Posted on 03/27/2013 10:45:06 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, issued some words of advice for fellow GOPers: Get in the 21st century with same-sex-marriage issues.
“We do have a platform, and we adhere to that platform,” Mr. Priebus said in a USA Today video. “But it doesn’t mean that we divide and subtract people from our party” who favor gay marriage.
“I don’t believe we need to act like Old Testament heretics,” he said in the USA Today video. Rather, Republicans “have to strike a balance between principle and grace and respect.”
His statements come as the U.S. Supreme Court is due to hear two cases on gay marriage — one on a California-voted ban on same-sex marriage, and the other on the legalities of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which bans the federal government from giving marriage benefits to same-sex couples.
His statements also come at a time when politicians from both sides of the political aisle are renouncing their past objections to gay marriage. On the Republican side, Sen. Rob Portman – an Ohio conservative with traditional values — just flipped on gay marriage, in part, he said, because of the recent revelations of homosexuality by one of his sons.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Well, isn’t that special.
I didn’t know “Old Testament” was an insult.
Why is this man the head of ANYTHING?
I've said for a very long time that the Calvinists and Lutherans have more in common with the pre-Reformation Roman Catholic tradition than we have in common with much of what passes for modern evangelicalism. We share a common Augustinian heritage. But that is a side issue.
The question I think you need to consider is whether civil government has — or should have — a role in promoting basic morality by punishing wrongdoing and encouraging right conduct.
It's an old saw to say it, but it's true — “Don't tell me government shouldn't legislate morality; all governments legislate morality. It's only a question of whose morality should be legislated.”
Saying that human freedom and choice must be valued and respected is a statement of someone’s values. That system of values, when worked out to its logical conclusion, will lead to a very different society than the one given to us by our Founding Fathers.
Conservatives and libertarians both agree on limiting the role of government. Federalists, states-rights advocates, and many other types of constitutional students who may have different views of what the Founding Fathers intended but still respect the “original intent” view of the constitution all agree on limiting the federal government vis-a-vis the state governments.
Where we disagree is **WHY** the civil government needs to be limited. That “why” question is very important in dealing with the question of homosexual marriage and responding to libertarians.
Civil government exists for a reason. The homosexual marriage debate is exposing a serious fissure within the conservative movement, and I'm afraid it's going to break conservatives apart. That breakup may not happen in conservative places like southwest Missouri where even a moderate Republican like Sen. Roy Blunt had little use this week for a serious of questions peppered at him by one of my liberal colleagues about homosexual marriage. It may well be a problem where moderate Republicans don't have a strong set of personal convictions (or at least constituent complaints) against homosexual marriage and will be tempted to give in to the demands by a very small percentage of society to let them do something which is destructive to society, namely, redefine marriage.
I am afraid this battle will not end well. Our culture is going the wrong direction, and going fast. My state is becoming much more conservative as the years go by, but I can't say that for a lot of other places in America.
“We find additional references to “Sodomites” in I Kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46, and II Kings 23:7 which pretty clearly refer to homosexuality.”
The traditional definition of sodomy includes any “unnatural” sex act, including homosexuality and oral sex. Nowadays, we have changed the definition to only include homosexuals.
That guy needs a new job. We should help him find one. I will go old Testament on marriage, because our civil society is based on the word of God.
Anyone who can’t have respect for that- is going to be in a whole lot of trouble.
Priebus has always been a dopy little creep, and one of the main reason Obamagabe was reelected. He can take his RINO brigade and stick em’ where the sun don’t shine.
You need to ask Jim, not me. He wrote it! (FURP!)
That guy needs a new job. We should help him find one. I will go old Testament on marriage, because our civil society is based on the word of God.
Anyone who can’t have respect for that- is going to be in a whole lot of trouble.
And so the criminalization of Christianity begins.....
There are a lot of black Christians in the Bible belt who are not for gay marriage too.
Muslims kill homosexuals but they aren't targeted because people fear the retaliation. Christians are easy prey because Jesus tells us to love everyone and turn the other cheek. We would not think of killing another because he was homosexual. But, I bet the homosexuals are fleeing London now just in case muslims get majority one day.
At least he admits he’s a heretic.
the elitist and the liberaltarian trolsl and infiltrators yet again raise their voices to push their communist agenda.
If this clown and other idiots would wake up then he would understand that his way of reaching out turns of millions from the base so either he can chase those 100 votes in the country or he wakes the hell up an dunderstands that many of us in the south and the midwest and AK thinks marriage and families are a mother and a father not like their elitist cocktail party who are out of touch
GOP OUT OF TOUCH, stupid party who lets in Dems, liberaltarians and homosexuals to push their agenda and to tell us to change our views and they wonder why they lose elections unless Sarah and others come to the aid of a candidate
Sarah, Cruz, Lee,, Col West , Haley, te other senator from SC and not the elitist one either, and others are the future of this party not our old guard either elitist types or the liberaltarians who push their communbist agenda.
See outside of their cocktail parties in DC people are not like them we think with common sense and while this fool keeps wanting turd pokers and strap on wearers to marry , to raise kids, to teach homosexuality and let the attacks on religious freedom keep happening then many of us do not and want marriage left alone as it has been for thousands of years
maybe the mods and Jim can put up his number and mail for ALL OF US , not a couple but ALL of us to send mail and call him .
He clearly wants to lose more elections and keep shouting reach out.
What frigging idiots, we let in liberals and liberaltarians to the party, gave them platforms to spout their social comminist views and then theelitist wonder why they lose..
IDOTS.
Can we all send mail and call this clown please
these idiots eem to be ignoring how if marriage is their law then they can adopt, raise kids, teach it in the school, have it as if it were normal, sue churches, adoption agencies etc\\\\frigging idiots tink this is about two people loving each other .
No wonder why we are in this mess, get Col West in his place and if not then Sarah, West, Cruz, Lee and others make a new party for conservatives with no more liberal, commubists and liberaltarians pushing their communist agenda in our primaries and conventions
just left a message
please AL OF YOU, TIME TO PUT UP and stop this nonsense.
202-863-8500
No use just posting here or lurking , lets tell the RNC and the GOP enough of this crao, the left ushed this for decades and never once did the left say drop it or reach out
number is
202-863-8500
ALL call and it only takes 30 seconds of our lives, tell him the RNC is dead as is the GOP if they do this, the left never gave this issue up why shoudl we give up our convictions.
CALL TO ALL
When they had brought them, they stood them before the Council. The high priest questioned them, saying, “We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name, and yet, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.”
But Peter and the apostles answered, “WE MUST OBEY GOD RATHER THAN MEN." (Acts 5:27-29 NASB Emphasis Added)
RNC Chairman Reince Priebus can go to Hell and bring the GOP with him, but we who know and love the Lord Jesus Christ and who seek to live in obedience to the living Word of God CAN NOT AND WILL NOT JOIN HIM by compromising the truth in order to please corrupted, godless men and women who are consumed by their perverted lusts and on their way to Hell and a Christless eternity.
Since these passages are Old Testament texts, the key issue is the meaning of the underlying Hebrew word.
It should carry weight that there was not a shred of doubt in either the Jewish or Christian traditions, at least not until modern “revisionism,” that male homosexual acts were condemned by Scripture. I'm aware of the debate within Judaism about the status of women who in their past had committed female homosexual acts, but within the Christian tradition, Romans 1 of the New Testament clearly closes that door as well.
If I'm going to get into the exegesis of biblical texts at the level of the original languages and how individual words are to be interpreted, I need to cite unimpeachable sources rather than rely on what I post “off the cuff.” While I have studied Hebrew, Attic Greek, and Koine Greek, it's been a long time — decades, in fact — and those are not my areas of expertise. My Greek and Hebrew teachers were well aware those were not my best subjects.
However, I am confident saying that while we can debate whether the relevant texts are best translated as “male prostitutes,” “passive male partners in homosexuality,” or some other term, there is no way to make the underlying words look like anything other than references to abominable acts. I grant that some of the individual texts may condemn either broader things than homosexuality or more specific things than simple male homosexuality, and I grant that the issue of consensual sexual activity versus attempted rape of angels in Sodom is relevant, but even voluntary homosexual acts between committed partners are condemned when the totality of Scripture is considered.
Imagine a book written several thousand years ago which describes murder with a knife, murder with bare hands, and murder with a blunt object such as a rock to the head crushing the skull, condemns all of those acts, and also says more generally that killing people is bad. Would we conclude from the lack of specific reference to murder by overdosing the victim with sleeping pills that it is acceptable to murder via sleeping pills because it does not involve an act of physical violence?
It takes that sort of nonsensical interpretation to say that consensual homosexual acts in a committed relationship are okay because the Bible knew nothing of such relationships. Personally I'd argue that the biblical authors of the New Testament were quite aware of Greek homosexuality and the consensual relationships between older men and younger men or boys were precisely what the Apostle Paul had in mind when writing Romans 1, but even if that isn't true, it is crystal clear that both historic Christianity and Orthodox Judaism clearly condemn homosexuality based on the texts of Scripture.
There is no way around it. To get “gay affirming” views out of Scripture, it is necessary to radically reinterpret the text using principles of interpretation which no sane person would ever use for any secular document — except, perhaps, for the United States Constitution, where lawyers reinterpret the written text because just like some theologians do with the Bible, they want to make the text say things it does not say.
mywife and I called and let them know we will never vote for the GOP eevr again if this is the new party.
To hell with our leadership
Sarah, Col West Cruz, just save save us form this mess
just called
202-863-8500
let them know he can take a flying jump, we let them know here and hope all others do the same.
If this is the new platform then to hell with the GOP
Sarah West and others can set a new party up
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.