Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

“Leading from Behind” On Same Sex Marriage:
Townhall.com ^ | May 10, 2012 | Hugh Hewitt

Posted on 05/10/2012 4:21:01 AM PDT by Kaslin

President Obama is a thorough-going man of the left obsessed with power and thus in re-election, so his decision Wednesday to declare for same sex marriage is hardly a surprise. The only surprise is that his timing was so nakedly political and reflexive. The president was pushed into declaring his support by his Vice President and his Secretary of Education, and no serious person disputes this.

“Leading from behind” –the famous White House description of the president’s Libya policy retailed by the White House to the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza--now has found its expression in domestic politics.

Of course Obama was for same sex marriage before he was against it and before he was for it again. He’s a weather vane on this issue, and his genuine ideological extremism had led him to support same sex marriage long before Gallup announced days ago it had become a preference among a majority of Americans, but the president had abandoned his earlier support when it became an inconvenient truth for him while running for president.

No matter. Every state electorate but one that has been asked to vote on the issue has voted for traditional marriage, and the vast, vast majority of supporters of traditional marriage are not anti-gay or anti-lesbians. They believe, as I do, that marriage between a man and woman is ordained by God for the happiness of humankind and the building up of society, and that it is to be preferred to any other situation for the raising of children.

This is not to say that single parents, or same sex couples cannot be terrific parents. They can be, often far better at it than married couples who are terrible, horrible parents from whose “care” children must be removed.

Rather it is to say that, as an organizing principle, societies can hold up as the ideal one father and one mother, joined for life in a sacred bond, committed to each other and their offspring. No child of a situation other than that ideal for society is any less a valued member of society –born or unborn, ordinary or disabled in some way—but equal love for all life is perfectly consistent with the conviction that the society is best served by keeping traditional marriage as the recognized best situation for the vast majority of children.

Well meaning people can and do disagree with this, but solid majorities of Americans still vote this way, most recently on Tuesday in North Carolina, and, to repeat, the vast majority of those people are not in the least bigoted towards gays or lesbians.

The president has now declared his strong opposition to their political preferences, and this will be an issue in the fall for some voters. Some will vote for him because of his support for same sex marriage despite the havoc he has unleashed on the economy, and some will vote for Mitt Romney despite the fact they support same sex marriage because they know that four more years of President Obama will cripple the country and the West. It is hard to say how the issue will cut in the November election..

What cannot be said, at least by serious people, is that the president is “on the right side of history.” If that were the case, how could he have casually abandoned Iraq where there are forces gathering that are not merely opposed to gay marriage and indeed for freedom or even life for gays? How can he be inviting the Taliban to sit down and reason together when their return to power will be a death sentence for gays and lesbians in that country? Unless they mean the "right side of history" for privileged elites in the west. That is a very narrow view of history.

Of course the president isn’t consistently on any side of history, or on any side of anything at all, except his own side at all times. He is a pure man of the hard left, and his contortions in search of re-election will neither surprise nor shock.

The debate over marriage will continue, however, next in Minnesota, where another marriage measure is on the ballot in November.

If you are not ready to declare that the oldest institution of the Western world –marriage between one man and one woman—has been proven obsolete or in need of casual experimentation, then you can contribute to the Minnesota for Marriage campaign via the Act Right button at HughHewitt.com.

If you’d like to deepen your understanding of the issue, you can read the relevant sections of Dennis Prager’s magnificent new book Still the Best Hope.

If you are on the fence about the issue, it is possible to consult the best writing and arguments on both sides. Jonathan Rauch's Gay Marriage is probably the best case for same sex marriage.

But you cannot trust the president for guidance or leadership on this or any other issue, and you ought not to applaud him for his "courage" on the issue, even if you support his (current) position. If he thought it would get him re-elected, he’d switch back to opposition tomorrow.

Whatever the outcome of the debate, understand that there is no predetermined outcome, just as there is not predetermined victor in the conflict between radical Islam and the West. If you agree with my latter statement, by the way, you must agree with my former assertion, though you may have to think about that for a bit.

No matter which way the debate over marriage goes over the next few decades and over the map of the world, however, it will forever be recorded that Barack Obama did not reach a principled decision on the issue, only a political one, a lurch driven be expediency and triggered by underlings. History is indeed unfolding, but it cannot be convincingly rewritten.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; leadingfrombehind; marriage; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
Entire title: “Leading from Behind” On Same Sex Marriage: The President’s Foreign Policy Finds Its Domestic Policy Expression as Joe Biden Pushes Barack Obama To Flip Flop On Marriage, Again.
1 posted on 05/10/2012 4:21:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; little jeremiah
“Leading from Behind” On Same Sex Marriage

You can't make this stuff up!

0h0m0 flip flops and leans "forward" on the subject because he "loves" to lean "backward. Just ask Reggie.

2 posted on 05/10/2012 4:26:33 AM PDT by melancholy (Professor Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist, Ph.D in L0w and H0lder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Yet ANOTER reason not to vote for the cretinous sumbeech.

Yeah...he is in BIG TROUBLE when he feels he has to try to snag the votes of an infintessimal segment of the population.


3 posted on 05/10/2012 4:30:38 AM PDT by Adder (Da bro has GOT to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
We all knew he has been lying anyway. What troubles me is the fact that Libs don't care if their candidates lie to get elected. To them the end, gaining a political office, justifies the means. At least now the public knows another little part of what Obama will do if he gets another 4 years.
4 posted on 05/10/2012 4:31:10 AM PDT by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“Leading from Behind”.. visualize that... Nevermind!


5 posted on 05/10/2012 4:33:56 AM PDT by wetgundog (" Extremism in the Defense of Liberty is no Vice")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wetgundog

specially in the context of “gay marriage”


6 posted on 05/10/2012 4:40:22 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wetgundog

“Gay marriage” has always failed a plebiscite in any state it has had one in. Even the screaming liberal ones. The net result of Obama “dividing” like this will be to multiply the number of potential Obama voters who will simply sit out November.


7 posted on 05/10/2012 4:42:42 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
BS. Obama was "forced" into it by his homo campaign cash bundlers.

Biden and Duncan's performances were just cover for that.

8 posted on 05/10/2012 4:43:53 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye

THe industry is independent of the jungle, it has no dog, by definition, in the jungle’s race to be the fittest top wolf and predator. The industry leaves the jungle to be.

However, the jungle dependent predators see the industry island as a prey. Their jungle is also not working and dangerous. And, in fact, man as a chief primate or wolf like predator within it would indulge and destroy it.

Thus, politics, leftist politics in particular, are the antithesis of protection of the environment. They say they would redo a jungle and an industry partnership etc... This is total utopia and delusion.

Politics of mankind oppose science and ecosystems ultimately, cheating them via a third dimention that the regular jungle does not afford, living in the “green wall” like low relief pictures seen in the caves of Neaderthals, and the leftist is the proud All Politics animal of them all, PC or not.

However, politics of treachery and 3 dimentionality is a hell hole liberals cannot even live in, truth be told. They are in a living hell they do not know how to make sense of, one with a greater level of indeterminism. That is why they depend on welfare so much or go defeatist suicidal. They cannot manage what they worship and what they are from.

They live in hell and they remain there for ever in the end because they cannot accept and believe that there is a better way that transcends all this, that they are fools. So their solution is to bring up this sort of National Consensual murder-suicide scheme of Obama, PC fascist and “realistic” or “rational”.


9 posted on 05/10/2012 4:51:11 AM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

10 posted on 05/10/2012 4:52:47 AM PDT by Bill Buckner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

And if Obama had stood pat? Maybe it would embarrass his gay pals how little true influence they had after all the tantrums had passed.

Obama is committing political harakiri almost every day.


11 posted on 05/10/2012 4:54:49 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Strange that he is committing political harakiri now while running for a second term.

Either he figures that his corrupt organization has the election in the bag or he figures that he is going to get beaten like a red headed stepkid and will cause as much destruction as he can while he can.


12 posted on 05/10/2012 5:05:22 AM PDT by Texas resident (November 6 - Vote Against obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Texas resident

It parallels the biblical description of the devil’s desperate rage during the latter part of the events predicted in Revelation, when he “has but a short time.”

The Democrat strategy seems to be to make Mitt Romney look as wonderful as possible by contrast, go home with their tails tucked between their legs, then come roaring back with someone more competent in the 2016 contest.


13 posted on 05/10/2012 5:08:50 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

“Obama was “forced” into it by his homo campaign cash bundlers.”

oh... the evil thoughts that I could post, rephrasing this in the context of the topic... oh well.

I’ll “leave it as and exercise to the reader”.


14 posted on 05/10/2012 5:10:42 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

You refer to Rev 12:12. Easy enough to remember that vs number. Check out this bit from God’s Word, with regard to 0bama being forced to show his hand:

2 Tim 3:1-9
But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.

6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. 8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9 But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.


15 posted on 05/10/2012 5:12:56 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Don’t see how that happens because the obama regime has spend their first term putting in place the whole infrastructure for dictatoral rule.

Don’t see them giving up power even if they lose the election.

They ignore the laws on a daily basis. When it comes down to surrendering power, I really doubt that they will pay attention to the results or to any legal action to remove them from power.


16 posted on 05/10/2012 5:18:10 AM PDT by Texas resident (November 6 - Vote Against obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MrB

The US people still have some sanity left, and Obama’s probes at the country’s underbelly will still fail... I think this gay marriage thing, frowned on by over 50% of every state’s population, marks his official entry into Waterloo... but the devil is still out there instigating trouble and with no plans to quit until forced.


17 posted on 05/10/2012 5:18:20 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Texas resident

They’d like to do that, but there are still too many bitter clingers to make it feasible. Democrats retreat then regroup. Mitt Romney had better actively promote the GOP brand and not be overly modest about it like George W. Bush has, if he doesn’t want a second Obama to come on the scene.


18 posted on 05/10/2012 5:20:24 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Texas resident

George W. Bush has => George W. Bush was


19 posted on 05/10/2012 5:21:47 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

To put it another way - 0bama won’t lose a close election. Since 2000, DemocRats never do.


20 posted on 05/10/2012 5:22:52 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I’ve never seen a Democrat president so intent on stabbing himself in his own back.


21 posted on 05/10/2012 5:25:13 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

My “famous” quotable:

“The Truth does not favor leftist ideology”

Therefore, it’s so hard to keep things “straight”... so to speak.


22 posted on 05/10/2012 5:27:07 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
He actually canceled a campaign stop to Asheville, North Carolina last week, because the polls where showing Amendment One would pass, and supposedly he didn't want to answer any questions from the media about it.

The timing of his newly “evolved” position just doesn't make any sense to me, and I don't see how it helps him in November!

23 posted on 05/10/2012 5:28:19 AM PDT by CarolinaGOP ("Within the covers of the Bible are the answers for all the problems men face." - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: melancholy
0h0m0 flip flops and leans "forward" on the subject because he "loves" to lean "backward. Just ask Reggie.

Imagine the bruised feelings at MSNBC, whose doyens dreamed up "LEAN FORWARD" ..... and now ABC News gets the interview!

Oh, and you noticed it was a sister who got the interview ....and one that is leaving GMA really soon?

24 posted on 05/10/2012 5:28:49 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Sounds like this scene.
(No, I'm not going to quote it -don't want banned)
25 posted on 05/10/2012 5:35:37 AM PDT by RandallFlagg (Look for the union label, then buy elsewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Barry has evolved from the perversion of his mentor Frank Marshall Davis, to the alleged wild Gurnee limo ride with Larry Sinclair, to the alleged relationship with the murdered Donald Young (no justice, no peace), to whatever happened with Bill Frist (or so the story goes) to Gay Marriage. It's his journey.
26 posted on 05/10/2012 5:39:08 AM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas resident
Either he figures that his corrupt organization has the election in the bag or he figures that he is going to get beaten like a red headed stepkid and will cause as much destruction as he can while he can.

A third possibility is that the regime knows that there will be NO election because of their plan "B" summer violence and the "postponing" the election.

No way will this narcissist go in an election knowing that he'll lose in a landslide.

27 posted on 05/10/2012 6:05:48 AM PDT by melancholy (Professor Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist, Ph.D in L0w and H0lder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: melancholy

That makes sense.
barqy is releasing terrorits from cuba and funding the MB and other terrorists groups.
Looks like he is setting the table for a terrorist attack to create a crisis that they can take advantage of.


28 posted on 05/10/2012 6:09:31 AM PDT by Texas resident (November 6 - Vote Against obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck; Kaslin
Actually, it's the heterosexuals who invented unnatural sex and gay marriage.

Marriage as defined by God's law is supposed to be exclusive, not even looking at a random person with lust, lifelong, til-death-do-us-part, sacred, and fertile.

Heterosexuals --- through porn and premarital sex, divorce/remarriage (found even amongst Christians), contraception (almost universally approved even by straight "conservatives") --- have already radically redefined marriage, making it optional, dissolvable, serial-polygamous, deliberately nonprocreative and unnatural.

Isn't it queer? Straights invented gay marriage.

It's not surprising that now the gays want in.

29 posted on 05/10/2012 6:14:51 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
“Leading from Behind”

No thanks for THAT mental image that won't go away for a while!!

30 posted on 05/10/2012 6:22:43 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

Biden and Duncan’s performances were just cover for that.

```````````````

Had the same thought


31 posted on 05/10/2012 6:24:53 AM PDT by patriotspride
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Actually, it's the heterosexuals who invented unnatural sex and gay marriage.

Marriage as defined by God's law is supposed to be exclusive, not even looking at a random person with lust, lifelong, til-death-do-us-part, sacred, and fertile.


 

Polygamy: How it all got Started


 
 
 
Joe: Hey Emma!   Guess what!?
 
Emma: You KNOW I hate these guessing games! What is it, Dear?
 
Joe: I heard a voice, probably the Lord, tell me I must take other wives.
 
Emma: WHAT!?   You ding bat!  Don't you KNOW what our precious BOOK says?   After all; YOU are the one that translated it!
 
Joe: Books; schmooks.   All I know is I've been COMMANDED to take other wives and you are to OBEY ME!!!
 
 
Emma:      "Though shalt NOT commit ADULTERY!!!"
 
 
Joe: Silly Woman!  You KNOW better than to take things out of CONTEXT!!!
 
 
 
 
 

 
...and the rest is HISTORY...
 

 
 
 
 
 
THE BOOK OF JACOB
THE BROTHER OF NEPHI
CHAPTER 2
 
  24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
  25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
  26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
  27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
  28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
  29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
  30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
  31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
  32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 

Or even HERE:
 

 1 Timothy 3:2-3
 2.  Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
 3.  not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
 
 
1 Timothy 3:12
   A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.
 
 
 Titus 1:6
   An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.



 
 
Emma: That's IT!   I'm LEAVING your sorry *!!!
 
Joe:  DARN you Emma; you were TOLD to accept this!!   Wait!!!   I hear a voice again!!!
 
 


 
THE
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
SECTION 132
 
  51–57, Emma Smith is counseled (commanded) to be faithful and true; 58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.
 
 
  51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to aprove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.
  52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.
  53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been afaithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.
  54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and acleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be bdestroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.
  55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an ahundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of beternal lives in the eternal worlds.
  56 And again, verily I say, let mine handmaid aforgive my servant Joseph his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart to brejoice.


32 posted on 05/10/2012 6:26:10 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Genesis 13:13
Now the men of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the LORD.

Genesis 18:20-21
20. Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and
their sin so grievous
21. that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

Genesis 19:4-7
4. Before they had gone to bed, all the men
from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house.
5. They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them
."
6. Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him
7. and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.

 

Psalms 12:8      The wicked freely strut about when what is vile is honored among men.

Ain't this just FABULOUS??      More?

Isaiah 3:9   The look on their faces testifies against them; they parade their sin like Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to them! They have brought disaster upon themselves.

2 Peter 2:13b  Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.


 

 

Ezekiel 16:49-50
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.



2 Peter 2

 1.  But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
 2.  Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
 3.  In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
 4.  For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,  putting them into gloomy dungeons  to be held for judgment;
 5.  if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;
 6.  if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;
 7.  and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men
 8.  (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)--
 9.  if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.
 10.  This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature  and despise authority.   Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings;
 11.  yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord.
 12.  But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish.
 13.  They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done.
Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.



But there IS hope!!!

1 Corinthians 6:9-11

 9. Do 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
10. nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

 


If you could NOT change, you would be in most pitiful shape...

33 posted on 05/10/2012 6:26:40 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus; little jeremiah
Imagine the bruised feelings at MSNBC, whose doyens dreamed up "LEAN FORWARD" ..... and now ABC News gets the interview!

After 0h0m0 "revolved," MSNBC's "LEAN FORWARD" will change to the ABC REAL slogan, "BEND FORWARD!"

34 posted on 05/10/2012 6:48:44 AM PDT by melancholy (Professor Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist, Ph.D in L0w and H0lder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Obama had meetings, read poll numbers, strategized with his people, probably waited to see what would happen with Lugar, and then made a calculated decision to go with it.

So, even if you are ecstatic that President Obama “came out’ for gay marriage yesterday you need to remember one thing: If Obama thought it would guarantee him a second term - he would toss his next pro gay marriage speech right into the shredder.

You can take that to the bank.


35 posted on 05/10/2012 6:52:29 AM PDT by servo1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Just interested in your opinion here: are the polygamous wives-and-comcubines arrangements typical of the Old Testament patriarchs considered marital? And is there a specific Biblical command that polygamy shall now be banned, and only monogamy recognized?

(Trust me, this is not some kind of FReepin' trick question. I'm interested in how you read it. I'm interested in how the transition from polygamy to monogamy as a norm came about.)

36 posted on 05/10/2012 7:02:03 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

When you forsake the one definition, you have no definition.


37 posted on 05/10/2012 7:03:10 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I’ve seen this before from conservative religious commentators. “What other kind of marriage is there besides gay?”


38 posted on 05/10/2012 10:32:47 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
LOL. Leading from behind.

And here is your Sh**cago White Sox starting line up. At "catcher", from parts unknown. Number Zero. Bacrooooock. Osammma. "Boooooooooo".

39 posted on 05/10/2012 10:35:41 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (The Republican Party is bigger than the presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

This would represent an identity shift from a person who “owns” homosexuality, to one who has given that and the rest of his known sins to the Lord in confession and now is a saved soul, perhaps with temptations but still saved.

The most fundamental way to understand sexual perversion, beyond the acts, is as an illusion or set of illusions. The better the affected person can deal with the illusions, the less temptation he will suffer.


40 posted on 05/10/2012 10:37:27 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: RandallFlagg
LOL. I was thinking a scene from Slap Shot.

"You son looks like a fag to me."

"You better get married again or he's going to wind up with somebody's blank in his blank before you can say Jack Robinson!"

41 posted on 05/10/2012 10:44:26 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (The Republican Party is bigger than the presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Darren McCarty

They’d never get away with that scene today.


42 posted on 05/10/2012 10:45:31 AM PDT by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
He's following Biden who is following Dick Cheney years after the fact.

There's no leadership here from either Dem. They're a joke.

43 posted on 05/10/2012 10:47:53 AM PDT by newzjunkey (I advocate separation of school and sport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
They’d never get away with that scene today.

I can see the reaction right now.

"How dare you! How dare you!"

44 posted on 05/10/2012 10:54:06 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (The Republican Party is bigger than the presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Just interested in your opinion here: are the polygamous wives-and-comcubines arrangements typical of the Old Testament patriarchs considered marital?

Instead of my 'opinion'; I'll quote Scripture:

Genesis 2:24
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.


(Wife; not WIVES)

Were multiple wives SANCTIONED by GOD?

1 Kings 11:1-3 reports,

But King Solomon loved many foreign women, as well as the daughter of Pharaoh: women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites; from the nations of whom the LORD had said to the children of Israel,

“You shall not intermarry with them, nor they with you. Surely they will turn away your hearts after their gods.”

Solomon clung to these in love. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart.

The story of Onan is about the closest thing I could find in the OT that mentions another wife. But I could not find that the practice was institutued at GOD's command.


And is there a specific Biblical command that polygamy shall now be banned, and only monogamy recognized?

In the Bible and also in the Book of MORMON we find:


1 Timothy 3:2-3
2. Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
3. not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
 
1 Timothy 3:12
A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.
 
Titus 1:6
An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.

 

 
THE BOOK OF JACOB
THE BROTHER OF NEPHI
CHAPTER 2
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 


45 posted on 05/10/2012 11:15:46 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
They’d never get away with that scene today.

Try to find a show on TV that does NOT have a fag in it!

46 posted on 05/10/2012 11:17:17 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Yes. The majority of heterosexuals deny that there is anything so very indispensible about the connection beteween sex and fertility. They have no objection to Kathleen Sebelius' assertion that contraception is a form of "preventive healthcare," i.e. it prevents normal sex, which is normally procreative, and treats it (normal physiological functiuon) as if it were a disease or disorder to be suppressed.

With that kind of attitude, you can see the (twisted) logic of gay marriage: it's the same as straight marriage because it's all about two adults and their mutual satisfaction. Nothing there that could pull them beyond egotism-for-two, nothing pregnancy-related going on here. And as a bonus, they don't even need plugs, rubbers, sprays, jellies, jams, pills: they're already flawlessly contracepted! Perfect DINKs! (Double Income, No Kids.)

/rant

47 posted on 05/10/2012 11:29:42 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Your sarcasm tag: don't leave home without it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Even serious polygamy would be better than this. It did not use to be considered declasse for a king, say, to have children through concubines as well as through the queen.


48 posted on 05/10/2012 11:37:56 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

It’s a New Testament ideal. (The book of Mormon borrows New Testament concepts and casts them in an Old Testament style.)


49 posted on 05/10/2012 11:40:04 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Mitt! You're going to have to try harder than that to be "severely conservative" my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Thank you for those good references, Elsie.

I absolutely agree with monogamy, but --- as I'm sure you know --- there are some “Sripture-alone” people who say Scripture doesn’t forbid polygamy..

This is not my argument, it is theirs:

The first polygamist mentioned in the Bible is Lamech, whose two wives were Adah and Zillah (Gen 4:19).

Abraham's three wives were Sarah, and concubines Hagar and Keturah, who are also referred to as "wives" in other parts of the Bible. (Gen 25:6).

Jacob's first two wives are the sisters Leah and Rachel (Gen 29:28) and despite an oath with their father Laban to not take any additional wives, he took Bilhah (Gen 30:4) and Zilpah (Gen 30:9).

Moses' two wives were Zipporah (Ex 2:21, Ex 18:1-6) and an Ethiopian woman (Num 12:1), who Moses was permitted to marry by God, despite ALL the rest of his people being forbidden to take a foreign wife (because foreigners were pagan). Interestingly enough, Aaron and Miriam were punished for disapproving of Moses' forbidden marriage.

Gideon "had many wives" (Judges 8:29-32).

David’s five named wives were Michal, Abigail, Ahinoam, Eglah, and of course, Bathsheba. David also took "more wives and concubines" (2 Sam 5:13) The prophet Nathan, confronting David with the murder of Uriah, said that God would have given David more wives if he had wanted them.(2 Samuel 12:8)

In support of polygamy, the Bible gives rules concerning the taking of multiple wives; noting that "If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights,(Exodus 21:10) and making it an obligation for men to marry the widow of a deceased brother.(Deuteronomy 25).

And even though Genesis says that a man cleaves to his wife (singular) and they become one flesh, it doesn't say he can't be one flesh with more than one woman. Otherwise you'd have to say that the women called "wives" of David and Jacob and so forth weren't really wives, which raises the question of, is the Bible mistaken when it calls them wives?

In the Bible marriages to additional spouses are considered valid. If this is not true, then there is a theological problem with the lineage of Jesus Christ which does not always go through the first wife. For instance, his genealogy in Matthew's Gospel says he was he descendant of David from Bathsheba.

The Jews themselves didn’t see Jewish Scrupture as requiring mongamy. Polygamy was not banned in the Jewish community until about 1000 A.D. by Rabbi Gershom. They knew what Genesis said about "one flesh," but they thought a man could be "one flesh" with a number of wives. Neither does the New Testament explicitly ban polygamy. The job-descriptions you quoted from the Epistles don't say that the one-wife requrement is for everyone, just for deacons, overseers, and elders.

Once again, this is not my argument. I am strictly pro-monogamy. Polygamy disappeared wherever Christianity was established. Why? Because Tertullian, Augustine, and other early Fathers of the Church, interpreted the Scriptures differently than than the Jews of their own time, and differently than Moses and David did. I am a monogamist because of the Church.

50 posted on 05/10/2012 12:56:59 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Evidence, and reasonable inference from evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson