Faith and Facts

I oppose legislation forming domestic partnerships and any bill that attempts to support Domestic Partnership such as Senate Bill 146.

I am a Christian and I believe in tolerance.

Tolerance: willingness to recognize and respect the beliefs or practices of others

As Christians, it is important to spread the word of God through love and mutual respect…not through hatred and judgment. Only One can judge and it is neither you nor I.

Thanks for the tip. I voted YES! Why on earth would you want to restrict the rights and love of another human being?

I don’t live in New Mexico but if I did, I would!

Gay couple will apply for marriage license at Dallas’ Freedom to Marry Day demonstration

Federal and state legislation, along with a state constitutional amendment, deny some 1300 rights and obligations that accompany marriage to LGBT couples.

http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2010/jan/26/gay-couple-marriage-license-dallas/

Are you serious? Who is going to be hurt by this? Why is religion even involved? Separation of church and State? Ever heard of it? Okay Dominique, when the church ends up in your bedroom telling you no more birth control or you will go to jail, remember that you support church and State and I am sure you will serve your sentence with a smile. And Beverly, when on of your children has a child out of a heterosexual marriage, that you too support church and State and will stand by and watch your child suffer.

Why not fix the dumb laws you already have instead of conjuring up new ways to harass a group of people that are causing no harm? Like in Carrizozo it is forbidden for a female to appear unshaven in public. In Las Cruces you may not carry a lunchbox down Main Street. During lunch breaks in Carlsbad, New Mexico, no couple should engage in a sexual act while parked in their vehicle, unless their car has curtains. My favorite has to be The Idiot Law which reads: Idiots, insane people and felons are not allowed to vote in New Mexico. If that is the case, how did Bill 146 come up?

Why do so many folks accuse me of hate when I express my views on marriage? I believe marriage should be limited to one man and one woman. Not polygamy. Not domestic partners. I believe this for many reasons including biblical, economic and social.

There is nothing hateful in my views or expressions.

BTW, scinsocal mis-states the concept of “separation of church and state.” The Constitution says the Federal government may not pass a law establishing a religion. It never says that churches and religious people may not influence the government and culture. Further, I never invoked religion in my opposition to domestic partnership laws. I merely stated I am opposed and encourage others to express their opposition.

Talk about overreaction.

First, I don’t believe that I addressed you personally Dr. Bruce, nor did I accuse you of hate. That is maybe your conscience?

Second, I googled the bill so that I could attempt to fully understand what was being stated. I discovered article quoting those against it. Many have quoted the one man/one woman constitutes a marriage point, and based it on religious connotations.

Please allow me to attempt to educate you further on the term “Homosexual” from the bible.
The word “homosexual” in English translations of the Bible:

Outside of the conservative wings of religions, the word “homosexual” generally refers to sexual orientation. People have one of three orientations:

1. Most are heterosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the opposite sex.
2. A minority are homosexual: they are sexually attracted only to members of the same sex.
3. A smaller minority are bisexual: they are attracted to both men and women, but not necessarily to the same degree.

The term “homosexual” dates from the late 19th century, when human sexuality first began to be studied as a science.
There is no term that means homosexual orientation in the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts of the Bible. The authors of the Bible did not understand sexual orientation and thus did not write about it. Thus, when you see one of these words in an English translation of the Bible, it is important to dig deeper and find what the original Hebrew or Greek text really means.

The phrase “separation of church and state” is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

Under the United States Constitution, the treatment of religion by the government is broken into two clauses: the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. While both are discussed in the context of the separation of church and state, it is more often discussed in regard to whether certain state actions would amount to an impermissible government establishment of religion.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment refers to the first of several pronouncements in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. Together with the Free Exercise Clause (“… or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”), these two clauses make up what are commonly known as the “religion clauses” of the First Amendment.

So, while you are correct, it is only partially. Respecting an establishment of religion is the ancient idea of marriage can only be between a man and a woman. This is not allowed.

It seems to be the typical that once a person finds the answer to their own question, they stop looking. Well, as you can see, if you had read further you would have realized that your statement is flawed.

And to wrap things up, from your bible…

Romans 14:10 But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.

Rock on sinsocal!! Dr Bruce needs to understand that he is restricting the rights of others, pure and simple, not because they are impeding on his personal rights, but because he wants to force his morality on others. His law won’t alter human behavior any more than temperance altered consumption of alcohol or abortion laws prevent abortions or pot laws prevent pot smoking.

Ultimately this is simply about human rights and keeping natural human behavior and desires in a legal framework to protect against real abuses like poison liquors, do-it-yourself abortions, community property abuses and emotional trauma caused by religious nutjobs forcing their inane morality down other people’s throats.

Dr. Bruce should consider getting another PhD in biology/zoology or simply read a couple of Richard Dawkins books to bone up on animal behavior.

Maybe the real reason he wants this law is that either he or someone he knows stands to lose some property if gay marriage is allowed, and that he is simply hiding behind a book of superstition to scare people into it. Maybe he enjoys the thought of preventing a relative on their death bed from having their gay loved one in the room with him. Who knows.

Since you opened the door to use the bible, let’s keep things in context:

Romans 1:24 – 32 (NKJV) 24Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. 28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29being filled with all unrighteousness, £sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, £unforgiving, unmerciful; 32who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

God did not create us to be same sex partners…nor does he approve of it.

I hate when the Bible is taken out of context.

First of all, I don’t hate homosexuals. But God says, in Romans 1, that man “inflamed in their lust towards one another, males with males” (original Greek translation) is “unnatural”. Also, the passage in Romans 14 is referring to people who are judging whether or not others are worshipping on the correct day of the week. ie. are people who worship on Sunday as opposed to Saturday going to hell. Another ridiculous argument.

This bill has nothing to do with hating homosexuals, lesbians, or bisexuals; it’s about the entitlements associated with marriage and the departure from the historical norm. Do I believe that two men should be ‘married” No, but that doesn’t mean I hate them. Everyone always gets so defensive when this issue comes up and labels it as “gay bashing”. I’m a minister in a church in south Texas. We happen to have several homosexuals who attend our church and they are as welcome as the next person. Does that mean we’re going to have a marriage ceremony for two of them? No it doesn’t.

God loves homosexuals too. He simply disapproves of the relationship because it’s not how He designed human nature to be.

I’m sure I’ll get crucified for this, but you need to know something else. Although Jesus loved everyone and spent time with many “undesirables” of his day, he never “tolerated” their activity. On the contrary, he told them, “go, and don’t be that way anymore.”

This is a ridiculous argument. I know you all mean well, but it’s not about hate.

We are being asked more and more to choose between a God-centered world view and a self-centered world view. Things begin in a very subtle way, in a way that the uninformed Christian might find it difficult to discern. HealthCare was one of these issues. On the surface it seems like a good idea, but what it does among other things is to take us closer to euthanasia in that the government would choose who was worthy of living. At the beginning of time God instituted marriage as a union between on man and one woman. This planned works as long as we place God in the center of our lives. When we start to deviate from God’s plan we begin treading a very slippery slope. When we start embracing man’s self-centered view of what marriage is then we begin to put ourselves in God’s place. Pretty soon our view is totally distorted and go further and further away from what God had planned for us and our nation. I cannot approve of domestic partnership on equal footing with traditional marriage. The state already provides rights to domestic partners. Domestic partners can already cover their partner with health coverage and write up any binding agreement they want to. What the state of New Mexico, and Governor Richardson, wants to do is to redefine the definition of marriage without having it go before a state referndum for vote. Please research the facts on this issue before you throw the baby out with the bath water. Blessings, Ric

Well, for such a simple blog post, making such a simple request, this article has sure attracted attention.

The first thing that usually happens when someone like Dr. Bruce mentions taking a stand against homosexuality and their effort to normalize their choice of sexual lifestyle is accusations of hate and intolerance. Dr. Bruce has advocated neither.

What he has done is to take a stand against a type of behavior that goes against the very laws of nature. At the same time, he is taking a stand for marriage, in the form God intended it to be. Nothing wrong with that at all and it certainly has no intonations of hate at all.

Good job, Dr. Bruce.

The entire debate over “domestic partnerships” (talk about a euphemism), is not about what the homosexuals say it is; equal rights. That’s a lie. It’s not about equal rights, its about the pursuit of legitimacy. They want everyone, especially the state, to view their immorality as legitimate; as, just another acceptable form of human behavior. And if anyone dare have a different view; who may suggest that God views such behavior as wicked or unnatural, then their labled as “homophobic” or “gay bashers”. The truth is, God’s view does matter, since He and he alone is Creator, Lord, and Lawgiver and therefore, he and he alone has the right to label what one does as either sinful or moral. Thus, it is not judgmental to agree with Scripture; to say that according to God, homosexuality is not a legitimate relationship that God ever intended for men and women to be apart of. (Romans 1:25-27) It is not judgmental to agree with Scripture that homosexuality is the product of a reprobate mind; of a heart that seeks to live in rebellion against the true God. While I affirm these truths from Scripture, I also affirm that God loves homosexuals and that his call is for them to repent; just as every one of us is called to repent, and believe the gospel by accepting God’s offer of forgiveness through his Son Jesus Christ. Yet I also know that in their rush to gain acceptance from the world for their lifestyle by the legalization of gay marriage; I also know that once they obtain this country wide legitimacy; their desire will be to have pedophilia legalized as well. If you doubt me, go to the North American Man Boy Love Association’s website. My prayer for homosexuals: Repent and accept the true love and forgiveness that Christ offers through his death for you on the cross.

Instead of offering reasonable arguments for making their case, some commenters are leveling unreasonable ad hominum attacks at a Pastor who is adhering to a very traditional, historic Christian position (which one might naturally expect a pastor to do).
Jesus, the Lamb of God, defined marriage (during a discussion on divorce) in Mathew 19. In His discussion, Jesus made reference to Genesis 2:24. Such verses define the traditional Christian view on marriage.

Leviticus 18:22 (New International Version)

22 ” ‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (New International Version)

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Like most of the commenters above, I am a follower of Jesus Christ, and my rule book for living my life is the Holy Bible. Unfortunately, not all the people in our community are so dedicated.

Listed above are references from both the Old- and New-Testament so there is no question about how I feel about any homosexual relationship. I consider it wrong, immoral, and downright ugly. So, to comtemplate the thought of anyone participating in such a relatioinship, much less legaliizing it, is beyond my comprehension.

It’s funny what we call love these days. When someone is participating in a behaivior that is destructive to both themselves and thier society, it is not love to tell them it is ok. To truly love them you need to help them recognize the truth, and if they won’t then you are obligated to put in place cultural standards that will protect children. A man having sex with a man and a woman having sex with a woman is not a right, it is a sin. It drops male life-expectancy by almost half. It is the root of all pedophilia between men and boys. Studies show it is part of a culture that rates an order of magnitude higher in abuse and rape. It is not normal behaivior, the most recent studies show that only 2-4 % of the american population are practicing this act. It is not natural behaivior, anyone can look at the male and female body and discern the design. Nature has voted, homosexual sex does not produce progeny. It is simply a sin that people choose to practice. As a society we are under no obligation to encourage it or sanction it. Domestic partnership is an idea that should be opposed, and I lovingly oppose it.