That's why I chose the examples of gluttony and gossip, because they are ongoing habits of behavior that are evident others. However, you chose to switch out those examples and substitute theft so that you could dodge the question. Clearly, the churches don't treat homosexuals as they treat other "sinners," and clearly you know this, or you wouldn't have had to discard my examples.
That is absolutely false. If a homosexual were to turn from his homosexuality and become heterosexual, it is obvious that he is no longer living contrary to God's will despite his past. How is gluttony and gossip any different? Just because you are fat doesn't make you a glutton at this very moment, for example. A homosexual person is classified as such because of his sexual preference
by his own ongoing admission. I'll agree that homosexuals are treated worse, in general, by people who attend church (
but they are not all Christians). I don't think I will repeat that again after this post. If you still just choose to ignore that very simple statement, I don't know that we can continue to have any meaningful conversation.
Remarriage is a constant lifestyle, as long as the adulterous second marriage continues. A remarried person who hasn't ended the adulterous second marriage has not repented of it. This is directly parallel to the case of a homosexual who is in a committed relationship, but you make excuses for the heterosexual while condemning the homosexual.
Remarriage is a one time event. Being married is not a sin. Divorcing would be a sin. Committing a sin will never right a previous sin. I would challenge you to back that up with Biblical evidence. Nonetheless, I have condemned no one. We are all sinners and I would love to talk to any sinner about God, homosexual or otherwise.
Of course you don't. Bigots always think think that their bigotry is reasonable; Strom Thurmond, forty years ago, didn't think that keeping black Americans from voting was a horrible injustice, either. Because, of course, "they" don't have the rights that "we" do, and "we" have a duty to uphold god's will. You've just endorsed the same line of reasoning the Christians have always used to justify the persecution and oppression of others.
Well, thanks for the name-calling, but it really isn't needed. You are entitled to your opinion, but as the originator and definer of marriage, I think that God has the final call here.
Then why do you define the church as a body that cannot accept homosexuals as members? You can't have it both ways.
I am discriminating against homosexuals because I don't think that a homosexual can be a Christian??? I hardly think that making a judgment about where someone stands with God is discrimination. Homosexuality is something that is easier to spot than other sins and that is the only reason that a Christian should be pointing it out.
Would you like to have your city bombed? Would you like to be arbitrarily imprisoned for years without being charged with any crime? Would you like to be tortured? It is simple. Jesus said you must treat your neighbor as you would be treated. He didn't say it would be easy.
Again, it is much more complicated than that. I don't agree with the war, for the record, but (apparently unlike yourself) I am willing to admit that I don't know every reason that we went to war.
Well, fine. You consider yourself the interpreter of the Bible and the judge of who the real Christians are. But you yourself support bigotry, oppression, and violence, so how are your "real" Christians any better than the Christians you think are "fake"?
I don't see that I've done any of that, but I guess it's okay for you to be the judge of that, right?
