Canada Likely to Legalize Gay Marriage?
“Gay” marriage about to become law in Canada?
Will they change their national anthem to the theme from Queer Eye for the Straight Guy?
Just curious…
(Yes, I know - that was a cheap shot. That’s why we have a comment section… so you can gripe.)
On the serious side, one wonders how this may affect the rights of Christian believers in Canada to speak out against homosexuality - given Canada’s “hate crime” position. I have friends and fellow ministries in Canada that are likely to be greatly affected by this. Given certain liberal leanings in the U.S. - I hope nobody is getting any ideas. Next thing you know, U.S. courts will be citing Canada as an example on this issue!
December 11th, 2004 at 1:57 pm
I guess the more shots you take at homosexuals , the more they will come to know the love of Christ —- NOT. We have to be receptive to everyone so that we can spread the love of Christ. If we say I am a Christian, I have the love of Jesus in my heart etc. but make dispariging remarks toward Homosexuals , isnt there some sort of hypocrisy going on here. Yes I know that homosexuality is wrong, but lets show the love of Christ to everyone that we meet , irregardless of sexual orientation, color, creed, etc. I think Christ mixed and mingled with the lowely ones of the Earth. Lets pound the pavement for Christ.
December 11th, 2004 at 2:06 pm
Yeah, you’re right, Scott. That was a cheap shot at the expense of a marginalized group of people. Maybe such people can be given civil rights in their country, be loved by people in the Church, and perhaps the church will be able to have a better hearing (because they first loved people).
December 11th, 2004 at 5:23 pm
I don’t think the church should try to argue that the right for homosexuals to marry is a civil right. To do that would go against what the Bible teaches us about ourselves. Also, let’s debate this without assuming that those in the church that speak out against this somehow ‘don’t love’ them. To argue that it is mutually exclusive is wrong. Why can’t we do both? I think the church will stop being the church if they don’t provide a Biblically based response/alternative to this same-sex marriage movement. Jesus met people where they were AND told them the truth that they needed to hear, not necessarily what they wanted to hear. We don’t want to forget that repentance is necessary on our part…and our tendency is to downplay that aspect of it.
December 13th, 2004 at 6:31 pm
– Mrs. Johnson: I suppose the more we refuse to confront the sin, the more likely they are to repent before God… NOT.
– Vaughn: First, if they’re so marginalized - why is it that I can’t turn on the TV (which I do very infrequently) without watching a show that has a homosexual in it? The fact is, homosexuality has become trendy. Don’t try to play the “poor oppressed homosexual” card with me. We both know it’s not true.
Second, to argue that people who are breaking the law of God intentionally and unrepentantly deserve some sort of reward for it is blatantly anti-Christian. I’m not saying let’s be violent or hateful with them. But let me also say, let’s not reward them for immoral behavior.
At least, I owned up to my cheap shot. When was the last time you heard someone in the homosexual community own up to theirs?
(added - 12/14/04)
By the way, my remark was in no way directed toward homosexuals - but at Canada as a nation; though one could fairly argue that it is was at the expense of the homosexual community. “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” is a show lauded by networks and homosexuals alike - this shouldn’t be offensive.
December 14th, 2004 at 12:56 pm
I never said that statement I suppose the more we refuse to confront the sin, the more likely they are to repent before God NOT.
So that is inaccurate. I was basically saying we should show Gods love to everyone. Sorry if I offended you.
December 14th, 2004 at 3:15 pm
Seriously DUDE do you think this “marriage” would truly be a “christian”marriage? The courts said that churches did not have to perform the ceremonies if they were against it. So is a marriage at a courthouse a “christian” marriage?
December 14th, 2004 at 3:22 pm
Mrs. Johnson: What you said was… “we need to be receptive of everyone so we can share the love of Christ.” Now, if by that you mean that we should receive them with all honesty sharing with them that their actions are not pleasing to God (as many of our own attitudes are not pleasing to God) and lead them to repentance… then I agree with you. But generally when people say “be receptive of everyone” what they mean is… “let’s just love everyone as they are and let them be who they are.” I don’t agree with that response in any way when it is directed to those who are blatantly, unprepentantly and intentionally sinning against God. We can’t “love people into the Kingdom of Christ” without being honest with them. If I jumped to conclusions and misjudged your statement, I apologize. God bless.
December 14th, 2004 at 3:26 pm
b: My response is this… if it is represented by the government as a legal and ordained marriage then, by law - anyone who speaks openly against such activity could be accused of hate crime under the laws of Canada. It would be along the lines of calling a black person a “n____r” from the pulpit or in public. Now I do not condone racism in any form… you’d be hard pressed to find someone more staunchly against it. But sexual preference is not the same as race. And if, by the laws of that country, calling homosexuality immorality can be punished by law… that is a dangerous and anti-Biblical stand.
December 15th, 2004 at 10:59 am
Comment 8 was better than the article. Why didn’t you just say that the first time?
December 20th, 2004 at 4:49 pm
It was an experiment… I wondered how many negative comments I would get… and I was frustrated.
Next time, I’ll say it the first time… errr… something like that.
December 20th, 2004 at 4:51 pm
good point… next time I will.