The one in GOD's 10 Commandments.
Why is this so hard to understand? I don't meant to harp on this subject, but now we have a group here in the USA that is bringing a case of a Incestual Marraige to the couts to become a *right* for legal marraige? Adultery in the Commandments covers every relationship to be forbidden that is not between a man and woman who are not related.
Do you think we should just omit the Commandments, so everyone can do and make legal what GOD has forbidden?
2007-03-09 04:01:16 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
Adultery is adultery. Anyone who leaves the sanctity of marriage and goes and has sexual relations with another person is committing adultery. It doesn't matter if it is the husband or the wife going outside of the home and having such a relationship. All are considered adultery. We shouldn't omit the Commandments and make legal what God has forbidden. God has put in the Bible what he knows is best for us and for our lives. He made those commandments to guide us throughout our lives, and I think that we should pay more attention to them.
2007-03-09 04:25:29 · answer #1 · answered by hbnlion2006 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The thing about the Ten Commandments is, they're all things that people knew were wrong BEFORE Moses even came down from that mountain. The rules have always been in place, even before they were written down. So the group that is bringing that to court is going to lose, I guarantee it.
And the guy below is right: Adultery is merely the act of promiscuity outside the confines of marriage. It didn't mention at all the personalities or genders of those involved.
2007-03-09 12:05:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It would be helpful if you could supply both the legal and the "10 Commandments" definitions of adultery, so that we might compare and contrast them based on a common understanding.
2007-03-09 12:19:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How do you reconcile some bigots who campaign against two unrelated people of the same gender who want to get married, but then turn around and accuse us of "adultery" for having sex outside of marriage? Can't they see that it is completely illogical to try and have it both ways?
To get to your point, I have heard no LGBT people campaigning for a change in the law against related people getting married. So why have you asked this question in the LGBT issues section?
Personally, I think stopping state-sponsored discrimination over the STATE-given rights associated with marriage is a much more important battle. That's the one I will be fighting for. If we maintain the approbation against related people marrying, that's fine, but very low on my list.
2007-03-09 12:10:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
If any god had forbidden anything, and intended to impose his/her set of laws onto us, he/she would have made his/her will known through a credible method. That has not yet happened, so it's time to stop pretending any divine intent.
that said, I do not agree with incestuous marriages for moral and biological reasons, not simply becuase of some ancient writings purported to be (but unsubstantiated) of divine nature.
2007-03-09 12:09:23 · answer #5 · answered by kent_shakespear 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As soon as you can prove some outstanding reason why your religious laws should be respected over the laws of any other religion, forcing everyone to follow your religious doctrine regardless of their beliefs, religion, or lack of belief, you might have some sort of point. Until then you simply have to be satisfied to keep those beliefs yourself and stop attempting to force your religion down the throats of others.
2007-03-09 12:14:01 · answer #6 · answered by IndyT- For Da Ben Dan 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
huh? i believe the commandment is quite simple, 'thou shalt not commit adultery'. are you reading some expanded version of the 10 Commandments?
2007-03-09 12:07:42 · answer #7 · answered by Spyder 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes we can make legal what god has forbidden! It's called separation of church and state.
2007-03-09 12:07:51 · answer #8 · answered by helehelo 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋