• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Christian preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin

EgoffTib said:
I guess you are not familiar with the phrase "hate the sin, love the sinner."
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about other states, but when the issue was put to the ballot here in SD, we voted for or against gay-marriage, not gays. I don't know of a single state which has banned homosexuals from it's borders.


EgoffTib said:
By your logic, all Christians should be demonizing every single person they encounter for their transgressions against God.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, the evangelicals do that.
 
Jerry said:
I'm not sure about other states, but when the issue was put to the ballot here in SD, we voted for or against gay-marriage, not gays. I don't know of a single state which has banned homosexuals from it's borders.
Click to expand...
I do not see how this is relevant. I'm not talking about gay marriage or voting.
 
EgoffTib said:
I do not see how this is relevant. I'm not talking about gay marriage or voting.
Click to expand...

You're talking about hating the sin and not the sinner.

Religious folks vote against gay marriage (= the sin), not gays (=the sinner).
 
Kali said:
People have the right to think whatever they want but when it gets to the point of nasty and not thinking of the others rights? That is where it becomes homophobic. Sure: people have the right to think it is a sin and I have every right to find them a homophobe if they are up in someones biz thinking loving someone else is a sin.
Click to expand...

I have the right to say anything I please, no matter how offended someone may become over my remarks. That's what free speech is all about.
 
Jerry said:
You're talking about hating the sin and not the sinner.

Religious folks vote against gay marriage (= the sin), not gays (=the sinner).
Click to expand...
Okay, I see what you mean. It doesn't address my original post, which stated that we are all sinners. If that's the case, how do "Christians" justify wearing shirts that say "God hates fags"?
 
EgoffTib said:
Okay, I see what you mean. It doesn't address my original post, which stated that we are all sinners. If that's the case, how do "Christians" justify wearing shirts that say "God hates fags"?
Click to expand...

They don't have to justify anything. It's their 1st Amendment right to do so.
 
apdst said:
They don't have to justify anything. It's their 1st Amendment right to do so.
Click to expand...

..while politically that is true; biblicly its not. Using the Lord's name to promote your political agenda is using the Lord's name in vain. "God hates Fags" is a personal political agenda.... as it is sin that is the focus of God's hate.

Then, this whole mantra of "....not hating the sinner, but hating the sin...." has got old. It has become a meaningless cliche that far too many hide behind. While it may have sounded good at the time, there are many, many Christians that have learned to actually hate the sinner as well. They just hide behind this feel good phrase. This issue. though. gets far, far too much attention in Christian circles. I understand homosexual sex to be sinful; but there are far, far more things that are also sinful that get no attention (as posted previously in this thread). If people were really outraged by sin, their wrath would be far more evenly distributed....
 
upsideguy said:
..while politically that is true; biblicly its not. Using the Lord's name to promote your political agenda is using the Lord's name in vain. "God hates Fags" is a personal political agenda.... as it is sin that is the focus of God's hate.

Then, this whole mantra of "....not hating the sinner, but hating the sin...." has got old. It has become a meaningless cliche that far too many hide behind. While it may have sounded good at the time, there are many, many Christians that have learned to actually hate the sinner as well. They just hide behind this feel good phrase. This issue. though. gets far, far too much attention in Christian circles. I understand homosexual sex to be sinful; but there are far, far more things that are also sinful that get no attention (as posted previously in this thread). If people were really outraged by sin, their wrath would be far more evenly distributed....
Click to expand...

None of that takes away from the fact that they are free, under the 1st Amendment, to wear a t-shirt that says any damn thing they want. The 1st Amendment applies to fake Christians just like it does to real Christians.
 
apdst said:
They don't have to justify anything. It's their 1st Amendment right to do so.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that they had to justify it. I was asking how they would go about doing so. Please read closer next time.
 
EgoffTib said:
I didn't say that they had to justify it. I was asking how they would go about doing so. Please read closer next time.
Click to expand...

I know what you said and I'm saying they're not required to justify anything.

Read your last sentence, aloud, five times, then off to bed for you.
 
apdst said:
I know what you said and I'm saying they're not required to justify anything.

Read your last sentence, aloud, five times, then off to bed for you.
Click to expand...

This is not difficult to grasp. I never said that they were required to. I merely asked how, if they were to try, they would justify it. This is purely hypothetical.
 
EgoffTib said:
Okay, I see what you mean. It doesn't address my original post, which stated that we are all sinners. If that's the case, how do "Christians" justify wearing shirts that say "God hates fags"?
Click to expand...

You're asking me how some hate group rationalizes their hate speach to themselves.

I argue that there is no objective, valid justification for such a shirt. I would not defend to the death someone's right to wear such a shirt.

If someone were wearing such a shirt on my campus I think the Christian response is to wear my own shirt which says:
  1. “Live in me, let me live in you, says the Lord.”
    [*]“Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”
    [*]“In the world you will have trouble but take courage for I have conquered the world.”
    [*]“Look at the birdas of the air; your heavenly father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?

In other words, the best response to hate speach, is more speach.
 
Jerry said:
You're asking me how some hate group rationalizes their hate speach to themselves.

I argue that there is no objective, valid justification for such a shirt. I would not defend to the death someone's right to wear such a shirt.

If someone were wearing such a shirt on my campus I think the Christian response is to wear my own shirt which says:
  1. “Live in me, let me live in you, says the Lord.”
    [*]“Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”
    [*]“In the world you will have trouble but take courage for I have conquered the world.”
    [*]“Look at the birdas of the air; your heavenly father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?

In other words, the best response to hate speach, is more speach.
Click to expand...


So play tit for tat huh?
 
apdst said:
I have the right to say anything I please, no matter how offended someone may become over my remarks. That's what free speech is all about.
Click to expand...

Try yelling fire in crowded movie theater and see how that works for ya. Free speech is still limited. Just saying;)
 
EgoffTib said:
I simply do not understand why a lot of Christians focus on homosexuality being a sin. Their own Holy Book says that everyone is imperfect and everyone I have met has at least committed some sort of sin. So if we are all sinners, why is it the gays that get demonized? :thinking
Click to expand...

Have you seen me focus on it? I comment on it because others have, but I don't have a particular hang up about it. If other people want to be homosexual, that is their business. It is still a sin as are many things. It is also one of the big ones. However, you are correct, we all sin. I strongly believe in "hate the sin, love the sinner" but perhaps that is the Catholic in me.
 
ludahai said:
Have you seen me focus on it? I comment on it because others have, but I don't have a particular hang up about it. If other people want to be homosexual, that is their business. It is still a sin as are many things. It is also one of the big ones. However, you are correct, we all sin. I strongly believe in "hate the sin, love the sinner" but perhaps that is the Catholic in me.
Click to expand...

Homosexuality is a sexual orientation, it is not a sin any more than heterosexuality is a sin. Both are simply basic urges, and neither are voluntary or matters of choice. Sin itself is a primitive religious concept, but wrongdoing requires evil intent, and intent cannot logically be attributed to something which is involuntary.
 
Leo said:
Homosexuality is a sexual orientation, it is not a sin any more than heterosexuality is a sin. Both are simply basic urges, and neither are voluntary or matters of choice. Sin itself is a primitive religious concept, but wrongdoing requires evil intent, and intent cannot logically be attributed to something which is involuntary.
Click to expand...

Sin has nothing to do with intent, it is not a legal concept. It is something we are all born with. So even basic urges can be sin, such as premarital sex of any kind.

We as Christians of all types are to try and avoid it, but that is damn near impossible. This is why Jesus, died for us.

This is a spiritual concept, not a legal one. :roll:
 
let us go ahead and admit that, of the groups that are definitionally involved in sinful activities, the homosexual community is particularly focused on because it is easier on the Church to do so. generally, homosexuals aren't part of the church in the first place, and historically they have been marginalized. they are safer targets, and furthermore, representative of a particular sin that don't make us uncomfortable to point out.

that doesn't make homosexual acts not inherenly sinful. but i would rather the Church be willing to deal with (for example) no-fault divorces that are blessed by the individual churches.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
let us go ahead and admit that, of the groups that are definitionally involved in sinful activities, the homosexual community is particularly focused on because it is easier on the Church to do so. generally, homosexuals aren't part of the church in the first place, and historically they have been marginalized. they are safer targets, and furthermore, representative of a particular sin that don't make us uncomfortable to point out.

that doesn't make homosexual acts not inherenly sinful. but i would rather the Church be willing to deal with (for example) no-fault divorces that are blessed by the individual churches.
Click to expand...

Let's also be clear that the Church is not the only, or even the majority religious force opposing gay marriage. They are the loudest because Joe Smith isn't about to fork over the cash for advertising, but it is Joe Smith who consistently votes against gay marriage in the polls.
 
cpwill said:
let us go ahead and admit that, of the groups that are definitionally involved in sinful activities, the homosexual community is particularly focused on because it is easier on the Church to do so. generally, homosexuals aren't part of the church in the first place, and historically they have been marginalized. they are safer targets, and furthermore, representative of a particular sin that don't make us uncomfortable to point out.

that doesn't make homosexual acts not inherenly sinful. but i would rather the Church be willing to deal with (for example) no-fault divorces that are blessed by the individual churches.
Click to expand...

Focusing on sins like greed, gluttony, infidelity, lying, and prejudice would likely alienate the flock and decrease donations. It's always easier to focus on OTHER PEOPLE's "sins." It costs nothing and allows the participants to feel gloriously self-righteous.

I think the church would do well to remember how Christ spoke to the religious hierarchy of his era..."whitewashed tombs full of rot and all uncleanness."
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Focusing on sins like greed, gluttony, infidelity, lying, and prejudice would likely alienate the flock and decrease donations. It's always easier to focus on OTHER PEOPLE's "sins." It costs nothing and allows the participants to feel gloriously self-righteous.

I think the church would do well to remember how Christ spoke to the religious hierarchy of his era..."whitewashed tombs full of rot and all uncleanness."
Click to expand...


Oddly enough, both my former pastor and my current one preach on all those sins far more often than they address homosexuality.

Actually, there's nothing odd about it... the sins a preacher should preach on the most are the ones his congregation is most guilty of! :mrgreen:

And yeah, there are still some real preachers around... lots of them actually, they just rarely make the news.
 
Goshin said:
Oddly enough, both my former pastor and my current one preach on all those sins far more often than they address homosexuality.

Actually, there's nothing odd about it... the sins a preacher should preach on the most are the ones his congregation is most guilty of! :mrgreen:

And yeah, there are still some real preachers around... lots of them actually, they just rarely make the news.
Click to expand...

I found that some denominations are better at this than others. The Southern Baptist churches I've attended seem to be more politically focused, the Presbyterian and Methodist Churches I attended seemed to be more personally focused. When I left being S. Baptist and switched to a more liberal denomination, I was pleasantly surprised that the first sunday I attended a Presbyterian church, the pastor preached on racism...in the south. And it was a beautiful sermon. It was a blessing to me.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I found that some denominations are better at this than others. The Southern Baptist churches I've attended seem to be more politically focused, the Presbyterian and Methodist Churches I attended seemed to be more personally focused. When I left being S. Baptist and switched to a more liberal denomination, I was pleasantly surprised that the first sunday I attended a Presbyterian church, the pastor preached on racism...in the south. And it was a beautiful sermon. It was a blessing to me.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough, the chuch I attend and the preachers I'm talking about are SBap. :mrgreen:
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I found that some denominations are better at this than others. The Southern Baptist churches I've attended seem to be more politically focused, the Presbyterian and Methodist Churches I attended seemed to be more personally focused. When I left being S. Baptist and switched to a more liberal denomination, I was pleasantly surprised that the first sunday I attended a Presbyterian church, the pastor preached on racism...in the south. And it was a beautiful sermon. It was a blessing to me.
Click to expand...

My dad is a Southern Baptist preacher, he never talks about politics from the pulpit. Each church has it's own flavor. Although I do agree that there are major denominational differences.
 
Jerry said:
I'm not sure about other states, but when the issue was put to the ballot here in SD, we voted for or against gay-marriage, not gays. I don't know of a single state which has banned homosexuals from it's borders.
Click to expand...

Sure, but you've said to homosexuals:

1 - you shouldn't be able to inherit each others hard-earned social security dollars that I can inherit from my spouse;
2 - you should spend approximately $2,300 in legal fees to do what I can do with my spouse for free (draw up private inheritance papers, file name-change documents with the courts, etc.)
3 - you should pay double taxes and NOT be able to declare each other as dependents like I can with my spouse
4 - you should have to go through legal harassment and difficulty if your spouse were to adopt your biological child OR you shouldn't be able to provide a home for a child (if the state bans non-married people from adopting - unsure if your state does, but some do)

In essence, you haven't said you hate homosexuals or don't want them in your community; but you've told them that they can love on another, you're just not going to receive any of the rights or responsibilities that you receive when you partner up with your spouse.

You should forgive people if they feel that you're treating them like second-class citizens when you vote that way. Because it's a little hard to hear someone claim not to be discriminatory and then say: I have no problem with gays, I just think they're lives and relationships shouldn't be respected in the same way mine is.

Gays are all right, they're just not as good as me. It may not be homophobia; but you can't alter the fact that that's what you are saying to gay people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom