If Jesus said that nobody wrote it down.
Jesus may also have said "And leave gay people alone!". But nobody wrote that down either.
Tom
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why is there no outcry from the Christian Right against divorce?
- Thread starter Jainarayan
- Start date
Jesus may also have said "And leave gay people alone!". But nobody wrote that down either.
Tom
sooda
Veteran Member
So? Do you know right from wrong?
In the end it's all about acceptance of our fellow humans ─ inclusion and respect instead of building walls, decency between people who are at heart decent.
Some Christians do it better than others. The Christian right often seems proud and boastful that they screw it right up, that they condemn and exclude and encourage hatred and contempt.
MJFlores
Well-Known Member
The Last Country in the World Where Divorce Is Illegal
Well the last time I checked, we still don't have divorce.
And the government still doesn't approve of divorce.
Well the last time I checked, we still don't have divorce.
And the government still doesn't approve of divorce.
I agree with you it is sad.View attachment 33881
They (Christian Right) were so fixated on prohibiting same sex marriage, really without any valid Biblical citations, that they completely ignored Matthew 7. Or maybe they have an edited versions?
View attachment 33882
"Tawk amongst yahselves"...
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Because you can't fight it anymore. If you crack down on divorce you lose half your congregation
instantly.
Soon you won't be able to fight gay marriage, polygamy and all the other issues I have mentioned
in my profile below.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Never heard that. I would suggest you might have a rough time from the
traditionalist Jews. It's biblical, so I suppose they would be determined
to do something. But I don't think the Jews had the right to execute under
Roman law.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
They only care about sins that they are not prone to.View attachment 33881
They (Christian Right) were so fixated on prohibiting same sex marriage, really without any valid Biblical citations, that they completely ignored Matthew 7. Or maybe they have an edited versions?
View attachment 33882
"Tawk amongst yahselves"...
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
The Gospels are not a license to sin.
That statement, "Love the sinner, hate the sin"
is super relevant.
Jesus had compassion on the woman taken
in adultery - but He told her to "Go, and sin no
more."
NOT
"Go for I don't judge adultery to be wrong."
epronovost
Well-Known Member
I must admit some of those issues are rather odd, but strategically it does make sense. That's how all political reactionnary and revolutionnary work. Create alliances to achieve a success before purging your congregation of "useless allies" and moving on to the next issue.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Actually, it's the opposite I am afraid.
Activists force you to accept their latest "issue", be it feminism, gays,
transgender etc.. And when you have accepted (often out of exhaustion)
these issues, the activist will move to the Next Big Issue.
Inevitably these are about sexualizing our entire society (with the notable
exception of euthanasia.)
It will be polygamy soon. And pederasty is on the horizon.
I sometimes put it like this.
Citizen - "Okay, I accept your point about letting minors have sex changes."
Activist - "Well, let me rephrase that - have you heard our latest issue about
gay boy sex?"
Last edited:
epronovost
Well-Known Member
The only major problem with your analysis is that it implies that feminist activists, for example, are in also sympathetic to pederastry for example, which isn't the case. You seem to be opposed to homosexuality, divorce, suicide, assisted suicide, polygamy (I also suppose polyamory and polyandry though you don't mention them), gambling, abortion, men having affairs (I also suppose women having affairs too), extra-marital sexual intercourse and you also seem to want to marginalise "********" again. To do so, you would hypothetically need the support of allies who are in agreement with some of these points, but not most of them. Should you succeed in outlawing homosexuality again for example, you would then attack the next issue which would imply turning against former allies. Your master plan and ideal was never hidden or very much a secret. They are quite clear. Beside some really rare and weird anarcho-capitalists, there is nobody in favor of allowing any and all forms of sexual acts ranging for rape, passing by pederastry and many others.
The only current master plan so far is to make the basis of all permissible sexual relationship be clear informed consent instead of tradition or religious dogma. In that matter, there is a similar alliances for example between those who would defend "no fault divorce", but who wouldn't defend gay marriage for example could have worked together under the same umbrella of "clear informed consent". Alliances of conveniance are a fact of life no matter the the position or the policy. It's especially importan for marginal groups who lack broad support within society.
Yup. I read a lot of Classical history, but my Jewish history is clunky.
Still, my thoughts would be somewhere near yours.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
View attachment 33881
They (Christian Right) were so fixated on prohibiting same sex marriage, really without any valid Biblical citations, that they completely ignored Matthew 7. Or maybe they have an edited versions?
View attachment 33882
"Tawk amongst yahselves"...
The prohibition against same sex marriage is just wrong, at least in today's world. Doesn't matter what Moses or Paul says.
I'd be more impressed by a Bible that taught that God is as much a woman as a man, that love transcends sex and just exactly how someone can find their own beam and pluck it out.
In today's world which has largely removed slavery and is gradually developing science including psychology, we dont need to pay any heed to anti-same sex relationship ideas. There is more love and mutual respect now than any of the Biblical authors could have imagined.
This might be useful for the discussion:
https://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_by_Religion
https://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_by_Religion
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
So, if a middle aged man wants to marry two 13 year, consenting, pubescent
twin sisters for a 48 hour marriage - can he?
I need an emoji with raised eyebrows...
That's what you take from that?
epronovost
Well-Known Member
No, the 13 years old cannot provide clear informed consent. They aren't well informed and experienced enough to provide the "informed" part of "informed consent". In country which base entirely the morality of sexual relationship on clear informed consent, child marriage is a crime.
Ironically, in certain part of the US and certain country of the world, this particular scenario is currently legal. It was also legal for the longest part of human history. Fight against child marriage is very much a modern thing carried mostly by feminist activists all around the world.
Last edited: