Holy cow, really? How? They come out to make a statement that the man should have the right to say what he believes and you think they should have been at the soup kitchen?

 

Evidently, you find my statement as incredulous as I find your question.

 

I think someone is much better serving God in a soup kitchen, building for Habitat for Humanity, counseling young women against abortion, working with troubled children and many other areas than I do standing in line at Chick-Fil-A. I feel this way for one main reason. Assuming that homosexuality is a choice (I don't really know, but I don't think that it is), no one is doing to decide not to be gay because of how long someone spends in line at Chick-Fil-A. Those other areas are ones in which you can make a difference.

Some would. Some wouldn't. My wife among the "wouldn't" group. :lol:

 

You don't know how close I was to the "like" button on that one, my man.

 

Seriously, your post backs up my contention. We can all throw around scripture but we all interpret it in our way. I guarantee you MOST who say they are strong Christians and on the right would NOT support you proclivities and would say that scripture supports them. Yet your interp , and I trust you know a lot more scripture than I, is that "anything goes inside of marriage."

 

So when someone tells me "the scripture says so" I would just point to this small debate here as an example of it not being black and white.

Evidently, you find my statement as incredulous as I find your question.

 

I think someone is much better serving God in a soup kitchen, building for Habitat for Humanity, counseling young women against abortion, working with troubled children and many other areas than I do standing in line at Chick-Fil-A. I feel this way for one main reason. Assuming that homosexuality is a choice (I don't really know, but I don't think that it is), no one is doing to decide not to be gay because of how long someone spends in line at Chick-Fil-A. Those other areas are ones in which you can make a difference.

 

IMO and fully knowing it cannot be determined I think that overwhelming majority of people who were there to support CFA were doing so more as a Republican than as a strong Christian. It's political grandstanding just like the protesters will be who are lip-locking on Friday.

 

So, TBG, I agree with you.

You don't know how close I was to the "like" button on that one, my man.

 

Seriously, your post backs up my contention. We can all throw around scripture but we all interpret it in our way. I guarantee you MOST who say they are strong Christians and on the right would NOT support you proclivities and would say that scripture supports them. Yet your interp , and I trust you know a lot more scripture than I, is that "anything goes inside of marriage."

 

So when someone tells me "the scripture says so" I would just point to this small debate here as an example of it not being black and white.

 

I think you underestimate Christians as far as your "proclivities" comment. I don't doubt folks 50 & up would disapprove, but I feel quite certain a lot my age & younger would be cool with it.

 

The thing is, Scripture basically gives sex a boundary, and that boundary is marriage. But it never really gives instructions on what can be done during sex. There's one comment in the New Testament about making sure sex is actually taking place, but nothing specifically touching on what is permissible & what isn't.

 

With homosexuality, there are numerous instances where the act is forbidden & clearly identified as sinful.

 

In other words, I feel like there are certainly some doctrines & teachings open to interpretation. Others are not & I believe homosexuality is one of them.

Evidently, you find my statement as incredulous as I find your question.

 

I think someone is much better serving God in a soup kitchen, building for Habitat for Humanity, counseling young women against abortion, working with troubled children and many other areas than I do standing in line at Chick-Fil-A. I feel this way for one main reason. Assuming that homosexuality is a choice (I don't really know, but I don't think that it is), no one is doing to decide not to be gay because of how long someone spends in line at Chick-Fil-A. Those other areas are ones in which you can make a difference.

Hey, if your only reach to be upset at those supporters is to criticize the 45 minutes they spent in support of the freedom of speech, regardless of whether you support his thoughts or not, by saying they're not doing all they can do because they wasted that 45 minutes on something that you think could have been done better to serve God.

 

Come on, how can you say that without knowing what those folks do with their time? How do you know what they all do with their time. I'd guess that many of the protestors volunteer, and do selfless things for others out of service to God.

 

If you don't like it, I understand. But frowning on the supporters because they "wasted" their precious time is a bit out there IMVHO.

IMO and fully knowing it cannot be determined I think that overwhelming majority of people who were there to support CFA were doing so more as a Republican than as a strong Christian. It's political grandstanding just like the protesters will be who are lip-locking on Friday.

 

So, TBG, I agree with you.

Reach. Come on Clyde. Republicans? I couldn't disagree more. Frankly, and much to my Republican chagrin, there were likely lifelong Democrats in those lines.

I think you underestimate Christians as far as your "proclivities" comment. I don't doubt folks 50 & up would disapprove, but I feel quite certain a lot my age & younger would be cool with it.

 

The thing is, Scripture basically gives sex a boundary, and that boundary is marriage. But it never really gives instructions on what can be done during sex. There's one comment in the New Testament about making sure sex is actually taking place, but nothing specifically touching on what is permissible & what isn't.

 

With homosexuality, there are numerous instances where the act is forbidden & clearly identified as sinful.

 

In other words, I feel like there are certainly some doctrines & teachings open to interpretation. Others are not & I believe homosexuality is one of them.

 

I appreciate your interpretation . I think many would disagree.

Reach. Come on Clyde. Republicans? I couldn't disagree more. Frankly, and much to my Republican chagrin, there were likely lifelong Democrats in those lines.

 

Call it what you will. This was started by Fox so it immediately is a right-wing stance. You pointing out exceptions does not mean the rule is incorrect.

I think many would disagree.

 

There's no question about that.

Hey, if your only reach to be upset at those supporters is to criticize the 45 minutes they spent in support of the freedom of speech, regardless of whether you support his thoughts or not, by saying they're not doing all they can do because they wasted that 45 minutes on something that you think could have been done better to serve God.

 

Come on, how can you say that without knowing what those folks do with their time? How do you know what they all do with their time. I'd guess that many of the protestors volunteer, and do selfless things for others out of service to God.

 

If you don't like it, I understand. But frowning on the supporters because they "wasted" their precious time is a bit out there IMVHO.

 

I am not "upset." They can spend their time however they want to. Additionally, everyone has to eat. I just feel that if you want to make a statement that supports scripture, help feed the hungry, clothe the poor, house the homeless or help a woman struggling with an unwanted pregnancy.

Wow, we've really broken new ground here. It's now political, not religious. Shame I have to hit the sack.

Wow, we've really broken new ground here. It's now political, not religious. Shame I have to hit the sack.

 

I'm stunned that you find this so hard to believe.

 

I will use my FB friends as a sample group. There were more than a few who showed up to eat mor chikin and I know where they will be on Sunday morning - home making pancakes, going for bike rides, watching the Sunday political talk shows. I also know where they won't be.

 

This was a Fox/talk radio event first and foremost IMO.

Reach. Come on Clyde. Republicans? I couldn't disagree more. Frankly, and much to my Republican chagrin, there were likely lifelong Democrats in those lines.

 

Why would it be to your "chagrin"? If I were into assuming, I might come to the conclusion that you don't want democrats to be Christians.

I am not for gay marriage and believe it is between man and woman, wow, now who really cares. Is it because the chicken store gives money to rehab gays.

 

Also the liberal media which by the way is everyone but fox news has bent over backward to bash chick fil a, but don't recall them bashing our dear leader for not believing in gay marriage a few months ago.

Homosexuality is an obamanation, I mean an abomination, well it the same thing.