North Carolina Passes Amendment Banning Same-sex Unions

[The Stranger]

Actually, in science it is. Otherwise I could claim that there are dragons and magic in the world and there's absolutely no way for you to prove they don't exist.

I don't get how people can actually buy that reasoning.

ehm well you cant. you cant prove that it exists and you cant prove that it doesnt so you ignore it...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Wrong focus? That is exactly where the focus should be. Christian intolerance of homosexuality stems directly from a few passages in the bible. Any time someone expounds on the immorality of homosexuality or the 'fact' that traditional marriage is the only one sanctioned by god (and that is the rationale behind opposition to gay marriage, whether the opponents choose to cower behind semantics or not), it should be immediately noted that they also believe a myriad of other crazy things. The problem is that Christian teaching receives way too much undeserved credibility. If you begin to view the story of Jesus as a first effort at zombie fan fiction instead of the sacred words of a very random and contradictory god, it becomes much more difficult to take anything in the bible seriously.

Have you read the Church fathers or later theologians? Wyclif, Luther, Calvin? Pope John Pail II?

The Bible is a foundational document of Christianity, but Christian doctrine is so much more - contrary to what Strike said it has always incorporated Aristotlien and Platonic logic, literary criticism, Judaic and Eastern mystical traditions...

A little Augustine for you

When I was writing about things I began with the warning that attention should be paid solely to the fact that they existed, and not to anything besides themselves that they might signify. Now that I am discussing signs, I must say conversely, that attention should not be paid to the fact that they exist, but rather to the fact that they are signs, or, in other words, that they signify.

Those modern philosophers are gabbing on without realising it has been done by Aristotle, or Augustine, or Epicurus, or Protagoras, or Boethius, or Thomas Aquinas.

If you want to talk about taking people seriously, look at the "Zombie Jesus" claim - it's based on a cult film director's perversion of Zombie lore. Jesus is not a "Zombie" he is, if you want to get technical, a Divine Revenant - a dead body whose soul has returned and has been animated and made to live through the power of God in contravention of natural law. It isn't a common trope, but I think you see it occasionally in Greek myths. Far more common is the spirit occupying a dead body, but Jesus' body is alive, he eats and drinks and his flesh remains uncorrupted.

His wounds remain not because he is dead, he isn't, but because they are a sign that he was dead. The Bible is quite explicit about this, his body is living.

Your understanding couldn't be more twisted. The gay marriage movement has nothing at all to do with the church or changing religious practices. No one is trying to force religious institutions to do... anything. On the other hand, the religious Right preaches anti-gay hatred from the pulpit. They are approaching the issue strictly from the 'church level' and, as usual, cannot seem to comprehend the separation of church and state.

Come now PJ - a large part of the Gay-marriage lobby are Gay Christians who want to have Church weddings. The European Court of Human Rights, in a review of proposed changes to marriage law in the UK said that if Civil Marriage was extended to Gay people it would be illegal for Churches to refuse to perform their weddings.

It is also currently illegal to have any religious content in a Civil Wedding in the UK - no hymms, no Bible readings, so that Gay couples who want a religious wedding must do so in a Church.

What is at stake here is the definition of marriage, not just the legal institution. If it were just the legal institution then they would be happy with "Civil Partnership" in most cases.

Actually, in science it is. Otherwise I could claim that there are dragons and magic in the world and there's absolutely no way for you to prove they don't exist.

I don't get how people can actually buy that reasoning.

ehm well you cant. you cant prove that it exists and you cant prove that it doesnt so you ignore it...

You are applying the scientific method outside science - that's why it doesn't make sense. The scientific method deals exclusively with the phyisical world and the natural Laws - religion is not abou the natural world, and when it interacts with the natural world it explicitely violates natural Law.

[Strike For The South]

I protest your postulation

I said it incorperated those things colored by a christian lens

THIS IS WHY NO ONE LOVES YOU, STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH