[quote]pookie wrote:
No gay pun intended.
[/quote]
I’m calling bullshit on this.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I don’t hate gays or polygamists. In fact, I don’t give a shit what they do- its got no bearing on my life at all.
It’s only the self-righteous assholes who want to get inside everyone’s bedroom that give two shits about any of this…man, what happened to “conservative” meaning “keep government out”? The Jesus Freaks have truly taken over the right…
My sentiments exactly.
[/quote]
I don’t wish to go into anybody’s anything. You can do in your bedroom all that you want.
However, where I draw the line is simply that I don’t have to be forced into accepting this by making it legal, right, and then reward it with joint health benefits, and government programs.
Do all the sin that you want – just don’t make the rest of us accept it because we will never.
Now, speaking as a “Jesus freak,” – I rather be a freak for my Lord, then freak out when I am about to go into Hell like those who don’t believe.
Think about it…
[quote]pookie wrote:
orion wrote:
You could also comment on polyandry which io not mentioned in the bible
It’s not mentioned in the Bible, because women are basically property. Objects. It would make as much sense to talk about polyandry as it would to mention an ass that owned multiple men.
No gay pun intended.
[/quote]
Well technically that is not a problem, you could see polyandry as a way for men to share a woman, because they cannot afford to own a whole one.
If polygamy becomes a part of our society again that could also become a very real possibility.
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
orion wrote:
Steveo,
now I am actually really interested in your take on polygamy and since you started that thread…
My take on polygamy rests upon Jesus’ statements in Matthew 19:4-8: [b]
"Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so."[/b]
God’s intention for marriage is simple:
One man
One woman
For life
All other possibilities come out of our sinful hearts that wish to do what we wish to do. Adam and Eve were the example that God set – we have choices, but the Bible is clear and clearly against any and all deviation from Jesus’ position.
You could also comment on polyandry which io not mentioned in the bible but not explicitly forbidden either and since women have reached a point where they have the earning power of men (well, not quite, but anyway) would that be a possibility?
Same answer for this. However, my intent for this thread was simply to point out, however, that why is this deviant behavior being punished, when we have all sorts of kooks running around demanding Sodomite (oh, excuse me “gay”) marriage?
I mean, what if a court somewhere like Massachusettes rules that you cannot discriminate against the polygamists, since they have already ruled in favor of the Sodomites? Then what? Then what is the next deviant behavior in this realm that we will have to allow? This is the slippery slope that I have been talking about. Where will it end?
Deviant behavior is deviant behavior – gay, polygamy, or otherwise…
[/quote]
Now I do see that your quote is clearly anti-divorce, but I do not see why it is against polygamy?
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Where did someone say that polygamy was against the Bible?
[/quote]
I’m glad you recognize that polygamy is biblical. The problem is that the reason used by the fundies for disallowing gay marriage is that it is “nontraditional”, despite the fact that polygamy is similarly “nontraditional”, yet is sanctioned by their bible!
Also, the fundies like to use the slippery slope argument by claiming that gay marriage will lead to polygamous marriage, again despite the fact that polygamy is SANCTIONED by their bible.
There is zero logic or consistency here, but that doesn’t stop the extremist religious right from continuing to selectively use their bible to legislate their smorgasbord beliefs into law.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Anal sex is illegal in many US States
Oral sex is illegal in many US States
I re-rest your case!
[/quote]
Anal sex is practiced by heterosexual couples in every US state.
Oral sex is practiced by heterosexual couples in every US state.
I re-re-rest your case!
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Deviant behavior is deviant behavior – gay, polygamy, or otherwise…
[/quote]
So Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…the great patriarchs and prophets of the bible, are now “deviants”? I guess that puts me in good company as a gay man 
[quote]pookie wrote:
TSuderman wrote:
Now it may be a bit odd to marry your nephew but, there is no mention at all of being forced into it. So we can set aside that example.
…
Again no mention of force at all. It says he loved them. The wealthiest man of his time(maybe ever?) had many consenting wives. I think Bill Gates could find a thousand consenting wives with ease.
Bill Gates is richer than Solomon, even if you adjust for inflation.
So my examples of incest, polygamy and cruelty towards children don’t bother you? Until it’s rape and molestation, anything goes? Ok.
[i]Deut 22:28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
Deut 22:29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.[/i]
So if you encounter a virgin and rape her, you can pay her dad 50 shekels and keep her as your wife.
That God character is really hard on crime! That 50 shekels probably deterred every rapist in the land.
Let’s get back to that Job guy:
Job 19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
Job would rather give his two virgin daughters to a mob, rather than two angels that came to visit.
The best part is that Job is later called, by Peter (Peter 2:7-8), a “just” and “righteous” man.
So God considers a man who’d deliver his daughters to be raped by a mob to be “just” AND “righteous?”
Then there’s Deuteronomy 22:23-25 where, if a rape occurs in a city, both the rapist and rape victim are to be put to death, the woman for not having cried out loud enough. If the rape happens in the country, the woman gets to live, because, presumably, there was no one to hear her cries, even if they were loud enough.
Truly, an all-loving God is a sight to behold.
2 Samuel 12:11 - Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.
As a punishment to David, God has his wives raped by his neighbors while David watches.
Way to go, God! That’ll teach him!
Do you still wonder “which Bible” was used by the molester mentioned in the top article when he said he wanted to set up “a parallel society in which women and children are molested and treated like in biblical times?”
[/quote]
SIGH…Yes I do. The verse you quote is GENESIS 19:8 Not JOB. And the man that it speaks of is Lot. Lot said that. So that is wrong.
Now about second 2SAMUEL
If I had just slept with another man’s wife then killed him I may be happy with just having my wives taken away as punishment, rather than being stoned.
Now DEUTERONOMY. If you look at 22:25 you’ll see the term “force her” then the man “shall die.”
So the wording in DEUTERONOMY 22:28 may say “lay hold” but it does not say “force her.”
I think I am, as they say in the woods, “snipe hunting” with you. First God’s word is interesting and I should read it. Then when I come back with an answer it becomes rubbish. Then you quote from it again. Then you miss quote it(deliberately?).
You can not have the Bible(or any books) be rubbish and yet use it as a defense for an arguement at the same time. We may some day find other topics to debate but dialog on this end is done.
And to anyone else-PLEASE read the Bible when someone says “this and such is in it” check the verse and the context.
[quote]orion wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
orion wrote:
Steveo,
now I am actually really interested in your take on polygamy and since you started that thread…
My take on polygamy rests upon Jesus’ statements in Matthew 19:4-8: [b]
"Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so."[/b]
God’s intention for marriage is simple:
One man
One woman
For life
All other possibilities come out of our sinful hearts that wish to do what we wish to do. Adam and Eve were the example that God set – we have choices, but the Bible is clear and clearly against any and all deviation from Jesus’ position.
You could also comment on polyandry which io not mentioned in the bible but not explicitly forbidden either and since women have reached a point where they have the earning power of men (well, not quite, but anyway) would that be a possibility?
Same answer for this. However, my intent for this thread was simply to point out, however, that why is this deviant behavior being punished, when we have all sorts of kooks running around demanding Sodomite (oh, excuse me “gay”) marriage?
I mean, what if a court somewhere like Massachusettes rules that you cannot discriminate against the polygamists, since they have already ruled in favor of the Sodomites? Then what? Then what is the next deviant behavior in this realm that we will have to allow? This is the slippery slope that I have been talking about. Where will it end?
Deviant behavior is deviant behavior – gay, polygamy, or otherwise…
Now I do see that your quote is clearly anti-divorce, but I do not see why it is against polygamy?[/quote]
Good question! Look at the verse where Jesus says that the two become “one flesh.” Think with me…it you take a complex organism of any kind (no less a person)(i.e. “one flesh”) and divide it in two by cutting it in half, can it survive? Can it be divided?
The point Jesus is making is that one marriage produces one new organism and that is the end of the definition of marriage. The example is Adam – no polgamy there! No divorce there! No sodomite marriage there!
The teaching is very clear, while in the context of divorce, Jesus teaches about the definition of marriage as brought out in Genesis.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Where did someone say that polygamy was against the Bible?
I’m glad you recognize that polygamy is biblical. The problem is that the reason used by the fundies for disallowing gay marriage is that it is “nontraditional”, despite the fact that polygamy is similarly “nontraditional”, yet is sanctioned by their bible! [/quote]
Wrong! The Bible does not “sanction” anything of the sort. The Bible, however, does record the behavior of people – sinful people – even its great heros when they mess up. Jesus teaching is controlling and the Genesis account of marriage is the pattern – 1 man + 1 woman per 1 lifetime.
Everything and anything else is deviant behavior not merely “non-traditional” as you sodomites like to call it. It is deviant, sinful, behavior and if your “brokback” deviant behavior is sanctioned as a “right,” then you have no right to not allow others their deviant behavior. That’s the slippery slope, not what you assert.
After pages and pages of responses on your idiotic thread, at least you should get what the debate is about. However, your blind sodomite urges prevent you from doing anything other than demanding your rights from those in the electorate which oppose you and will always oppose you.[quote]
Also, the fundies like to use the slippery slope argument by claiming that gay marriage will lead to polygamous marriage, again despite the fact that polygamy is SANCTIONED by their bible. [/quote]
Answered above…[quote]
There is zero logic or consistency here, but that doesn’t stop the extremist religious right from continuing to selectively use their bible to legislate their smorgasbord beliefs into law.[/quote]
The Biblical position is very clear and very Biblical. It is a joke that you try to use the Holy Scriptures to allow for things that the Bible clearly says is sin or in the case of sodomy – ABOMINATION.
Use another book – ours is very clear.
[quote]forlife wrote:
steveo5801 wrote:
Deviant behavior is deviant behavior – gay, polygamy, or otherwise…
So Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…the great patriarchs and prophets of the bible, are now “deviants”? I guess that puts me in good company as a gay man :)[/quote]
Now you are getting it! Yes, you are a sinful man just like the rest of us. The only question is what are YOU going to do about it.
Abraham, Issac, Jacob, David,…and all born-again by faith individuals, are indeed sinful, but we came to the knowledge that the grace of God washes away our sin if we come on His terms.
Will you turn from your sin and follow Him?
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Good question! Look at the verse where Jesus says that the two become “one flesh.” Think with me…it you take a complex organism of any kind (no less a person)(i.e. “one flesh”) and divide it in two by cutting it in half, can it survive? Can it be divided?
The point Jesus is making is that one marriage produces one new organism and that is the end of the definition of marriage. The example is Adam – no polgamy there! No divorce there! No sodomite marriage there!
The teaching is very clear, while in the context of divorce, Jesus teaches about the definition of marriage as brought out in Genesis.
[/quote]
First of all it obviously can be divided or Jesus would not have spoken out against it.
Then, I still do not see why not 3 or more people can become one flesh.
(Do not force me to send pictures, lol…)
Adam and Eve is a point, but that fact that polygamy does not occur when only one woman is around is probably not the strongest argument against it.
Neither the old testament nor Jesus ever mentioned polygamy as a problem/abomination/etc but had something to say on divorce and homosexuality.
I am sorry but your argument against polygamy seems rather weak if that is all you have.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Oral sex is illegal in many US States
[/quote]
And those states need to be slapped sensless!
The guy’s crazy. I have one wife and she’s more than enough!
On a serious note, though, here (in South Africa) polygamy is legal for black African people who marry according to tribal custom. Our ex-Deputy President, Jacob Zuma, has three wives.
King Mswati lll of Swaziland has 12 wives (the youngest is about 14) and another fiancee.
His late father, King Sobhuza II, who led the country to independence in 1968, had more than 70 wives when he died in 1982.
So … to each his own …
[quote]coolexec wrote:
The guy’s crazy. I have one wife and she’s more than enough!
On a serious note, though, here (in South Africa) polygamy is legal for black African people who marry according to tribal custom. Our ex-Deputy President, Jacob Zuma, has three wives.
King Mswati lll of Swaziland has 12 wives (the youngest is about 14) and another fiancee.
His late father, King Sobhuza II, who led the country to independence in 1968, had more than 70 wives when he died in 1982.
So … to each his own …
[/quote]
What if a white person wants to marry according to tribal custom?
[quote]orion wrote:
coolexec wrote:
The guy’s crazy. I have one wife and she’s more than enough!
On a serious note, though, here (in South Africa) polygamy is legal for black African people who marry according to tribal custom. Our ex-Deputy President, Jacob Zuma, has three wives.
King Mswati lll of Swaziland has 12 wives (the youngest is about 14) and another fiancee.
His late father, King Sobhuza II, who led the country to independence in 1968, had more than 70 wives when he died in 1982.
So … to each his own …
What if a white person wants to marry according to tribal custom?[/quote]
Can’t do.
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Wrong! The Bible does not “sanction” anything of the sort.[/quote]
You really need to read your own bible, steveo. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were greatly blessed while practicing polygamy. So was Moses. And in this verse, God directly says that he GAVE MULTIPLE WIVES TO DAVID!
“And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.”
2 Samuel 12:8.
So this “deviant behavior” that your panties are in a twist over was considered quite normal by biblical standards. Nice try though, buddy!
[quote]coolexec wrote:
orion wrote:
coolexec wrote:
The guy’s crazy. I have one wife and she’s more than enough!
On a serious note, though, here (in South Africa) polygamy is legal for black African people who marry according to tribal custom. Our ex-Deputy President, Jacob Zuma, has three wives.
King Mswati lll of Swaziland has 12 wives (the youngest is about 14) and another fiancee.
His late father, King Sobhuza II, who led the country to independence in 1968, had more than 70 wives when he died in 1982.
So … to each his own …
What if a white person wants to marry according to tribal custom?
Can’t do. [/quote]
Cool, a black man can have as many wives as he can afford and a white man is limited to one?
That hits me from so many angles and I have no idea who in this whole thing got the better deal…
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
Abraham, Issac, Jacob, David,…and all born-again by faith individuals, are indeed sinful, but we came to the knowledge that the grace of God washes away our sin if we come on His terms. [/quote]
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses all died having multiple wives. They did not “repent” of practicing polygamy, because they never considered it a sin!
So by your standards, these men are bound for hell, just as I am bound for hell, due to never changing their ways.
It’s all good, though. I would rather be in their company than yours, anyway
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
It is a joke that you try to use the Holy Scriptures to allow for things that the Bible clearly says is sin or in the case of sodomy – ABOMINATION. [/quote]
Your supernatural holy book also says that eating lobster, wearing polyester, and eating medium rare steak is an ABOMINATION. Repent now, ye sinners!
Leviticus 11:10 on eating shellfish:
Leviticus 19:19 on wearing mixed fibers:
Leviticus 17:12 on eating blood: