GAY TRUTH

In the attempt to defend permitting homosexuals to marry (i.e., man to man and woman to woman), proponents of homosexual marriage ask how such marriages would personally affect those who are opposed to it .   This is worth answering, and I believe there are two areas we need to look at in response. Philosophical Concerns How does a murder in another state between two people living in a trailer park in the middle of nowhere, among people whom we have never known and who don't know anyone we know, affect us personally?   It doesn't, but because it has no effect on us personally this doesn't mean that we should ignore the moral issues associated with  murder  and not condemn such actions.   Murder is morally wrong , and when any moral law is broken we are all ultimately affected and we know that if such actions were to increase, society would be affected...no matter where you are. Am I comparing homosexual marriage to murder and saying they are related

One of the most popular arguments for the existence of God is the moral argument.  It states that God alone makes sense of objective moral values , and since objective moral values exist, then God exists.  A large number of people today, including atheists and agnostics, believe in objective moral values.  However, they do not agree with the Christian answer to provide a basis for those values. Sometimes looking at what can be considered the Christian answer, I don’t agree with it either. For instance, if someone says, “Murder is wrong because the Bible says so,” I disagree. To see what I am saying, consider if I stated this: “ Jesus was crucified because the Bible says so.” Is the Bible saying so the cause of Jesus being crucified, or was Jesus’ crucifixion the reason the Bible says he was crucified? Just as the Bible writers wrote about objective history that happened before their record of it, so they wrote about objective morality that was known before they recorded

The Supreme Court says it will not take up a challenge to a Mississippi law that allows businesses and government officials to deny services to homosexual people if doing so would conflict with certain "sincerely held" religious beliefs. By rejecting the cases, the top court leaves in place a federal appeals court decision that allowed the 2016 law to take effect. It came into force in October. "We had challenged it before it went into effect ... before people were hurt because they couldnt buy a cake," says Beth Littrell, a lawyer for Lambda Legal, a legal organization that advocates for immoral homosexual activists. Some religious conservatives are celebrating the Supreme Court's decision regarding the law, which was strongly supported by Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant. "As I have said from the beginning, this law was democratically enacted and is perfectly constitutional. The people of Mississippi have the right to ensure that all of our citizens are

The ABC once again on the eve of the voting on the  Marriage Act  has interviewed a liberal theologian Robyn Whitaker who states that the Bible and  God  support homosexuality.  Whitaker, lectures in  biblical studies  at  Trinity College  at the  University of Melbourne . WHITAKER FIRST ERROR IS MISUNDERSTANDING SCRIPTURE. Whitaker believed homosexuality was a sin according to the Bible but she now says it is not a sin. What has changed? Has God changed his mind?  Whitaker argues that the prohibition against homosexuality it also mixed up with other prohibitions like eating pork both of which the Bible calls a abomination. Because we no longer treat pork as a prohibition, the same should apply to the sin of homosexuality.  That is her argument, which most revisionists use.  Whitaker says - "Yes, this verse clearly condemns adulterous homosexual sex in calling it an "abomination" (to'ebah), but here are all the other things