It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by denynothing
I'm honestly in bewilderment about your accusation about the bible, because thats the book I know, not saying anything about homosexuality is a sin. Leviticus condemns homosexuality fairly clearly, and Romans does too. Those two have passages that do specifically talk about homosexuality. It is not an ignorance of the books, it is intentional denial of the word. Don't worry we all do it, it's impossible not to go against the word.
So, we have proved that bible does talk about homosexuality and I think the Koran does too, however I don't know about Hindu, Buhddism, Taoism, Shinto...etc. But it would be difficult so sit here and claim religious discrimination because to my knowledge no religion specifically allows or calls a person to be gay. And therefore, the passage of the bill hinders one's right to practice said religion.
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by wirehead
Your example of leviticus is really illogical because tattoos have nothing to do with gay marriage. Yes, I get your argument but they have nothing to do with each other. Culturally and socially we have come to accept the mixed fibers and tattoos. However we have not accepted homosexuality on a whole scale, hence the religious backlash.
Your right it won't affect for them to get Married, but I am called to reject sin and speak against it. Therefore, to not vote against it, or speak against it would be to accept said sin, which would be a sin.
P.s. I think you might have been confused with how I meant a sentence. The intention was to make a point that if a religion exists that calls a person to be homosexual, then and only then does this law equal religious discrimination.
Originally posted by denynothing
P.s. I think you might have been confused with how I meant a sentence. The intention was to make a point that if a religion exists that calls a person to be homosexual, then and only then does this law equal religious discrimination.
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by Annee
To my knowledge there is not a religion that calls a believer to be a homosexual, therefore when this billed passed it discriminated against no set belief system. Again to my knowledge. They only way you can prove that religious beliefs are being impressed upon others is by showing that every person that voted for this bill did this out of religious beliefs. It may sound strange but some people don't agree with homosexuality simply because they don't like the idea of it or don't like the idea of homosexual marriage. Simply out of personal opinion did they make this decision.
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by Garfee
It's impossible to follow every rule, hence the reason Jesus came. I doubt you follow every law this country has, the coin does have two sides.
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by Annee
And its complete nonsense to think every single naysayer of homosexuality does it our of religious conviction. Some people sans religion simply do not agree with homosexuality so you cannot claim this bill was passed simply out of blind faith.
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by Garfee
Some people find happiness in murder, some people find happiness in touching children. Really your argument is a moot point. So yes you do deny people their happiness, as do I.
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by Annee
I'll give you that most did vote out of religious conviction but all did not, its ludicrous to think that every person in north Carolina voted because of religion that's not even logical.
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by Garfee
Some people find happiness in murder, some people find happiness in touching children. Really your argument is a moot point. So yes you do deny people their happiness, as do I.
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by Annee
However - attempts to claim the vote in North Carolina was not religious based is ludicrous.
You literally claimed what you said I claimed right there. You are claiming that the vote is based upon religion. I am claiming that it wasn't.