Cos, you have to admit it, it's a pretty compelling piece of logical philosphy, isn't it? And what about Amanda & Eve?! Case closed!
2006-06-14 10:06:32 · 12 answers · asked by wild_eep 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The show: THAT is a sentence to conjure with. Thank you.
Static: meet irony.
2006-06-14 10:18:07 · update #1
Hey! a liberal minister! cool. Reverend, are you a real reverend, or does the second R stand for "run"?
2006-06-14 10:20:37 · update #2
Yeah, I'm not gay myself, but I doubt that that little piece of wisdom ever actually helped anybody. That's basically on the same level as a bunch of guys in hoods and robes burning a cross on somebody's yard hoping to convert them from black to white. It's pretty much pointless and only makes yourself feel better.
2006-06-14 10:13:05 · answer #1 · answered by thenetnomad 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
'm so tired of reading signs carried by protesters that say: "It's about Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." In fact, the creation story is as important to Adam and Steve as it is Adam and Eve. Gays and non-gays alike need to know and celebrate the truth at the center of this story.
This creation story is primarily about God, a story written to show the power of God who created the world and everything in it. It teaches us that ultimately God is our Creator, that God shaped us, and that God said, "It's good." Isn't this the heart of the text?
Now what does the creation story say about homosexuality? Because the text says it is "natural" that a man and a woman come together to create a new life, some people think this means gay or lesbian couples are "unnatural." They read this interpretation into the text, even though the text is silent about all kinds of relationships that don't lead to having children:
couples who are unable to have children
couples who are too old to have children
couples who choose not to have children
people who are single
Are these relationships (or lack of relationships) "unnatural"? There's nothing said here that condemns or approves the love that people of the same sex have for each other
2006-06-14 11:29:41 · answer #2 · answered by azdbackfan99 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't see that as a logical philosphy, I see it as ignorance to various natures and birthrights of beings. I'm not even really sure it holds any relevance to anyone other then christians because "Adam and Eve" are christian belief, they arn't in any historical text books that I know of.
Many people throughout history were homosexual, as have many animals. It's not something that you can be "saved" from because there's nothing wrong with it in the first place.
2006-06-14 10:15:58 · answer #3 · answered by static_nerdling 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not as far as I know, well actually now you mention it I remember someone was going to go swimming with his boyfriend but didn't notice the sharks circling, a churchy person came over to them (he could tell they were gay) and fed them that line, they decided to have an argument about it and by the time the argument was over, the sharks had gone and so they were saved from getting eaten by sharks hehe.
2006-06-15 12:40:57 · answer #4 · answered by Mummy of 2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a close member of my family was saved from homosexuality.you know if you read the bible well you will descover that a city was destroyed because of sexual emorality and homosexuality being part of it.in this modern world people r want to change the truth to suit there own desires.people are lost in other words.blinded by lust and rebellion.
2006-06-14 16:40:53 · answer #5 · answered by toothpick 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
homosexuality is not something from which people need to be "saved."
there is much more that needs to be addressed in this case.
if you're talking simply about procreation, the "Adam and Steve" thing makes sense, however, it's very insensitive.
but a loving relationship is not defined by the desire to procreate.
if you're looking for someone to talk to about it, email me.
2006-06-14 10:17:28 · answer #6 · answered by Reverend R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They guy at the place was cept I think that's pretty ctupid cause gosh you can't just not be gay you are or you aren't well at least that's what I think maybe I'm wrong but who really knows less you actually are gay and woah that was a long sentence.
2006-06-14 10:11:07 · answer #7 · answered by The Show Must Go On 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Even I find the Adam and Steve gag offensive, and I'm not gay. Those type of quips serve only to polarize.
2006-06-14 10:09:47 · answer #8 · answered by lenny 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, "God mad Adam and Eve, Not Adam and Steve" is right up there with "Marriage = One Man + One Woman" for changing my political and religious views.
2006-06-14 10:14:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If everyone was gay there would be no kids... fair point...
What if everyone was a cook... no farmers no food.
How about everyoen was a farmer... who would build things.?
And if everyone had kids no room
And if sex is about procreation should all infertile people commit suicide of just live in pain and lonely?
2006-06-14 22:35:51 · answer #10 · answered by Joey 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋