Poll: Would you attend a gay marriage/civil union ceremony, and support the couple as if hetero?

[Tweedr01]

No worries - I certainly meant no disrespect to you and think it's good that your natural instinct is to be defensive of her.

As for your opinions above, I can respect that they are yours. I obviously don't agree with you and I don't think the pot-smoking is the greatest analogy, but I know what you mean.

Thank you, and I can respect yours, its what makes this country great!

Sorry, I couldn't think of another one of the top of my head. I'm at work and finishing up for the day, so I'm trying to do both at once. I'll see if I can think of a better analogy, but there aren't many comparisons I could use.

[The Brave Little Toaster Oven]

Promise us that once the season starts, and there is a raging Stadium debate about a blown call or controversial play, you'll chime in with a hypothetical about how it would have been different if a super hot middle eastern chick had run onto the field just as it was happening! OK?

theres never a situation where I cant bring up how hot middle eastern girls are...never! :pfft:

done!

Fat Albert would have been at OTAs if the Redskins would have just hired a super hot middle eastern cheerleader/trainer....they make every situation better

[renaissance]

Ok, and just because you've withdrawn yourself it doesn't automatically mean that you don't love them. Its just that you don't approve of what they are doing. Right?

I brought this up because there are some who are implying that just because a parent wouldn't attend thier child's homosexual wedding - it means that they are lacking in love. It doesn't necessarily have to be the case.

I don't know if you got this from what I was saying, but I'll respond anyway

I was never implying that a parent not going to their gay kid's wedding = the parent doesn't love their kid. In fact, I think that a parent and their kid is on of the few relationships in this world in which we see unconditional love.

However, for me the question would be then, once your kid is married to someone of the same sex, how do you continue being around them/doing family stuff with them if you don't approve of that marriage? Once they're married, their partner and that relationship becomes an integral part of their life, socially, personally, financially, etc.

So ok, you didn't support the wedding, but will you support their kids? Will you spend Christmas at their house one year? And for that matter, will the kid even want to be around you knowing that you don't support their relationship/marriage - something that was likely one of the biggest decisions of their lives?

I have no doubt that as a parent you will always have love for your child, and you will always wish them the best and do what you can to help them succeed in life and beyond. This, in my opinion, is what sets a parent/child relationship apart from any other kind of relationship, even the best of friendships.

But I simply cannot imagine that the day-to-day relationship between a parent and child would be able to survive if that parent chose not to go to the child's wedding because the parent didn't agree with the child's choice of partner - not because the partner was a bad person, not because the child and their partner weren't geniunely happy and in love, but because the parent feels that their partner will affect how God views them.

[Zguy28]

But I simply cannot imagine that the day-to-day relationship between a parent and child would be able to survive if that parent chose not to go to the child's wedding because the parent didn't agree with the child's choice of partner - not because the partner was a bad person, not because the child and their partner weren't geniunely happy and in love, but because the parent feels that their partner will affect how God views them.

I guess that's why Jesus said "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn

'a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -

a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.' Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. "

[zoony]

I guess that's why Jesus said "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn

'a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -

a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.' Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. "

So I guess you'd have to ask yourself how best to address the life of sin your children chose. Alienate them? Turn your back on them?

___________

Mark 2:13-17

13Once again Jesus went out beside the lake. A large crowd came to him, and he began to teach them. 14As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector's booth. "Follow me," Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed him.

15While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the "sinners" and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"

17On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

John 8:1-11

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

11"No one, sir," she said.

"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."

[Zguy28]

So I guess you'd have to ask yourself how best to address the life of sin your children chose. Alienate them? Turn your back on them?

___________

How about rebuke them? Correct them? Train them up to know what is right and to seek holiness?

How about being honest with them about how you feel about it, and in my case, be honest with them about what the Scripture says?

In the first passage you quoted, we see Jesus ministering to sinners where they are. I do not see him celebrating them collecting taxes, nor encouraging it, or any other sin that has caused them to be called sinners.

1. If my (fictional) gay son came to me and said "Dad, would you come have dinner at my house?" I'd say yes.

2. If he said "Dad, will you come help me celebrate my marriage to Joe?" I'd decline.

Its not that hard to distinguish the difference. Jesus did #1, not #2.

In the second passage, the woman is seeking forgiveness and repentance of sin. She knows she has sinned and wishes to be forgiven. Jesus forgives her and says "don't sin anymore."

Its no different than the Prodigal Son parable that Jesus told.

[NewCliche21]

I think that a lot of people here are talking big and saying that they wouldn't go to a gay child's wedding.

If it's true, then man, I just don't want to be associated with you.

As for the "I wish that people would tolerate my intolerance", just stop. I don't tolerate any intolerance because it hurts people. I never sat idly by and watched someone get the crap kicked out of him physically, and I won't do it emotionally, either. If you would, then I question your morals.

[Zguy28]

I think that a lot of people here are talking big and saying that they wouldn't go to a gay child's wedding.

If it's true, then man, I just don't want to be associated with you.

As for the "I wish that people would tolerate my intolerance", just stop. I don't tolerate any intolerance because it hurts people. I never sat idly by and watched someone get the crap kicked out of him physically, and I won't do it emotionally, either. If you would, then I question your morals.

I guess you wouldn't care about a child emotionally kicking the crap out of their parent(s) by putting them in that position?

[Hubbs]

But this again goes back to the fact that Jesus never took part in celebrating something His Father considered a sin. Going to a wedding is a celebration of the two getting married, no?

EDIT: Also, do you know who Jesus was referring to when He said that the tax collectors and prostitutes would enter heaven before them? Do you know why He said that they would? Context is everything good sir!

I chose that line because, if I'm remembering correctly, he was speaking to the Pharisees.

[twa]

Parents don't matter...kick away;)

[Hubbs]

I guess you wouldn't care about a child emotionally kicking the crap out of their parent(s) by putting them in that position?

No different than if the parents have some other religious conflict with their child's marriage. In the interests of maximum anonymity, I'll say I have a friend named Sarah. She was raised in a very, very Baptist family. She wound up wanting to marry a Catholic. Her parents were so upset by this that they originally told her that they wouldn't even come to the wedding.

Ultimately, it's the child's marriage. He/she holds the trump card. Someone will be upset in this situation no matter what, so the decision has to rest with the person who's actually getting married.

[twa]

I chose that line because, if I'm remembering correctly, he was speaking to the Pharisees.

And what was he chastising the Pharisees over?

[PokerPacker]

I guess you wouldn't care about a child emotionally kicking the crap out of their parent(s) by putting them in that position?

come on, zguy, you're better than this :doh:

[NewCliche21]

I guess you wouldn't care about a child emotionally kicking the crap out of their parent(s) by putting them in that position?

Accept your children. She/he's not harming anyone or anything except archaic and baseless ideas about what marriage is. Sexuality isn't a choice.

Sorry, but you're not Abraham and your son isn't Isaac.

[Bang]

Wait a minute.

Now we're talking about gay children getting married?

Laawd have mercy! When will it ever end?? Little league is the DEVIL's instrument, I tells ya!

~Thump

[zoony]

1. If my (fictional) gay son came to me and said "Dad, would you come have dinner at my house?" I'd say yes.

2. If he said "Dad, will you come help me celebrate my marriage to Joe?" I'd decline.

Its not that hard to distinguish the difference. Jesus did #1, not #2.

You had already conceded the point that your relationship with your son would not have survived, so your point is irrelevant imo

[NewCliche21]

Question:

Do you guys who are quoting the Bible follow everything that's written in there? Every single law? Verbatim?

If not, then why not? Isn't every single one just as important as the others? Aren't all of them the word of the Lord? Why are you able to decide which is more important than others?

I'm not being accusatory, I swear. I really am curious.

[Bliz]

I guess you wouldn't care about a child emotionally kicking the crap out of their parent(s) by putting them in that position?

That's a pretty sad way to look at it. They're not doing it to hurt their parents. They're following their own path.

Unfortunately, in most of these situations (and I've witnessed a few), the "I won't come to your wedding" footdown is the first event in a short road to "not on speaking terms."

I'm with New Cliche.

[NewCliche21]

That's a pretty sad way to look at it. They're not doing it to hurt their parents. They're following their own path.

Unfortunately, in most of these situations (and I've witnessed a few), the "I won't come to your wedding" footdown is the first event in a short road to "not on speaking terms."

I'm with New Cliche.

Which only ends in heartbreak when the parent dies on both ends. Or child. You'll both be miserable, as will the grandchildren, your spouse, her/his spouse, your families, and everyone else. All because of one selfish decision to not go to the wedding because you're too stubborn.

It's really a shame to put all of those people through that. But, I guess that's what the Lord wants, apparently, right?

[Zguy28]

That's a pretty sad way to look at it. They're not doing it to hurt their parents. They're following their own path.

Unfortunately, in most of these situations (and I've witnessed a few), the "I won't come to your wedding" footdown is the first event in a short road to "not on speaking terms."

I'm with New Cliche.

I didn't say they were doing to intentionally hurt their parents. But the anguish is there nonetheless. It would be no different than finding out your daughter was a porn star. I don't think I'd go to Adult Film awards either if she won.

Bottom line is this: somebody asked the question of everybody. We all answered honestly. If you don't like it, that's your prerogative. I don't even know why I have gone to such lengths to convince you since you (speaking in the general sense, not Bliz) obviously are just as closed off to my view as I am to yours.

Good day.

[rincewind]

I didn't say they were doing to intentionally hurt their parents. But the anguish is there nonetheless. It would be no different than finding out your daughter was a porn star. I don't think I'd go to Adult Film awards either if she won.

Bottom line is this: somebody asked the question of everybody. We all answered honestly. If you don't like it, that's your prerogative. I don't even know why I have gone to such lengths to convince you since you (speaking in the general sense, not Bliz) obviously are just as closed off to my view as I am to yours.

Good day.

Being gay is the same as being a porn star? Could you please explain how.

[Zguy28]

Being gay is the same as being a porn star? Could you please explain how.

Did you not see where I said "Good day"? :mad:

Both involve sexual immoral behavior and celebration of such behavior.

[rincewind]

Did you not see where I said "Good day"? :mad:

Both involve sexual immorality.

Well since you were kind enough to respond...

One is selling yourself on video and is generally considered the seediest of seedy professions.

Being gay simply involves loving who you love.

No offense, but this issue pushes me farther and farther away from being able to understand any religous base. I can't say it drives me more towards being an atheist, because I don't think it has ANYTHING to do with the existence of a higher being or not. Personally, I doubt it has anything to do with Jesus or his teaching either. I always thought his main lesson was to love your fellow man - and we should all be happy when somebody finds their special someone, especially our children.

[Special K]

First I agree with Zoony. I wish the government would stay the hell out of this whole religious debate in regards to marriage and simply recognize legal, civil union between a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, or a man and a man.

I think the religious aspect should be left up to individual churches. They don't want to condone the union on religious grounds, no problemo.

Nor do we see Christ joining in a celebration of something that is a frankly a mockery of something that is sacred to God.

So, was Abraham, the father of many nations, and thought to be the father of multiple religions, making a mockery of something that is sacred to God by having a wife, Sarai, but impregnanting her handmaiden? If not, why not? If so, what does that make us as believers in Christianity, the religion he happens to be viewed as the "father" of? Not only do we support a complete sinner, but we practice a religion he was essentially the father of...on a daily basis.

A marriage/civil union of SSM is an affirmation and confirmation of the behavior. To attend is tacit approval. A child out of wedlock is a consequence not the sin. There is no issue to be had with a marriage involving a kid out of wedlock.

I very much disagree with this. First of all, to attend something to support a loved one is not tactic approval of something. Sometimes people attend things to show someone they love them and care about them as a human being, not because they are making a statement that they condone something.

I'll use an example that has always stuck with me. I'm Seventh-day Adventist. Raised SDA, baptized SDA, etc. The pastor of our church throughout my childhood and early teens is someone I think is the best example I've seen of someone who is Christ-like and treats everyone with such compassion and respect, more than any other pastor I've known. My family has always been very close with this Pastor Sam and his family as the kids in both families grew up together and were friends.

Anywho, being a Seventh-day Adventist, we are supposed to observe the Sabbath from sundown Friday evening to sundown Saturday evening. There are varying interpretations of "proper" observance, but most consider observance as not involving oneself in secular activities during Sabbath hours (sports competitions, shopping, eating out at restaurants, watching secular TV, listening to secular music, and so on). My family happens to be pretty liberal in this regard, while we went to church and everything, they didn't make us strictly adhere to every rule for fear of overbearing regulations and legalities making us completely reject any religion. Sorry, that's the background.

So, as a pastor of an SDA church, as someone who is supposed to be setting an example regarding the "rules" of the church, it's pretty faux pas to attend or be seen supporting something secular on the Sabbath. Well, his youngest son was on the amateur golf circuit and had a tournament on Saturday. My brother couldn't caddy for him for some reason, so guess who did? Pastor Sam did. Not because he agreed with his son being involved in competition on the Sabbath, not because he wouldn't advise against it, not because he didn't recognize that in our denomination it's considered sinful to not respect the sabbath as God commanded...but because he wanted to show his son that he loved him unconditionally, no matter what he did.

I'm sorry for the long-winded story, but what Pastor Sam did that day, quietly caddying for his son and showing his love and support for him, made an impression on all of my family who saw it and the rest of us who heard about it. Ultimately, I think it broke down a lot of preexisting barriers between him and his son and his son started viewing his father in a different light, not one full of holier than thou judgement, but someone who was compassionate and wanted to show his love for him regardless of the circumstances.

Personally, I think that is very similar to how Jesus lived His life on this earth. He had love and compassion for everyone, no matter what they were involved in, and he certainly DID take part in things considered sins of his time (working on Sabbath healing people, walking more than so and so paces on Sabbath, hanging out with the "lowest of the low" sinners, etc.)

So yes, I think one can go to a ceremony to show a loved one that they care for them without "compromising" their own religious beliefs. Just my personal opinion though...

[rincewind]

First I agree with Zoony. I wish the government would stay the hell out of this whole religious debate in regards to marriage and simply recognize legal, civil union between a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, or a man and a man.

I think the religious aspect should be left up to individual churches. They don't want to condone the union on religious grounds, no problemo.

This should basically be quoted at the beginning of every single one of these threads.