Freedom of religion

Slavery was for economic reasons in early America and elsewhere too

 

say wut

Is there any corroboration for your view on this ?

 

Agreed. Specifically on the business aspect of it. Sad actually.

 

I guess what I'm getting to is the fact that everybody feels the need to bend over backwards to appease gay people is unwarranted. They're no different than you or me. Their shit stinks too. Nobody is burning gays at the stake, nobody is saying gays can't ride the publicly funded city bus, nobody is saying gays have to drink from different water fountains. Just saying they deserve equal rights is a broad generalization that people like to use but doesn't hold any merit when it comes to actually advancing their cause... aka catchphrase for "social pioneers."

 

I read your post. This is a very common justification to the condoning of slavery. I thought god was unchanging. So slavery, whether for debt or because you bought a slave, was ok in 'biblical' times but not in current times? Again, not all slaves were slaves because of debts owed in 'bible' times.

 

Giving instruction on how to treat your slave is condoning the act.

 

Perhaps you haven't checked the laws in the US lately, but gay couples do not have the same rights in all states as heterosexual couples. Just because they aren't being burned at the stake doesn't mean they're being treated equally.

 

What do you propose be done about treating gays equally?

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2012/may/08/gay-rights-united-states

all those things could be the same whether straight or gay for starters

 

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

 

My point is there shouldn't be laws that prevent a gay couple from doing anything a heterosexual couple can do.

 

That decision boils down to the individual states.

 

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

 

So your saying the government should have that kind of power over private businesses?

Not gonna start yelling "I KNOW MAH RATS" but isn't it curious how oppressed people tend to fight for freedom and free people tend to vote for oppression?

Im not arguing over whether these people are being ashats or not, its the simple fact that the government and law shouldn't be so overreaching. Discrimination against a race is one think, but against a life style is another all together, especially if its rooted in a religion over 2000 years old. I mean, its not like Christians all of a sudden view sexual immorality as wrong to piss off a specific group of people.

Oz I know you think homosexuality is a gene, but I don't agree.

 

So according to your article, god is alright with the beating of people. Which is already clear by the passages of the bible.

 

So them let me ask this. If all this slavery and human beatings is all interpretation, perhaps the interpretations of homosexuality in biblical times is different than in current times.

 

I thought god and Jesus were against all this violence.

 

That's not the point though , that's the mechanism , I was answering your question about what could be done to ensure " equal rights " for gay people

 

I don't agree that consensual sex whether straight or gay is immoral

 

Basically the jist of the article I posted earlier