Culver Pictures
In an 1862 lithograph, a slave is depicted fleeing
toward Canada before the Civil War.
Posted on 11/23/2003 10:59:06 AM PST by putupon
Culver Pictures
In an 1862 lithograph, a slave is depicted fleeing
toward Canada before the Civil War.
VANCOUVER, British Columbia — Heaven was the word for Canada and the Negro sang of the hope that his escape on the Underground Railroad would carry him there," the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once noted in describing the codes American slaves used in their spirituals to fool their masters before taking flight.
Canada is heaven again for Lance W. Bateman and William E. Woods, two American men who were married here recently.
The wedding on Aug. 31 looked like a typical Hawaiian wedding, with the grooms wearing tropical ceremonial shirts made of pineapple fiber woven to look like fine silk and every guest wearing at least one orchid lei. Except the affair was in Canada, because the two men could not legally be married in Hawaii, where they live and to which they have returned.
As untraditional as the affair might seem, the men were actually following a long tradition of Americans coming here to break the conventions of the day, do something illegal, or simply live as they wished. The tradition goes back to the American Revolution, when 30,000 Loyalists flooded into Ontario and Nova Scotia to remain in the paternal embrace of King George III.
Mr. Woods, a 54-year-old public health administrator, and other gay-rights advocates are campaigning to encourage American gay couples to marry in Canada and then take their Canadian marriage licenses back home to press for the kind of pension, medical and other benefits that heterosexual married couples
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Am I reading too much in this to say that it distills down as, "It is better to be a slave on a plantation, than a practicing homosexual," or is that misinterpreting?
Your argument is specious.
"It is better to be a slave on a plantation, than a practicing homosexual gambler?" I would say no. Yet gambling is still immoral according to the Bible. Do you believe differently?
Many pro-homosexual soi-disant Christians like to use the fact that Jesus never spoke of homosexuality per se as being immoral. But he did speak on marriage. You can't deny that. And you can't misinterpret his words to mean homosexual marriage is acceptable.
I don't understand why people insist on remaining Christians while blatantly defying Christ's own tenets. It's a shame.
Thx.
You're welcome. The author of the piece was one of the speakers at the conference at which Sean Hannity spoke over the weekend, so I hope he heard her and received a copy of her article. He could be a powerful voice for sanity on this issue.
Can you type with your Klan hood on, or do you remove it for comforts sake when inside?
The majority, who are straight.
The same thing that slavery has to do with the abortion issue: How is a society going to treat living beings with the 46 human chromosomes, who have committed no crime, who are relatively powerless, or not favored by majority society? I approach the issue of unborn persons as a civil rights issue, I can approach the problem of how homosexuals are treated as a civil rights issue, also.
Yet gambling is still immoral according to the Bible. Do you believe differently?
I'm not a believer in the Bible, and I'm not aware of any passages in it that prohibit gambling. But, if you have found some in there, I'm sure that the Catholic parishes I went to as a kid found some way to exempt bingo from their interpretation. Anything done to excess can be corrupting of the human spirit. Wine in moderation can be beneficial (want me to find a Biblical passage supporting it?) but to excess can lead to destruction. Some interpret the Bible as condemning only drunkenness, some interpret as prohibiting alchohol altogether. Our society currently sees fit to deal with drunkenness, but still allows people the opportunity to see if they're wise enough to use it without parental supervision if they're 21 or over. It wasn't that way during Prohibition, and we see how that turned out. A similar period of "prohibition" of gay people has ended in our country, and society is still figuring out what to do with gay people. Since we no longer have the stomach to throw them in prison, we have to figure out whether we're going to keep them on the fringe, or let them grow up and form stable relationships.
I don't understand why people insist on remaining Christians while blatantly defying Christ's own tenets.
It's all in the interpretation. Clearly, we have circumstances that did not exist in Jesus' time, that no words attributed to him would have applied. Clearly, the fact that homosexuality is mentioned in both the Old and New Testaments mean that it existed throughout history. Certainly, Jesus would have been aware of it, in the Roman Empire of his time. All NT thinking comes from the works of Paul, who never met Jesus, and only claimed to after his death. Paul said a lot of things about women that we have been able to throw off, yet, they were part of "tradition" that persisted for many centuries.
But my post dealt not with slavery, but with the explicit, unrelenting, and universal condemnation of homosexuality. Did you happen on any of those passages while you were perusing your concordance?
No, far better to base it on a religion of convenience that tells you exactly what you want to hear and imposes on you no moral constraints whatsoever. That way you're free to indulge your perversion with no moral repercussions. Voila! Of course, the price you pay is that there's not much spirituality in the rut. But hey, you're not after anything transcendent anyway, just permission to behave like an animal.
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.