Family Research Council: Homosexual Behavior Should Be Criminalized in America

Ezekiel 16:48-50 (New International Version)
48 As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, your sister Sodom and her daughters never did what you and your daughters have done.

49 " 'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.

There's more "out of control sin" on Wall Street than in the bedrooms of the nation's gay community. And yes Sprigg can be faulted for ignorance.

Some people say the U.S. is a Christian country. What about Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo. Can they be considered Christian?

Good post and good discussion. You guys should check out Brian McLaren in The Ordinary Radicals documentary: http://www.theordinaryradicals.com/

"Even the NYTimes published an op-ed by Edmund Meese that the attack on Prop 8 was 'disquieting.'

"Do you agree with David Boies, one of the attorneys leading the attack on
Prop 8 that that traditional marriage is nothing but 'the residue of centuries of figurative and literal gay bashing'?

This is one writer expressing an opinion. Which is his right under the First Amendment. A writer expressing an opinion doesn't constitute an "attack" on marriage in any way.

"Let's extend this out one more step. Let's say the Prop 8 bashers win and
the traditional definition of marriage loses. What then becomes the
definition for marriage? One-person - one-person? Or, would you want it to
be one-unrelated-person - one-unrelated-person?"

Civil marriage should be performed and recognized by government officials based upon the Constitutional equal protection of all citizens under the law.

Marriages performed by religious institutions should be performed in accordance with their own religious views.

And the judge could have ruled on equal protection grounds without the
attacks on people with sincere religious beliefs. Equal protection grounds
would not have required a show trial.

Even the NYTimes published an op-ed by Edmund Meese that the attack on Prop
8 was "disquieting."

Do you agree with David Boies, one of the attorneys leading the attack on
Prop 8 that that traditional marriage is nothing but "the residue of
centuries of figurative and literal gay bashing"?

Let's extend this out one more step. Let's say the Prop 8 bashers win and
the traditional definition of marriage loses. What then becomes the
definition for marriage? One-person - one-person? Or, would you want it to
be one-unrelated-person - one-unrelated-person?

If one-person - one-person becomes the definition, what is to stop someone
from then challenging the new one-person - one-person definition of marriage
(which I assume you and your "religious beliefs" support) as the residue of
centuries of polygamy bashing. What if Prop 9 is then enacted to protect the
new definition of marriage and assume you oppose polygamous unions. Would
you then object to an inquiry into your religious beliefs in an attack on
your definition of marriage?

Or are your religious beliefs such that in terms of marriage, anything goes?

It's the hate crimes bill that was slipped through in legislation with the last defense appropriations bill. There is probably lots of information on the web about it. If you can't find any, get back with me and I will help you out.

There is also video of Congress drilling Eric Holder about what the law would do to people who speak out against homosexual behaviour. But I know how you hate those "out of context videos" :). Just kidding. The videos show the entire answer to the question, so they are not out of context. You can probably find them with a You Tube search.

As far as the end justifyig the means, that is a Saul Alinsky thing and I do not subscribe to that philosophy.

What is the position of Sojourners on homosexuality and homosexuals?

1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

"I believe the law leaves it up to law enforcement and the court system to subjectively determine if any statment I made resulted in harm coming to a homosexual."

Not if you only said something about homosexuality or Gay people. Only if you had physically harmed someone solely because s/he were Gay. If a KKK member said something against freeing Blacks from slavery or said something against Black people, that is still allowed. However, physically harming a Black (or White or Asian) person only because of their race would be covered.

What I find very, VERY interesting is that so many people on the "religious right" never protested at all against hate crime laws when they covered crimes based upon race or religion. I guess some of these people only get upset when the law prohibits commiting crimes against Gays.

Loss of freedom???!! Who loses freedom?? If the plaintiffs prevail, will heterosexuals (or heterosexual anti-Gay Christians) be forbidden to marry?

There is NOTHING in this lawsuit that would force a private institution, such as a church or other religious insitution to marry anyone that they don't wish to marry. My own Episcopal church requires pre-marital counseling before a marriage will be performed by its pastor. Nothing in this lawsuit will require my pastor to marry anyone who refuses this pre-marital counseling.

"Anyone been following the Prop 8 trial in San Francisco. Got to tell you that the way the testimony has gone just plain creeps me out. Welcome to the thought police. Very troubling."

I've been following the Prop 8 trial in SF. Some of the testimony creeps me out as well -- the sheer expressions of bigotry and untruths given out by some of the anti-Gay people testifying there.

"Silencing the Liberty Bell - In Philadelphia, home of Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell, the Pennsylvania state "hate crime" law was used to justify the arrest and jailing of nearly a dozen Christians. On October 11, 2004, homosexual activists were celebrating "National Coming Out Day" at a street fair for an event called Outfest. The Christian Group Repent America walked into the gathering, singing hymns and carrying signs encouraging homosexuals to repent. They were surrounded by a self-described group called "The Pink Angels," who blocked their movement with large cut-outs of angel shapes. Police then arrested 11 Christians and none of the Pink Angels."

This is because the group Repent America was invading a private space that had been rented from the city to hold their festival. These people refused to leave and thus were arrested, likely for trespassing and maybe disorderly conduct and/or resisting arrest. Any group that reserves space for a gathering or festival has the right to maintain that space as private property.

Here is a link to what actually happened.

http://www.phillypride.org/news.html

Now to get the other side:

http://iamachristiantoo.org/?p=136

Focus on the Family had some Gay Christian activists arrested.

Excerpts:

"Gay son and his parents arrested for trespassing as they try to deliver a letter to Dobson and Focus on the Family

:(Colorado Springs)

Just live and let live.
The best Android Tablets under 500

Only the sick ones.

Kansasmenonite,

I'm sorry I am not sure what your focus is in the Ez. 16 passage. Are you focusing on the fact that Sodom was "arrogant, overfed and unconcerned" in addition to "not helping the poor and needy"? Or were you focusing on the "detestable things".

Seems like there's another example of how God can not stand any kinds of sin-- our arrogance and unconcern for the poor as well as our sexual sins.

Some people say the U.S. is a Christian country. What about Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo. Can they be considered Christian?

Brian,

What the Family Research Council is proposing is scary. I hope we have learned enough from our past to not get the government involved with enforcing a certain religious code. This is beyond sad. I hope the homosexual community knows that this extremism is not representative of the majority of the Christian community.

"as well as our sexual sins"

Pray tell, where does Ezekiel mention "sexual sins"? He talks about "detestable things." You are reading things that aren't in the passage. Having no regard for the poor is detestable in Ezekiel's mind.

The frustrating thing about the marriage debate has been that it is NOT about religion. The UCC for example marries gay people all the time. What it is about is that heterosexual taxpayers get special rights FROM THE GOVERNMENT that are not given to law abiding, tax paying gay couples.

---What they do not have the right to do is encode their particular religious views upon others as the law of the land.---

Ironic coming on a religious-political site like this one.

and what about DIVORCE ... ?? should we criminalize that as well ? DIVORCE is referred to in the BIBLE as a NO-NO ... several times. OOOO ... but wait ... that isn't so convenient is it ?