Evan Hammersmith
-
The Basics
-
Evan on Patch
-
More Stuff
Comments
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
1:19 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
ReplyBrian, you'd have to double check me, but I think we passed an ammendment in 2004 to uphold the definition of marriage. One my pet peves is everyone (right and left) saying states are passing bans on gay marriage. I don't believe a single state has passed a ban on gay marriage. They've only affirmed the traditional definition of marriage as that between 1 man and 1 woman.
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
1:12 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
ReplyBrian, please call my Evan. Ethan's a nice name, but not mine. I dont disagree with you about spreading hate or holding a non-Christian to the same standard I would a Christian. Where we part ways is the idea that my faith or Judeo-Christian values have no place in our legal framework. That's not historically been the case. Redefining marriage or protecting the definition doesnt fall into the category of spreading hate. Don't you agree?
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
12:37 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
ReplyCherise, the issue of slavery and your misinterpretation of 1 Timothy 6 is a separate issue. You're setting up a straw man every time you say that the bible is used to justify biggotry. I have some gay friends and I'm not a biggot. They would love for the state to sanction their relationship. I do not agree with them. They also go to church and claim to be Christian. God loves everyone regardless of sin. it's the sin that God hates, not the person. That's why I don't hate gay people. You seem to suggest that believing the Bible in it's entirety means you have to hate others who sin or wish for the return of slavery. I don't agree.
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
12:27 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
ReplyBrian, if your obesity is caused by an addiction to overreating, then perhaps it is a sin. I'm not going to split hairs on that. But my point still stands. If you're an unrepentant sinner, then I agree, you have no right to throw stones. If you're a Christian, you can advocate for God's standard to be upheld and not be a hypocrit. Otherwise, we might as well have only laws that everyone can live by so we are not biggots, hypocrits, and in this case homophobes!
I also can't expect an unbeliever to live under the same Christian standard I choose to, and that's why I said that we as a people decide on the standard of morality as law at the ballot box. In this case, we (Ohio) and and many other states have affirmed the traditional definition of marriage with legislation. -
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
12:08 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
ReplyBrian, by your logic, we have to throw out the entire Bible and all of it's commands because we're not perfect beings. That's silly. I think gossip is wrong even though I sometimes do it. Just because I or anyone else can't live up to God's Holy standard doesnt mean there shouldn't be a standard. I advocate for upholding the standard, even if I cannot live by it. The difference is that i'm willing to admit that I can't and I ask forgiveness. Others want to change the standard so their actions wont be considered wrong. If you think homosexual behavior is ok, that's your choice. If you believe the scripture to be accurate, then you have to accept all the words therein. If you pick and choose what you accept from the bible, you're in essence professing that you know better than God.
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
11:58 am on Friday, May 11, 2012
Reply1 Timothy 1:9,10: We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
11:56 am on Friday, May 11, 2012
ReplyI did not miss your point. You say that since we don't follow every law given by God to Moses under the old Covenant that we have no right to single out a few of those laws and still abide by them. I will fill in the blanks and say that since Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the law (through his death), we're no longer bound by the law (old testament), but by a new covenant. The New Testament was given to us through Jesus Christ and that is where I cited 2 passages. If or 2 or 3 isnt enough, how many do you need? 4, 6, 8? 10?
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
-
On the article Area Lawmakers React to Obama's Support of Same-Sex Marriage
Evan Hammersmith
10:57 am on Friday, May 11, 2012
Cherise, your talking point is status quo, and your lack of knowledge of scripture shows. To keep it short, Leviticus is not the only place that condemns homosexual behavior. Read Romans 1:24-27.
Evan Hammersmith
1:42 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
If everyone believed gay relationships were a civil right, your view would be the reason to change the traditional definition from what it is now. At present, a majority dont see it that way. That's why it's been upheld by the voter in all states it's been brought to a vote. Will that change in the future? time will tell.