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
2134 Views
I disagree on the latter part
- 12/08/2010 12:04:15 PM
1465 Views
I follow your point...
- 12/08/2010 12:14:17 PM
1461 Views
Suspect you would find plenty of denominations that would argue with you rather strenuously.
- 12/08/2010 12:24:55 PM
1499 Views
See, that's what I'm saying...
- 12/08/2010 07:37:26 PM
1412 Views
You didn't read my post.
- 12/08/2010 09:10:21 PM
1340 Views
Actually, you didn't read my post
- 12/08/2010 09:23:54 PM
1426 Views
Um, you're wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:37:13 PM
1362 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:37:13 PM
1362 Views
Re: Um, you're wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:44:17 PM
1324 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:44:17 PM
1324 Views
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale. And no, he described it accurately. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:53:31 PM
687 Views
You're still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:54:55 PM
1470 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:54:55 PM
1470 Views
Re: You're still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:58:26 PM
1319 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:58:26 PM
1319 Views
Again, you are still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 10:04:42 PM
1394 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:04:42 PM
1394 Views
Re: Again, you are still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 10:17:13 PM
1220 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:17:13 PM
1220 Views
Wrong definition of "club"
- 12/08/2010 10:30:52 PM
1490 Views
Re: Wrong definition of "club"
- 12/08/2010 10:40:55 PM
1408 Views
Also
- 12/08/2010 10:02:44 PM
1442 Views
And wrong again.
- 12/08/2010 10:08:24 PM
1452 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:08:24 PM
1452 Views
Not so quick!
- 12/08/2010 10:21:31 PM
1284 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:21:31 PM
1284 Views
Yes, so quick!
- 12/08/2010 10:32:13 PM
1233 Views
Let's be reasonable here
- 12/08/2010 10:41:53 PM
1342 Views
Why do you get to judge?
- 12/08/2010 10:48:57 PM
1377 Views
I don't
- 12/08/2010 10:53:21 PM
1277 Views
OK.
- 12/08/2010 10:58:22 PM
1372 Views
Re: OK.
- 12/08/2010 11:03:50 PM
1341 Views
Here's the thing: your opinion seems to be informed by the Roman Catholic Faith.
- 12/08/2010 11:14:03 PM
1283 Views
Re: Here's the thing: your opinion seems to be informed by the Roman Catholic Faith.
- 12/08/2010 11:23:35 PM
1395 Views
Then please stop.
- 12/08/2010 11:01:05 PM
1346 Views
- 12/08/2010 11:01:05 PM
1346 Views
What's wrong with discussion?
- 12/08/2010 11:05:48 PM
1301 Views
Discussion? Nothing. Your assertions about other people's views, something.
- 12/08/2010 11:09:48 PM
1307 Views
What, because the expressive message of scouting is anti-gay?
- 12/08/2010 10:12:54 PM
1195 Views
Re: What, because the expressive message of scouting is anti-gay?
- 12/08/2010 10:23:36 PM
1320 Views
Well then that brings us back to my question, which you have yet to answer.
- 12/08/2010 10:36:48 PM
1316 Views
Re: Well then that brings us back to my question, which you have yet to answer.
- 12/08/2010 10:46:22 PM
1417 Views
Not entirely true either... or, well, true as far as Brown goes.
- 12/08/2010 10:08:42 PM
1289 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
1389 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
1291 Views
Gah.
- 12/08/2010 09:59:45 PM
1243 Views
What a mature response.
- 12/08/2010 10:11:00 PM
1462 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
1256 Views
Um
- 12/08/2010 09:46:43 PM
1409 Views
That's a very good question. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:49:05 PM
662 Views
It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 04:29:24 PM
1247 Views
Re: It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 07:39:25 PM
1311 Views
Re: It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 07:41:02 PM
1411 Views
Yes, but while marrying two murderers does not ensure that they will continue to murder...
- 12/08/2010 09:08:53 PM
1232 Views
Re: Yes, but while marrying two murderers does not ensure that they will continue to murder...
- 12/08/2010 09:42:21 PM
1362 Views
What other church sanctioned circumstances encourage continued sin?
- 12/08/2010 09:45:33 PM
1398 Views
Re: What other church sanctioned circumstances encourage continued sin?
- 13/08/2010 11:04:02 AM
1392 Views
Wow, it's almost like an entire denomination believes that!
*NM*
- 13/08/2010 03:41:07 PM
653 Views
- 13/08/2010 03:43:26 PM
1142 Views
*NM*
- 13/08/2010 03:41:07 PM
653 Views
- 13/08/2010 03:43:26 PM
1142 Views
Yeah, that's the Roman Catholic basis against masturbation and contraception. *NM*
- 13/08/2010 04:12:00 PM
622 Views
Yes
- 13/08/2010 04:22:58 PM
1197 Views
Dude....please at least have a working knowledge of the Bible before you spout off.
- 12/08/2010 10:47:13 PM
1213 Views
secular marriage is decoupled from religious marriage
- 12/08/2010 02:50:43 PM
1432 Views
Simple, require the legal and religious marriage to be performed separately.
- 12/08/2010 02:58:43 PM
1264 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
1307 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
1292 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
1288 Views
What in the world would that accomplish?
- 12/08/2010 03:44:32 PM
1343 Views
Provide some much-needed clarity, evidently.
- 12/08/2010 03:49:33 PM
1171 Views
the problem is it would be changing a centuries old tradition..
- 12/08/2010 04:26:47 PM
1215 Views
heheheheheheheHAHAHAHEHEHehehehehahheeh*cough*
- 12/08/2010 04:55:09 PM
1228 Views
thats OK I am sure you will get over it
- 12/08/2010 05:22:08 PM
1243 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
1342 Views
Really? I was hoping for something better
- 12/08/2010 10:06:00 PM
1289 Views
So government recognition makes your religion meaningful?
- 12/08/2010 10:11:54 PM
1403 Views
not my religion I'm agnostic
- 12/08/2010 10:34:40 PM
1234 Views
I'm not far left, thank you very much. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:20:31 PM
718 Views
no but your are European and that slants your views
*NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:36:01 PM
698 Views
*NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:36:01 PM
698 Views
Simples
- 12/08/2010 09:30:31 PM
1323 Views
there are about 140 post ranging from boyscouts to infant babtism
- 12/08/2010 10:57:46 PM
1286 Views
So.
- 14/08/2010 01:27:59 AM
1166 Views
sorry I responded I forgot what a tool you are. my bad
- 14/08/2010 02:48:57 AM
1679 Views
You spout some utter gibberish then dish out insults when called on it? Very funny
- 15/08/2010 12:47:04 PM
1519 Views
- 15/08/2010 12:47:04 PM
1519 Views
Agreed *NM*
- 12/08/2010 03:45:04 PM
577 Views
I love you, Camilla
- 12/08/2010 04:02:15 PM
1115 Views
Re: I love you, Camilla
- 12/08/2010 04:04:10 PM
1309 Views
A couple of things
- 12/08/2010 12:58:09 PM
1303 Views
there is major flaw in your argument
- 12/08/2010 03:31:45 PM
1435 Views
Re: there is major flaw in your argument
- 12/08/2010 04:01:32 PM
1315 Views
I should clarify that I support gay marriage
- 12/08/2010 05:20:36 PM
1259 Views
One point about Prop. 8
- 12/08/2010 07:38:55 PM
1276 Views
I know that is the commonl;y held belief but I thinkit is wrong
- 12/08/2010 10:32:58 PM
1205 Views
Religious institutions, though, pushed hard to pass it.
- 12/08/2010 10:42:33 PM
1299 Views
that doesn’t translate into people voting for religious reasons
- 12/08/2010 11:19:48 PM
1107 Views
Bigotry and Fear that are supported and encouraged by religious institutions.
- 12/08/2010 11:32:30 PM
1278 Views
there are major flaws in your argument
- 12/08/2010 07:51:52 PM
1439 Views
Women can't be priests in the Catholic church.
- 12/08/2010 08:00:24 PM
1061 Views
Forcing religious institutions to marry gay couples is hideously unconstitutional.
- 12/08/2010 04:18:59 PM
1379 Views
You are absolutely wrong
- 12/08/2010 07:57:19 PM
1347 Views
Your arguments are so specious and stupid I don't know where to begin.
- 13/08/2010 05:04:17 AM
1242 Views
Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 07:11:15 PM
1302 Views
Because "homophobic", like "xenophobic", has shifted a bit in meaning...
- 12/08/2010 07:33:56 PM
1323 Views
Because your reasons for being against gay marriage are so specious *NM*
- 12/08/2010 07:59:42 PM
723 Views
I particularly enjoy the implied assumption that your a good enough judge of my motivations. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:24:14 PM
678 Views
Re: Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 08:04:24 PM
1497 Views
+1
- 12/08/2010 08:06:19 PM
1441 Views
Stop with the pile on Camilla.
- 12/08/2010 09:22:35 PM
1368 Views
You would have said nothing if I had just said "agreed"
- 12/08/2010 09:27:33 PM
1190 Views
Which speaks highly of you....
- 12/08/2010 09:36:30 PM
1388 Views
This is being very petty. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:41:26 PM
684 Views
As opposed to a snarky +1 comment? *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:45:02 PM
702 Views
It's not snarky.
- 12/08/2010 09:47:47 PM
1351 Views
Its a +1 shorthand comment...
- 12/08/2010 09:52:04 PM
1606 Views
Wow. Those two characters allowed you to read Camilla's motivations?
- 12/08/2010 09:54:25 PM
1228 Views
Re: Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 09:13:07 PM
1435 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
1285 Views
Ok, so if the state does then...
- 12/08/2010 09:44:31 PM
1205 Views
No, marriage started because of property.
- 12/08/2010 09:59:14 PM
1321 Views
So then two things come to mind...
- 12/08/2010 10:04:39 PM
1286 Views
Only two?
- 12/08/2010 10:27:08 PM
1293 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:27:08 PM
1293 Views
That's a little difficult to do
- 13/08/2010 03:19:32 PM
1503 Views
Re: That's a little difficult to do
- 13/08/2010 03:30:14 PM
1355 Views
yes but about half of the old testament deals with protecting those rights
- 13/08/2010 05:16:09 PM
1286 Views
The relationship between religion and rain go even farther back...
- 13/08/2010 06:15:32 PM
1283 Views
Actually, I agree with that
- 12/08/2010 10:01:37 PM
1178 Views
See, what I don't get is why gay people care about
- 12/08/2010 08:18:45 PM
1280 Views
It's mostly about getting married in the eyes of the state.
- 12/08/2010 08:42:52 PM
1388 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
715 Views
Starting again
- 12/08/2010 08:23:08 PM
1402 Views
Not at all
- 12/08/2010 10:58:45 PM
1325 Views
Re: Not at all
- 13/08/2010 09:14:48 AM
1098 Views
Agreed *NM*
- 13/08/2010 10:21:06 AM
578 Views
Oh dear
- 13/08/2010 10:30:45 AM
1199 Views
I suppose you also think that religious Pacifists should be eligible for the draft?
- 12/08/2010 08:42:21 PM
1361 Views

*NM*
*NM*
*NM*