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 ...
So, if we object to the gay agenda being collectively shoved down our throats at every turn, that makes us "anti-gay?"
You are a bigot. Celebrate your bigotry. Come out of the closet and just say that you hate conservatives.
It's so much more honest.
The verses you quoted had to do with obedience to authority. Just because you were a slave did not mean that you were allowed to commit all kinds of heinous acts just because you were a slave.
Slaves were just as accountable as Freedmen to Jesus Christ.
Please do not distort the Gospel message, especially if you do not actually understand it.
"Married" in what sense? If they're atheists, they probably didn't opt for a church wedding. So that means they're married for the state's purposes, the very situation we've been discussing here. I repeat, the state does not require any spiritual dimension to endorse a relationship, nor should it. But the resulting union is a "marriage" in the same sense that a contract between me and my mechanic is.
And don't post then retreat. It just makes you look small.
They may. The problem they'll eventually face is caused by their behavior. What I think is really sad is the help available to homosexuals that doesn't get mentioned by the major media. The experts state the major factor in determining homosexuality is environment, and many who want to change can and have. For myself, I can't condone a behavior that results in severe health hazards, monogamous or not, especially when that behavior can change.
What did I post that wasn't in there? I got this from the first Bible link I could find on Google. Maybe I went to one of those Satanical sites that "distorts everything".
The verses you quoted had to do with obedience to authority.
No, I left those out. There are many references to the Hebrews being slaves in Egypt, and there are many references to Paul saying that he is a slave to Jesus. All I quoted were references that shows that both in the Old and New Testaments, slavery was accepted as an everyday part of life, and Hebrews in the OT were just as likely to own slaves (and procreate with them) as anybody. I also made comments that slaveowners in more recent times must have taken some comfort that they could be slaveowners, and still consider themselves good Christians.
Please do not distort the Gospel message, especially if you do not actually understand it.
Do you mean, understand it the exact way you do? There are ten thousand denominations of Christianity because all of them use the same set of scriptures, and understand them differently.
Or, maybe there are so many sects of Christianity because its all a power trip thing, as I believe in my most cynical moments.
"There are ten thousand denominations of Christianity because all of them use the same set of scriptures, and understand them differently."
You do not understand the God of the Bible. There is only one truth. Most denominations understand them exactly the same way.
You are throwing up smoke screens. What you are doing is transparent to me.
For myself, I will continue to be tolerant of those who who don't want to change and haven't. But I will continue to oppose the imposition of same-sex "marriage" by the judicial tyrants of my state.
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?
There is only one truth. Most denominations understand them exactly the same way.
Then why not find ways to merge, and present a more united voice? Now, you have mainline Protestant denominations on the verge of schism over whether or not to ordain gay people, much less marry them to each other. In a hundred years, there will probably be 20,000 denominations. All because of a few differences.
You are throwing up smoke screens. What you are doing is transparent to me.
What I'm trying to say is this: Times have changed in the last two thousand years. The way that people lived at the time of Paul included slavery, women as property, and the need for people to procreate, unless they were the holy men. Most of us have gotten used to no slavery, and letting our women vote, and nearly all Christian denominations have allowed clergy to marry.
I grew up Catholic, left it as a teenager, rejoined it as an adult, and left it again after a divorce. I couldn't find a biblical reference to it in the site I Googled, but I did remember the words of a folk hymn,:
"Whatsoever you do, to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me"
Maybe that's why half of the Catholics polled by the Boston newspapers don't oppose the Court's decision, in spite of what their bishops say.
But from the point-of-view of the state, other distinctions can be made. All relevant religious traditions hold a union of man and woman in marriage as sacred. Those strong traditions are very, very valuable to the preservation of liberties. For hundreds of years, our several states have supported an institution of marriage, based on the traditional ones. There still exists a strong cultural tradition, even while there is now a lesser prominence of religion among the populace.
I believe it to be one of the many stupidities of modern liberalism that it is pushing to change the legal and broader cultural institution of marriage. It is beyond stupidity and approaching tyranny to change it by judicial fiat.
The article linked here is by far the best catalog of homosexual lobby-claimed deficiencies in current law with point-by-point rebuttals.
This is why in a culture in which Christianity has declined other gods have arisen. Hollywood celebrities fill that role for many people. So do sports stars. That's one reason why the compensation for those at the top has risen as much as it has...but that's another topic for another day.
Even if we shift focus to the more physical kind of slavery referenced in the Bible we still find many distinctions from the modern view. An especially big distinction is that one Greek work translated as "slave" in the popular but dumbed down translations such as the NIV is more accurately translated as "bondservant" in many of the passages. The Bible is not talking about the kind of slavery that lasts for generations but more of a debt slavery, which a diligent servant could escape in time with hard work (even foreign captives usually had this option).
That's why the Bible says both that bondservants should serve their masters well and that they should try to gain their liberty, if possible: "Were you a bondservant when called [to Christ]? Do not be concerned about it. But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity. (1 Cor 7:21)
As to masters, they were commanded: "Masters, treat your bondservants justly and fairly, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven." (Col. 4:1)
Puts a different light on the subject, doesn't it?
I understand that, thanks for the additional info. One of my biggest concerns is getting the information out to as many folks as possible, that change is indeed a possibility.
But I will continue to oppose the imposition of same-sex "marriage" by the judicial tyrants of my state.
Glad to hear it.
Btw, the word for a slave that is only a slave for a set period of time is "serf."
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.