I've just done some research on that case. BSA was only allowed to dismiss him on the grounds that association with homosexuals "altered" the boy scouts "expressive message."
The expressive message of christianity is a broad and varied thing, but it certainly is not anti-gay. Sin, throughout christianity, is embraced and accepted as part of life we must forgive and deal with.
This, in a nutshell, is my whole point. In fact, your mention of BSA v. Dale only strengthens my points because it states that the expressive message of the church must be altered by marrying gays. Or, as I said it, the essence of christianity.
I don't see how the expressive message of christianity is altered in any way by gay marriage. And I challenge you to show me.
The expressive message of christianity is a broad and varied thing, but it certainly is not anti-gay. Sin, throughout christianity, is embraced and accepted as part of life we must forgive and deal with.
This, in a nutshell, is my whole point. In fact, your mention of BSA v. Dale only strengthens my points because it states that the expressive message of the church must be altered by marrying gays. Or, as I said it, the essence of christianity.
I don't see how the expressive message of christianity is altered in any way by gay marriage. And I challenge you to show me.
There is not a single "expressive message" for Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox churches definitely wouldn't recognize Benny Hinn's ministry as "Christianity." Nor would the Catholics call the little home cell churches run by a single pastor with his family making up the flock the same thing as their Church.
Each Church, at least in America, is considered its own legal entity. There certainly are churches whose message of biblical literalism where homosexuality is condemned as an abomination would be altered by forcing them to perform and condone gay marriages.
Your challenge was accepted and easily defeated. Thank you, come again.
Obviously there are countless denominations out there. Which is why discrimination ought to be analyzed on a case by case basis. If there's a church out there that says gay people are demons on earth, then marrying them clearly effects their expressive message.
However, many churches allow and permit sinning of many kinds. They do this because there is an admission that every human being is a sinner and that we must acknowledge that fact before we can become one with god.
Churches, as I stated in a different post below this one, often "sanction" sin, after a fashion or at the very least, permit it. This happens in case of divorce or premarital sex and a number of other issues I can't think off hand. I go into a lot more depth in the other post, so you can check there if you want, but you seem quick enough to get the gist of it.
So saying it's illegal to ban gay marriage is not altering the expressive message of a number of churches. If anything, it's upholding it.
Unless you are a member of each of those churches, or have done an exhaustive study that was confirmed by members of those churches, you cannot speak to their expressive message as a whole.
I was Phelix on wotmania, I will always be Phelix in the "real" world, and now I am Phelix on RAFO.
You will make all kinds of mistakes; but as long as you are generous and true and also fierce you cannot hurt the world or even seriously distress her.- Churchill
*MySmiley*
You will make all kinds of mistakes; but as long as you are generous and true and also fierce you cannot hurt the world or even seriously distress her.- Churchill
*MySmiley*
Gay Marriage
- 12/08/2010 10:23:19 AM
2041 Views
I disagree on the latter part
- 12/08/2010 12:04:15 PM
1370 Views
I follow your point...
- 12/08/2010 12:14:17 PM
1356 Views
Suspect you would find plenty of denominations that would argue with you rather strenuously.
- 12/08/2010 12:24:55 PM
1396 Views
See, that's what I'm saying...
- 12/08/2010 07:37:26 PM
1323 Views
You didn't read my post.
- 12/08/2010 09:10:21 PM
1248 Views
Actually, you didn't read my post
- 12/08/2010 09:23:54 PM
1326 Views
Um, you're wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:37:13 PM
1273 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:37:13 PM
1273 Views
Re: Um, you're wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:44:17 PM
1245 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:44:17 PM
1245 Views
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale. And no, he described it accurately. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:53:31 PM
633 Views
You're still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:54:55 PM
1379 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:54:55 PM
1379 Views
Re: You're still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:58:26 PM
1232 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:58:26 PM
1232 Views
Again, you are still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 10:04:42 PM
1296 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:04:42 PM
1296 Views
Re: Again, you are still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 10:17:13 PM
1123 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:17:13 PM
1123 Views
Wrong definition of "club"
- 12/08/2010 10:30:52 PM
1382 Views
Re: Wrong definition of "club"
- 12/08/2010 10:40:55 PM
1289 Views
Also
- 12/08/2010 10:02:44 PM
1342 Views
And wrong again.
- 12/08/2010 10:08:24 PM
1359 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:08:24 PM
1359 Views
Not so quick!
- 12/08/2010 10:21:31 PM
1194 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:21:31 PM
1194 Views
Yes, so quick!
- 12/08/2010 10:32:13 PM
1145 Views
Let's be reasonable here
- 12/08/2010 10:41:53 PM
1250 Views
Why do you get to judge?
- 12/08/2010 10:48:57 PM
1282 Views
I don't
- 12/08/2010 10:53:21 PM
1172 Views
OK.
- 12/08/2010 10:58:22 PM
1278 Views
Re: OK.
- 12/08/2010 11:03:50 PM
1241 Views
Here's the thing: your opinion seems to be informed by the Roman Catholic Faith.
- 12/08/2010 11:14:03 PM
1188 Views
Re: Here's the thing: your opinion seems to be informed by the Roman Catholic Faith.
- 12/08/2010 11:23:35 PM
1298 Views
Then please stop.
- 12/08/2010 11:01:05 PM
1244 Views
- 12/08/2010 11:01:05 PM
1244 Views
What's wrong with discussion?
- 12/08/2010 11:05:48 PM
1201 Views
Discussion? Nothing. Your assertions about other people's views, something.
- 12/08/2010 11:09:48 PM
1217 Views
What, because the expressive message of scouting is anti-gay?
- 12/08/2010 10:12:54 PM
1111 Views
Re: What, because the expressive message of scouting is anti-gay?
- 12/08/2010 10:23:36 PM
1232 Views
Well then that brings us back to my question, which you have yet to answer.
- 12/08/2010 10:36:48 PM
1206 Views
Re: Well then that brings us back to my question, which you have yet to answer.
- 12/08/2010 10:46:22 PM
1306 Views
Not entirely true either... or, well, true as far as Brown goes.
- 12/08/2010 10:08:42 PM
1203 Views
Actually, I did. And since everyone else told you you're wrong about that I didn't see any need
- 12/08/2010 09:38:33 PM
1288 Views
Re: Actually, I did. And since everyone else told you you're wrong about that I didn't see any need
- 12/08/2010 09:55:05 PM
1193 Views
Gah.
- 12/08/2010 09:59:45 PM
1152 Views
What a mature response.
- 12/08/2010 10:11:00 PM
1353 Views
I can't speak for Rebekah, but I don't think the issue is that your points are invalid per se.
- 12/08/2010 10:22:30 PM
1156 Views
Um
- 12/08/2010 09:46:43 PM
1302 Views
That's a very good question. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:49:05 PM
607 Views
It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 04:29:24 PM
1150 Views
Re: It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 07:39:25 PM
1220 Views
Re: It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 07:41:02 PM
1313 Views
Yes, but while marrying two murderers does not ensure that they will continue to murder...
- 12/08/2010 09:08:53 PM
1135 Views
Re: Yes, but while marrying two murderers does not ensure that they will continue to murder...
- 12/08/2010 09:42:21 PM
1243 Views
What other church sanctioned circumstances encourage continued sin?
- 12/08/2010 09:45:33 PM
1309 Views
Re: What other church sanctioned circumstances encourage continued sin?
- 13/08/2010 11:04:02 AM
1260 Views
Wow, it's almost like an entire denomination believes that!
*NM*
- 13/08/2010 03:41:07 PM
608 Views
- 13/08/2010 03:43:26 PM
1050 Views
*NM*
- 13/08/2010 03:41:07 PM
608 Views
- 13/08/2010 03:43:26 PM
1050 Views
Yeah, that's the Roman Catholic basis against masturbation and contraception. *NM*
- 13/08/2010 04:12:00 PM
574 Views
Yes
- 13/08/2010 04:22:58 PM
1091 Views
Dude....please at least have a working knowledge of the Bible before you spout off.
- 12/08/2010 10:47:13 PM
1123 Views
secular marriage is decoupled from religious marriage
- 12/08/2010 02:50:43 PM
1330 Views
Simple, require the legal and religious marriage to be performed separately.
- 12/08/2010 02:58:43 PM
1152 Views
And they are, in fact, separate right now in the US. They're just called the same thing.
- 12/08/2010 03:29:26 PM
1202 Views
It's not the same name that's confusing so much as the single ceremony. Or so it seems to me.
- 12/08/2010 03:37:20 PM
1207 Views
I disagree. I think giving the legal institution the same name as the sacrament is the problem.
- 12/08/2010 03:59:43 PM
1186 Views
What in the world would that accomplish?
- 12/08/2010 03:44:32 PM
1249 Views
Provide some much-needed clarity, evidently.
- 12/08/2010 03:49:33 PM
1082 Views
the problem is it would be changing a centuries old tradition..
- 12/08/2010 04:26:47 PM
1108 Views
heheheheheheheHAHAHAHEHEHehehehehahheeh*cough*
- 12/08/2010 04:55:09 PM
1133 Views
thats OK I am sure you will get over it
- 12/08/2010 05:22:08 PM
1143 Views
Just guessing, but I think it was the "centuries old tradition" that set off the giggle fit.
- 12/08/2010 07:25:38 PM
1256 Views
Really? I was hoping for something better
- 12/08/2010 10:06:00 PM
1202 Views
So government recognition makes your religion meaningful?
- 12/08/2010 10:11:54 PM
1292 Views
not my religion I'm agnostic
- 12/08/2010 10:34:40 PM
1144 Views
I'm not far left, thank you very much. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:20:31 PM
671 Views
no but your are European and that slants your views
*NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:36:01 PM
652 Views
*NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:36:01 PM
652 Views
Simples
- 12/08/2010 09:30:31 PM
1224 Views
there are about 140 post ranging from boyscouts to infant babtism
- 12/08/2010 10:57:46 PM
1185 Views
So.
- 14/08/2010 01:27:59 AM
1072 Views
sorry I responded I forgot what a tool you are. my bad
- 14/08/2010 02:48:57 AM
1583 Views
You spout some utter gibberish then dish out insults when called on it? Very funny
- 15/08/2010 12:47:04 PM
1407 Views
- 15/08/2010 12:47:04 PM
1407 Views
Agreed *NM*
- 12/08/2010 03:45:04 PM
528 Views
I love you, Camilla
- 12/08/2010 04:02:15 PM
1017 Views
Re: I love you, Camilla
- 12/08/2010 04:04:10 PM
1218 Views
A couple of things
- 12/08/2010 12:58:09 PM
1197 Views
there is major flaw in your argument
- 12/08/2010 03:31:45 PM
1330 Views
Re: there is major flaw in your argument
- 12/08/2010 04:01:32 PM
1218 Views
I should clarify that I support gay marriage
- 12/08/2010 05:20:36 PM
1151 Views
One point about Prop. 8
- 12/08/2010 07:38:55 PM
1185 Views
I know that is the commonl;y held belief but I thinkit is wrong
- 12/08/2010 10:32:58 PM
1114 Views
Religious institutions, though, pushed hard to pass it.
- 12/08/2010 10:42:33 PM
1202 Views
that doesn’t translate into people voting for religious reasons
- 12/08/2010 11:19:48 PM
1020 Views
Bigotry and Fear that are supported and encouraged by religious institutions.
- 12/08/2010 11:32:30 PM
1187 Views
there are major flaws in your argument
- 12/08/2010 07:51:52 PM
1332 Views
Women can't be priests in the Catholic church.
- 12/08/2010 08:00:24 PM
975 Views
Forcing religious institutions to marry gay couples is hideously unconstitutional.
- 12/08/2010 04:18:59 PM
1294 Views
You are absolutely wrong
- 12/08/2010 07:57:19 PM
1236 Views
Your arguments are so specious and stupid I don't know where to begin.
- 13/08/2010 05:04:17 AM
1159 Views
Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 07:11:15 PM
1185 Views
Because "homophobic", like "xenophobic", has shifted a bit in meaning...
- 12/08/2010 07:33:56 PM
1229 Views
Because your reasons for being against gay marriage are so specious *NM*
- 12/08/2010 07:59:42 PM
666 Views
I particularly enjoy the implied assumption that your a good enough judge of my motivations. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:24:14 PM
630 Views
Re: Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 08:04:24 PM
1396 Views
+1
- 12/08/2010 08:06:19 PM
1341 Views
Stop with the pile on Camilla.
- 12/08/2010 09:22:35 PM
1262 Views
You would have said nothing if I had just said "agreed"
- 12/08/2010 09:27:33 PM
1091 Views
Which speaks highly of you....
- 12/08/2010 09:36:30 PM
1266 Views
This is being very petty. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:41:26 PM
616 Views
As opposed to a snarky +1 comment? *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:45:02 PM
637 Views
It's not snarky.
- 12/08/2010 09:47:47 PM
1242 Views
Its a +1 shorthand comment...
- 12/08/2010 09:52:04 PM
1497 Views
Wow. Those two characters allowed you to read Camilla's motivations?
- 12/08/2010 09:54:25 PM
1138 Views
Re: Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 09:13:07 PM
1331 Views
you are exactly why the state needs to make a clear seperation between the secular and religious
- 12/08/2010 09:33:22 PM
1190 Views
Ok, so if the state does then...
- 12/08/2010 09:44:31 PM
1117 Views
No, marriage started because of property.
- 12/08/2010 09:59:14 PM
1210 Views
So then two things come to mind...
- 12/08/2010 10:04:39 PM
1191 Views
Only two?
- 12/08/2010 10:27:08 PM
1185 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:27:08 PM
1185 Views
That's a little difficult to do
- 13/08/2010 03:19:32 PM
1401 Views
Re: That's a little difficult to do
- 13/08/2010 03:30:14 PM
1233 Views
yes but about half of the old testament deals with protecting those rights
- 13/08/2010 05:16:09 PM
1178 Views
The relationship between religion and rain go even farther back...
- 13/08/2010 06:15:32 PM
1188 Views
Actually, I agree with that
- 12/08/2010 10:01:37 PM
1078 Views
See, what I don't get is why gay people care about
- 12/08/2010 08:18:45 PM
1183 Views
It's mostly about getting married in the eyes of the state.
- 12/08/2010 08:42:52 PM
1291 Views
I'm fairly sure Jonte was referring only to the "churches have to accept gay marriages" bit. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 08:44:52 PM
665 Views
Starting again
- 12/08/2010 08:23:08 PM
1309 Views
Not at all
- 12/08/2010 10:58:45 PM
1208 Views
Re: Not at all
- 13/08/2010 09:14:48 AM
1008 Views
Agreed *NM*
- 13/08/2010 10:21:06 AM
510 Views
Oh dear
- 13/08/2010 10:30:45 AM
1105 Views
I suppose you also think that religious Pacifists should be eligible for the draft?
- 12/08/2010 08:42:21 PM
1261 Views

*NM*
*NM*
*NM*