Who is the Real Fundimentalist

I have been busy over at Tony Jones' Blog. They posed a question about being 'intersexed' and I have been responding to one person specifically, Panthera.

I am going to post the conversation that has being occurring between He (?) and I, the goal of this is to see who the real fundimentalist is within this conversation.

panthera:

dustin germain my marriage is legitimate. What you and your hateful version of Christianity thinks is totally irrelevant.

For what it's worth, my opinion is very simply put:

You should love the person who loves you. Build a committed, monogamous, loving, faithful and true marriage. Who cares what your chromosomal status or your sexuality is, marriage is strictly between two people and not determined by hateful conservative Christians.

Regardless of how often they rape, torture, beat and kill us.

Me:

Panthera~

I don't know what your story is, or frankly anything about who you are, and I'm not trying put on a pretense of judgment towards you, however, I think that for the Christian, the word of God must be our Authority for Truth. There are so many experiences, philosophies, sects, cults, and religious persons that I believe that to submit to any of them outside of scripture is folly.In Short, We must have an Arbiter of truth that is external from us.

That said I am a conservative Christian. I have never Raped, Tortured, Beat or Killed anyone and being as I don't even know who you are I clearly don't hate you. That said, I am, because of my belief in Sola Scriptura, against any and all forms of marriage that are not given to be valid covenantally by the Word of God (see Gen. 1-2, Matthew 19). I am forced by my love for scripture and the God of Scripture to say that out side of God instituting a covenant, persons in committed, monogamous,loving, lifelong relationships are still fornicating, an act described as sin by both the New and Old Testaments.

Is it possible for you to see that perhaps persons who take the view that I have just outlined are not hate-mongers, but rather are people who lovingly desire for you to not come under condemnation from God Almighty?

panthera:

Of course it is possible for me, Ken.

I find it sad that you needs must imprison God by limiting Him to your interpretation of the Bible. And that is what you do.

Calling my marriage fornication is absurd. Do you really think I would abandon my husband just to satisfy your mumbo-jumbo?

Not going to happen.

There is little charity amongst you fundamentalist Christians, little indeed if you can call a faithful partnership of 25 years a sin.

Oh, and, yes, I am a Christian. You can be a Christian and gay. Even a Christian and gay and married.

Me:

panthera -

I would like to systematically address your response.

1. I think that it is completely irrational and unreasonable to say that I am imprisoning God. If the text explains God, then holding to that isn't an imprisonment, but rather a representation. This type of language serves more to Poison the Well, rather then to make a rational argument.

2. I am not calling your marriage fornication, I am saying that I do not believe that you can support from scripture same-sex marriage, being covenantally begun by God. I would also note that Dee Bradshaw a pastor in the MCC in his debate with Dr. James White said that he could not do so.

3. Do I really think you would abandon your husband just to satisfy my "mumbo-jumbo?" No, I don't. I don't think in fact if Jesus came down and told you that he did not approve of your actions that you would abandon your 'husband.' I hope that you understand that I mean that in the kindest was possible.

4. To say that there is little charity amongst fundamentalists may or may not be true, however, I am not a fundamentalist, which is frankly a derogatory term, that has no place in civil discussion. Notice that no where in what I have said did I Directly say that what you are doing is a sin. That is your conclusion from the logical case I am forwarding, but I did not use the word Sin.

5. I think that we must submit to 1 John as to what a Christian, I don't Judge you.

panthera:

Ken, you wrote, I answered. I won't get into the hysterical fundamentalist/conservative/literalistic/bible-as-God's-only-message discussion with you.

Calling a fundamentalist a fundamentalist is no more an insult than it was after church Sunday when a local farmer came up to me and said his b i t c h was in heat and did I think my dawg might spend the week with his family, 'cause he knows what to do with his nose.

That man would die for his pretty little dog, they're that close. But he still calls her by what she is.

Tony, I see little hope of any mercy from these people for anyone whom they consider 'other'.

Me:

Panthera ~

The clear issue is that I am not a Fundamentalist. As a matter of fact based on the definition of the term, by Richard Dowkins, You are more of a fundamentalist then I am. "Richard Dawkins has used the term to characterize religious advocates as clinging to a stubborn, entrenched position that defies reasoned argument or contradictory evidence."

The clear fact is that you, in our brief encounter, have done exactly this. Thus we must conclude that You are the Fundamentalist not I.

panthera:

Ken,
And Richard Dawkin's opinion is relevant because...?

I simply don't care how you self-identify. I have no interest in the mumbo-jumbo you practice in your version of Christianity in your church.

All I care about is that you cease attacking my status as a human and stop blocking my civil rights, including the right to have my marriage legally recognized in the US.

That is the difference between us - I am more than happy to leave you and your hatefilled ilk be. You recognize neither my status as Christian nor human, demanding I bend to your perverted, hatefilled will.

Ain't gonna happen.

I will die before I surrender to you and your nasty fellow travelers.

Me:

Panthera ~

Can you please show me, and everyone else reading this where exactly I have said you are "not-Human" in any interaction here.

I find it funny that you refuse to do anything but cry victim, as if I have dehumanized you, degraded you, or treated you at all poorly. When in fact I have done none of these things. I understand that you have no doubt been mistreated previously, which I openly condemn. I am simply trying to have a rational discussion with you about in issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I find it amazing that 1. I am not a nasty, hate-monger, anti-gay, dehumanizing, fundamentalist. However, looking at the more modern definition given by Richard Dawkins, I am asking:

Who is the Real Fundamentalist??

You be the Judge.

One Table Many Heresies

In the Booklet "One Table Many Blessings" there are a collection of 'devotionals' for the ELCA Assembly that meets until the 23rd of this month. The booklet says this about itself:

Mingled with the devotions you will find twelve stories and pictures from the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Each is a story of a family: of individuals within church families, of couples with and without children, of extended families of kin. Some are clergy, some laypeople. All give witness to the importance for the church to recognize and support the ways their ministries and families are called by God and are poured out in service to the neighbor. In Christ, we are one family, and our families take many shapes.

I would like to bring to light one of these stories. The story is of two lesbians ('Rev.' Phyllis Zillhart and 'Rev.' Ruth Frost) who are both Ordained ministers. They have been together for 25 years this fall, and have a fifteen year old daughter who they raise with two gay 'men.' While there is much to be said about this unnatural parenting arrangement, I would like to set that aside and focus instead on something that they say about there daughter. This is their statement:

The “village” that has helped raise our daughter includes LGBT people of faith and our allies. She has marched in Pride parades every year of her life. She is clear about who her parents and her village are to her. She is not clear what the Lutheran Church as a whole is to her. Her generation will decide what place the Church will have in their lives based on the justice and hospitality they see extended to or withheld from LGBT people.

Notice what they link the activity in the church body to... It is how the church treats "LGBT people." Now, last I checked, and maybe I have missed some memo - but is it not the Gospel that dictates our Church activity. After all, why would we call a gathering of non-christians, in the name of there invented Christ? It Certainly isn't The Church. Maybe it is a church, like a Jehovah's Witness Kingdom Hall is a church. The Church is those who are regenerated by Christ, who are in relationship with him.

"Reverends" with all due respect, It is not the way we treat GLBT people, but rather it is those who are Christ's Sheep who will come into the Fold. Moreover, If we do not call for both your repentance, and the repentance of all sinners, the church will be of little eternal meaning in the future.

There is another part of this One Table Many Blessings, that I would like to address, it is the 95 Persons who signed the document acknowleding their Homosexual, Bi-Sexual or Transgendered status and having been "separated from the ELCA roster in one way or another, through removal, resignation, retirement (sometimes early), postponement, leave, being dropped from candidacy,or are awaiting call." These people have rightly been disciplined, for their lack of repentance, and now, thanks to this choice by the denomination, they will be told that they are no longer in sin by being in a same-sex relationship. It seems to be that the result of liberalism, is the acknowledgment of sin, as non-sin.

For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. (2 Timothy 4:3-4 ESV)

We All Saw This Coming - News from the ELCA

The title says it all, if you know anything about the ELCA, you know that it is moving the way of liberalism. When they began accepting the the homosexual lifestyle, by becoming open and affirming in the 90's it was only a matter of time until what happened today, occurred. Based on a vote of 619-402 the motion that asks "the assembly whether, in principle, this church is committed to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as professional leaders of this church" has passed. Yet another American Denomination has abandoned the clear teaching of scripture, today is a day for morning. Sinners will not be called to repentance, as their sin will not be called such.

**Update**

There is headline news from Yahoo, put forth today.

The Following is a quote, from that article.

Tim Mumm, a gay man and an assembly delegate from Whitewater, Wis., said the Scripture that guides opponents of the more liberal policy was written by mortals, at a much earlier time, and doesn't reflect what many Christians now believe.

"I believe for me to marry a woman would be wrong — even sinful," Mumm said.

Tony Jones and Gay Marriage, Video Blog

I have started to read Tony Jones Blog. If you are unaware of whom Tony Jones is, I would suggest you google the man, but as a short description it would follow (from Zondervan) -

Tony Jones is the National Coordinator of Emergent Village (www.emergentvillage.org), a network of innovative, missional Christians. He's also a doctoral fellow and senior research fellow in practical theology at Princeton Theological Seminary. Tony has written several books on philosophy, theology, ministry, and prayer, including Postmodern Youth Ministry and The Sacred Way. He's a sought-after speaker on the topics of theology and the emerging church. Tony lives in Minnesota with his wife, Julie, and their three young children.

Now Tony describes his stance on the issue of homosexuality as follows -

I now believe that GLBTQ can live lives in accord with biblical Christianity (at least as much as any of us can!) and that their monogamy can and should be sanctioned and blessed by church and state.

So what we have is yet another 'christian leader' who believes that Scripture does not condemn homosexual activity as unnatural, improper or unrighteous. Now I say this with the understanding, that I am assuming that Tony believes and subscribes to Sola Scriptura. However, I do not dismiss the idea that Tony could reject Sola Scriptura, Consider the conclusion of an article from Emergent Village titled So Long Sola?, "We should welcome challenges to the doctrine of Sola scriptura. What was a pillar of truth half a millennium ago, has become an untenable deadweight (one is tempted to say, an idol) in the life of the church." It is possible, given the content given to us from other emergents, that Tony subscribes to an emergent form of finding truth, which would involve Scripture, reason, tradition, experience, creation, intuition, and imagination.


Now that there is a bit of introduction about Tony Jones. I would like to respond to a challenge that Tony Issued on his blog about homosexuality and gay marriage, with the first ever video blog from Thoughts of a Christian.

Gender Roles - Homosexual Student named "Prom Queen"

I have to say that I was prepared to write something on this several days ago, however, I took a couple of days to cool off. For whatever reason this story really fired me up...
(http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-news-promqueen0528,0,1160352.story)

Openly Gay Student Dubbed Prom Queen

Senior high school student met with encouragement and support at LA-area high school

By Ari B. Bloomekatz Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

May 28, 2009

Sergio Garcia stood in the gymnasium and told the senior class at Fairfax High School not to worry: If he was elected, he wouldn't wear a dress.

"I will be wearing a suit," Garcia said, "but don't be fooled, deep down inside, I am a queen!"

Garcia, 18, spent most of his years at Fairfax openly gay and wanted to be part of the Los Angeles school's prom court -- but not as prom king. He felt that vying for prom queen would better suit his personality, so he decided to seek that crown, running against a handful of female classmates.

He said it started out as a bit of a stunt and challenge -- he wasn't sure the school would allow it. But his campaign for queen ended up being serious and sparking dialogue about gender roles on campus.

A few days before the dance and election, the contenders gave short speeches on why they deserved the crown.

"At one time, prom may have been a big popularity contest where the best-looking guy or girl were crowned king and queen. Things have changed and it's no longer just about who has the most friends or who wears the coolest clothes," Garcia told the crowd of seniors. "Sure, I'm not your typical prom queen candidate. There's more to me than meets the eye."

The audience erupted in applause after his speech, and a group of his female friends spent the rest of the week wearing pink crowns and campaigning for him.

On Saturday night at the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, wearing a charcoal-gray tuxedo and a black bow tie, he was named prom queen.

"I felt invincible," Garcia said.

He's among the first male students in Southern California to take the title usually owned by female high school beauties.

"It just shows how open-minded our class is," said Vanessa Lo, 18, the school's senior class president.

Lo said that she, like many students, had initially been against the idea of Garcia running for prom queen. But she said he "spoke with complete confidence" and carried himself in a way that made students believe he was serious, not a class clown or joker just trying to get attention.

"His speech was great," recalled Unique Payne, 17, a senior who said she voted for Garcia. "I did it because I support the gay community," she said.

Although many students were supportive of Garcia's run, others were upset and didn't understand why Garcia chose to run for prom queen.

"I'm not really happy about that. He should've run for prom king," said 17-year-old senior Juan Espinoza.

Espinoza said he has nothing against Garcia but believes many students voted for him as a joke so they could see the prom king dance with another guy on prom night.

One member of the prom court also said she didn't think it was right for a male student to take the crown.

Garcia, who lives in Mid-City and is an aspiring choreographer and hairdresser, said he didn't plan on running for prom queen until notices were posted around school. The qualifications didn't include gender, and he said running for king didn't quite feel right.

"I didn't really know if the school approved. I thought 'Why can't I do it?' " Garcia said. "I see myself as a boy with a different personality. . . . I don't wish to be a girl; I just wish to be myself," he said.

Some teachers and students were encouraging, others told him not to "stir things up," he said. But his close friends continued to support him, and after his speech, the campus community seemed to be coming around to the idea.

Fairfax High, which is near West Hollywood at the intersection of Melrose and Fairfax avenues, has often been at the forefront of the gay rights struggle. It has a Gay-Straight Alliance student group on campus, and Project 10, an on-site support program for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender youth, was started there in 1984 after a social worker wanted to help a gay student who was being harassed by his peers. The program has since been expanded to encompass the entire Los Angeles Unified School District.

Project 10's founder, Virginia Uribe, said she was encouraged by news of Garcia's crowning. She said that in the last two years, there have been similar elections to prom and homecoming courts in high schools and colleges around the nation.

"I think that indicates where our society is right now. That the young people, they are not involved in this whole argument about gay rights. They think this whole fight is silly. They just accept people for who they are," Uribe said. "Gender-bending is just kind of in," she said.

--------------------------------

Ok, so this is really messed up, for clear reasons, but let me make it more clear. 1. If you have a Penis, you can not be a "queen," you may sexually act like a woman, dress like a woman, ect... However, you are not a Woman, you are gay, but you are still a man. Personally, I am troubled that Teachers/School Employees would promote any type of none traditional gender understanding. You are a man, you are not a Queen deep down. You are just gay. I am tired of homosexuals being treated as 'special.' No More Special Rights! Your sexual desires should not somehow change traditional gender identity. Finally, I am frustrated that Homosexuals are doing the same thing they accuse evangelicals of doing; namely using their sexual ethic to define law. Yet, we are condemned as Bigots or anti-gay or hateful.

How do you think that the guy who was dubbed Prom King feels? Does he have to pariade around with this gay guy now? He Certainly wouldn't want to be doing the king/queen dance... How is he going to remember his senior Prom? What are his Children going to see in their dad's yearbook?

Calif. AG urges court to void gay marriage ban - You Have Got to be Kidding me!

By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer Lisa Leff, Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO – The California attorney general has changed his position on the state's new same-sex marriage ban and is now urging the state Supreme Court to void Proposition 8.

In a dramatic reversal, Attorney General Jerry Brown filed a legal brief saying the measure that amended the California Constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman is itself unconstitutional because it deprives a minority group of a fundamental right. Earlier, Brown had said he would defend the ballot measure against legal challenges from gay marriage supporters.

But Brown said he reached a different conclusion "upon further reflection and a deeper probing into all the aspects of our Constitution.

"It became evident that the Article 1 provision guaranteeing basic liberty, which includes the right to marry, took precedence over the initiative," he said in an interview Friday night. "Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote."

Brown, who served as governor from 1975 to 1983, is considering seeking the office again in 2010. After California voters passed Proposition 8 on Nov. 4, Brown said he personally voted against it but would fight to uphold it as the state's top lawyer.

He submitted his brief in one of the three legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought by same-sex marriage supporters. The measure, a constitutional amendment that passed with 52 percent of the vote, overruled the state Supreme Court decision last spring that briefly legalized gay marriage in the nation's most populous state.

Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, called the attorney general's change of strategy "a major development."

"The fact that after looking at this he shifted his position and is really bucking convention by not defending Prop. 8 signals very clearly that this proposition can not be defended," Minter said.

The sponsors of Proposition 8 argued for the first time Friday that the court should undo the marriages of the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters banned gay marriage at the ballot box last month.

The Yes on 8 campaign filed a brief telling the court that because the new law holds that only marriages between a man and a woman are recognized or valid in California, the state can no longer recognize the existing same-sex unions.

"Proposition 8's brevity is matched by its clarity. There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions or exclusions," reads the brief co-written by Kenneth Starr, dean of Pepperdine University's law school and a former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.

Both Brown and gay rights groups maintain that the gay marriage ban may not be applied retroactively.

Starr's co-counsel Andrew Pugno said Brown's decision to challenge the voter-approved measure and the argument advanced by the attorney general was "totally unprecedented."

"His legal duty as attorney general of the state is to defend initiatives passed by the voters," he said.

The state Supreme Court could hear arguments in the litigation in March. The measure's backers announced Friday that Starr had signed on as their lead counsel and would argue the cases.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What does it take? The voters have spoken, Twice! Get it through your head California Liberals, Gays, and Mr. Brown - The People Don't want Gay Marriage.


This is where things get to be even more amazingly Stupid - - - This is a direct quote from Mr. Brown:

Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote.

The Gays already have the Right to Marry, they can marry Just like everyone Else -- You sir are talking about extending a Special Right, creating a new right... People already have the right to marry in California. No Special Rights for 'Special' People!

I may not live in California but ...

I realize that I don't live in California. But as they say, so goes California, so goes the country... Which brings me to Proposition 8. For those who are unaware -- The Passage of Proposition 8 would amend the state constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, negating a California Supreme Court decision in May that legalized same-sex "marriage" in the Golden State.

This then brings me to who is for and who is against this --

In support of Porp 8.

Rick Warren, Jim Garlow, Miles McPherson
The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod
Roman Catholic Church, LDS Church


Opposed to Prop 8.

Google, Apple, Every Major Californian News Paper (10 in all)
All six Episcopal diocesan bishops in California, and Several Liberal Jewish Groups.


I would like to publicly say that I believe that Pastor Rick Warren, of whom I am often Critical, is acting in both a biblically sound and proper Christian Manner. Well Done sir, Well done.

To The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - You have done well to speak out on all three state issues that you have. If I were a Lutheran, I would most likely Go Missouri Synod.

To the six Episcopal Bishops - May God have mercy on your souls. I pray that you would repent and return to sound biblical thought. I hope the Anglican Communion gives you the left hand of fellowship. You openly blaspheme the name of Jesus Christ. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Pastor Fights Back: A news Story.

Girl blowing a kiss song from an increasingly popular singer is still stirring controversy as well as criticism for a pastor for openly objecting to the song.

Pastor Dave Allison of Havens Corners Church of Christ in Christian Union in Blacklick, Ohio, heard about Katy Perry's song I Kissed a Girl (and I Liked it) -- and he did not like it. As he explains, he became especially upset while he and his family arrived at a camping site.

"And as we went to check in there, there was a CNN story about how this song is literally changing behavior across America," Allison explains. "Young girls Pastor Dave Allisonare acting out on it, experimenting with kisses in public and those kinds of things."

Allison was then inspired to put a message on the church's sign reading "I Kissed a Girl and I Liked It. Then I went to Hell." He contends he was just trying to get across a message on the Bible's firm statement about homosexual conduct among men and women.

"[W]e're living in a liberal culture today, a relativistic culture. They don't read their Bibles the way people used to read their Bible," Allison adds. "And the liberal churches in America have done us a great injustice by muddying the water on the issue of sin when it comes to homosexuality."

He says he intended the sign as a loving warning to young people who might be taken in by the song.

I have to say that I really understand where this guy is coming from. Homosexuality is on the rise as is fornication, and I would submit that pop culture has a lot to do with it. Liberals in and out of the church want and fight to get us to water down the Christian message, and I, like this pastor am tried of it. I say that we should fight back, we should show that we oppose such behavior. We must teach the truth of Sin and Judgment to come.

That said, I think this billboard was a swing and a miss. I like that he stepped up and did SOMETHING, however, I think this loving attempt will be misunderstood. That said perhaps a good discussion on if understanding of people should effect the message, and how this message could have been changed to be more effective.

More Bathroom/Shower Issues

Remember how it is that there is no longer segregation in term of sex in Colorado? This is now going to be voted on in Maryland. OneNewsNow.com Reports:

Baltimore residents have lost their battle against an ordinance protecting transgendered people.



Under the controversial "gender identity" law, a man would be allowed to walk into a women's restroom or shower room claiming he believes himself to be a woman, essentially opening the door for rape or sexual molestation. In July a lower Montgomery County court agreed more than 900,000 petition signers had the right to see it on the ballot to choose whether to overturn it -- but it was appealed.

"A group that supports rights for cross-dressing transsexuals came into court at the last minute and raised a number of technical objections, many of them quite far-fetched," says Alliance Defense Fund attorney Jordan Lorence.

But the Maryland Court of Appeals apparently did not see the objections in that light, and ruled that the measure will not go on the ballot. Consequently, says Lorence, voters are "stuck" with the transgender discrimination ordinance. "And there's nothing they can do about it unless they start all over again to gather signatures," the attorney laments.

There is no provision in the law to protect citizens from predators, and there is no exception for religious organizations -- including the church, says Lorence. For example, he states it would be a violation of the ordinance if two men, one of whom claims to be a woman, wish to get married but are denied by a church that defines marriage as a man and a woman.

Wow, this is a great day for horny teen-age boys who want to use the womens locker room. Moreover, lets make it so that not only is Gay Marriage legal, but so that Churches can get sued over not marrying a Man and a Women, or a man who believes he is a Women. This is just foolishness. Man has desired for equality with such vigor that now we have equality in our bathroom usage. This is exciting... When will we come to our senses and stop allowing perversion to dictate morality? Stand up for Truth!

News and Responce: Gays Have More Rights then Christians, in New York

I am not a fighter for 'civil rights,' I am a fighter for the gospel. However, there comes a time at which we must take a stand for the civil liberties of the people of this (Great?) Nation. To that effect, I am posting this story that I recieved in my e-mail today, and will right a response to it. Please Read on.

ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND NEWS RELEASE

March 14, 2008 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT ADF MEDIA RELATIONS: (480) 444-0020

ADF files appeal after court finds Christians “guilty” of praying

Christians who engaged in free speech in New York public park convicted by judge

ELMIRA, N.Y. — ADF attorneys filed an appeal Friday on behalf of four Christians arrested and convicted on charges of disorderly conduct for praying in a public park. Police arrested the four last year after they silently prayed during an event celebrating homosexual behavior while lying prostrate on the ground.

“Christians shouldn’t be punished for expressing their religious beliefs. They have the same First Amendment rights as anyone else in America,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Joel Oster. “Arresting and prosecuting Christians simply because they choose to exercise their First Amendment rights in a public place is unconstitutional.”

On June 23, 2007, four Christians, including Julian and Gloria Raven, entered Wisner Park with their heads bowed to pray for the participants of a “gay pride” event. Materials advertising the event stated that it was open to the public and that all were invited.

The four were told by a police sergeant that they were not allowed to “cross the street, enter the park, or share their religion with anyone in the park.” The entire group was later arrested and charged with disorderly conduct even though the officer herself testified at trial that their actions were peaceful.

The court sentenced the Ravens, along with Maurice Kienenberger and Walter Quick, to a $100 fine at a trial Feb. 29 (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4408). Additionally, each member of the group is required to pay court costs.
“At no time did the peaceful actions of this group break the law,” Oster said. “If the sit-ins of the 1960s were not a crime, then certainly this wasn’t either. The law on this is well established.”

A copy of the appeal filed by ADF attorneys in Elmira City Court in People of the State of New York v. Raven is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/RavenAppeal.pdf.

How is it that today, in the United States of America, we can have people arrested for public prayer? Is this not a Christian nation? If it is, how is it that Homosexuals have more rights then Christians? How is it that a Christian is not allowed to "cross the street, enter the park, or share their religion with anyone in the park." Are we not free to evangelize anymore? Is this where we are going? I am wondering where the ACLU is, with there love of "free-speech"? Or have they, like most people, including Christians, bought into the idea on one way tolerance, tolerant and even accept anyone, but the Christians?

Why do Christians have fewer rights then other groups?

Homosexuality Argument

I am showing:

1. Why marriage can not be between members of the same sex, as there is not starting of the practice by God. ( Genesis 2:24)

2. As Homosexual's can not marry, therefore they must fornicate.

3. Fornication is sin. (1 Corinthians 6:18 Darby : Flee fornication. Every sin which a man may practice is without the body, but he that commits fornication sins against his own body. )

4. Christians should Hate Sin. ( 1 John 3:8-10)

Therefore:

5. A Christian can not be a homosexual, in action.

All fornication is sin. (1 Corinthians 6:18) This is regardless of who you are fornicating with.

Now, the issue is can a homosexual be married. Because if he can then one might be forced to look beyond this argument, as it is beyond the scope.

So, lets look at when marriage was instituted.

Gen 2:22-25: And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from the man, made He a woman, and brought her unto the man. And the man said: 'This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.' Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

some NT statements to the same effect...

Eph 5:22-31: Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the saviour of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. Even so ought husbands also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his own wife loveth himself: for no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the church; because we are members of his body. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh.

Mark 10:4-9: And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. But Jesus said unto them, For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of the creation, Male and female made he them. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh: so that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Mat 19:3-6: And there came unto him Pharisees, trying him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh? So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

The question then is -

Can anyone give a God ordained example of members the same sex marrying, from the bible or one could show where homosexual marriage is instituted by God.

If not, we must say that all homosexual acts are fornication, and therefore sinful.

I am not saying that Christians can not have homosexual attraction, But i am saying that if they openly practice this behavior, they are in opposition to Scripture.