Supreme Court to Decide on Same Sex Marriage

Other faiths:

What is the Bahá’í attitude towards homosexuality?
Bahá’í law limits permissible sexual relations to those between a man and a woman in marriage. Believers are expected to abstain from sex outside matrimony. Bahá’ís do not, however, attempt to impose their moral standards on those who have not accepted the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh. While requiring uprightness in all matters of morality, whether sexual or otherwise, the Bahá’í teachings also take account of human frailty and call for tolerance and understanding in regard to human failings. In this context, to regard homosexuals with prejudice would be contrary to the spirit of the Bahá’í teachings.


Islam

* Even though our religion allows us latitude, more than most, to ponder and reconsider some issues, homosexuality is clearly and explicitly condemned by the Quran (7:80-83, 11:77-79), the Prophet, and his progeny.

* When we have a conflict with the Quran, which is the word of God verbatim, we do not ask where the Quran went wrong but rather why are we, limited beings, in conflict with the wisdom of the absolute, God Almighty.

* As Muslims we do not make up our religion, but we receive it and we obey it.

* Thus stated, we need to clarify, that it does not mean that we hate the homosexual person but rather that we find the behavior abhorable. We want to help with sensitivity and care whoever has these tendencies, or practices such behavior. We can further point out the following:

God has created everything in pairs each endowed with physical and psychological characteristics to complement and complete one another. The Quran (4:1) indicates that human beings have been created from one living entity (nafs), which represents the origin of both the male and the female. The human species though has included male and female since its existence. The "mating" or "spousing" of male and female sexes is original in human nature and out of this instinctive relationship the human race develops, continues and spreads.

Between the two sexes a gravitating combination of love, tenderness, and care is engendered, so that each finds in the other completeness, tranquility, and support (Quran 30:21). Having children and loving them represents another fulfillment of the human nature (Quran 42:49-50). It is through this spousal complementation and completion, according to the Quran (7:189), that each spouse achieves comfort, and enjoys peace of mind, satisfaction, and fulfillment. These relationships extend beyond the physical sexual contact and to psychological, spiritual relations.

The blessings of this completeness are not ended by their accomplishment, but they continue and develop through bringing forth children, raising them, and providing the whole family with material, emotional, and moral needs.

The pleasures of completion and procreation may well be extended and multiplied, when one is granted grand children, who not only represent genealogical continuation, but are also a dynamic revitalization of the human race.

Such physical-psychological-spiritual development through spousing and mating, followed by procreation, that may continue for more than one generation, ought to lead every sensible human being to be grateful to God for His successive and multiplying favors with his own family.......
 
Some more...with the recurrent themes...."love of the homosexual...but that procreation is holy because this is how we come about.."

Orthodox Judaism

Biblical Prohibition

According to the Bible, homosexual acts are "to'evah," an abomination.

In Leviticus 18:22, it is written: "And you shall not cohabit with a male as one cohabits with a woman; it is an abomination."

And in Leviticus 20:13, it is written: "And if a man cohabits with a male as with a woman, both of them have done an abominable thing; they shall be put to death; their blood falls back upon them."

The Biblical prohibition of homosexual acts seems harsh at first glance, but not all orthodox Jews interpret these passages in a simple way.

Boteach

Rabbi Shmuel Boteach, Chairman of the Oxford University L'Chaim Society and author, uses a wider perspective in his interpretation of these passages. Boteach has developed a more humane interpretation of G-d's mandate for heterosexual acts and prohibition of homosexual acts.

According to Boteach, homosexual acts are wrong simply because the Torah says they are wrong, and not because they are an aberration or sickness. Sexuality as a whole is instinctive, and both heterosexuality and homosexuality are natural. Then why does G-d say that heterosexual love is holy and homosexual love is an abomination? Heterosexual love is the way the human race propagates itself. G-d demands that we regulate our sexual activity so that we will lead happier lives and fulfill our commitments to our communities.

The Torah is against homosexual acts, not homosexual people. Judaism and G-d love all people. Boteach reminds us that the Torah also calls eating non-kosher food 'to'evah', an abomination. The word 'to'evah' in the Torah does not depict a social repulsion.

Furthermore, the Torah condemns the homosexual act, not homosexual love or the homosexual urge. "Judaism does not prohibit or in any way look down upon homosexual love. In the eyes of Judaism the love between two men or two women can be as natural as the love between a man and a woman. What it does prohibit is homosexual intercourse."


Sikhism

Q: What are Sikhism’s beliefs on homosexuality?

A: Sikhism has no specific teachings about homosexuality. The holy scripture of Sikhs, Guru Granth Sahib Ji, does not explicitly mention homosexuality; however, married life is encouraged time and time again in Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Whenever marriage is mentioned, it is always in reference to a man and a woman.

Guru Granth Sahib Ji is the complete guide to life and salvation. Some Sikhs believe that if a marriage between two of the same sexes is not mentioned, it is therefore not right. The counterargument is that, marriage is mentioned as a spiritual unity and since the soul does not have a gender, homosexuality should be permitted. The counterargument again arises that spiritual unity in marriage is only mentioned between a man and a woman. Since sexuality with the same gender is not directly mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Sikhism’s stand on homosexuality is derived from other beliefs such as marriage and sex.

Since marriage is only mentioned as a spiritual relationship between a man and a woman in Guru Granth Sahib Ji, same sex marriages are not conducted in Gurdwara Sahib. Only the services that are clearly permitted are conducted in the Gurdwara Sahib.

Sikh Gurus introduced a lifestyle with which one remains focused in life in order to be one with God. Homosexuality is not a part of the lifestyle instructed by Sikh Gurus. And nor is having premarital sex or having multiple sex partners if you are a heterosexual. According to Sikh Lifestyle, sexual relationship is to only exist between a man and a woman married in the Gurdwara Sahib.

Since sexual relationship can only be after marriage and marriage can only be between a man and a woman, homosexual lifestyle is logically not accepted by Sikh beliefs.

Sikhism does not hate or believe that homosexuals are damned to hell. Gurbani tells us that God is without hatred and animosity. We are all children of God. Gurdwara Sahib is open to all, no matter who they are or what kind of lifestyle they live. God loves everyone regardless of one’s thoughts or actions. Homosexuals are free to attend the Gurdwara Sahib and participate in church services.

Sikhism is more concerned with ones attainment of enlightenment rather than habitual desires such as sexuality. Views on homosexuality tend not to be a primary concern in Sikh teachings, as the universal goal is to overcome sexual desires all together. Sikhs are not to have hate or animosity to any person, regardless of race, caste, color, creed, gender, or sexuality.
 
Last edited:
I haven't left the stand yet...


In fact, the point is NOT to abuse homosexual people and look at them with disgust...I've not supported that on here...but the point is to support traditional marriage and to stop this madness calling traditional and average marriage proponents as bigoted neanderthals. It is not true. Again, ad nauseum, if they wish for civil unions and benefits, go right ahead...I cannot tell you nor any other person how to conduct his/her life. However, please do not utilize the term "marriage." Across cultures and religions, it refers to a man and woman who are open to procreation (in the most traditional of insight).
 
I would argue that they shouldn't have a government sanctioned marriage, because the government only involves itself in marriage to begin with because marriage produces CHILDREN and the family is the basic unit of society. The government has a vested interest in its next and future generations of citizens.

I can see the points you made as to hetrosexual marriage. But on the other hand the courts do take into account the changing times. If 40,000 children already live with homosexual couples who are actively raising them, should they not get the same economic benefits of a union through the government? I mean, there are families based on the union of homosexual couples that have grandchildren by now. So again, while I agree to some of your points, I still wonder what is the solution. If children are the basis of the reason for union and marriage, and homosexual couples have already adopted or created children through whatever means, then are the children and partners entitled to the same economic and social benefits that married couples receive?

I just think the staus quo is not working and these cases will continue to go to the supreme court until a soultion is made as most of them are based on government benefits. Right now we are in limbo which I think can be as detrimental as making a final decision. There are homosexual familes, now what?

I am very interested in responses although I don't know if this is the right forum for that as I am asking from a legal perspective. I also already assume the opinion of homosexuality as a sin and anti gay-marriage given the Christian forum.
I hope I explained myself:spinning:
 
We have a difference of opinion here. I don't believe homosexuality is a sin. I don't believe that God sees it as a sin either.

You are in the wrong forum. Per the bible, this issue has already been settled. This is the Christian Forum, and per the rules clearly posted since 2005:

"The purpose of this particular forum is to allow believers of Jesus Christ to fellowship together. Its not political, controversial, or a means for debating. Any post that do not pertain to spiritual advancement, encouragement, etc. will be removed."

Further still, tone matters greatly in this forum. What occurs in other parts of the LHCF won't be tolerated here. Please be mindful of that.
 
Shimmie, you have no idea...this is so powerfully true on so many levels...like the ocean's current, a force that is continually moving, driven by the Wind. The climate may change, the waves may break, but the water remains water.
Spiritually, that 'current' runs right through us (man) ....

John 7:38 KJV
He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.


God's Word is always 'current' with the times in which we live.

Thanks for sharing this Galadriel. Awesome Word.
 
If this is passed we all we will to deal with Gods wrath. Remember God said next time it won't be a flood it will be fire. Fellow Christians all we can do is pray but also continue to stand up for what's right. Homosexuality is a sin and it is clearly written in the bible. One has a choice to sleep with the same sec and they choose to do as they please they will indeed perish unless they stop. If someone wants to be Gay then so be it buy all this wanting equality and what not is preposterous to me. They chose that lifestyle so deal with the consequences.
 
I can see the points you made as to hetrosexual marriage. But on the other hand the courts do take into account the changing times. If 40,000 children already live with homosexual couples who are actively raising them, should they not get the same economic benefits of a union through the government?

I'm assuming you mean certain tax benefits and being able to add one's partner onto health insurance. I think those economic benefits should be addressed individually, for whichever households with adults who want to put together their finances and even add one another to their insurance. There are perhaps adults living together in households with no sexual relationship, but who would benefit from a financial joining of assets and benefits.

However, that does not constitute a marriage.

A marriage is more than just the financial benefits, and this is what they are striving for. Just look at California--it already has generous domestic partnership laws on the books, but why is there still the push for "gay marriage" in California? Because, again, it's more than just the financial benefit that's being sought after. They want the moral and social equivalency of marriage.

As for the children, studies show that they do best with a mother and father (re: adoption vs. gay adoption). As for gay couples who have children from the result of previous heterosexual relationships, I think a financial arrangement (like the one I described above) could be helpful. As for the child's social and emotional growth, that's going to be rough territory since statistically they're at a disadvantage.

I just think the staus quo is not working and these cases will continue to go to the supreme court until a soultion is made as most of them are based on government benefits. Right now we are in limbo which I think can be as detrimental as making a final decision. There are homosexual familes, now what?

What about polygamous unions with resulting children? Would you agree or disagree that polygamy should be legalized and recognized as the same as a marriage between one man and one woman because there are children also involved in such unions?
 
So glad you pointed this out, this is true.

And clearly, gays are on it, hence the increase in adoption of babies among gay couples... :yep:

B
I would argue that they shouldn't have a government sanctioned marriage, because the government only involves itself in marriage to begin with because marriage produces CHILDREN and the family is the basic unit of society. The government has a vested interest in its next and future generations of citizens.
 
This is to BeingofSerenity,

This is coming from my husband and from me, Nice & Wavy....

The sun rises and sets on all of us. If the sun didn't set, we would have disorder. If the sun didn't rise, we would have disorder as well. So comes the disorder when we choose to separate ourselves from the Son of Man, Jesus Christ.

You said in an above post that God smiles upon the actions of lesbians/queers, etc. How can He smile upon sin? How can He as a Holy and Righteous God smile and enjoy the sins of man? When Jesus was on the cross dying for the sins of the world, God didn't look upon Jesus and smile, NO...He had to turn away because GOD CANNOT LOOK UPON SIN!!!

No matter how you view life and what you think God is thinking, only the Holy Spirit continuously searches the mind of God and He, the Holy Spirit, reveals to those of us who have given theirs lives to Jesus Christ and are listening and obeying the Word...it is He who reveals God's heart.

All of these arguments and feelings we have of what we say God thinks or doesn't think, and what we feel is right or wrong, is simply a distraction for our real purpose on earth and that is to get to know Him, the Great I AM, Jesus the Christ AND so that we can be with Him for all eternity. And the more we separate ourselves from Him, is the more we study the ways of satan and live our lives for him and trust...he isn't your friend.

Whether you believe in the Bible or not, or believe in God or not...We all are going to answer to Him for every deed that has been done in our bodies.

Jesus died on the cross, to shed His blood for our sins so that we could be with Him for eternity. You don't want to be at the other address...which is....separation from HIM for all eternity.

Believing or not is a choice and we will have to answer for that choice.

Choose life.
 
I'm assuming you mean certain tax benefits and being able to add one's partner onto health insurance. I think those economic benefits should be addressed individually, for whichever households with adults who want to put together their finances and even add one another to their insurance. There are perhaps adults living together in households with no sexual relationship, but who would benefit from a financial joining of assets and benefits.

However, that does not constitute a marriage.

A marriage is more than just the financial benefits, and this is what they are striving for. Just look at California--it already has generous domestic partnership laws on the books, but why is there still the push for "gay marriage" in California? Because, again, it's more than just the financial benefit that's being sought after. They want the moral and social equivalency of marriage.

As for the children, studies show that they do best with a mother and father (re: adoption vs. gay adoption). As for gay couples who have children from the result of previous heterosexual relationships, I think a financial arrangement (like the one I described above) could be helpful. As for the child's social and emotional growth, that's going to be rough territory since statistically they're at a disadvantage.



What about polygamous unions with resulting children? Would you agree or disagree that polygamy should be legalized and recognized as the same as a marriage between one man and one woman because there are children also involved in such unions?

Yes I am speaking of tax benefits, insurance, etc.:yep: The case before the court against DOMA is that two women were together for 40 years. Now that one is decreased, the other had to pay 350,000 on a house instead of receiving a tax break. I agree that the "unions" or alternative names and label given have not be sufficient and I honestly don't know how to think about that now. Polygamous unions could be put in the same category. I am unsure of how couples work those situations out because I assume at least one of them is legally married, and certain members of the household automatically have benefits. :spinning:

This discussion has brought up new aspects for me to think about:yep:
 
Yes I am speaking of tax benefits, insurance, etc.:yep: The case before the court against DOMA is that two women were together for 40 years. Now that one is decreased, the other had to pay 350,000 on a house instead of receiving a tax break. I agree that the "unions" or alternative names and label given have not be sufficient and I honestly don't know how to think about that now.

I think those should be improved or tightened up so that the remaining woman could get the tax benefit :yep:. Heck, if we can throw money at failing banks, then why not a tax break for a citizen :lol:.

But to be serious, I think this means we need to re-examine our financial and tax laws when it comes to people in a household who are financially dependent on each other or who wish to join benefits & assets. This could cover a whole range of people. The only glaring thing however, is that whatever we call this arrangement, X, it will not be marriage.

Polygamous unions could be put in the same category. I am unsure of how couples work those situations out because I assume at least one of them is legally married, and certain members of the household automatically have benefits. :spinning:

Whew! I can imagine. I know it sounds cliche, but we are heading down a slippery slope.

This discussion has brought up new aspects for me to think about:yep:

It's a complex issue, that's for sure :yep:.
 
Its so disturbing that people are trying to beautify sodomite activity. My mom is a nurse and I've heard some stories so I can assure you its not beautiful. I have also read studies about what it does to the body. Just as said in Romans they are receiving the penalty for their actions in their bodies.... I can't be convinced that 2 men or women sodomizing one another makes the holy and righteous Lord Jesus Christ smile...
 
Its so disturbing that people are trying to beautify sodomite activity. My mom is a nurse and I've heard some stories so I can assure you its not beautiful. I have also read studies about what it does to the body. Just as said in Romans they are receiving the penalty for their actions in their bodies.... I can't be convinced that 2 men or women sodomizing one another makes the holy and righteous Lord Jesus Christ smile...

MrsHaseeb my sister's a nurse and she sees so much going on :perplexed.
 
@Nice & Wavy ... :love3:

Thank you for posting this, especially the word, 'Institution'.

Praise God...

As soon as I read your post, the words to the Wedding Vows began to flow...

"Marriage is an 'Institution' which should not be entered into unadvisedly..."

I love these words. They are striking and make an impact regarding the truth of Marriage.


:wave: Hi Pastor 'A'. I love you. :love3:
Thank you, sis. Pastor 'A' says to tell you hello and that he loves you too! :love3:

And we love you too....@sweetvi :love4:
Yes we do!
 
Today was the first day that my husband actually read a thread with me. He wanted me to let you ladies know that he is very impressed with all of you and he said "my wife is in a great company of believers in Jesus!"

He said you ladies are awesome and that he would call on many of you in a minute if he needed help!

:love2:
 
Today was the first day that my husband actually read a thread with me. He wanted me to let you ladies know that he is very impressed with all of you and he said "my wife is in a great company of believers in Jesus!"

He said you ladies are awesome and that he would call on many of you in a minute if he needed help!

:love2:

How sweet :-)
 
Something I realized about homosexuality that keeps me from feeling disgusted at people...sex is just sex, no matter how it occurs. But how it's acceptable to G-d is very simple. Man to woman, in a valid marital state, consensual and open to procreation. I think G-d's plan was to create more believers. Many can see that as selfish of G-d, but it's beautiful. I was spring cleaning today and ran across some homework paper somewhere that my kids had at their parochial school. On it, it said:

Isaiah 54:13

All your children will be taught by the LORD, and great will be their peace.


No one has to feel dirty about sex. There is simply one way in which the Creator intended it. I have many thoughts about homosexual behavior but they may cause a problem here if I delve too deeply into them. I've posted some points of view on a rabbinic and catholic nature previously and comprehend it. In those, the person with the tendency is not committing sin for having the state of mind/existence, it's the very act of that is the sin. It is intrinsically a very disordered existence and that it is very complicated involving the spiritual, physical and psychological of the individual. Even with that recognition of it's extreme complexity and that we don't know all there is to know about it, the prescription for life by G-d says that it must not be acted out, albeit, it is certainly a cross they bear.

Well, let me also say that people can genuinely love another person deeply of the same sex. But I believe that the affections the bible warns about for same-sex are lust, not love, and are those actions that are carried out through sexual acts. It does not lend itself to family life in which a child is welcomed to enter naturally. It goes against our procreative nature. I mean to say that I don't wish any homosexual person to think they are disdained and that there are turned up noses at them behind these computers. Rather, there is a simple way for living that is prescribed by the Creator and it's evident all across the globe.
 
Last edited:
Today was the first day that my husband actually read a thread with me. He wanted me to let you ladies know that he is very impressed with all of you and he said "my wife is in a great company of believers in Jesus!"

He said you ladies are awesome and that he would call on many of you in a minute if he needed help!

:love2:

Nice & Wavy...

Tell Hubby...

"I love you Pastor 'A'. :love3:

The two of you are such a Beautiful 'One'.

Most would say 'Couple', however the two of you are truly 'One'. This I know, for a fact.
 
Aw that's sweet.. Big hug for Pastor 'A' ! :bighug:

Today was the first day that my husband actually read a thread with me. He wanted me to let you ladies know that he is very impressed with all of you and he said "my wife is in a great company of believers in Jesus!"

He said you ladies are awesome and that he would call on many of you in a minute if he needed help!

:love2:
 
Shimmie, you have no idea...this is so powerfully true on so many levels...like the ocean's current, a force that is continually moving, driven by the Wind. The climate may change, the waves may break, but the water remains water.
Spiritually, that 'current' runs right through us (man) ....

John 7:38 KJV
He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

Praise God, Laela, such a powerful Word. The scripture in John 7:38 is one the scriptures that God blesses me with when I'm ministering in marriages. :yep:

As Wives, women hold their husbands in prayer in their 'bellies', they give life to their husbands in prayer. From their bellies shall flow rivers of living waters as they intercede for their husbands, who reside in the 'belly' of his wife, day in and day out. In Jesus' Name, the prayers for her husband just naturally flow, by way of the Holy Spirit, without end, nor breaks.

Yep! :yep:

Prayers without end... :love3:
 
article-2299671-18EE9DE7000005DC-837_634x446.jpg


Making light of hell :nono: A bunch of foolishness :nono:
 
Back
Top