Why I Love Mike Huckabee

BearDad wrote:

ishmael81 wrote:

Redeemed Fool wrote:

I know what the modern supreme court is ruling, I also know that there's no way the founders thought they'd were legalizing homosexual marriage. Homosexual marriage is not a civil right it's a special right and is opening the door to all kinds of deviant sexual behavior as we see in the move to start dropping the age of consent and recognizing that pedophilia might have positives. If thetr are no laws governing marriage then you can't tell 50 year old Uncle Tom he can't marry 15 year old niece Sally as well as some third party in there too. Marriage as God defines it is for the good of us as private citizens as well as for a nation, don't have to look to hard to see that stepping out from it hurts. All this shows is our culture is in absolute rebellion against God's laws as we see in Romans 1.

I'm sure my homosexual friends who just got married would be offended to know that their marriage will lead to pedophilia (which happens despite the law), bestiality and other "deviant" behavior.

Don't take everything so literally. RF is not saying allowing homosexual marriage will lead to "other deviant behavior", but to the acceptance of it.  It wasn't too long ago smoking marijuana was completely illegal and considered unacceptable, but then it became OK to do so for medicinal purposes, and now it's legal for recreational purposes in four states and Washington DC. This is the way the enemy works: he get's us to agree to take a bite and before we know it we've eaten the whole apple, or had it shoved down your throat!

Accepting homosexuals for who they are is one thing, but being forced by the government to accept their lifestyle as "normal" is another.

You do realize that Americans didn't invent pedophilia or bestiality right? I mean, this stuff is documented well before Christ's time even.

Using Marijuana as a counterargument is tricky. Is it a sin to smoke it? Don't people use it illegally anyway?

Pretend for a moment that marijuana became legal in your state. Do you believe people would rush to buy some and smoke it up like Cheech and Chong?

You said "Accepting homosexuals for who they are is one thing, but being forced by the government to accept their lifestyle as "normal" is another." This is the standard for this argument. But aren't you really arguing that all people, regardless of their belief system, should be forced to maintain laws founded upon Christian morals?

^ Wow, you do like to take things literally. Did I say smoking marijuana was a sin? No. I used the acceptance of it as an example of how society can slowly be made to accept something that was at one point considered unacceptable. 

As for when pedophilia and bestiality started .... of course I know. But that's irrelevant. When it started doesn't make it more or less acceptable. It is detestable behavior that any God-fearing Christian should fight to prevent being accepted by our society ... just like we should have prevented certain other deviant acts and behaviors that are now accepted.

And with that I am done. I started this thread as a praise for a Christian politician that I respect, not to get caught up in a CMR theology realm discussion.

"CMR theology realm discussion"???  That's it!  I'm locking this thread!  Oh wait... I can't.  Carry on. 

Haha but in all seriousness... nowadays the trend is to not say ANYTHING is "detestable" or not.  Bestiality?  If a man and his dog love each other and they're not hurting anyone else... why not?  Obviously, you and I know that's wrong and I'm sure it just absolutely breaks God's heart to see His creations hurt themselves in this way, but the current trend of social and moral relativity says otherwise...  Sigh...

Quote :

that any God-fearing Christian should fight to prevent being accepted by our society

but this is the point...we live in a country where religion plays no part in our laws nor should it...Judeo  Evangelical Christians have no more right than radical Islam or anyone else  to use their religious viewpoint to create laws...In short what happens in your neighbors bedroom is none of your business and you dont have the right to force your religious viewpoint on anyone else..I am not a judeo Christian or an evangelical Christian and I see organized religion as a poison but I instead have a relationship with my God without religion but I am not trying to force you or anyone else to see it or live it my way..you dont even have to accept my way personally ...coexist however is what our country is built on and exactly what our Constitution says..
Just for the record homosexuality in itself is not trying to be forced on anyone..if you have a problem with it so be it but they have the same rights as you to reject your view however the law should and does create the same equal law for everyone regardless of their personal view...

Quote :

I started this thread as a praise for a Christian politician that I respect, not to get caught up in a CMR theology realm discussion.

thats fine Beardad but when you start a thread that praises a Christian politician who holds a certain view you should expect that there will be some who disagree with that view and will speak up...and yes, even in the church there is disagreement and thats why we have 1000's of different theology's and denominations all claiming to be right...... we should all keep this in mind every-time we post....

Quote :

Obviously, you and I know that's wrong

and comments like this are ones personal opinion and belief....

Savage Amusement wrote:

Quote :

Obviously, you and I know that's wrong

and comments like this are ones personal opinion and belief....

Yup, I was referring to Beardad and I, not anyone else.    I'm sure many others would disagree, and that's just my point.

BearDad wrote:

^ Wow, you do like to take things literally. Did I say smoking marijuana was a sin? No. I used the acceptance of it as an example of how society can slowly be made to accept something that was at one point considered unacceptable. 

As for when pedophilia and bestiality started .... of course I know. But that's irrelevant. When it started doesn't make it more or less acceptable. It is detestable behavior that any God-fearing Christian should fight to prevent being accepted by our society ... just like we should have prevent certain other deviant acts and behaviors that are now fully accepted.

And with that I am done. I started this thread as a praise for a Christian politician that I respect, not to get caught up in a CMR theology realm discussion.

I appreciate your discussion. I hope nothing I said was taken personally. Just because my viewpoint is different does not (to me) affect that we are brothers in Jesus.

kerrick wrote:

"CMR theology realm discussion"???  That's it!  I'm locking this thread!  Oh wait... I can't.  Carry on. 

Haha but in all seriousness... nowadays the trend is to not say ANYTHING is "detestable" or not.  Bestiality?  If a man and his dog love each other and they're not hurting anyone else... why not?  Obviously, you and I know that's wrong and I'm sure it just absolutely breaks God's heart to see His creations hurt themselves in this way, but the current trend of social and moral relativity says otherwise...  Sigh...

Kerrick, you know I love you and consider you a friend. Keep that in mind.

It baffles me that people compare two grown, adult men (or women) in a relationship to people who have sex with their dog. I just don't see how it carries over. Would anyone compare my marriage to my wife to that?

Can you please explain how you went from A to B there?

No worries dude, I know you mean no malintent and hope you know the same goes for me to you.    But did I ever compare the two?  I was responding directly to Beardad's comment about bestiality.  I never said anything about homosexuality...  So there's the A but there was never a B. 

That being said, as far as homosexuality goes, I see it as this:  God created man and woman to love each other in a physical, sexual, intimate way - within the confines of marriage.  Anything outside of that is against God's hopes, desires, and intentions for us - be that homosexuality, bestiality, or premarital sex between two consenting adults of opposite genders.  Those all have different earthly consequences and I'm not saying they're "the same" or necessarily even comparable to one another in terms of said earthly consequences.  I'm assuming Beardad might agree but that he was comparing them from a Christian/spiritual/sin-oriented perspective.  It's all against God's design and we are attempting to make ourselves "gods" by choosing what is moral or immoral and therefore disregarding God's Word on the matters.  So in that sense, whether a man has sex with another man, his dog, or his girlfriend - it's all sin.

I'm curious though... how do you draw the line between homosexuality and bestiality?  What makes one moral/acceptable and the other immoral/unacceptable?  Is it really nothing else but our culture saying so?  Assuming the dog is not being hurt and doesn't seem to mind it, why not?  Who's to say it shouldn't be?  Who are we to judge the man who has a sexual attraction to his dog?  Again, I don't mean to compare the two, as I agree they're quite different indeed, but I feel like it's kinda gotta be all-or-nothing.

kerrick wrote:

"CMR theology realm discussion"???  That's it!  I'm locking this thread!  Oh wait... I can't.  Carry on. 

Well at least that made me laugh....nothing else in this thread is.

Please keep your comments to each other civil friends.

Glad I can be of service. 

topshot wrote:

Nevertheless, I don't believe RF was saying that homosexuals would be party to that other "deviant" behavior, just that we may as well legalize everything. I see it the same way. Homosexual marriage is just the first step. That said, from a legal standpoint, I don't see much that can prevent it even though from a Christian standpoint I see it as violating God's natural laws. That's why I figure bestiality, incest, etc. will follow suit eventually.

I agree with this.  I remember 10-15 years ago when the political homosexual agenda was that they wanted "Civil Unions" only, and claimed to have no intent to redefine marriage legally.  Now look where we are.  There are homosexual now governors and judges in this country trying to strong-arm pastors into cutting comments opposed to homosexuality out of their sermons (talk about seperation of church and state).

topshot wrote:

BTW, I do have a dog in this particular fight, too. Our oldest is gay and somewhat an activist. I don't agree with him at all and won't support anything that has to do with that aspect of his life, of course, but I still love him like his brothers and pray one day he'll decide to come back to following God instead of himself. He admitted that he knew it was "wrong".

Just had my oldest son (17) tell me that until about a year ago he was convinced that he was bisexual.  I let him know that I loved him no matter his orientation, and like you am fervently praying that he will turn himself to God instead of his own desires.

Quote :

Please keep your comments to each other civil friends.

I have been impressed with how civil this conversation has been...by now on the cmr it would be a  war with blood everywhere and so called brothers ripping each other to pieces... 

here is a question for you guys that want to use the Bible to support your ideas...the Bible talks plainly about Divorce and Jesus even talked plainly about divorce but I dont see any of ya lining up to make a vocal outcry over divorce or change the laws and I rarely see churches that speak about divorce..why is that (there was a time when divorce wasn't ok in this country either)..divorce issues fall under the sex and law issues so like Kerrick says " it's kinda gotta be all-or-nothing."...right? you either keep all the law or at least try to keep it all or you keep none of it...and to tie it in here to the original thread...why isn't Mike Huckabee speaking out against divorce and why isn't he preaching that we should all keep all Of Gods laws..it kinda seems hypocritical to me to pick and choose the laws to keep and make an issue over...I actually think divorce (which is rampant in the christian church) causes more damage than homosexuality..not that I think thats reason to ban it because I don't...

kerrick wrote:

No worries dude, I know you mean no malintent and hope you know the same goes for me to you.    But did I ever compare the two?  I was responding directly to Beardad's comment about bestiality.  I never said anything about homosexuality...  So there's the A but there was never a B. 

That being said, as far as homosexuality goes, I see it as this:  God created man and woman to love each other in a physical, sexual, intimate way - within the confines of marriage.  Anything outside of that is against God's hopes, desires, and intentions for us - be that homosexuality, bestiality, or premarital sex between two consenting adults of opposite genders.  Those all have different earthly consequences and I'm not saying they're "the same" or necessarily even comparable to one another in terms of said earthly consequences.  I'm assuming Beardad might agree but that he was comparing them from a Christian/spiritual/sin-oriented perspective.  It's all against God's design and we are attempting to make ourselves "gods" by choosing what is moral or immoral and therefore disregarding God's Word on the matters.  So in that sense, whether a man has sex with another man, his dog, or his girlfriend - it's all sin.

I'm curious though... how do you draw the line between homosexuality and bestiality?  What makes one moral/acceptable and the other immoral/unacceptable?  Is it really nothing else but our culture saying so?  Assuming the dog is not being hurt and doesn't seem to mind it, why not?  Who's to say it shouldn't be?  Who are we to judge the man who has a sexual attraction to his dog?  Again, I don't mean to compare the two, as I agree they're quite different indeed, but I feel like it's kinda gotta be all-or-nothing.

Well that's the rub isn't it? The only places it talks about bestiality (that I'm aware of) are Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy. No mention in the NT that I know of.

But I guess my thinking pushes me to believe that God told man to take care of animals and creation and I don't think that would be taking care of them.

Savage Amusement wrote:

here is a question for you guys that want to use the Bible to support your ideas...the Bible talks plainly about Divorce and Jesus even talked plainly about divorce but I dont see any of ya lining up to make a vocal outcry over divorce or change the laws and I rarely see churches that speak about divorce..why is that

I'm not sure what you're really after here but probably because it's sort of a one-time thing rather than a lifestyle. Yes, you're not supposed to get divorced except in certain circumstances. Do Christians always do that? Of course not. It's sin like any other in that case. Unlike homosexuality, it's not something you continue to participate in though (not counting divorcing multiple wives). So they ask for forgiveness, repent as much as possible and move on. It does bother me when Christians divorce outside the boundaries given. And you are correct that it has devastating effects if children are involved.

Quote :

'm not sure what you're really after here but probably because it's sort of a one-time thing rather than a lifestyle. Yes, you're not supposed to get divorced except in certain circumstances. Do Christians always do that? Of course not. It's sin like any other in that case. Unlike homosexuality, it's not something you continue to participate in though (not counting divorcing multiple wives). So they ask for forgiveness, repent as much as possible and move on. It does bother me when Christians divorce outside the boundaries given. And you are correct that it has devastating effects if children are involved.

So your not suppose to get a divorce except in certain situations but Christians do it anyway and if they repent afterwards then its ok to just move on..so you think its not as big a deal as homosexuality so you are assigning different levels to the sins of man as well as the laws of God? Thats my point and what I am driving at...if you guys want to use the Bible and the Laws of God to justify your argument then you can't pick and choose which Laws of God you will fight to uphold. If you believe that the Bible is correct (most of you do) then you know that it teaches that to break one law  is the same to break them all so if you guys pick and choose which laws to try to uphold while kinda ignoring others where does that leave you?  The Bible says guilty and dead....
...............
Questions...
1. If the Bible was silent on homosexuality would you guys still want to see it outlawed and if so why?
2. Do you guys agree that the constitution is not a Christian document?
3. Do you guys agree that the constitution guarantees freedom of speech and religion and the right for all to live and practice whatever religion they see fit?
4. Would you guys like to see the constitution changed and what changes should be made?
............................
How does this tie into Mike Huckabee...he claims that Christians are not getting to believe and practice their religion but to me thats not true..no one asked him or any other Christian to marry a homosexual or to practice homosexuality or to change their views or even accept homosexuals as brothers in Christ but Christians (and everyone else) are being told that equal rights for everyone means you live your life and let others live theirs and coexist....even God agrees with that as he gives everyone free will to live as they want....

I think there is a huge difference between getting a divorce and living a continuous life style as a homosexual.  Mostly because as Topshot indicated.  (Ignoring the fact that some here may not believe homosexuality is a sin) living as a homosexual, or a drug addict, or an alcoholic, or having an adulterous ongoing relationship is somebody choosing (almost daily) a sinful behavior, you are actively, daily sinning against a God you claim to believe in.  Getting a divorce, while in many (maybe even most) cases is not biblical, it is not a daily on-going sin.  It also takes only one person to have a divorce, it is highly probable that many Christian men and women where divorced from their spouses even when they didn't want it.  Does that make them a sinner?

Having said that I think divorce should be very very very rare.

Savage Amusement wrote:

So your not suppose to get a divorce except in certain situations but Christians do it anyway and if they repent afterwards then its ok to just move on..so you think its not as big a deal as homosexuality so you are assigning different levels to the sins of man as well as the laws of God? Thats my point and what I am driving at...if you guys want to use the Bible and the Laws of God to justify your argument then you can't pick and choose which Laws of God you will fight to uphold. If you believe that the Bible is correct (most of you do) then you know that it teaches that to break one law  is the same to break them all so if you guys pick and choose which laws to try to uphold while kinda ignoring others where does that leave you?  The Bible says guilty and dead....

Well, you're putting words in my mouth. I was just giving what I thought might be an explanation for why you don't see much argument against divorce. However, there ARE different levels of sin though I'm not saying divorce and homosexuality are equal or inequal in that regard (since that would be up to God).

Quote :

Questions...
1. If the Bible was silent on homosexuality would you guys still want to see it outlawed and if so why?

I never said it should be outlawed, but yes, if the Bible said nothing specific about it, it would still be sin since it clearly is against God's natural order.

Quote :

2. Do you guys agree that the constitution is not a Christian document?

Perhaps. It was framed with general Christian principles but that doesn't make it a "Christian document".

Quote :

3. Do you guys agree that the constitution guarantees freedom of speech and religion and the right for all to live and practice whatever religion they see fit?

Yes, of course. No on #4.

Quote :

How does this tie into Mike Huckabee...he claims that Christians are not getting to believe and practice their religion but to me thats not true..no one asked him or any other Christian to marry a homosexual

There have been many cases now where people are being forced to "serve" homosexuals against their beliefs though many are choosing to just close their business.

ishmael81 wrote:

Even thought I didn't come right out and say it, in my middle paragraph I alluded to the fact that I'm not entirely sure homosexuality is a sin. The "evidence" is too small and not very convincing to me anymore. Therefore, your first sentence is not really a convincing argument to me.

Like I just wrote to SA, even if there wasn't a single Scripture against homosexuality, it would still be a sin since it clearly violates God's natural order. It's not rocket science.

Quote :

There have been many cases now where people are being forced to "serve" homosexuals against their beliefs though many are choosing to just close their business.

and many have been forced to serve Christians against their will and beliefs....

Quote :

if there wasn't a single Scripture against homosexuality, it would still be a sin since it clearly violates God's natural order.

  with all due respect ..what?      (I had to use symbols because I cant find the words) With that I will just agree to disagree and get back to the music thread..(its not like Christians are going to get their way anyway)

Savage Amusement wrote:

with all due respect ..what?

I didn't think this was that difficult, but did God create another man for Adam's partner? No. Men and women naturally go together and are intended to be that way. While there are a few minor abnormalities in nature (ie, asexual organisms), it seems quite logical and obvious that male and female are meant to be "one flesh".

Quote :

its not like Christians are going to get their way anyway

We will in the end. But unfortunately, it will continue to get worse until that time.

topshot rhit wrote:

ishmael81 wrote:

Even thought I didn't come right out and say it, in my middle paragraph I alluded to the fact that I'm not entirely sure homosexuality is a sin. The "evidence" is too small and not very convincing to me anymore. Therefore, your first sentence is not really a convincing argument to me.

Like I just wrote to SA, even if there wasn't a single Scripture against homosexuality, it would still be a sin since it clearly violates God's natural order. It's not rocket science.

I understand your stance but this is tricky. I could make the case that computers are against the natural order and therefore sinful, even though there isn't one verse about them in Scripture. Same for heavy metal, I suppose... And cars, phones... basically the Amish way...

ishmael81 wrote:

topshot rhit wrote:

ishmael81 wrote:

Even thought I didn't come right out and say it, in my middle paragraph I alluded to the fact that I'm not entirely sure homosexuality is a sin. The "evidence" is too small and not very convincing to me anymore. Therefore, your first sentence is not really a convincing argument to me.

Like I just wrote to SA, even if there wasn't a single Scripture against homosexuality, it would still be a sin since it clearly violates God's natural order. It's not rocket science.

I understand your stance but this is tricky. I could make the case that computers are against the natural order and therefore sinful, even though there isn't one verse about them in Scripture. Same for heavy metal, I suppose... And cars, phones... basically the Amish way...

Weak parallel (or comparison) IMO.  Sex and reproduction is in the bible....the microchip is not.

Savage Amusement wrote:

Quote :

There have been many cases now where people are being forced to "serve" homosexuals against their beliefs though many are choosing to just close their business.

and many have been forced to serve Christians against their will and beliefs....

In the last 100 years?  In this country?  They were forced to cater to the tenants of "Christianity"?