@ said:
You've never heard of Gomer Pyle? Gooooolllllllly…
Same sex marriage debate...
- Thread starter TrueTiger
- Start date
You've never heard of Gomer Pyle? Gooooolllllllly…
Byron_Bay_Fan
New member
@ said:
Isn't your being a Gomer Pyle and John Wayne fan a bit contradictory? Are you Arthur or Martha?
@ said:
Since when have I said I was a fan of either? I was implying Munk had been living under a rock. I'm in my early 30's and know what Gomer Pyle was.
goldcoast_tiger
New member
@ said:
You and your Parents should, ( and could already) be really against discrimination against any other group of people, as they know how it feels.
Religion is one of the flimsiest excuses for discrimination that is possible, as almost anything can be claimed to be against ones religion.
If you got a Christian( whatever brand you want), A Muslim ,(again , whatever brand you want), a Hindu whatever brand again or a Happy Clapper from our own home grown brand s of Hillsong,
you know the type, with the 60 year old ringleader who tries to look like a 25 year old with spiked hair and the shirt carefully left hanging out, trying to appeal to the young audience that usually gets attracted to the rock music, and the plethora of sportsmen that seem to drift in and out of that type of religion.
Get that lot together and the pile of things that would be against their combined religions would be enormous.
But its strange that almost all of the things that are said to be so sacred, can be immediately thrown out if it pleases the current Pope;Pastor, or Imam:
The Catholics dropped the “ can’t eat fish on Friday, “ bit like a hot chip ,when the Pope had a change of mind, and what would send you running off to Confession one week, became a nice feed of fish & chips the next Friday night.
The ban on contraception is , in a lot of countries, responsible for some of the worst over populating that exists, but in more enlightened countries nowCatholics now know the value of latex and those little pills, and none of them are any more likely to burn in hell than any Catholics that have gone before then
The Muslims keep telling us that theirs is a peaceful religion, but some of their Brands seems to think it’s Cool to try to kill anyone who doesn’t agree with them
This garbage about Bakers and Florists is just that. Trivial rubbish
And yes discrimination does still exist in Australia; but we all should be trying to get rid of any that we still have, rather than making laws to increase it.
Especially when it’s over such a flimsy , ludicrous reason such as a few bakers and florists getting their knickers twisted because some group of people dont conform to some religions version of what should happen.
Jeez , I hope nothing really important happens to Australia , as the bakers and Florists won’t be able to be relied on to be much help ,as they have such an important problem in front of themselves consuming their lives. Lol
@ said:
The funny (or sad) thing is that you don't see the hypocrisy of your own words.
According to your warped wisdom, its not ok for a Christian to 'discriminate' and not participate in a gay ceremony, but its ok for a Christian to be discriminated against and be forced to participate in an event which they consider sacrilegious.
That's what happens when a society does not value an individual's God-given freedom … the Government takes upon itself the position of God and determines according to its own whims which class of people's freedoms are politically expedient to defend, at the expense of those it wishes to discriminate against itself.
The common sense outcome is to let the individual judge for themselves what they do and don't want to be involved in... but common sense ain't that common these days.
You may not care in this instance, but when they come after something you hold dear under false pretenses, it will already be too late for you to start whinging.
JD Tiger
New member
@ said:
Abraham, please correct me if I'm wrong, (for it was a long time ago,) but I'm fairly certain I remember from my catholic primary school days that God's doctrines was also to follow the rules and laws of the government of the day.
I can't give a biblical reference, but I'm sure the bible is where the teachers got it from. You are a fellow who might know, isn't there that in there somewhere?
cochise
Well-known member
@ said:
yes the bible states “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities.” Meaning that everyone is to follow the laws of the land even the ones they do not agree with because "For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God" which basically means that anyone who has been given authority has been given that authority by god.
@ said:
No its not the case.
For example, abortion is legal, yet the Church will never support the murder of babies. Fornification is legal, yet the Church will never support people sleeping around. There are many many similar examples.
Secular laws change all the time based on who is running the country, but the Church's Doctrines never change in response.
Just be careful to understand that there are different types of Church laws. There is 'Doctrine' which is set in stone and can never change (for example the teachings of Jesus Christ), and then there are traditions or disciplines which are able to be changed in response to circumstances (for example fasting on certain days, or allowing priests to marry). These are not Biblical Law, and so can be changed if necessary for different reasons.
Hope that clears it up for you.
cochise
Well-known member
@ said:
That is actually wrong
Romans 13:1-7 states, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”
Now when the law of the lands differ to Gods doctrine there is a leeway to not follow the laws of men but in that situation one should still acknowledge the governments right to rule over them and not only accept the consequence for breaking the law but rejoice in the consequence.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
He reminds me of Mundine. Runs his mouth purely to get a reaction out of people. And because people are idiots, they give him what he wants.
goldcoast_tiger
New member
@ said:
Sorry but there’s no hypocrisy at all:
Bakers and Florists can think what they like about gay people getting married.just as Someone who doesnt want to associate with coloured people doesn’t have to go to their place for lunch, they just cannot actively discriminate against them.
People will still think whatever they want to think,
These people who want all these discriminating laws added,will probably never have to officiate at a gay wedding, or make a cake for them Anyway .
For one thing who would really want someone there who dosnt want their marriage to happen.
And there’s be plenty of more enlightened Bakers who would be willing to take the
Extra customers that the religious few will let go.
The people complaining now will probably never stop complaining , but there’s another way of looking at it .
A lot of Gay people are Fireman, Police, medical workers, surgeons Ambos,ect.
How would one of these over zealous Christians, Muslims, or any other ones feel, if they are lying in a crashed car, and one of these same rescue “Gays” decided that he didn’t want to help them and possibly save their life, because they discriminated against gay people,
That’s the thing, they would never do that , they’d go ahead and do their job and not give a thought about what sort of person the victim is.
Its a pity that the Bakers and Florists don’t just Stop and think about some of the real problems in the world, and accept that a vote was taken and lost.
I think that it’s safe to say that no one will end up in Hell because he or she cooked a Lamington for a gay wedding, in fact I think that we could gaurantee that.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
He's self loathing
@ said:
Oh I'm sorry I didn't realise the only way to discriminate by race was against black men and that if you married one you were automatically not a racist. So many rules in the world these days…
I didn't prove any point for you. I didn't say he was racist, I said he probably was. I said that because he seems extremely arrogant and vitriolic towards people who are different to him (like women). He's predisposed to see himself as different to and better than others and to hate. So he probably is racist despite what he says, which probably bears little resemblance to what he actually thinks because it's all calculated to generate attention anyway.
Tim Sheens
Well-known member
The guy is an idiot and the senator that sponsored his appearance at Parliament House is treating us as fools.
@ said:
The passage from Romans is a little different than what i am talking about.
Obeying a law, and actively engaging in sin at the behest of secular authorities, are two different things.
When the law of the land contradicts God's law, Christians can and are expected not to participate in actions that are deemed sinful. Yes we are fully expected to obey the law, but are never expected to engage in evil acts just because they may be legal.
Bringing this this back to the topic. Christians would not be allowed to disrupt gay weddings just because they disagree with the premise. That would be un-Christian. But by the same token, are not in any way compelled to participate just because they are legal.
