squeaked by, but they were allowed. After the first such vote, for me the writing was on the wall.

Only the censure of a practicing homosexual pastor was allowed to continue by popular vote -- that was the only vote allowed to proceed that day. [Perhaps because he swore continuing celibacy prior to his ordination and, once in, revoked that oath. We DO consider "Go and sin no more" to be a valid phrase.]

To this 68-year old, happily married, two-years-confirmed ELCA Lutheran, heterosexual male it was a revelation; obviously, the fix was in. The scales were removed from my eyes.

Now that our leadership has spoken, I must now examine my conscience. I am on the horns of a dilemma; revoke my membership in a now morally bankrupt church or condone immorality. The choice seems clear.

Ordaining a celibate homosexual or lesbian pastor is one thing. Recognizing, even rejoicing in, a pastor's continuing moral degradation is another; I expect more from my leaders.

All the while, our leadership preached one thing and committed another. Hypocrisy at its height.

LCMS Lutherans Disagree Strongly
The tolerance of homosexual practice by the ELCA has long concerned our 2.6 Million member conservative Lutheran church body. As our Creator, God knows what's best for us. He gave us the good gift of sexuality and we should hear Him out. He intended this gift to bond a man and woman together for a lifetime and as a stable place to raise children. Just like the geek that ignores the owner's manual for their new device, we risk problems when we do not listen to God, Who really wants us to be happy.

Probably the best summary of our view is that statement of our church body president, the Rev. Gerald Kieschnick: http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=12394

In order for it to have gotten this bad
the rot had to have settled in a long time ago and those of genuine faith, in the Lutheran and other mainline denominations who are embracing this abomination which makes desolate, should have been standing up and fighting a long time ago. Now it's a little too late.

It amazes me that some are thinking that there is still something left to fight for in this denomination. Now all that is left is to stand up and walk out.

But better late than never.

So what?
There are plenty other flavors of religion to choose among beside ELCA Lutheranism.

The problem IMO is that at the root of things ALL flavors of religion are about sex, as they are practiced among Americans. Who can have sex with whom, under what circumstances, with what goals, and (probably) even whether the woman is allowed to enjoy it.

Religion = business in the USA and Europe, and with the same results.


I'm amazed
there are ANY true believers left in the ELCA. Back in the 1960s when the ALC and ELC merged, there was already heresy creeping in. The Association of Free Lutherans began as a result of a group of Norwegian Lutherans not wishing to be part of it. It began in Minnesota, but has churches throughout the United States.

When I moved to my present location, I joined the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Church (another conservative synod.) The doctrine is still pure Lutheran and the preaching is sola scriptura.


pssyfrts

Read closer next time.
Here is what he said: "they’ve just voted last Saturday to no longer enforce the celibacy requirement for their unmarried staff—both straight and gay?"

He was picking on the "do as I say, not as I do" approach.



All sex all the time
Libs. are about all sex all the time because it undermines traditions and families. The Fr. Rev.'s advocated "free sex" and so did the Russian Revolutionaries. Both ended up with rootless orphans, disintegrated farms, towns, and cities (as families are the foundations), and a deconstructed society. Both returned to customary families and conservative practices. Christian churches that advocate sexual dissolution stand outside the New Testament.

consistency
Having experienced various Lutheran synods:

The ELCA (or American Synod as it was previously known) is the most liberal of the Lutheran synods. It started falling away from the bible in the early 50s and has been going "downhill" ever since.

The Wisconson Synod churches are by far the most consistent Lutheran churches - being quite biblically conservative as a whole.

The Missouri Synod is not consistent - a few churches being more "conservative" than the Wisconson Synod churches while others being more liberal than ELCA churches.

Blackthorne, an honest question. ...
... Who are the fixers? I don't understand why any committed Christian would support sex outside of marriage, yet a majority of those who control your denomination appear willing to fight for the right to sin.

It seems to me that rational people who have such a fundamental disagreement with the beliefs of a denomination would just leave rather than fight.

Perhaps, as a participant in a Synod Convention, you can give me a clue as to their thinking.

Let's not only focus on the ELCA!

As a "cradle" Episcopalian, I am heart sick over what has been happening to the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA.)

Bipsy Quee was right, "In order for it to have gotten this bad the rot had to have settled in a long time ago and those of genuine faith..."

Of course the ECUSA has been experiencing this since Bishop Spong (NJ) started his anti-Christian crusade in 1987 when he openly endorsed gay marriage..

I'm ashamed to say that the ECUSA has done more than its share to help us get to where we are now.




Libs. and sin
Since the 1960s and the creation of "nonjudgmentalism" to "neutrally" address problems like illicit sex and illegal drug use, esp. among young people, the very act of NOT objecting has become an acceptance of almost any practice. After all, the radical gay movement started in this atmosphere of anything goes.

A talk program last week had "sugar" daddies/mommies as subjects. They seek support for sexual favors or offer support to another for such, but vehemently claim these practices are perfectly normal and not prostitution. At least Dr. Phil, who doesn't practice nonjudgmentalism, told them they were prostitutes or pimps and were participating in very degrading and self-defeating behavior, for at least one, in front of her daughter. However, people arrive at their "not me" conclusions because almost no institution, including churches, tells anyone anything is a sin.

Libs. don't recog. sin. It's all how you "feel." Or a matter of "health." So, amoral actions aren't condemned, and young people have terrible models. Consider almost all 11 year olds have seen internet porn. Now there's a citizen-building, mature-adult, good-parenting example for children. No wonder we now have 56 STDs, at least 3--HIV, herpes, and HPV--incuable and/or fatal.

Does anyone ...
recall the article posted here concerning how these organizations are now funded? Apparently, main stream church attendance and consequent offerings are declineing so folks like the Ford Foundation are maintaining the churches.
Everything is coming together very nicely for the powers of this world.
The sheeple were born to be slaves .....

First Commandment
The first commandment is to Love God. How can these denominations claim to love God and disregard His teachings? It isn't all "just about sex." It is about every word that came from God. Our society tends to view everything through the lens of sexuality, but there are certainly other teachings in the Bible that are ignored too. It is just easier to get everybody stirred up about sex because actually taking a moral stand against sex outside of marriage alienates a huge segment of the population.

Ephesians chapter 5 is pretty clear on what is expected of followers of God.

"See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is." Ephesians 5: 15-17 (KJV)

Better to alienate part of the population than to alienate yourself from God. Believers need to stand up and be counted and not support this kind of thing. When such denominations agree to this, it only tars everyone who don't believe this is God's teaching. No wonder everyone attacks Christians...Who are we?

Sin Boldly
Martin Luther told his flock to "sin boldly" and also pointed out that if you have faith, you can commit adultery a hundred times a day and still be saved.

The ELCA has stuck very closely to Martin Luther's teachings - that's why they are an abomination.

GOD'S TOES
Free will carries responsibility, and when these people use their free will to urinate on GOD'S toes, and teach it to be acceptable, there will be consequences. I would suggest you boot them out, "from amongst your midst" or leave that denomination at a high rate of speed. Let them wallow in their own filth, for it is not the "denomination" that saves, but the blood of CHRIST. Free will folks, it carries a responsibility.

Just Asking
Here is a profound thought: the God that created us also gave us free will. If we then use that free will, does that mean we deny God?

skellmeyer: "abomination?"

"Martin Luther told his flock to 'sin boldly?'"

Ummm?

"...if you have faith, you can commit adultery a hundred times a day and still be saved."

Clearly words from someone who knows NOTHING of what he speaks.

We can always count on a few of those every time Christianity, morals and ethics are written about on TH.


funky p, others miss scooter's hyperbole
funky p, scooter is using hyperbole to make a point. Read his posts elsewhere. He's doing a good job of making his points, in humorous fashion.

Hillary delenda est.

lilly: Just Asking?


If I understand correctly, you were teacher???
That's scary!

OF COURSE, free will means one CAN make choices!

So yes, if one can make a choice, than one may deny God?

Sorry, lilly, that's NOT profound thought!

funky p is another one who knows NOTHING

of what he speaks!!!!!

Not even worth a comment or response.


Oh, I forgot
It would seem to me that adults have alot of privileges not given to children. We don't let them drive cars, drink beer, fly airplanes, or go to X-rated movies.

Most posters on TH are able to find a bible verse for every single idea they want to promote, including slavery and killing animals for sport-- this one shouldn't be so hard.


Every single comment funkyp posts just

proves my point... He has no idea of what he's talking about....

Hey funk, we're talking about the Word of God, what man has done over the years... and today, that strays from and distorts the Word of God.

Which, by the way, is exactly what Frank Pastore has written about...

You are truly a "FOOL" and I do mean in the Biblical sense....




Anne writes:
"If I understand correctly, you were teacher???
That's scary!"

LOL!! My thoughts exactly!

Frank said: "Not only have they decided, essentially, to rewrite the Bible and declare homosexuality no longer a sin, but now they’ve gone beyond that to include fornication too. Adultery can’t be far behind."

What's that old adage about a camel's nose? Or the slippery slope? Domino effect? Isn't this exactly what Bible believing Christians have said all along? It's how divorce became mainstream.

My grandma used to say, "Sin a little leads to sin a lot!"


funky p
You should have read down a little!

JO1 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
JO1 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Touchy subject
I prefer Townhall for its political rather than religious commentary. However, I would agree that ELCA has taken things a bit too far. On the one hand, I don't see where what people do with their sexuality is of any concern to anybody. Frankly doesn't bother me if people engage in homosexual activity, behind close doors. But the celebration of it, as I think Blackthorne notes in an earlier post, begins to call into question the integrity of the church's Christian heritage. Still, the judge not lest thou be judged is good practice and so long as they are not forcibly recruiting me into the Church's beliefs I will respect their right to do whatever the want to do.

funky p
Oops, I copied the wrong verse, sorry!

The point Frank is making is that the ELCA is rewriting the Bible. We are to acknowledge our sin, ask forgiveness, and then sin no more. The ELCA has just decided to change the definition of sin.


JO1 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
JO1 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
JO1 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
JO1 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
JO1 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
JO1 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

IdahoGal: The only problem is....

reading down a little wouldn't help!

funkyp and his ilk have no interesting in learning about what they ridicule. Which, of course goes right back to lilly's supposed profound question about "free will."





Here's my other question
Why can't fundamentalist, conservative, born-again, righteousness peddlers ever discuss anything without tossing self-selected bible verses in every direction? Don't you all have a vocabulary of
your own?

It's no different than my listing admonitions from the Upanishads, the Diamond Sutra, the Koran, or the Book of Hours. If you had an original or thoughtful idea of your own, you wouldn't have to quote someone else's all the time.

Also
Why don't you just say that everything you find in the bible that an be interpreted to spell out your private feelings is the end of any discussion as shows that you can't be wrong about anything. Then just end the thread.

also
Referring to one of the hundreds of translations of the bible as the final word means that you never have to ask hard questions or think for yourself.

Hey Funky
I'm not any more SCARED of GAY RIGHTS than you are of PEDOPHILE and BESTIAL RIGHTS.....

Does that make you a PEDOPHOBE or a BESTIALPHOBE?
Does that make you a BIGOT against these other RIGHTS and a HYPOCRITE to BOOT...?

OR,,,, Are you DOWN with JUDGES and not SOCIETY recognizing these RIGHTS and changing societies LAWS to accomodate them?

funkyp
Obviously, I'm one of your ilks.

Is there a verse for that? You bet.

Jo j
I think you just ended the thread! What can anyone say to one so brilliant??!!

Wither Away ELCA
The ELCA fringe of American Lutherans claim to represent 4.8 million people of that denomination. However, based on statistics supplied by the denomination headquarters, only approximately 1.3 million ELCA Lutherans "communed and/or contributed." In other words, some 75% of their alleged members do not actively participate. Most likely, they were added to the membership roles years ago through birth, infant baptism, a church wedding, or just filling out a "visitors card" during a casual visit to an ELCA church. Once added, it is almost impossible to remove anyone from the membership roles.
In a nation of some 300 million people, the 1.3 million active ELCA Lutherans represents a small fringe of the Christian community, whose secular humanist practices will insure that they will continue to wither away...
In two generations they will have withered away completely and be a curiosity or footnote in any future book on the American liberal church. community...

Jo j
Great points about these Christians personal opinions on the matter being PERSONAL OPINION...

I know thier personal opinion,,, I'm tryin to know yours...?

Will you join me in recognizing all RIGHTS,,, especially PEDOPHILES and BESTIALS...? these poor MINORITIES are going thru REAL discrimination, not that fake crap the GAYS are claiming.

Why should'nt this LUTHERAN group go all the way and OK PEDOPHILE and BESTIAL PRIESTS? That choice is no more deviant than HOMO PRIESTS...

Why should'nt society look forward to JUDGES determining PEDOPHILE and BESTIAL RIGHTS,,, just like they did on GAY RIGHTS..?




In response to mr boss
The situation of the ELCA in recent decades is rather in marked contrast to that of, say, the Southern Baptist Convention, all right.

We are all a seamless garment
Sin is sin no matter what denomination it shows up in. I'm a Roman Catholic and the more I study and pray trying to understand the homosexual (and GBLT) issue the more I realize the truth in the Catholic Church's teaching which can be found here:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm
FunkyP is right. Sin breaks our relationship with God. It destroys trust. The sin of homosexuality as does any sin (adultry etc.) breaks up families, destroys churhes and wrecks communities. The multi million dollar settlements teach us another thing about sin. It's expensive! What we do behind closed doors is connected to our neighborhoods.
Peace be with you!

FunkyP and Ann
"Anne, did you know that the ten commandments had their origin in another book? It's called the Egyptian book of the dead."

Actually, they go back even further than that. So does the nativity story, the resurrection story, the virgin mother story. They were all taken, along with more minor stories like Paul's trip to Damascus, from the circulating stories of the time, which were taken from very early mesopotamian cultures.

funkyp: How many times are you going to

post and show your ignorance????

You cherry pick passages with no understanding of what you speak...

If you had just an tiny inkling of what you ridicule, you wouldn't be posting what you post.

Here's an idea! :-) Why don't you make a concerted effort to take a few (not just one or two...) classes in theology. (In fact, you'd do well to take those theology courses from a Jesuit.)

Attempt to actually learn something about the Bible and Christianity, and then come back and tell us what you think.

If you're at all intelligent, that's what you'd be doing. If you're at all intelligent, we'll be hearing from you in two or three years.

:-)






In response to funky p
You know, after Christ made the comment you quoted ("Let he who is without sin cast the first stone") and the accusers left, he told the woman taken in adultery "Go and sin no more".

The people's error lay not in recognizing that the woman sinned, but rather in trying to execute a judgement that Christ's new covenant reserved solely to God.

Second response to funky p
"Anne, did you know that the ten commandments had their origin in another book? It's called the Egyptian book of the dead."

I'd like to responsd, if I may.
IF God created us and was known personally to the first humans, and IF God's character and expectations never change, THEN it is only reasonable to suppose that some accurate memory of him was retained even by religions that otherwise diverged sharply from the 'baseline'.

You know, there are flood epics in a number of cultures; that doesn't mean that Genesis copied them, but rather that independent and somewhat differing traditions have been handed down about the same event.

interpretation
Who decides what God wants? Or does not want? Who is the final arbiter of what is sin? Is it a church, is it the authors of words written in ancient manuscripts, is it a group of voters or in the end simply the common sense of individuals joined by a common need to live in harmony? And if I say it is the latter, where does that 'common sense' come from? It comes from the hundreds of generations of ancestors who left word of their failures and triumphs. It comes from the interpretation of histories lessons. It comes from the hopes, needs and challenges of the people that surround us. Times change but the hearts of men do not. We need spend more time trying to understand and accept the differences of our fellow men and women than condemning them.

Liberty is right on with this one!

"Sin breaks our relationship with God. It destroys trust. The sin of homosexuality as does any sin (adultry etc.) breaks up families, destroys churhes and wrecks communities."

The family is the basis of any solid, thriving society... a mother and a father. So goes the family, so goes society. And we're seeing the fruits of the break up of the family unit in our society today.

The priest in our old parish used to say, "There is a reason God called them the "Ten Commandments" and NOT The Ten Suggestions!

He was a wise man.






Historically
The Bible is younger than the Egyptian Old Kingdom and some of the New Kingdom. The first invisible and unknowable god was Amen in Thebes in Upper Egypt. The first monotheistic religion (though brief) was devised by Amenhotep IV most often called Akenaten. He overthrew the polytheistic gods of Egypt and ordered the worship on the one god, Aten, the sun disc.

The first written law was Sumerian, also predating the Bible, and created by King Hammurabi.

None of these facts decrease the Bible or its narratives.

for punky p: What about YOUR ideas
punky p writes: "They all claim to contain the word of God. Some of them may disagree on a few points. You have chosen the version you favor. We are all free to believe all or none of these books."

In that case, since you don't believe any of them, where do you get YOUR ideas from on: morality, sexuality, ethics, the purpose of your life or of the human race, or any of the deep philosophical questions?

Are your ideas just your personal opinions too?

Because if they're just your opinions, then they are RELATIVELY WORTHLESS when measured alongside 2,000 years of religious and philosophical thought.

If I bought the idea that the answers to all the above questions were just a matter of opinion, then I would honor the "opinions" of: the Mahabharata, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Confucius, Hobbes, Locke, Spinoza, Kant, Nietsche, Hayek, and Friedman, long before I would even care about YOUR ideas. YOUR ideas, in contrast, aren't worth even 30 seconds of my time, unless I had an inkling that your ideas were supported by more authorities and/or more evidence than just what's running around inside your head.

If only ML himself was around for this
If only Martin Luther himself could witness what is going on in the *Lutheran* church. He knew in great detail what the Bible teaches, and he was -not- a soft-spoken individual.

Have to admit, I'd pay quite a lot for a front-row seat.

New Jersey
Add this to what all is going on in New Jersey I don't think even God can save that state until they elect some responsible leadership.

funkyp and jo j and others
First, I don't blame these individuals for having no understanding of Christianity. It is only common to throw around these kinds of arguments which are, of course, meaningless.

That those who recognize sin as sin do, themselves, sin, DOES NOT mean that sin is no longer sin. Of course we all sin. Though Blessed Augustine got it wrong due to a mistranslated Bible, we do all sin and THAT is why we all die. However, that we sin does not mean we should NOT call sin out as sin. Yes, especially in ourselves. But to say that because we sin we cannot call sin what it is, in the behaviors of others as well as ourselves, is a worthless argument that is only a poor attempt at a "gotcha!" moment. It does NOT, in fact, undermine any central tenant of any faith, let alone Christianity.

Second, I find it interesting that people are so upset about this decision from the ECLA. From a historical perspective, this is only the natural result of centuries of regression into egocentrism in Western Christianity. What the Church in Rome started (and fully exercised in the 11th century) Luther, Calvin and Zwingli took to the next step. The Anabaptists took it to the final level.

The Church in Rome declared one man a pope, the Reformers made each man a pope unto himself. That is why we have, what, 25,000+ denominations in Protestantism. The idea that the Bible could be re-interpreted started with Church in Rome and came to full fruition in the Reformation.

The idea that there is some sort of "common-sense" ability to "know" how to read the Bible is the cornerstone of the problem. EVERY SINGLE denomination in the world has an extra-Biblical tradition in which it reads/interprets/understands the Bible. The question is, from whence comes that tradition?

PunkyP
It is very threatening to most people to say anything that is challenging when it comes to religion. Conservatives love to say that hate political correctness, but just try to set the record straight on any unquestioned religious view and they'll burn you alive if they find you.

jo jo
For someone who claims to have a knowledge of history of Christianity, your remarks to Anne sure reek of the failed, late-19th century "theories" about the pagan/syncretic origins of Christianity.

Christianity is NOT, in fact, close to Platonism. Not in the sense you're implying - which is that Christianity borrowed from Platonism or neo-Platonism. This is NOT documented "again and again." It is an unsubstantiated theory using linguistic similarities that ignores the long, Patristic history and tradition that CLEARLY distinguishes it from any form of Platonism.

In addition, many of the Platonist documents used to try to show borrowing came after the establishment of Christianity, which, if any borrowing occurred, could just have easily been going the other direction. (Which is the same for the attempts to link many near-Eastern cult religions and Christianity and Mithraism with Christianity).

That there is a similarity in terms and language does not mean it is neo-Platonic. In addition, the idea of a "soul" existed long, long before Plato.

In fact
If anything, Plato was the direct influence on the gnostics. They were dualists (which makes a mockery of the latest attempts to "prove" that Christ was married and had children), like Plato. Though Western Christians do promote a form of dualism, inherited through the mistakes of Augustine, the Fathers make it very clear, from the 1st century on, that there was no such view of reality in Christianity.

Jo Jo: No one in their right mind would

try to discuss theology with funky... He's not interested in discussion or debate. He's ONLY interested in ridicule, and doesn't seem to be all that bright, and I just won't get involved in that.

"I have alot of experience with seminaries and Christian history, by the way." Sorry, doubtful. based on your posts.

Case in point..."the notion of "soul" was invented by Plato, and was usurped by the Christians, which is why Christianity is so close to Platonism and neo-platonism."

Really??? LOL

What IS a matter of debate, (if you so choose) is if Plato wasn't proven to be right by Christianity.

Just as Newton "thought" about the "theory" of gravity! Does that mean it was recycled when it was proven? Don't think so! ;-)

And, if you think you're so smart, you'd know that the New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Didn't you learn that while you were spending time around the seminary??????

Here's what's honest. You are in the same "ridicule camp" as funky, and you're not nearly as smart and educated as you'd like people to think you are.......


Renny
You said, "Libs. are about all sex all the time because it undermines traditions and families. "

If there was ever a statement that expressed the basic attitudes of fundamentalists this has to be it.

MARC: How right you are!
.


The core problem
In my opinion (always a good way to start), the main problem with the ELCA is that the church was formed with the belief that the Bible is the primary basis for faith and belief, and this resolution so obviously is in contradiction to what the Bible says. One of the two has to give, but either way they will alienate a large portion of their members.

What I don't understand from the article is the statement at the start: "they’ve just voted last Saturday to no longer enforce the celibacy requirement for their unmarried staff—both straight and gay?" I don't see anything in this vote dealing with non-homosexual relationships.

Pssy, Charles, Anne
Pssy,My point exactly. In fact, science has basically proved that there isn't.

Charles: "your remarks to Anne sure reek of the failed, late-19th century "theories" about the pagan/syncretic origins of Christianity."

As opposed to what, the mega-church, big-screen, dry-ice-fog church of what's happening now?


Very early Christianity did not have a body of dogma, and in fact, it was fairly common thought that the world was coming to an end anyway. Ultimately it was heavily influenced by Greek philosophy and is much closer to Plato than a few linguistic similarities. For example, even the notion that one can improve themselves by righteous thought and living is essentially Platonic.

Anne: As for the New Testament being proof that the Old Testament prophecies were accurate, you must admit that it was pretty convenient to re-interpret the facts after the event.

I have learned from entering into these dialogues on TH that the subject of religion is so emotional and at times irrational that I'm really not interested in matching wits any longer - I personally don't care what anybody thinks as long as my personal life is off limits.



Here's my question... Are some of these

folks on crack, or can one get that delusional by just drinking kool aid? Or, can it be a cognitive problem?

Beats me! I just know that it's an exercise in futility to try to discuss anything what so ever with crazed people. Ugh!





Sex and the Lutherans?
This commentator is too stupid to live. His report is so full of inaccuracies that I am surprised that he spelled his name correctly. This ELCA pastor has a 15 yo daughter and categorically reject ever word which was written. I caution all of you from accepting it as truth.

Marc
You know, I've seen your comments on other threads. I have to say that among all the people I know both liberal and conservative, I don't know anyone as knotted up with venom and rage as you are. If that's what being Christian means, I'm glad I walked away from it years ago.

Sorry, but it's hard to even be this harsh with you- you seem so damaged that I don't even feel like getting into a TH food fight with you.

lilly's "profound" thought
lilly, at 11:10 AM, "just asked": "...the God that created us also gave us free will. If we then use that free will, does that mean we deny God?"

As usual with liberals, the question

1) ...is offered disingenuously, with a superior attitude and a little half-smirk that the questioner just can't hide because they're being so very clever. Liberals are predictable.

2) ...deliberately confuses the issue, which is actually easily understood and abundantly clear.

Try this for an analogy, lilly:

If you that bore your children also gave them a car, and they took the car and deliberately ran down a pedestrian for fun, does that mean your child denies you?

Pretty easy when it's your kids, isn't it?

So why play "I'm-smarter-than-all-you-conservatives" games with God's name?

If you really think that the granting of free will makes all choices equally good, then allow me to point you toward some neo-nazi web sites that you should find just peachy, ok?

How disingenuous can you get?
pssyfrts wrote: "First of all, frankly, I'm offended by your misspelling of my name."

Oh, my freakin' goodness.

Do you REALLY expect us to believe you didn't intend that interpretation of your nickname?

I've seen liberals get disingenuous for the sake of sounding morally superior before, but that has to be the slimiest, most obvious set-up I've ever encountered.

I'm not the owner or moderator of this site, but allow me to express what has to be the opinion of the bulk of the posters here: please don't come here anymore, you represent the very worst of the blog world, and embody the reason political discussion cannot be civil. Not that I expect a person of your moral emptiness would EVER do ANYTHING for the sake of politeness or courtesy, but I'm asking for a miracle here: please go away.

For the Record
Just FTR, I do NOT think I am "above it all"

My point is that God made the rules. We don't pick and choose which rules to believe and which ones not to believe.

That is where I part ways with the denominations that are bending doctrine to suit themselves. And, it is up to believing Christians to speak out against the hypocricy inside the church.

We're all sinners (ME TOO!) but if you love God, you really try to abide by what is pleasing to Him. Asking forgiveness is not a "get out of jail free" card that gives you a license to do whatever the heck you want.







Gay marriage a fraud (Part 1)
A poster with an offensive nickname posted this laugher: "Wouldn't you wager that many gay church leaders would be married if it were legal?"

The answer is, "Nope, I'll wager really good money against that."

In Massachusetts, the first year of legal gay marriage saw something like 6,000 marriage license applications. The second year there were about 1,800. By May of this year, there had been fewer than 100 applications for marriage licenses by gays.

Why so few?

Well, the first year, you've got some pent-up demand, but that wouldn't explain the near-vanishing of demand by year three.

The truth is, gays for the most part don't want to get married. And what they do when they get married isn't really much like marriage.

The figure I've heard is that only 3% of gays actually express a desire to marry. The great hue and cry about gay marriage is really about the unending quest by gays to be perceived as "normal" by the surrounding culture; they need this, because at the center of their own beings, they deeply, neurotically fear that they are NOT normal, so they need to have someone scream "YOU'RE NORMAL" in their ears in order to feel better. Of course, since the sense of being abnormal comes from within themselves, the attempt will fail. And it's the height of narcissism to bend the entire culture just to get somebody to help you rationalize your dementia. But when did that ever stop the gays?

(cont...)

Free Will
Free will means that you have a choice. It doesn't mean you will make a good choice or a bad choice, but a choice is allowed nonetheless. Those of us who believe God's word have made the choice to accept Him, and follow His advice for living. It is a free choice. Just like rejecting Him is a free choice.

It's sort of like if you agree to play baseball, you accept that there are some things that you can do legally, and other things that are against the rules. You didn't write the rules, but if you want to play baseball you agree to play by the rules. It's pretty simple, really.

Free will means you can decide to play, or not to play (or make up your own rules to suit yourself). But, if you want to play in the big leagues, you play by their rules.

Gay marriage a fraud (Part 2)
(cont...)

Once they're married, what goes on has little in common with hetero marriage. One study -- by a gay researcher, no less -- discovered that most of them revert to a sort of open marriage format, where the partners regularly go out on weekends and find anonymous partners, but come home to their "spouse" once it's over. And in Denmark, where gay marriage has been legal for quite some time, the average length of a gay marriage is 1.5 years. This is, of course, what happens when you allow narcissistic sex addicts to pretend they're normal and "play house" together -- to expect either fidelity or stability in such an environment is so delusional you can't even call it wishful thinking.

So, no, Miss "I'll name myself something offensive and then complain if anybody mentions it", we're not buying your little "THEY'RE HYPOCRITES!" meme. It's just part of the dishonest game narcissists like you play.

A disingenuous liberal proves herself so
The woman with the deliberately offensive name wants to know why I think she's morally empty.

I thought I explained that the first time. Or, doesn't the act of deliberately naming oneself something offensive, then complaining when somebody points out exactly what it was meant to be taken as, sound like a demented, mean-spirited game by a morally empty fool to anybody other than me?

I should have written something about how your response would be worded. I would have come close to getting it verbatim. But then, you'd have shifted to something else if I'd have done that.

We know your type, ma'am. What's even worse, you know yourself, and you know I'm speaking the truth. So now, please take your mean-spirited, morally empty, narcissistic hate chatter somewhere else where people actually think that sort of thing is clever. I think Daily Kos will suit you just fine.

So solve the problem!
Conservative Christian know in their hearts that there is a solution to the behavior that offends them so deeply. Here's how all problems conservatives have about sex can be solved. (1) Get lots and lots of votes and put the right people in office; (2) instruct those people to pass laws making all forms of homosexual activity illegal, in fact, make them federal crimes; (3) insist that courts enforce these laws strictly; (4) root out the gays, lesbians, etc in your own ranks (this will take awhile) and subject them to the criminal penalties in (1). (5) Generate support for a constitutional amendment to declare the US a straight country. (6) Pass the amendment. (7) Look in the mirror and congratulate yourselves on a job well done for God and country.

An open Bible…

‘This is what happens when sin and the Bible collide: either the Bible will change the sin or the sin will change the Bible.’ –Frank Pastore

Mr. Pastore, we understand what you are saying. How is it that the church leadership is living in open sin? This is the height of deception; Paul calls it the deceitfulness of sin. These are ones of whom it is written…


'For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.' [Jude 1:4]


How do we know this church is corrupt?

The revealed truth given to us in the Scriptures is independent of the opinions of men, either for or against. The Scriptures will endure after our bodies return to dust. The same Spirit that gave them to us will teach those yet to come its eternal truths.

The Bible exists that the people of God might know the things freely given to us. [I Corinthians 2:12-13]. And what are these things? Paul answers in his earnest prayers that we might know the hope of God’s calling, the riches of our inheritance in Christ and the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. [Ephesians 1:18-20] And to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge. [Ephesians 3:14-19]

By the mercies of God we can know these things apart from a corrupt church because we have an open Bible in the common tongue.


So solve the problem!

Since Gestell thinks forcing HOP on us through congressional powers or through judicial fiat, maybe what she describes is exactly what should be done.

If the children cannot control themselves perhaps we should change their diapers, spank their butts, and put them to bed.

This concept of them putting word in my mouth is getting old and stale. But if that is what they want, sobeit.

Gestell

You have convinced me! I pledge to vote for the most conservative Christian candidate running for any/every office. Thank you for that sound advice.

Gestell
You have reassured me that there are still sane, unflappable and sensible people in this world. I personally will vote not just liberal or conservative, that's for people who like things simple, I will vote for whoever displays the same rational good sense that you do.

http://www.elca.org/assembly/
Posted without comment.

Passed:

"RESOLVED, that in an effort to continue as a church in moral deliberation without further strife and pain to its members, the Churchwide Assembly prays, urges, and encourages synods, synodical bishops, and the presiding bishop to refrain from or demonstrate restraint in disciplining those congregations and persons who call into the rostered ministry otherwise-qualified candidates who are in a mutual, chaste, and faithful committed same-gender relationship; and be it further

"RESOLVED, that the Churchwide Assembly prays, urges, and encourages synods, synodical bishops, and the presiding bishop to refrain from or demonstrate restraint in disciplining those rostered leaders in a mutual, chaste, and faithful committed same-gender relationship who have been called and rostered in this church."

http://www.elca.org/assembly/
And a buck passing of the blessing of same-sex marriages. Note the strong vote which I am sure will have no effect on the Task Force's final decision. Yeah, right.

"The 2007 Churchwide Assembly of the ELCA voted 733-278 to refer memorials on the blessing of same-sex relationships to the Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality. The Task Force is engaged in developing a social statement on human sexuality to be presented to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly."


F.E.L.C.A.
Believers quote the Bible to other believers. The world will take it as foolishness. I don't expect the world to take the Bible as an authority. I expect other people who declare themselves to be Christians to do so.

So why is homosexuality a problem in the New Testament as well as the Old Testament?
An answer comes in I Corinthians 6:

Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idloaters nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

I can't quote Martin Luther exactly, but he compared sin to a bird: It can fly over your head, but don't let it make a nest in your hair. I'm not perfect; I sin everyday. But I am heartily sorry for those sincs and sincerely repent of them. I don't celebrate them.

It's probably time for E.L.C.A. to become F.E.L.C.A., the Formerly Evangelical Lutheran Church of America.


A member of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod

http://www.elca.org/assembly/
Finally, this one passed and brings rogue bishops into line.

"The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America meeting in Assembly in Chicago Illinois on 11th August 2007 request the ELCA's conference of Synodical bishops to enter into discussion and consideration of the matter of the accountability of bishops to the adopted policies, practices, and procedures of the ELCA and to formulate a clear statement of such accountability for consideration and adoption by the 2009 Assembly of this church."

Jo Jo

You would vote for a braying jackass. As a matter of fact, you probably did the last election.

ELCA vs Missouri Synod Lutherans
Thank you for distinguishing Missouri Synod Lutherans from ELCA Lutherans at the end of your article. I was getting a little concerned reading your article as you were just referring to Lutheran parents or Lutheran camps without any distinction. As you are aware, there are major distinctions between the ELCA and Missouri Synod. Please always try to add the ELCA label when describing 'that' form of Lutheran. Those of us who are a part of the Missouri Synod Lutherans very much do not want to be associated with them. Thanks.

pssyfrts
You miss the point of the analogy. You are absolutely correct, we do not choose to be born. That is the gift of God. Choosing to accept His word, however, IS indeed a choice. You don't have to make it. But, if you DO, you can't decide which rules to accept and which ones not to accept. In that regard, it is certainly more similar to Baseball than not. I stand by my analogy, imperfect though it is.

I do not accept the attitudes that Christians have no free-will. We all do. God's rules, not ours. Agree/abide or Not. But, don't call yourself His Church and ignore His Word.

I don't understand your X and Y comment. You play the hand you are dealt...

Plenary Session Five pgs 6-7
Are enlightening insofar as the Assembly's thoughts were progressing. Interesting that the rest of the minutes were not available...
http://www.elca.org/assembly/votingmatters/minutes.html

Nor does ELCA wish to be
confused with Missouri Synod. Thank you for that distinction.

For instance, ELCA believes women are not second class Lutherans, but can serve God at all levels.

We have problems, yes, but folks should not throw stones unless...

skinnywhiteboy

But if the Lutheran Church is not subject to Christ in everything why should the wives be subject to their husbands at all?

Perhaps that was what you meant?

I like that!

Men, it is up to us to follow Christ in everything.

ELCA: THEIR FIRST HOLY ABORTIONS
"A developing life in the womb does not have an absolute right to be born . . . "
http://www.elca.org/SocialStatements/abortion/

As one of the baby-killing sects, it's no wonder that ELCAs numbers are in decline. That mirrors the United Methodist baby-killers, who dropped from over 13 million in a US population of 200 million to 7.9 million in a US population of 300 million.

These baby-killing geniuses should learn from the Albigenses, a sect that taught that life on Earth was sinful and recommended departing from it asap by suicide, a doctrinal goal its members pursued with genuine gusto. You notice there aren't any Albigenses around anymore.

Birdman
"You would vote for a braying jackass. As a matter of fact, you probably did the last election."

As a matter of fact, I did, and he got elected, all right. Go figure.

Skinny White Boy
Interesting contributions. What do you want to bet that responses to it will:

a) be non-existent, as they present a true challenge that is beyond the scope of most posters here;

b) will call you a liar, which is the TH response when challenged with something not popular;

c) Summon up a response from Marc, who will put down his bong long enough to call you alot of unoriginal and sadly stupid names;

d) PUt a curse on you for calling to attention those parts of the bible that aren't popular.

Good Luck.

funky P
Hang in there. I for one, think you have every right to believe in any God you choose - everybody else does.

I truly hope your choices work for you and I applaud the kind tone and honesty of your posts. It's truly refreshing.

PS funky
I also think you're right on about people's over-the-top reactions being evidence of their insecurity and uncertainty about their own views.

Defensiveness is the name of the game here. It's interesting to me how many posters of faith are either blind with rage or hide behind endless bible verses, as if they were in a kind of trance. Either way, they seem to feel threatened.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu on gay rights
July 12, 2007

In case you missed this excerpt from a Vanity Fair article in which actor/activist Brad Pitt interviewed Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu.

Brad Pitt: So certainly discrimination has no place in Christianity. There's a big argument going on in America right now, on gay rights and equality.


Desmond Tutu: For me, I couldn't ever keep quiet. I came from a situation where for a very long time people were discriminated against, made to suffer for something about which they could do nothing--their ethnicity. We were made to suffer because we were not white. Then, for a very long time in our church, we didn't ordain women, and we were penalizing a huge section of humanity for something about which they could do nothing--their gender. And I'm glad that now the church has changed all that. I'm glad that apartheid has ended. I could not for any part of me be able to keep quiet, because people were being penalized, ostracized, treated as if they were less than human, because of something they could do nothing to change--their sexual orientation. For me, I can't imagine the Lord that I worship, this Jesus Christ, actually concurring with the persecution of a minority that is already being persecuted. The Jesus who I worship is a Jesus who was forever on the side of those who were being clobbered, and he got into trouble precisely because of that. Our church, the Anglican Church, is experiencing a very, very serious crisis. It is all to do with human sexuality. I think God is weeping. He is weeping that we should be spending so much energy, time, resources on this subject at a time when the world is aching.


Brad Pitt: I couldn't agree with you more. Thank you for saying that.


I beileve that God does weep when His children are denied basic rights, especially when it is done in His name.

__ Tutu was elected and ordained the first black South African Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town, South Africa. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984.

You can't say the scoffers
weren't told, all of you who have tried gave excellent points but these you dialogued with
now have the responsibility on their own heads.
that's the way of it. Sin is sin. The ECLA is apostate, as is my former church ECUSA. I left
when they began ordaining women (now don't get going on that one, I happen to believe it is unscriptural unless someone can explain how a woman preacher/bishop can be the husband of one wife..not a problem for the idolators who put homosexual sin on their high altar), joined my husbands church, WELS and were there for another 15 years, thankful for the grounding we got in both our churches (I was low church) which has helped greatly in our current church. Bottom line,
is many mainline churches are chrinos (Christian in name only), the onus is on those who destroyed
the doctrine for carnality and committed to Christ people should shake the dust off their feet.
I don't know what happened in Jo j's life that has so embittered her against God and I hope someday she will return. I wonder if these scoffers ever think about the day they die, o I know they bravely say, they go back to nothing but
no one can say they aren't terrified. I heard
a story about Voltaires death that traumatized his nurse..athiest's death.

Skinny, Marc
Marc said " i didn't read skinnboys post because i got bored with it before i was done"

Here is my first prediction coming true - (no one will respond to your points because they won't address a challenge that is beyond their ability to debate).

The first non-responder couldn't finish reading it. Who's next?

.

ELCA Lutheran & Methodist
Just a dying sect, that at one time honored God. Now they spitefully reject God.

If it were't for dual enrollment, both these sects would be at least half of their stated membership.

Hey skinny white boy,,
I love your note on PEDOPHILIA in the BIBLE,,,, Can't you also come up with one on BESTIALITY as well...

I myself have not referred to the BIBLE or religion on this discussion (they are all pretty much personal opinion)...

However,,,, I have brought up the FACT that GAY RIGHTS have been passed by JUDGES by changing laws SOCIETY SET,,, MARRIAGE, SODOMY, ADOPTION being among the few... Can you tell me why PEDOPHILE and BESTIALITY RIGHTS cannot be passed also? Why can't judges change society laws on AGE and SPECIES of CONSENT? Why can't a judge just say the age of consent or ADULT is now 10? (this would certainly help the PEDO crowd out). Why can't a judge just say the SPECIES of consent is discrimantory and all species have the same RIGHTS as we do? (the ENVIRO/ANIMAL LOVERS would back this one). You can even assume IMPLIED CONSENT on the other species that have a handicap in communicating this matter. The significant other (human) can relate the animals loving intentions to all....

Whenever people respond to this they say "scooter is just crazy" or "it takes consenting adults",, knowing full well that the definition of ADULT or CONSENT is easier to change by JUDGES than SODOMY, MARRIAGE, or ADOPTION is for GAYS.

HOW intellectually bereft is that?

PEDOPHILE and BESTIAL RIGHTS are about where GAY RIGHTS were 30 years ago... so in the next 30,, all the folks today will be PEDOPHOBES and BESTIALPHOBES.

Whats the answer? Put the issues of the RIGHTS to the PEOPLE and not JUDGES,, unfortunatly the GAYS know they won't win this way,,, hence the JUDICIAL ACTIVISM on the matter.

Scooter vs. Desmond Tutu; U choose
Scooter is crazy. I Back Desmond Tutu. There is no comparison. Sorry Scooter.

Greg
Why is scooter crazy? He makes an excellent point; one which you homos don't have an answer to. Of course, instead of debating him on the points he makes, it's much easier to dismiss him as crazy, right? Pathetic.

Gays should have a church home
Before YOU ignorant fools miss understand

Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA)

is about a Lutheran as Scientology is Catholic.

I know may of you don't go to church of any kind or have a clue about religion including Lutherans (but you all to happy to prostitution religion to make political points based on some supposed moral superiority).

Lutherans like Wisconsin and Missouri synods are very conservative, main stream, meaning they believe in the true word of the bible. Most Lutherans make so called "Evangelicals" (who run the GOP) look like Scientologist.

I love all people because I am a christian. You can hate the sin but the sin of GAY is no worse than any of your sins. I KNOW BECAUSE IT SAYS SO IN THE BIBLE, READ IT SOMETIME.

I suspect this author is a Jew, Catholic or "Evangelical" (which means no name non denominational Ted Haggard closet gay guy church)who attacks other religions. Shame.

Yes the American Lutherans are REALLY GAY. However I am glad the Gays have found SOME church home, even if I don't believe they have their story straight. I AM NOT GOD, YOU ARE NOT GOD, WE ARE ALL ALL ALL SINNERS AND DESERVE TO GO TO HELL. Only faith in God in heaven who will judge us can save us. So SHUT UP YOU FREAKING hypocrites and holier than thou idiots. This is a political site. WHY TALK RELIGION? Especially when its clear you don't have a clue, except you are in touch with your inner hate and bigot.

PS to the idiot above speaking of pedophiles? What about all the molester priest and little girls and boys. At least the main stream Lutherans have married pastors with kids. THEY KNOW FAMILY. What does a "single" bachelor know about children and families?

I don't respond to prejudice
When scooter can be the man that Desmond Tutu is, then I'll think about responding to him. But right now I see a person that is interested only in spewing nonsense.

Scooter, you have some work to do.


Desmond Mpilo Tutu (born 7 October 1931) is a South African cleric and activist who rose to worldwide fame during the 1980s as an opponent of apartheid. Tutu was elected and ordained the first black South African Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town, South Africa, and primate of the Church of the Province of Southern Africa (now the Anglican Church of Southern Africa). He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984. He is also a recipient of the Albert Schweitzer Prize for Humanitarianism and was also rewarded with the Magubela prize for liberty in 1986. Desmond Tutu is committed to stopping global AIDS, and has served as the honorary chairman for the Global AIDS Alliance. In February 2007 he was awarded Gandhi Peace Prize by Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, president of India.

He was generally credited with coining the term Rainbow Nation as a metaphor to describe post-apartheid South Africa after 1994 under ANC rule. The expression has since entered mainstream consciousness to describe South Africa's ethnic diversity.


Skinny, Funky, and Greg
Skinny,, thank you for (not answering my question) but responding in some form,,, FUNKY and GREG,, you guys are LAME.

To SKINNY,,,
1. Should society set the RULES? When it comes to RIGHTS and the ability of JUDGES to determine them,,YES (don't assume judges got these RULES from society,,, this is called JUDICIAL ACTIVISM and they take these rights from the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH of our NATION)
2. Judges in the BROWN vs. BRD of EDUCATION decision?
I believe that process (allowing Blacks in white schools) should have been passed by the CONGRESS and not JUDGES... Further,, To extend the CIVIL RIGHTS question to SEXUALITY for GAYS is no more a decision to be made by JUDGES than any other. Further still, You recall the DRED SCOTT CASE in 1856,, Court decided BLACKS are not CITIZENS in support of the SOUTHS slavery. And yet again I believe that blacks (as society progressed) would have been accepted into white schools thru CONGRESS,,, EXP,, SLAVERY was changed by CONGRESS and not JUDGES in the CIVIL WAR.
3. Womens Suffrage, how I feel? Womens Suffrage was PASSED by the CONGRESS of all MEN! My opinion of this action was that it was GOOD. And furthermore that it was done correctly by an amendment to the CONSTITUTION 13th i think. NO JUDGES(GREAT EXAMPLE SKINNY)
4. Why don't I cite religion in my discussion on the process of GAY RIGHTS?
To think religion is not RELEVANT in this discussion is absurd. It's relevant but only one's PERSONAL opinion. I don't think giving my PERSONAL opinion is going to progress the discussion or change MY or anybody's mind on the MATTER. Thus I don't consider it RELEVANT. If, however you want my personal opinion on RELIGION and it's relevance to this matter I will do so. (i am a churchgoing fellow)

Now,, Why won't laws be changed by judges for PEDO's and BESTIALS,, especially those EASY CONSENT ONES'


Jetpilot
I'm guessing your referring to me as the idiot on PEDOPHILIA,,

Please respond why it can't happen (assuming the same process of GAY RIGHTS).

Otherwise,,, please grab a seat at the next REALLY COOL PEDOPHILE/BESTIALITY Pride Parade.

So it beginns
Some of you conservative "Christians" may believe that this sectarian hatred will only extend to liberal mainstream protestants.But of course it won't.

Slowly but surly the common cause you perceived with conservative Catholics and Conservative Jews are slowly slipping out from beneath your feet.

The new Pope has made it clear that you worship a lessor Christianity.

And you are finding it harder to downplay the fact that you have long used the word "Christian" to explicitly exclude Catholics. Needless to say Mormons aren't covered by the word as you use it.

Just to speed things along a bit. Many but certainly not all of the undocumented immigrants happen to Catholic. And Catholic priests have already promised to break the law to serve their flocks.

Just imagine if your dream comes true and vouchers replace public schools. But there is only enough students to support one highschool in a community evenly spit between Catholics and Protestant.

How long before one school burns down. And what if their are children inside? What next? Who would you like to file your police report with a police officer whose desk is shrine to Mary veneration. Or me with my little picture of LBJ?

Greg
Your correct on the fact of me not measuring up to MR. TUTU.

I really did'nt think I was trying though... (of course I could'nt)

If you think comparing the PROCESS of RIGHTS for GAYS, PEDOPHILES, BESTIALS, or any others is PREJUDICE then you probably have nothing INTELLIGENT to add to the discussion.

The fact that you won't respond is now to be considered a PLUS.

Funky P
Yes, you & I agree (thunder clap)...

My posting is in regard to the article this thread is commenting upon. It deals with a Christian denomination that appears to want to accept some teachings and reject others, and still call themselves Christians. It happens to take a radical viewpoint contrary to most Christian denominations. My Bible is pretty clear on what constitutes adultery. And, BTW, the New Testament reveals a New Covenant, so all of the old testatment quotations are out of context.

You are right, however, you can back it up one more step and choose which religious system among many you wish to accept. I don't dispute that. I may not agree with your choice, but it is your free-will that allows you to do what you want.

This ignores my point that God came first and He set the standard. You may not believe what I do, but I didn't choose to be a Christian because it was easy or because everything made perfect sense or exactly fit my ideas on life. As I say, God made the rules, and I think He's allowed. I'm not going to abandon Him just because I think I should be allowed to do whatever I want without anyone telling me what I should or shouldn't do.

Good luck finding that belief system that doesn't cause you any discomfort or effort.


Pssyfrts
Why is this so difficult for you..

We are not comparing "where you put your dingaling" or which particular group is not to YOUR particular liking.
Don't let your RELIGION or PERSONAL preferences or opinions cloud your ability to see where PROGRESS is taking us.
Considering your comments on this and your inability to broach the SUBJECT please consider yourself in the same class as GREG.

We are comparing how different GROUPS get RIGHTS in this country.
Please add to the discussion by mentioning how JUDGES cannot change laws that currently discriminate against PEDOPHILES and BESTIALS. Just like they did for GAYS on SODOMY, MARRIAGE, and ADOPTION.

REMEMBER the definition of ADULT and CONSENT is just as easy to change as SODOMY, MARRIAGE, or ADOPTION,,,, probably easier.

I don't expect you to see this happening today,,, just like your counterpart 30 years ago could NEVER imagine where GAY RIGHTS were going at the time.....

Remember buddy,,, the future's soo bright,,, gotta wear shades....

pssyfrts
This is your question: "Say we have two mutually exclusive options: X (shooting Joe) and Y (not shooting Joe). You seem to think that having and being aware of these two options gives one free will, yet awareness off the possibility of X and Y does not imply that I can avoid choosing X. My question to you is, what if I'm aware of the two options and I choose X instead of Y, but my choosing X instead of Y couldn't have been avoided? Do I still have free will?"

To shoot or not to shoot, that is the question?

I'm trying to figure out your premise that shooting Joe couldn't have been avoided. Under what circumstances is this a question of free will? If this is pre-meditated murder, then of course it is a case of free will. If it is self-defense, then, you might make the argument that you "couldn't avoid" the shooting, but that isn't strictly true either. You could always choose to die instead of defending yourself. If someone is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to shoot poor Joe, then you are again on the horns of a dilemma, to shoot or die. It is a choice, but a really sucky one.

So, how is this applicable to an argument of free will when applied to acceptance of God? Christians believe that God wants us to come to Him (free will). True Christians will not hold a gun to your head to make you convert. It is a choice. Free will. Take it or leave it.

I don't see the connection to your argument that it couldn't be avoided. Unless, of course, you compare this to the Muslim faith that uses coercion to garner converts. You still have free will, but the choices aren't great...Convert or die.

Pssyfrts
Oh, so the "mental events that led to Joe's death at your hand couldn't have been prevented by you?"

You're one of those folks that thinks everything is morally relative, aren't you? "Not my fault" and all that jazz. I understand your desire to show free will as a logical impossibility, but it is a pretty lame argument. Just as lame as the "voices made me do it" argument. Lucky you, you don't have to take responsibility for anything you do...it'll always be somebody else's fault, or due to circumstances beyond your control. What a cop out.

Pssyfrts
An observation: you're kind of a "glass half empty, instead of a glass half-full" sort of person. News flash:God doesn't owe us anything.

I guess you could think of it like this. If you gave someone a place to live, and lots of other "gifts" and then they ignored you, or refused to acknowledge you were even a part of their life, would you choose to hang out with them anyway? You couldn't force them to be considerate (that free-will thing) but, in terms of where the obligation lies, who has it? Would you be opening up your home to them anyhow?

God has offered us immeasureably more than we deserve or can ever repay. I look at it as a net positive. Those who choose to turn their back on Him shouldn't cry foul later when He "punishes" them. He's been pretty clear, and He died for us, so how do you figure He owes us any more? All He asks is we acknowlege Him, love Him, and try to please Him. He gave us the gift of free will because He wants us to come to Him willingly. If He wanted robots, he could've done that, I suppose.

Ah well
It's late. Perhaps I'll check back tomorrow.

Funky,,
I apologize your comments did in fact discuss my PROCESS on RIGHTS for GAYS, PEDO's and BESTIALS.

You say that besides CONSENT you cannot fathom how society would let this occur..

Neither could your counterpart 30 years ago for GAY RIGHTS. In fact PEDOPHILE and BESTIAL movements are further along today than the GAY movement was 30 years ago...

You say society as a whole would not allow PEDOPHILIA and BESTIALITY and that you further believe in the MAJORITY of citizens in this country making the RIGHT decisions.

I'm betting that society 30 years ago could not see where GAY RIGHTS was going either (for better or worse depending on your opinion).
Furthermore, why don't you join ME in opposing JUDGES making these decisions and hand this decision back to the MAJORITY of citizens by either a VOTE directly or thru CONGRESS, where they are answerable to the "majority of citizens"

Why do YOU think the GAY RIGHTS process is progressed thru the COURTS and not CONGRESS?

Please talk sense to your fellow GAY supporters (greg) that the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH of our GOVT. is the CORRECT process to recognize RIGHTS.

PS,, I love the fact you recognize the INHERANT GOODNESS of the majority of citizens in this nation.. let's let them decide EHHHHHH.
PSS,, I don't have RICK SANTOREM on speeddial, But I can look up the # to your local chapter of NAMBLA for ya. (North American Man Boy Love Association)

Pssyfrts
I'm comparing the PROCESS in our society of RIGHTS, for GAYS, PEDOPHILE's, and BESTIALS.

This is different than assuming they are the same thing. GAYS have sex or are attracted to the same GENDER. PEDOPHILES have sex or are attracted to VERY YOUNG ADULTS (change the age of adult). BESTIALS have sex or are attracted to different SPECIES (change the law on species).

The reason I compare Gays to these specific other GROUPS RIGHTS is that I'm going on the assumption that you are opposed to these groups getting RIGHTS. And would thus see the problem in letting JUDGES determine this in the FUTURE for YOU.
(this is a big ASSUMPTION I KNOW)

I could go on and on about the RIGHTS of OBESE people or SHORT people or the POLYGAMYSTS or FOLKS that wear bad clothing....

A RIGHT is whatever a JUDGE TELLS you it is...

A society is only as GOOD as the majority of it's citizens.
I'm with FUNKY,,, he believes in the INHERANT GOODNESS of the MAJORITY of CITIZENS... Let's give them the chance to make these "GOODNESS" decisions shall we...?

scooter
First, I presume you are not pushing for the legalization of child molestation or bestiality.

That said, you are on very solid legal ground in your discussion and your position. It even has precedence; sodomy, in all its forms, is no longer illegal, thanks to the US Supreme Court decision in Lawrence vs Texas some years back.

"Sodomy" is no longer mentioned in any current law, nationwide. It simply is NOT a crime. That includes acts of homosexuality, pederasty and bestiality. [Bestiality is prosecuted as "Indecent Exposure" or some such; pederasty on a non-consent basis.]

So we are already part way there -- only social acceptance is lacking; once homosexual acts are fully accepted and condoned by our society under force of law, the others will follow in short order. NAMBLA loves it.

Have you considered two other groups who will petition for equality and are as deserving, legally speaking? Those are polygamous and blood-related [incestuous] marriages. Not quite as controversial as those you have discussed so far, but still legally deserving...

There is no legal reason to bar those acts or those marriages today -- provided only consenting adults are involved, of course. Very simple thing for a court to overturn all such laws. If I read the Massachusetts law correctly, father/son or mother/daughter marriages are entirely legal there under its highest court's decision; neither coupling will fall under the procreation issue raised by opposite-sex incest.

Good discussion you've started.

Awaiting response[s]... Heh, heh, heh.

Amazed
I am always truly amazed at the number of homosaxualist that cruise Townhall and take the time to write posts here. And as always there posts rarely have anything to do with the article in questions, but are merely rants of calling the writer and anyone who agrees bigots. This tells me much about the mindset of at least those homosexualist who post here and only seems to confirm the observation that homosexuality is a result psychological disfunctionality, an acute, self destructive form of narcissism of some sort.
As for the main-line churches of the USA, the homosexualist have been targeting them since at least the 50's, and more likely since the 30's. The homosexualist realized that they had to abolish morality in order for their self-destructive behavior to be accepted.
I would even argue that the the whole Catholic priest abuses was if not an out and out conspiracy, at least a windfall opportunity resulting from a major push in the 50's, 60's and 70's to accept into the priesthood those who where "former" participants in the homosexual lifestyle. And the homosexualist have made the most of their brethren who managed to get into those positions of trust only to abuse the innocent.

No free will?
This is a REALLY interesting thread, but I'm very baffled that pssyfrts seems to imply he believes there is no free will. Am I misunderstanding his posts?

Pssyfrts, how did you come to post on this site then? Didn't you freely will to do so?

We do have free will and any honest person will say so. Yes, it is impaired **occasionally** (drugs or alcohol, etc.--usually deliberately taken though) and coerced sometimes (emotional pressure from others or internal passions).

Interestingly, Catholic theology takes into account these diminishments of free will and any objectively evil act committed is less, unless the diminishment is deliberately self induced (e.g. you freely choose to drink too much, knowing your judgment will be impaired).

Still, even under coercion, a degree of free will remains and some use it heroically (many people, threatened with death, have still refused to be raped, or have still refused to harm someone else, for example).

It is so obvious that we humans have free will that I suspect that pssyfrts is deliberately implying something that he doesn't want directly stated, similar to the missing vowels in his name that he is "offended" (his word, not mine)by being spelled out, deliberately implying offense at being called something, then in a a later post claiming no offense at the name itself--so it's only the "misspelling," right?

Come on, pssyfrts. You're a more intelligent and honest arguer than that. Aren't you? So "spell it out" for us about free will, and stop putting it in the form of questions to others. Do you believe humans have free will, or not?

correction - sorry
"any objectively evil act committed is less"

should read:

"any personal moral responsibility for an objectively evil act committed is reduced or taken away"

laugh break
Let's take a break from bashing each other.

A story is told of the poor country parish in the south. It was during the depression and times were very tough for everyone.

In the Parish was a poor farming family - a husband and wife and their three children. They never failed to attend Sunday services and no matter how hard their circumstances they always managed to put at least a few pennies into the collection.

One day after Church the Pastor was saying goodby to the parishioners as they were leaving the church. One of the daughters of the farming family called the Pastor to the side. She pressed a nickel into the Pastor's hand.

"Why thank you, Amanda", said the preacher. "This is very kind of you. I am very touched."

Amanda looked the Pastor in the eye and said "My father says you are the poorest preacher he has ever heard."

Saw this coming
Seven years ago I left the Lutheran Church after being told the same sex marriage issues would pass one day. When asking the clergy at the Bishop's office for any biblical support of this, he admitted there is none.
In checking out other issues, I found that the Lutheran Church had no firm stand against abortion. Where is the outcry against that policy?
Where did I go. I found Catholicism to follow the Bible much more closely than any other. And for those into sola scriptura....tell me where that is found in the Bible. In fact, in 1Timothy 3:15, you will find that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. This refers to the church started by Christ when he gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom. And that church has existed since then.
Yes, there were abuses by clergy, but I believe "rampant" is the wrong adjective, and those actions were certainly not supported by Catholic doctrine. I was Lutheran long enough to know that there are plenty of problems there (but for some reason they don't make the evening news). I personally know of an active Lutheran pastor who moved his young gay lover into the house he shared with his wife of many years (at least their kids were grown). The bishop was fully aware of this and took no action.
I believe I prefer the magistarium developing doctrine than the folks at these conventions.
I am happy I have found the fullness of The Catholic Church...The one holy catholic and apostolic church.

Amen, TC.
You are not alone in giving up your baptismal church and embracing the Catholic Church. My Episcopalean dioscese has embraced, both figratively and literally, a gay-loving bishop.

Now, there is nothing in my soul that says gays cannot attend an Episcopal church, but my dander gets a fluff when the Church starts feeling empathy for these people and refuses to direct them to the Light of Christ.

So my wife and I attend her Church, and what an awakening it was! All my life, my suspicion was that the Catholics were a stodgy lot! No way! They are charismatic and a delight on Sunday mornings!

Funky, Alex
Funky: Thanks. No, I didn't really, I'm not perfect but I'm not suicidal either.

Alex; i only read your post this morning - it is so incorrect, so full of inaccuracies, sloganeering, lies, misinformation, and superstition that you will all behappy to know I'm giving up this post.

Whenever I read about lynchings, public executions, witch-drowning, etc. I always wonder who the people were who watched with sanctimonious, self-serving glee. This thread has really shed light on that question for me. Alex, Scooter, people like you were right in front, holding the rope or the gunny sack. Reading most of these posts is so depressing that I at best hope that you are a limited minority of eccentrics who will ultimately have no influence on the larger society of people who are just trying to live a decent life.

Marc, you wouldn't be at the front of the mob, you would be wandering in the streets, talking to your buttons. Every village needs one, sadly. Unfortunately for religious conservatives, it's easy to see you are the attack-dog poster boy.

This was amusing for a rainy sunday, but has become so oppressive and has cast such a smear on people who I know who are truly religious and try to put their ethics, and their desire not to hate, into their lives on a genuine and daily basis. They are not afraid of reality, facts, and are not obsessed with other people's private lives. Their lives, in fact, are expansive and they tend to their own struggles with grace and dignity.

I wish that someday this could happen for most of you - you know who you are.

Blackthorne
POLYGAMY and INCEST are issues that are indeed easier yet to do without changing LAWS on CONSENT...

But the true goal here is to get the RIGHTS and MINORITIES decisions back to the people and away from ACTIVIST JUDGES....

Our society is already so jaded (progressed) that pointing out POLYGAMY and INCEST as other changes to LAW does not necessarily mean that GAY RIGHTS supporters will go against them. The ends justify the means stuff....

On the other hand the FUTURE RIGHTS of PEDOPHILIA and BESTIALITY still seem to get a RISE out of the common man...
We would get more resistance against GAY RIGHTS 30 years ago than we currently do today on PEDO's and BESTIALS... so it's not all that great.

Besides they have no answer to why CONSENT LAWS cannot be changed for PEDO's and BESTIALS. This inevitably leads them to GIVE me thier PERSONAL opinion how PEDO's and BESTIALS are wrong and THIER MORALS are RIGHT...(they find themselves in the same class as the rest of society not agreeing with HOMO RIGHTS)

I just love the IRONIC NATURE of the discussion. They take the same argument that the (hated) christians take against them. FOR THEM... Whats good for the GOOSE is definitly not good for the GANDER.

The smart one's that actually look at the question will realise that SOCIETY is the ANSWER and that we need to make all RIGHTS and laws pertaining to them thru the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH of our nation....

This does not mean that GAY RIGHTS will not occur,,, (if we pass it in CONGRESS or by a direct vote)it means that the majority of citizens in this country have PROGRESSED beyond ME.

Won't like it, but i'll deal with it.

A SOCIETY IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE MAJORITY OF IT'S CITIZENS...

Jo j
I'm sorry you feel that the discussion on the PROCESS of this society recognizing RIGHTS and MINORITIES is AKIN to HOLDING the HANGMANS ROPE.

If as you HOPE i'm in the MINORITY of citizens in thier opinions of just what is a RIGHT and who is a MINORITY then I would hope you would join ME in asking that WE get a chance to VOTE on the matter.

You do believe in the voting PROCESS for this country don't you? Or do you believe the discussion on the PROCESS of VOTING is AKIN to HOLDING THAT ROPE as well?


Everyone
I apologize ahead of time,,, must head off now,,, I will not be able to get BACK to ALL those FUTURE comments in a timely manner. Lord knows i've tried... which is more than we can say for those who still won't breach the PROCESS QUESTION.

Comes down to accountability
The Bible is the Christian's ultimate accountability. With it open before us on the table we can find the words of life. Contrary to some beliefs, the Bible is not that hard to understand. Just read it. You probably won't get all of it the first time. You may not get all of it on the 100th reading. I have a 72-year-old friend who has been a Christian 55 years and he says he's still reading the Bible with new eyes every day.

There are many things in the Bible that are clearly stated. That God hates the practices of sexual immorality, including homosexuality, adultery, and extra-marital sex, is plain. That there will be punishment for those who live in sin without repentence is also plain. Salvation by faith will save your soul, but Christians who choose to go on sinning will suffer consequences. That's plain. Just read it.

And, now we have the problem. This one branch of the Lutheran organization has decided to not follow the Bible. I'm sure they think they have perfectly logical reasons for this. The problem is that God wants our obedience more than our logic. Pastore is right to confront them. Christians should always confront one another when we find our brothers have entered into error. And, we should be prepared to condemn them if they choose to remain in error. That is, after all, why the Reformation happened. Heresy cannot be tolerated within the Church and if the "official" Church won't reform itself, those who recognize the heresy in the hierarchy must leave in order to obey God. A good faith effort should be made at reform, but if it fails, then there is no shame in moving on to an actual Christ-centered, Bible-believing Church. There are plenty of us out here who attend churches where God is still the boss.

lilly, yesterday
Attempts to plumb the depths of profundity with:

"Here is a profound thought: the God that created us also gave us free will. If we then use that free will, does that mean we deny God?"

There is a criticism of this proposition even more fundamental than the good one posed by inkling_revival.

It is that leftists too often exclusively equate "using free will" with rejecting the tenets of religious morality or the norms of society.

If you're going to invoke God and free will, as understood by Christians, know what you're talking about. The entire point of Creation, the entrance of sin into it, and God's provision of a means to redemption is precisely that God wants us to use our free will TO CHOOSE HIM. News flash: HE already knows we have the freedom not to.

You may or may not believe that, of course. But there is no profundity in merely adopting the shallow perspective of the adolescent on free will -- i.e., that it means doing whatever The Man told you not to.

From the Christian perspective, doing that is actually the OPPOSITE of free will: it's letting yourself be driven, like a braying donkey, by sin. "Free will," to a Christian, is the gift that frees us to choose the narrow path, rather than be herded like goats along the broad one.

Again, you don't have to believe that. But your efforts at profundity will be materially enhanced by understanding it.

dyerje
Thanks for your (as usual) cogent post. Always a pleasure to read your thoughts.

A great sin
Isn't homosexuality a great sin? You can get all pious and judgmental and never have to worry about being hypocritical or getting much resistance because only 5% of the population is gay. Greed, violence, infidelity, i.e. the real sources of suffering in our world and the subjects Jesus actually discussed - you wouldn't ever want to talk about that.

curious
Do married youth pastors often discuss the sex life they have with their wives, or refrain from doing so only out of fear of losing their jobs? That would seem to be the implication of the above article, but it seems an odd thing for youth pastors to do.

As Always,
those who scream loudest FOR "equal rights for homosexuals and lesbians" are the very first to scream AGAINST equal rights for incestuous couplings, polygamous families, and the various paraphilia-centered groups such as NAMBLA, et al.

Nor can they defend their discriminatory beliefs, actions and "hate speech" against those equally-deserving minorities. To do would be to include themselves in those same minorities. Catch-22 is a bxtch.

Indeed, they think what's good for another's goose is NOT good for their gander. [chuckle]

A moment of peace.
I curled up tight with my beautiful boyfriend last night, and gently fell asleep with a smile on my face.

I'll do the same tonight, and for every night for the rest of our lives.

Cam
They aren't even 5% of our population. It is much closer to two percent. [See Lawrence vs Texas].

Besides, it is the nature of the sin...or perhaps the "unnatural nature", if you will. If nothing else, religion teaches morals; we might learn the lessons badly but there it is.

This is a thread on actions by churches in re homosexuals/lesbians not greed, violence, and so on. Those belong on separate threads.

TurnLeft
And may your years be many.

Hopefully you have already taken the necessary legal steps to protect each other from unwanted family interference, etc -- insurance, living wills, property in both names, etc.


replies to Birdman and Jo Jo
All I'm doing is trying to show religious conservatives the most rational, consistant approach to getting what they want. I'm glad you understand that. Too many conservatives don't have the courage of their convictions. Some of them do.

Blackthorne
Thank you. We are both (extremely) lucky enough to have loving, caring families who both adore the others' partner and would never interfere in the slightest. We've lived together for 5 years, just moved to a new city together, have both joint and separate bank accounts, and both are gainfully employed. We consider ourselves very, very lucky.

We also have just registered as Domestic Partners in our big, northern metropolis/county. It doesn't mean much legally, but it means we're more than "roommates" to the County Clerk, and that's sumthin!

Blackthorne
It's a rare thread on this website that condemns greed.

I don't quite see the point to this thread. Piety and judgmentalism are not looked kindly on in the Gospels. If there were any rationale for being judgmental, it would go something like this:

We too are tempted to do X.

X causes this harm.

But we suppress our desires to do X.

Therefore, we're morally superior.

If you're not attracted to people of your gender, what's the point in judging those who are?

By the way, I'm a proud member of the ELCA. I could enumerate what I believe to be the flaws of other faiths, but I don't see much value to that.

Church's should obey primary law.....
which goes beyond the 10 Commandments. The Catholic Church did not acknowledge a problem and failed to act and now they are paying for it with big bucks. If they would have defrocked priests based on their first incident they would not have had to pay and many children would not have been maimed. I expect that pedophiles and other perverts will come out and attempt to legalize their sexual orientation.

Differences
I am very, very proud of the ELCA. And I've been a member since 1998!

They have prayed and discovered the truth of this homosexuality debate; put most simply:

1. Homosexuals have been around as long as humanity, and have very, very rarely been witness to periods of time where living openly was safe. Centuries- check that, millenia- of secrecy and hiding are easily explained by the brutality and overall lack of knowledge among humanity before modern time. (Your average homosexual in 549 a.d.: "No HRC, ACLU or Gay and Lesbian Task Force AND death by lion-eating is still common?! Think I'll keep it to myself.")

2. The authors of the Bible lived in a very, very different time, when the only understanding of homosexuality was as a form of prostitution, presumably practiced mostly by those hiding their true nature. There was no concept of monogamous, chaste gay relationships. So how could they have had an opinion?

The only model my boyfriend and I have of a healthy marriage is our parents' marriages. So we intend to follow in their path. Security, laughter, health, prosperity, loyalty, and most of all, love.

Not the authors of Leviticus, nor even the Apostle Paul, could ever have imagined that.

funky p, good job.
funky p wrote: "I believe there is no constitutional prohibition against homosexuality, and I do not believe god would make you gay (they really are not making this choice) and then condemn you for all eternity. If you think he does, you have a serious case of dissonance. You may want to get that checked out."

Oh, you're good. Couldn't have said it better myself. You see? You see, all of you krazy kristians? What funky p said right there was called common sense. But to you, it's "feel-good immorality". Get yer heads out of yer self-righteous behinds, and THINK.

"No one wants to accept that their core beliefs may be mistaken."

So true.

holier than thou
Actually MARC, homosexuals sometimes adopt and raise orphaned children, even some that might have otherwise been aborted. All childless homosexuals pay taxes to our schools from which they derive no direct benefit. That's quite a big help to society. My Lutheran church is solidly biblical. There are a lot of us who just value the countless biblical references to justice and mercy more than the handful of references condemning homosexuality.

Scooter
Your attempts to derail the topic by likening any recognition of "gay rights" to some slippery slope of pedophile or beastimist rights merely demonstrates that your understanding of Rights is critically flawed. Don't worry. You're not alone. Americans, in general, have forgotten what Rights really are or mean.

In short, properly understood, no Right may (a) impose any obligation upon others, except the singular obligation to ~not~ infringe upon it, and (b) may ever be exercised at the expense of another's Rights.

Children lack the capacity to give informed consent. Convincing them to have sexual relations is akin to doping a woman so that she is not in a proper state of mind to give informed consent. It's that simple.

The fact is, some rights simply do not exist. There is no right to have sexual relations with someone -- of the age of consent, below the age of consent, or outside of one's own species -- who is incapable of giving consent.

hey
Reading all above I wonder are you going to start killing again? Just curious....

Great to hear
Lefturn: Congrats on your relationship.

I miss a relationship. I was in a monogamous relationship for 12 years but during the last few months he found someone else. I was devastated. It has been a few years since that happened though and I really miss being in a relationship. I have been seeing a guy for a while tho ... maybe it will work out.

Best wishes for the two of ya



Sex and the Lutheran Youth
Yes, it's a muddled mess. I too was there not only at this debacle, but at our previous gathering two years ago. As a regular former listener (when I served an ELCA church in Orange County), please remember that there are yet faithful who attend ELCA churches across this land who are painted with the same dirty paint brush. Not all have bent the knee to Baal and there are still some faithful Martin Luther Reformation preaching going on even in the ELCA. In the midst of a nasty adulterous divorce, what is the child to do? God has purpose for everything and He will fulfill His promises even in this mess. A holier-than-thou attitude for those who have been struggling for biblical faithfulness in the midst of spiritual warfare for years is not helpful. Pray for those in the trenches -- there are 7,000 (to use that biblical metaphor) who are still faithful. The war is coming to a neighborhood near you. Many run, but some are called to turn toward the enemy and fight. It's not helpful when troops from a different division in the same army ridicule those who are on the front lines.

Sex and the Lutheran Youth
Yes, it's a muddled mess. I too was there not only at this debacle, but at our previous gathering two years ago. As a regular former listener (when I served an ELCA church in Orange County), please remember that there are yet faithful who attend ELCA churches across this land who are painted with the same dirty paint brush. Not all have bent the knee to Baal and there are still some faithful Martin Luther Reformation preaching going on even in the ELCA. In the midst of a nasty adulterous divorce, what is the child to do? God has purpose for everything and He will fulfill His promises even in this mess. A holier-than-thou attitude for those who have been struggling for biblical faithfulness in the midst of spiritual warfare for years is not helpful. Pray for those in the trenches -- there are 7,000 (to use that biblical metaphor) who are still faithful. The war is coming to a neighborhood near you. Many run, but some are called to turn toward the enemy and fight. It's not helpful when troops from a different division in the same army ridicule those who are on the front lines.

Gays do raise kids
Turnleft: sorry I got your nick turned around above ...

My partner and I (mentioned above) are friends again now. We both helped to raise our Godson. Our Godson’s mom stayed in our house during much of her pregnancy. My partner went to Lamas class with her and I was the first to hold Nick when he was born. Nick stayed with us during most weekends. We were his surrogate fathers, since his real father deserted his mother when he found out she was pregnant. We helped raise Nick and now Nick is a great 18 year old straight kid who still sees us from time to time. We were all fortunate that we had that experience.

I think you're right Skinny ...
That slippery slope leads right to scooter and MARC


Slip slid'n away

"Whoah God only knows, God makes his plan
The informations unavailable to the mortal man
Were workin our jobs, collect our pay
Believe were gliding down the highway, when in fact were slip sliding away

Slip sliding away, slip sliding away
You know the nearer your destination, the more you slip sliding away"



Which one of the two is the BEAST ?
... and what species ?


HA HA

docgreene, we let the ELCA
Bishop know exactly how we felt about the direction the ELCA was moving in...it fell on deaf ears. Because of this we felt there was no choice other than to leave the ELCA. After reading the article by Mike Adams (a month or so ago) about the ELCA "church" in California we know we made the right decision. Read Mr. Adam's column here:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2007/04/30/my_conversion_to_the_lutheran_feminist_faith

The fact that the ELCA sanctions this church is quite telling. Like I posted earlier, the ELCA saw the money to be made in "accepting" homosexual behavior as normal (not that they will ever admit it.)

SKINNY,,
You mean I had to wait EXTRA LONG on an answer for that.

The slippery slope analogy only works when you explain why LAWS set by society are changable,,,

HERE is a great example of the SLIPPERY SLOPE IN PROGRESS....
SODOMY,, A law set in our nation by SOCIETY is OVERTURNED (by judges)for GAY RIGHTS. HOMO's are now legally able to have sexual relations.

Where is the next step on the SLIPPERY SLOPE for GAY RIGHTS? MARRIAGE...

YEP folks once SODOMY is history the next step is MARRIAGE,,, you have now gotta change MARRIAGE to give HOMO's the same RIGHT. But MARRIAGE is also a law set by SOCIETY... how can a judge just do so...? BECAUSE the JUDGE TELLS YOU,,, who is a MINORITY and who gets RIGHTS....

So what is next on our SLIPPER SLOPE..?
ADOPTION,,, YEP if they are now MARRIED and equal to everything else then why not ADOPTION,,, (of course this is by JUDGES and not society again). Can't go against the JUDGE remember they are the one's in our society that determine the RIGHTS and who is a MINORITY...

Are there any more slippery slope RIGHTS that we should know about skinny today, or is the plan just to eat piecemiel socities laws? (whatever is doable at the time right)

Why am I asking you,,, YOU OR I don't make that decision,, just JUDGES.

ALL three cases SODOMY, MARRIAGE, and ADOPTION change DIFFERENT society laws. Each one is best explained by the SLIPPERY SLOPE story that SKINNY KNOWS won't occur again.

Skinny,,, can you hear people out there laughing at you? Don't take it personally buddy...

If I was in your shoes and I also wanted my MORAL compass of GAY RIGHTS acceptance but no others then maybe I would have come out with SLIPPERY SKINNY too.



Skinny
As to the QUESTION of why judges changing SODOMY, MARRIAGE, ADOPTION for GAYS is KAPICH ,,, but AGE and SPECIES of CONSENT (remember consent is whatever a JUDGE tells you it is) for PEDOPHILES and BESTIALS is not OK is still waiting for an answer. (this injustice also leaves out INCEST and POLYGAMY but I won't overload SKINNY with these other RIGHTS today).

SKINNY, I got an IDEA! How about we let SOCIETY decide the RIGHTS and just who is a MINORITY worthy of them....!
WHOAAAAA, ..
Does the idea of society determining these RIGHTS scare you? (vs JUDGES)?
Why do you put your FAITH on the issue in JUDGES and not SOCIETY? Are you afraid that YOUR special groups RIGHTS won't be passed by society? Is this why you DEMAND that JUDGES do YOUR BIDDING,, because society does not see it YOUR way?

Hey man,,, I don't know what happened to you as a kid but it's OK,, Your not alone everyone has issues. Even myself...

On this one however, I don't have an issue with society determining the RIGHTS and who is a MINORITY. Maybe GAY RIGHTS will pass and then I will live with it... under an acceptance that the majority of my fellow citizens feel that way about it...

This JUDICIAL CRAP that is occuring however leaves nothing but revulsion at the PROCESS and the FUTURE RIGHTS it USHERS in.

Greg
If it makes you feel better by calling me a BEAST... Please do so,, I can handle it..

As to your lack of response to the question on why Sodomy, Marriage, and Adoption are changeable but CONSENT is not..... well....

Lets just keep your comments to NASTY STATEMENTS shall we... Everyone has different TALENTS, I think we have found yours.

funky p
“I didn't notice you chiding Scooter for changing the topic to legalizing pedophilia and bestiality, like we see that as a real possibility. “

Acts of pedophilia and bestiality are sexually deviant in our society as are those of homosexuality and lesbianism. Greed, etc are not. The Church treats them differently as does our society and our laws. This thread does the same.

BTW, they are not merely a “real possibility”, they are almost here. Once the same-sex marriage and preferential rights dust settles, their fight will begin using that as precedent.

So what is your position on denying “equal rights” to someone based on their sexual preference/orientation? A straight answer, please, no pun intended. I suspect I know your answer already.

According to your lights -- and those of others here -- no one should be denied the right to have sex with or marry the consenting person to whom they are attracted, right?

Now the real question arises... “Consent” and the “Age of Consent” is determined by the courts and only the courts -- society’s rules don’t count, remember? On which side in a judicial ruling on dropping that age to, say...ten years, would you fall and why? Same thing with a ruling that animal consent is not required? Or redefining "legal person" to include other living things [or dead ones, for that matter].

funky p -- Part 2
"...god would [not] make you gay...and then condemn you for all eternity."

You are right on that one, funky p. He didn’t and He doesn’t. It is not the condition, it is the act which he condemns.

Finally, as to your old chestnut re:latent homosexuality... Oh, please. Anyone who disagrees with you is a homosexual/lesbian in disguise? [chuckle] All that’s being done here is point out the next most logical step down the ladder you have built.

Dead Turn
As this group is probably already done, I'll keep it simple. No one is born gay and God does not make anyone gay. Never happened never will. Homosexuality is a mental aberation, a coping mechanism, that develops in the prepubescent age and is sexualized in later years, i.e. homosexuality is like any psychosis and curable if the victim wants to be cured.

So my question is, why are we pushing to give special rights to the mentally deranged? And if we do, why not give special rights to the homicidal maniacs, pedophiles, etc out there to? You murder 10 or 20 people, oh, it's not your fault, you were born that way. Give me a break.

Greg writes:

"Gays do raise kids."

Every competent study on this subject reveals that yours was indeed the exception, Greg.

It think the key to the whole thing was in your saying you "helped raise Nick." Meaning Nick stayed with Mom and you and your partner filled the father role. So, in essence, both male and female roles were filled...which is probably why you were the exception.

Alex
Simply stated, homosexuality is no longer considered a "mental aberration". This was brought about by removing it from the DSM with a stroke of the shrink leadership's organizational pen.

If they no longer consider it "kooky" or even kinky, it must be OK and lawsuits can proceed.

That same shrink leadership is trying/has tried to remove pedophilia, etc from that same DSM.

scooter
In your impassioned concern about beastiality and pedophilia you forget something.

Yes, sodomy has been decriminalized (mostly). However, force-sodomy (ie: sodomy performed without the other's consent) is ~still~ a crime. It's sexual assault. The only sodomy that has been decriminalized is ~consensual~ sodomy.

Yes, divorce has been "legalized" or, rather, "legitimized". Again, however, there is a consent factor involved. Either, both parties consent/agree to the dissolution of the marriage.

It is possible for one spouse to get a divorce without the other's willing consent, however. BUT, I ask, ~should~ someone be forced, against their will, to remain in a marriage they no longer want?

Regardless, divorce happens because one or both partners ~withdraw~ their consent to remain married. Marriage ~cannot~ occur, properly, without the consent of ~both~ parties to begin with. Marriage cannot last if ~either~ party later withdraws that consent.


I reiterate, your pedophilia/beastiality concern is nothing more than hysterics and a red-herring.

Ducks in a pond
If I may throw in my two cents worth here...

Liberty First sez:
"Yes, sodomy has been decriminalized (mostly)."

Decriminalized [MOSTLY]?? Wow. That is like saying she's pregnant [mostly].

Pick a state, any state, Liberty. Google its current law books for the crime of "Sodomy". It doesn't exist and hasn't since the US Supreme Court fully and completely decriminalized it nationally a few years ago. The court even recognized the far-reaching effect of their decision and tried to waffle out of it, but it stuck. That is what happens when judges start dicking with the law.

There are no degrees of sodomy, consensual or otherwise; it either is or isn't. The word is still in common use and means the same things it always did; but it is no longer a crime in any of its forms. Certain acts of sodomy are prosecuted, not as sodomy but as something else -- "Sexual Liberties with A Child" [formerly pederasty], "Indecent Acts" or "Indecent Exposure" and so on. "Sodomy" is not mentioned.

For the record:
Here is the "Sodomy" crime the USSC struck down, as listed in Black's Law Dictionary. [My copy predates the USSC Lawrence vs Texas "sodomy" decision so it describes the "used-to-be version".] Please note it is very specific and includes bestiality. Cites omitted but available; these are typical of former state laws.

"Sodomy. A carnal copulation by human beings with each other against nature, or with a beast.
"Sodomy is oral or anal copulation between persons who are not husband and wife or consenting adult members of the opposite sex, or between a person and an animal, or coitus with an animal."

So the USSC threw out the baby [bestiality] with the bath water[homosexual acts in the privacy of one's home]. Too typical of poorly thought out judicial activism.

skinnywhiteboy
Again, if I may insert my two cents...

You said, "Name one instance in which a judge has ENACTED or changed the age of consent."

Well, since to my knowledge, the age of consent has not YET been tested in court, you bet on a sure thing. But I seem to recall the ACLU has been nibbling around the edges of the subject in support of NAMBLA's varied goals [knowingly or not].

If preferential rights are judicially awarded to homosexuals in the name of "constitutional equality" and on the basis of sexual preference or orientation, you may be assured the other, more-colorful sexual orientation/preference groups and their attorneys will be on it like stink on...well, you know.

Let us recall there is already a push to lower the consent age to 13 nationally, provided the boy is no more than 4 yrs older. [Georgia already has.] After all, girls of 12 and 13 are routinely given legal abortions with neither parental and/or law enforcement notification. Those weren't immaculate conceptions...


Some genuine questions
I have some genuine questions to ask. As a fundamentalist I have a hard time understanding this modern views regarding sexuality and would like people who actually hold these views to respond. I’m not going to use it as an excuse to go on and on about my beliefs, I am truly trying to understand beliefs that are strange to me.

1. What is the Bible to you? For us it’s the source of absolute truth and literally/contextually true. I can only assume that is not the case with ELCA members, so what is it to you? How much influence do you think it should have personally and in your church practices and policies?

2. Do you believe in absolute truth? What determines right and wrong and good and bad for you? How do you answer the question, “How shall we then live?”

3. How do those of you with these views justify internal change of church policy/practice rather than starting your own denomination that teaches these views? What was the policy in Lutheran Churches regarding dealing with its membership openly practicing and teaching as acceptable what the church defines as sin? Are there any behaviors that do fall under the category of needing “church discipline”? If so, what are they and how are they dealt with?

Good answer Slippery SKINNY
Do you mind if I now call you Slippery Skinny? I just can't get that out of my mind after giving the examples of GAY RIGHTS progress and SLIPPERY SLOPE analagy?

before SODOMY (the law of the LAND) was changed by JUDGES for GAY RIGHTS...

SKINNY's counterpart back "in the day" told his fellow citizens. 1960's

You guys stop worrying about this Slippery Skinny stuff on GAY RIGHTS happening in our future...
I mean in our previous history of a country when has a JUDGE ever MEDDLED with this societies laws on SODOMY?

NEVER,,, YEP NEVER,,,, and even if a JUDGE was to change SODOMY,,, you can't honestly BELIEVE that they would also change MARRIAGE and ADOPTION too?

So don't worry about it,,,, BE HAPPY.

Don't worry folks the fact that JUDGES have not gotten around to recognizing GAY RIGHTS at this TIME 1960 means they will NEVER do so.

How do I know this? Because I'm telling you so. DUH

I sure am glad you cleared that up for me skinny.

PS,, the Constitution as it is INTERPRETED correctly does not scare me (i rather think it's pretty good). However an incorrect INTERPRETATION done by ACTIVIST judges is SCARY.

EXP... The CIVIL RIGHTS act when it was completed (passed by congress) related to RACE and blacks getting RIGHTS (notice all the changes for them at that time),,, THERE WERE NO CHANGES FOR GAY RIGHTS AT THAT TIME. We had to wait 30 YEARS for JUDGES to determine that GAYS also QUALIFY for this CIVIL RIGHT....

Liberty
The definition that society has set for ADULT or CONSENT is no more of a hindrance for PEDO'S and BESTIALS to overcome than the definition of SODOMY, MARRIAGE, and ADOPTION was for GAYS.

All we need is a little more tolerance and acceptance of society towards these other oppressed groups,, maybe some MEDIA stories that show the TRUE LOVE that "very young adults" have with others.
You don't think the MEDIA SEXUALIZATION of CHILDREN today is all for NOTHING do you?
Is there anybody out there that does NOT know somebody that LOVES thier PET above all others... What about thier RIGHTS,,,? I'm sure the PARTNER of the PET will be able to vouch for the PETS CONSENT... ...

It's all about LOVE MAN... where is your LOVE? Its also all about who decides who is a MINORITY and gets the (future) RIGHTS of the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT. What do the GAY RIGHTS supporters call this,,, "PROGRESS"?
Don't stand in the way of PEDO/BESTIAL RIGHTS PROGRESS its comin and you might as well get used to it..
Gotta LOVE the JUDGES,,, they hold all the CARDS

Another thing, Superskinny...
[My last shoulda been addressed to Superskinnywhiteboy. My bad.]

Under Article 3, Section 2.1 of the Constitution, "The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States..."

Now Article 1, Section 1 says, "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

That means the Legislature makes the laws and the judiciary decides on the constitutionality of the law AS WRITTEN. It does not allow a judge to make up meanings and relationships of the written law. This is exactly why Roe vs Wade will fall -- there is no constitutional basis for the decision.

Therein lies the fear held by the homosexual/lesbian community; that the courts will no longer be allowed to change the law.

Don't know a whole lot about the battle for civil rights, do you? Does the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ring a bell? The word "Act" means it is legislative in nature, not judicial [they are called "decisions"]. That's the one that cast racial equality in concrete and not some judicial decision. Please get it right.

You also say, "On why the gay rights movement is sometimes fought in the courts:

"Short answer: Because we can."

Longer answer but still short; it is because you can find activist judges with an agenda who decide issues based on their own faulty opinions.

You don't stand the chance of a poot in a windstorm of getting a real law passed, so you take that route.


superskinny
Indeed they were illegal, but only if two [or more] men were involved... They were successfully prosecuted, too.

Must say I disagreed with the law...not out of sexual preference, mind you [smile], but out of fairness...long as it was in private and consenting adults only.