• 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!

Family: Lakewood church stops woman's funeral because she was gay

Maybe you should be asking yourself why those insisted in violating the pastor's rules for the church he shepherds were not respected by the deceased's family? If they wanted the funeral in his church they had to follow his rules and they did not showing no respect for the beliefs of the pastor that they chose off the Internet because they couldn't muster up one between all the friends and family present.

I never claimed the family was right. To stop a funeral after it has started over a picture is not a very good portrayal of the Gospel presented in the bible. Maybe if the family had let him pass the offering plate around he would have let them stay!
 
I gave similar examples, except mine were more ambiguous...as is kissing someone. Kissing someone is not inherently sinful....is there lust inherent in kisses? No. If the congregation chooses to attach that value to it then it's no different than them attaching sin to a woman kissing a man not her husband or someone toasting friends (in a congregation against drinking).
Kissing her...homosexual partner? Come on...you are being disingenuous. At best.
 
"Cherry picking?" So are you condemning the church's actions then? Because if an atheist committed a crime that I obviously condemned and you (as just an example) said that the crime represented atheistic behavior, then I could safely say you were cherry picking. But if you and several other Christians gather to defend the church's actions in this case, then it can't be said that I'm cherry picking, but that I'm taking note of a very real Christian trait when taken to fundamentalist levels.
No I am not condemning the church's actions. The pastor had every right to refuse the funeral in his church because those who hired him did not respect his beliefs or wishes. This is just another example of others wanting to force someone to compromise their beliefs and when they won't you want to declare they are un-Christian? What a bunch of crap.
 
No it's not.

It's not reasonable. It's insulting and vial for anyone to dare have the balls to stick their nose into the private affairs of a family in that way and muss things up.

Private affairs? Once they requested to hold the funeral on another person's property, it quit being a "private affair".

You do have a valid point in that the funeral was interrupted after permission was given. The Pastor should have discreetly left the room to avoid giving affirmation, then changed the church protocols to advise families in advance as to what may, or may not be actively presented during a funeral.
 
I think the pastor should have told them upfront he wasn't comfortable with doing them and sent them elsewhere, instead of deciding right before the ceremony that he didn't like the pictures. Perhaps it was a question of interpretation - what he feels are "too celebratory of a lesbian lifestyle" (or whatever) they may have seen as just "depicting a loving relationship".

I think the way he did it was cruel and contrary to his profession. Was it his right? Sure. But was he right to do it? No.

I agree...certainly ham-fisted. I personally dont agree with how it was handled by either party. Then again...I dont view 'sin' the way most people do either.
 
So what your saying is that no one who acts unchristian cannot have church wedding or burial? By my experience that is every "Christian" I have met. There has been and will be no human that lives up to the Christian ideal. You just choose believe one sin is more egregious than others and use that to defend cruelty. I could see if the family placed pictures of the woman having sex with her partner being a problem. That is not the case. It was showing her in her best moments as all people want to be remembered. Some of those best moments were with her chosen partner...big surprise. The minister showed a wantonness thinly veiled as religiosity simply because he does not like their lifestyle.
No that is not what I am stating at all. Go back and re-read my post. The minister does not recognize same sex relationships and refused to have one highlighted in his sanctuary. Those who hired him to perform the Christian funeral refused to honor the pastors requests. So the funeral was moved across the street to the funeral home.
 
No I am not condemning the church's actions.

Then I'm not cherry picking.

The pastor had every right to refuse the funeral in his church because those who hired him did not respect his beliefs or wishes. This is just another example of others wanting to force someone to compromise their beliefs and when they won't you want to declare they are un-Christian? What a bunch of crap.

And if your only rebuttal is the strawman that I'm claiming the church didn't have this right, then you have no leg to stand on. Although you'll probably ignore this again, I'll repeat that the church had this right, and that my position is this church has done us a favor by painting a microcosm of society if created in their image, and I'm grateful they didn't bother to hide their true colors.

This story is, in essence, educational. It teaches us why a secular instead of a strongly religious political system is necessary.
 
Last edited:
Then I'm not cherry picking.



And if your only rebuttal is the strawman that I'm claiming the church didn't have this right, then you have no leg to stand on. Although you'll probably ignore this again, I'll repeat that the church had this right, and that my position is the church has done us a favor by painting a microcosm of society if created in their image, and I'm grateful they didn't bother to hide their true colors.

This story is, in essence, educational.

Educational how? That there are those who want a minister in their time of need but refuse to honor his convictions, rules in using his church that he shepherds? Expecting the pastor to compromise in his beliefs in order to fulfill their wishes? Then yes, it is an educational moment.
 
Educational how? That there are those who want a minister in their time of need but refuse to honor his convictions, rules in using his church that he shepherds? Expecting the pastor to compromise in his beliefs in order to fulfill their wishes? Then yes, it is an educational moment.

Nope. If the pastor feels that it's his place to condemn and exile gays, or if the head of that other church feels it's his place to fire a pregnant woman for not being married in a timely manner, then I believe they should demonstrate this clearly and publicly so we can all observe and make educated decisions before choosing a religious-based political system. We deserve to know what sort of society we'd be living under in a theocracy.
 
To the church's defense, this was a RELIGIOUS ceremony. That's a fine line you're walking. Do I disagree with what they did? Yes. But remember, it's their religious ceremony.

I think it is sick and cruel and stupid... The pastor should be ashamed and his congregation should be outraged.
 
No that is not what I am stating at all. Go back and re-read my post. The minister does not recognize same sex relationships and refused to have one highlighted in his sanctuary. Those who hired him to perform the Christian funeral refused to honor the pastors requests. So the funeral was moved across the street to the funeral home.

After it was begun. Again showing a wantonness because he (the pastor) does not like the gay lifestyle. Whether or not the family agreed to limiting certain aspects of her lifestyle or not is beside the point. The "pastor" should have known that pictures celebrating her life were going to include pictures with her chosen mate. If he did not want them displayed in his church he should not have agreed to the funeral in the first place. By allowing it to start and then trying to stop it after it began because of a few pictures that show her with her mate is again wantonness. I am not saying he didn't have the right to do it. I am saying everyone should decry him as the cruel bastard he has shown himself to be.
 
Being a ****head is legal, but still ****ty.
 
Nope. If the pastor feels that it's his place to condemn and exile gays, or if the head of that other church feels it's his place to fire a pregnant woman for not being married in a timely manner, then I believe they should demonstrate this clearly and publicly so we can all observe and make educated decisions before choosing a religious-based political system. We deserve to know what sort of society we'd be living under in a theocracy.

To remove a pregnant woman who is not married or any other member holding a position in the church to be found involved in what the church calls sinful behavior is removed. This is common practice. A secretary caught stealing from the church funds to the pastor embroiled in a marital affair. These things happen because people are not inherently good. They can be excommunicated upon the severity, yet forgiven while being removed from their position. There is Scripture to back that practice up.
There's churches out there that have no problem with same sex relationships. The family and friends of the deceased did not pursue one. Instead chose one who does not accept it and refused to adhere to their wishes/beliefs. Yet you categorize it as "condemning and exiling gays". What you want is for others who find something to be sinful to compromise their beliefs to match yours.
 
Some Rabbis conferred on this issue and decided that if man was made in the image of God... He also made gay people. The pastor is an unforgiving creep.
 
To remove a pregnant woman who is not married or any other member holding a position in the church to be found involved in what the church calls sinful behavior is removed. This is common practice. A secretary caught stealing from the church funds to the pastor embroiled in a marital affair. These things happen because people are not inherently good. They can be excommunicated upon the severity, yet forgiven while being removed from their position. There is Scripture to back that practice up.
There's churches out there that have no problem with same sex relationships. The family and friends of the deceased did not pursue one. Instead chose one who does not accept it and refused to adhere to their wishes/beliefs. Yet you categorize it as "condemning and exiling gays". What you want is for others who find something to be sinful to compromise their beliefs to match yours.

You are extremely confused about my position, so I'll try again: I'm not advocating that religious fundamentalists with warped views of love and compassion share my morality, because I'm fully cognizant such a thing is impossible. No, I'll settle for religious fundamentalists being extremely upfront and honest about their worldview so we can all be reminded why secular societies are superior to theocracies. It's also why I'm always happy any time a pro-lifer publicly states that a woman should have the rapist's baby.

If you're still confused I'd be happy to bulletpoint my beliefs using shorter sentences.
 
I think it is sick and cruel and stupid... The pastor should be ashamed and his congregation should be outraged.

Ever notice...its ALWAYS the ones trying to get something over and that get caught that feel the OTHER GUY should be ashamed. Its always the ones most consumed with hatred and intolerance that shriek and clamor the loudest for others to be tolerant. Funny how that works...
 
After it was begun. Again showing a wantonness because he (the pastor) does not like the gay lifestyle. Whether or not the family agreed to limiting certain aspects of her lifestyle or not is beside the point. The "pastor" should have known that pictures celebrating her life were going to include pictures with her chosen mate. If he did not want them displayed in his church he should not have agreed to the funeral in the first place. By allowing it to start and then trying to stop it after it began because of a few pictures that show her with her mate is again wantonness. I am not saying he didn't have the right to do it. I am saying everyone should decry him as the cruel bastard he has shown himself to be.
The pastor sees the gay lifestyle as a sin against his God. What part of that can't you grasp?
He made it known to the deceased's family that he could not celebrate that part of her life.
They refused to abide by his wishes and did so anyway which shows no respect for the one they want to perform a Christian funeral.
But then again this group had to resort to the Internet to find a pastor because between the two families and hundreds of friends they couldn't come up with the name of a pastor on their own. Go figure.
 
You are extremely confused about my position, so I'll try again: I'm not advocating that religious fundamentalists with warped views of love and compassion share my morality, because I'm fully cognizant such a thing is impossible. No, I'll settle for religious fundamentalists being extremely upfront and honest about their worldview so we can all be reminded why secular societies are superior to theocracies. It's also why I'm always happy any time a pro-lifer publicly states that a woman should have the rapist's baby.

If you're still confused I'd be happy to bulletpoint my beliefs using shorter sentences.
You by your very post shows your bias and unwillingness to be objective.
It's impossible to have a conversation with someone who is so bias.
Have a nice day.
 
Ever notice...its ALWAYS the ones trying to get something over and that get caught that feel the OTHER GUY should be ashamed. Its always the ones most consumed with hatred and intolerance that shriek and clamor the loudest for others to be tolerant. Funny how that works...


Church is for sinners.. not for the perfectly righteous.

The family made a mistake.. This pastor is a creep.
 
Church is for sinners.. not for the perfectly righteous.

The family made a mistake.. This pastor is a creep.
Definitely could have been handled better. No doubt. Your outrage though is rather...judgmental.
 
The pastor sees the gay lifestyle as a sin against his God. What part of that can't you grasp?
He made it known to the deceased's family that he could not celebrate that part of her life.
They refused to abide by his wishes and did so anyway which shows no respect for the one they want to perform a Christian funeral.
But then again this group had to resort to the Internet to find a pastor because between the two families and hundreds of friends they couldn't come up with the name of a pastor on their own. Go figure.

Who cares if they couldn't come up with a name of a pastor. If he did not want them to celebrate her life he should not have agreed to perform the funeral in the first place. To interrupt it mid-stream again shows a cruelty not befitting a minister. You can say the family agreed to certain conditions all you want but even they probably could not control the situation. If you have a funeral for someone in our culture that is supposed to be a celebration of their life. You cannot celebrate someones life without showing them in their happiest moments. I don't know about you but my happiest moments include my wife. To celebrate my life is to celebrate my life with her. Any pastor worth **** would know that and would know there is now way anyone could honor such an onerous condition as he applied.
 
Some Rabbis conferred on this issue and decided that if man was made in the image of God... He also made gay people. The pastor is an unforgiving creep.
The pastor agreed to do the funeral and offered his church as long as the family understood he could not celebrate her same sex relationship. He seems to have spoke to the family enough to learn about the deceased so he could give a Eulogy that highlighted the good in her life. Yet those who hired him could not respect him enough on his beliefs to follow through on his wishes. If anyone is a creep it is those who have no respect for others beliefs or wishes and expected him to turn over the sanctuary that he shepherds and compromise his beliefs to suit them. Now that's what I call a real creep.
 
The pastor agreed to do the funeral and offer his church as long as the family understood he could not celebrate her same sex relationship. He seems to have spoke to the family enough to learn about the deceased so he could give a Eulogy that highlighted the good in her life. Yet those who hired him could not respect him enough on his beliefs to follow through on his wishes. If anyone is a creep it is those who have no respect for others beliefs or wishes and expect him to turn over the sanctuary that he shepherds and compromise his beliefs to suit them. Now that's what I call a real creep.

Were all the people who loved her also gay? I think a pastor.. or any of us.. could err on the side of kindness and compassion.
 
Were all the people who loved her also gay? I think a pastor.. or any of us.. could err on the side of kindness and compassion.

And compromise his beliefs in the process? I don't think so. I think he showed much kindness. Unfortunately it was not returned.
 
And compromise his beliefs in the process? I don't think so. I think he showed much kindness. Unfortunately it was not returned.

I don't care about his "beliefs".. I think he's a perfectly righteous pill.
 
Back
Top Bottom