I Have Never Read Such Hatred ! This Letter Is Horrible...

Thanks Joe.  Energy flow regardless of how it is done, helps.

http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/a-brief-history-of-oaths-and-books  This is quite a good explanation of oaths.  An excerpt is below but the entire article (written in England) sheds more light.

But the use of any text during a swearing-in ceremony is, if not exactly a gimmick, at least more style than substance. There is no constitutional requirement for any federal official—firefighter, ambassador, or President—to take the oath of office over a particular text or, in fact, over any text at all. This explains why LeVine was able to swear over the Constitution rather than the Bible, which is a much more common choice. Legally, if not diplomatically, “Moby-Dick” or “The Cat in the Hat” would have been just as acceptable.

joefrank wrote:

6/29

                I read this on Face Book, this Minister his wife just died, he has two raise
                two children and he has a grandfather he loves dearly, I believe this 
                happened in Virginia , he found this note on his car, this is the most
                hateful thing I have ever read, read it and wonder..

                                                        Cheers..Joe

As writers we know the power of the written word. When people read something they take it as truth most times. As we get older we start questioning what we read. We turn the paper over to see if anything is on the back side.
My first question would be, "Who wrote the letter, and why?"
Did some one outside the church write it, or did the receiver write it himself? If the writer was an outside person who did not go to the funeral, how would he know nobody else went? On the other hand, I sure the receiver was hurt that nobody went to the funeral of his wife. Maybe it is his child like way of getting back, or maybe it was just for attention?
Before I start throwing stones, I would first make an effort to find out who wrote the letter?
It could have been a gay person trying to make Christians look bad? Was the letter turned over to the police? Something like this would be a hate crime...that would bring in the Federal Gov.
There are too many unknowns about this letter to make a snap judgment. I have reservations about who wrote it, and why?

Shelagh wrote:

A great deal has been said about same sex marriage. The activists said that if they won, then that would be an end to the matter and life would go on as before. The early evidence is that the gap between straights and gays is widening rather than narrowing. Whatever two people do in private is of no concern to anyone else. It only becomes a problem when sections of the community claim rights because of their sexuality. As regards the law, all men and women are equal. There is no colour, sexual orientation, or religious belief that gives one man or woman greater rights than another. 

Humans are the only animals who take part in sexual activity as a pleasurable activity. Animals only have sex to procreate. If humans did the same, same sex relationships would be based on love, not sex. Human sexual activity has evolved to be enjoyable; if it were not enjoyable, humans wouldn't do it and the species would die out. Evolution has not yet reached a point where men and women can control their sexual urges. Prostitution, paedophilia, homosexuality and other forms of sexual activity are a direct consequence of humans' inability to exert contol over sexual urges. 

Over the centuries, religion has been used to offer moral guidance. Often, religion failed because of human frailty and the willingness of some to hide behind the Church to conceal their own sexual desires. Under the circumstances, it is hypocritical to condemn any kind of sexual activity between consenting adults. We have to learn to accept one another and not judge. The Supreme Court ruling did not, in fact, help to facilitate that acceptance. Ground that had been gained over the last two decades is crumbling. I will remain an independent observer.

I love sex for sex. I have never had sex with an English women. it is on my bucket list, as is a French, Russian, and Pole.
The gays are in deep water with their same sex marriage...I don't think they understand if they split up, the court cost, and all they could lose...they should have let it stand as was.

Abe,

You and your wife are in my kindest thoughts and prayers. I am so sorry for your situation.

Abe F. March wrote:

Waiting for Domenic to weigh in on this conversation. 
My observations over the years with the use of the Bible to swear an oath was implied as swearing to tell the truth, as in a court of law.  "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God"

How many have sworn vows in marriage that end in divorce?  It seems that swearing is based on the moment and not for the long-term.  Is there some reference to a document that explains the meaning to swearing an oath?

There is a scripture Abe, "Let your yes mean yes, and your no mean no." In other words, do what you say you are going to do.
Most young people today throw things away when they start to brake...they don't even try to fix things. A marriage needs work from time to time.

 I’m not one for a 50%-50% relationship…that is only half an effort. I’m for 100%-100% effort on both.

If a person can’t try to work out problems with their mate, can they be trusted?



Sad to hear about your wife Abe. I know there is nothing I can say that will help. We are all near the end of life. You know what I believe. I have told the people when I die, don’t cry, have a party. Eat, drink, and sing. Tell stories about me. If you don’t have one, make one up. Death does not end it by a long shot.

I heard a good conservative radio description of marriage.  He said the vows are between each person in the marriage couple and God that they are marrying in God's presence and have a pact with God to make it work forever.  When a marriage ends in divorce, the civil divorce decree is not the end of the vow with God. That is a separate matter that most people conveniently forget. 

According to the conservative understanding, marriage creates one person held together through each of their bonds and vows with God.  Without God, and allowing themselves to become too concerned with earthly matters and not enough spiritual ones, the bonds of marriage wear down and only turning to God will repair them.

Therefore, divorce is a shredding of great proportions because it is a civil division of what God sanctified.  Ripping one person (the marriage bond) back into two individuals is difficult and painful in most cases, that pain spreading to all members of the family, the children and even acquaintances.

Whew!

dkchristi wrote:

I heard a good conservative radio description of marriage.  He said the vows are between each person in the marriage couple and God that they are marrying in God's presence and have a pact with God to make it work forever.  When a marriage ends in divorce, the civil divorce decree is not the end of the vow with God. That is a separate matter that most people conveniently forget. 

According to the conservative understanding, marriage creates one person held together through each of their bonds and vows with God.  Without God, and allowing themselves to become too concerned with earthly matters and not enough spiritual ones, the bonds of marriage wear down and only turning to God will repair them.

Therefore, divorce is a shredding of great proportions because it is a civil division of what God sanctified.  Ripping one person (the marriage bond) back into two individuals is difficult and painful in most cases, that pain spreading to all members of the family, the children and even acquaintances.

Whew!

Good post dk...
Brings up the subject of what type of marriage can people bring before God? Same sex, one man & one women an old lady and her cat, a cowboy and his sheep?
Which brings up a second question: If a person conducts a marriage that is not in line with what God says a marriage is, is that person guilty of breaking Gods law on marriage?
If we follow one of Gods laws, should we not follow all of his laws? Perhaps it's okay to just pick the laws of God we like, and forget all the others?  Would it be a good idea to not follow the laws of God that are bad for humans...which one's would those be?

Those are all very good questions however people do pick and choose from the Bible according to their beliefs.  The conservative view that I heard was one person's opinion from his reading of the Bible and his beliefs.  It did carry with it some logic, however, that explains why divorce is such an awful, shredding process.

If a person is in a secular job then they must perform the requirements of that job or seek employment with responsibilities closer to their beliefs.  Similarly, I was in a position where the requirement was to perform some responsibilities in a "gray" area that was against my ethics.  Since I could not perform those duties, I lost that job.  I went to work for myself where I controlled the definition of what was ethical in my work environment.

So far as I know, people choose (because of their religious beliefs) to make their wedding vows with God.  The legal paper declaring someone legally married has nothing to do with God and everything to do with property, caretaking, heredity, etc.  Ministers in my opinion are free not to marry couples whom they regard outside their religious beliefs.  However, a clerk of the court must perform what is in their job description or find another job more to their beliefs.

Thus, whatever laws are made regarding marriage have no effect whatsoever on those with religious beliefs that are different.  They may continue as always with their marriages.  The only effect is at the clerk of the courts, a secular place with secular responsibilities.

It is complex.  No getting around that.

dkchristi wrote:

Those are all very good questions however people do pick and choose from the Bible according to their beliefs.  The conservative view that I heard was one person's opinion from his reading of the Bible and his beliefs.  It did carry with it some logic, however, that explains why divorce is such an awful, shredding process.

If a person is in a secular job then they must perform the requirements of that job or seek employment with responsibilities closer to their beliefs.  Similarly, I was in a position where the requirement was to perform some responsibilities in a "gray" area that was against my ethics.  Since I could not perform those duties, I lost that job.  I went to work for myself where I controlled the definition of what was ethical in my work environment.

So far as I know, people choose (because of their religious beliefs) to make their wedding vows with God.  The legal paper declaring someone legally married has nothing to do with God and everything to do with property, caretaking, heredity, etc.  Ministers in my opinion are free not to marry couples whom they regard outside their religious beliefs.  However, a clerk of the court must perform what is in their job description or find another job more to their beliefs.

Thus, whatever laws are made regarding marriage have no effect whatsoever on those with religious beliefs that are different.  They may continue as always with their marriages.  The only effect is at the clerk of the courts, a secular place with secular responsibilities.

It is complex.  No getting around that.

 I understand what you are saying. If there is no God, the Bible, and Gods laws in that book don't matter...people could marry a dog if they wanted too. On the other hand, if there is a God, his Bible is true, and his laws are real. Man can make all the laws they want, but if they go against Gods laws, people won't be in a good position. Saying to God, "Well I was only following mans laws," won't give them a free pass to go around Go, and collect $200.
I guess it's a matter of, "Is there a God?"

Thanks for your input, Domenic.  I found it interesting along with DK's responses.
I agree with DK that a minister should have the right to refuse conducting a marriage if it goes against his beliefs and that of the church.  Civil law is entirely different, as DK pointed out, and workers are obliged to perform their job.  If they don't like it, then they should not do that job.

In the end, I think we are responsible for the vows we make.  It is our choice to honor them. 
As Domenic pointed out, our throw-away society seems to have entered all phases of our lives. 
I'm going through a process right now in purchasing a new freezer.  In the past, products were made to last.  Things changed and products were made to have a limited life-span forcing one to buy a new product.  Repairs can be as expensive as buying a new product.  In the days when self-repair was the norm, that changed with electronics affecting most products and only experienced technicians can efffectively make the repair.  How to repair a marriage gone sour can also be costly and one may wonder if it is worth the price.  Once again, it comes down to personal choices.  Is the relationship worth saving or thrown away?  What about the investment in a relationship? 
Then there is the thought about putting good money after bad.

7/1

                           " OH GOD !." 

                           Why can't be just love each other ? Why all the hate ?

                                                    Cheers...Joe

I don't know how biased the Atlantic is, but putting bias aside, this article does highlight the fact that supporters of marriage for the uniting of one woman and one man are becoming the minority in this debate. This will lead to new legal cases presented to the Supreme Court. Sanctioning same sex marriage was not an end, or even the beginning of an end; it was the beginning of a long and protracted conflict that could go on for decades.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/how-will-the-us-supreme-courts-same-sex-marriage-decision-affect-religious-liberty/396986/?utm_source=SFFB

7/2

              What scares me is the religious right has gotten into the Republican politics,
              everyone of them is into it, to me religion has no business in politics if I do
              remember correctly it's separation of Church and State. And as far as gay 
              politics go it should have been called " Civil Ceremony," with the same
              rights stated in the law and these benefits will cover the person's rear end 
              because if you don't cover your rear end you'll have Dr.'s questioning you,
              you'll have hospitals refusing you to be with that person you love, you'll
              also have greedy relatives biting you in the rear end. I'm sure you remember
              two years ago I lost my partner of 40 years to Alzheimers. His brother didn't
              want to be bothered, so when you love someone for that long you take care
              of them, many years when I had spine surgery, Gall Bladder surgery he took
              care of me, that's love. When he was ill  every time I went to the hospital I had
              to have Health Care Proxy, Living Will, Will, you name it I had it and it was a
              pain in my rear every time , now if we had a legal civil ceremony stating we were
              committed to each other with those benefits on paper I wouldn't have to had to go
              through hell each time but I'm afraid many straight people don't understand that I
              do and as far as the religious right is concerned I don't want anything from them and
              I don't want to interfere with their rights to pray or etc. I have news for them not all
              gay mature men act like what you see in Gay Pride etc., many are in happy committed
              relationships and want to just be left alone and live their lives like everyone else and 
              feel safe they don't have to go through the bull shit I or anyone else did. I love all, no
              matter who you are we are all human beings...Oh yes I don't believe in church ceremony.

                                                                   Love Joe......

Wow Joe, you said a revealing mouthfull.

joefrank wrote:

7/1

                           " OH GOD !." 

                           Why can't be just love each other ? Why all the hate ?

                                                    Cheers...Joe

Joe,

this may be hard for those who don't believe the Bible to understand, but there are two types of people on planet Earth; The wheat, and the tars. The wheat are the good guys, and the tars the bad. Jesus spoke of these two different seed lines.



Then Jesus sent the multitudes away, and went into the house. His disciples came to him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the darnel weeds of the field." He answered them, "He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man, the field is the world; and the good seed, these are the children of the Kingdom; and the darnel weeds are the children of the evil one. The enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. As therefore the darnel weeds are gathered up and burned with fire; so will it be at the end of this age. The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will gather out of his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling, and those who do iniquity, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be weeping and the gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth like the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.



—Matthew 13:36-43, World English Bible

Joe, unfortunately, the gay rights activists are like a dog with a bone; they won't let it go. Modern advances in what is and is not possible to produce a child mean that, with sperm donors and surrogacy, anyone can become a natural, single parent. This means that a child can be brought into the world with at least one natural parent with a partner of the parent's choosing, whether that be a partner of the same sex or opposite sex. These family units want the same rights as one another. The rights were originally established for straight married couples. Now, gay married couples want to be in a marriage that is exactly the same in all respects. The Supreme Court has upheld that right. This problem will not go away; there is too much opposition. Sometimes, less is more. If the gay rights activists had left marriage as it has always been, then all this conflict could have been avoided, and people would have continued to get along despite their differences.

Shelagh

7/1

                The one thing I never wanted was children and I felt that way when I
                was a teenager, now I always did great things for my nieces and for my          
                nephew, but guess what they went home! I guess this came from growing
                up in a family of six and I was the oldest and now I'm the last !

                                                              Love Joe........

Live and let live I say.  The children I know with gay parents are doing well.  Perhaps better than the children of parents who shredded each other in hot divorces and left the children holding the blame.

The trick is to form family units that remain strong.  In today's world that is very difficult.  The culture has changed and women don't have to remain with abusive men and men can choose to go find as many younger wives as their divorce payments can afford.  Marriage is no longer a fence or a prison.

The couple who refused to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding have been issued a gag order. Freedom of speech means being able to defend one's actions in public even when the law states that you behaved in an illegal manner.  For instance, those fined for libel or slander can defend their action provided they do not continue to utter anything slanderous. Refusing freedom of speech violates the first amendment. The letter Joe posted is just the beginning of the backlash from the Supreme Court ruling.

http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/in-oregon-gay-wedding-case-state-morality-enforcers-confuse-identity-and-activity/article/2567581

Agree Shelagh. 
There is an old saying:  "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
IMV.  Any merchant can decide to open or close his store.  He also can sell or not sell.  If the customer doesn't like it, they can go elsewhere.  Of course when racism enters the picture, all that goes out the window.  Now they are equating Gays & Lesbians with racism.  There is no perfect society or system.  Trying to regulate morality or other human behavior doesn't work.  Stop trying to fix it and it will eventually adjust itself.

7/3
        I look at it this way I have been in retail for over 30 years, if I had a Bake
        shop and two gay men or two gay women came in and wanted a wedding
        cake of course I would say " YES !,"  why because in retail you keep your 
        personal views out of business, doesn't belong there, I even was taught
        this in big retail, If you say yes you gain $200- if you say no which is so
        stupid you loose $200- , so you loose I would make it that's the difference
        between me and someone who's being ignorant...Just Me !

                                                       Cheers....Joe

I think everyone should take a vacation to Key West, Florida.  Especially stay for the Fantasy Fest parade.  Also, to make Joe's point, watch how much money you drop into the local economy.  Buckets. I forgot the time of year for Fantasy Fest but it was hot enough for painted, naked women to walk the streets.  Those of conservative orientation might be shocked by the whole event and feel like I did the first year that they had truly arrived in Sodom and Gomorrah.  However, I thought I arrived in Sodom and Gomorrah when I went to Las Vegas at 18 so I was already prepared for Phase II.

After you spend quality time in Key West, an astute person will realize that everyone there lives and let lives from ordinary families to the kinkiest of sexual lifestyles and behaviors.  It's a place full of choices and freedom to make choices that fit with one's beliefs.  The churches are many and full as are the bars and nudist places.  There's the high rent district to the "Keywesters," barefoot and enjoying a good rum and everything in between.

I remember it as a place safe to walk at 3:00 in the morning as it was nearly a 24 hour town - and in summer 3:00 was at least the coolest time.  I remember being shocked at children sitting on the curb with their parents to watch the parade but the children weren't shocked.  They laughed at the clowns and didn't have a clue about all the sexual innuendo on some of the floats.  They also know what a naked woman artfully painted looks like (beautiful to observe - not raunchy or sexual other than the fact that she is actually naked) without hiding girly books under their beds.  They didn't point and giggle, they just laughed when appropriate and enjoyed the bright costumes, music and fun.

I think the conservative movement in the U.S. and other nations makes things more difficult and noticeable by attempting to regulate people's sexual preferences and private, adult behaviors.  In Key West, as I have said before and similar to Joe's point about business, I often spoke at the Gay Mens Business Association. Obviously, they did want to limit their membership to men of similar persuasion.  My workforce was a mixture that one could not create on purpose of multiple ethnic and sexual persuasions - but all tending to their job descriptions during working hours.  What they did away from work that harmed no person was none of my business.

Social events and charity events had everyone present, dancing and singing and having a great time.  For my local Rotary, I sold rum and coke on the street corner raising money for scholarships.  It felt weird at first until I saw the scholarship kitty growing and people having a good time.  During Fantasy Fest, some very raunchy parties and shows bring in fabulous amounts of money for specific charities.

Even Abe, who shows a bit of a conservative cloth now and then, said to let it cool and it would settle.  It's those who benefit from stirring things up that win in a shouting match or retribution
.  Ordinary people just want to get on with their lives.  To me, it's not the person that shouts his religion but the one who quietly provides an example of their spiritual nature that is the best example.  All the shouting is necessary when a group needs to overcome intransigence.  After, stop shouting.  After, shouting is only divisive.  It's not going to change anything back.

One of the best churches full of kind and compassionate people was in Key West.  It was a church of acceptance that preached love and understanding and demonstrated it in the behavior of people in the congregation.  I also knew many people in the arts, people who were vegan with strong environmental convictions.

I was ready to leave after three years because I hungered for less of the diverse and more people who were a bit more like me in my choice of lifestyle.  It started to feel like everyone in the universe lived alternative lifestyles when it's really the few that gathered in Key West where they were part of the milieu, not outcasts. My conservative side didn't really enjoy the painted ladies or the raunchy shows for charity.  However, I would fight for the rights of those for whom those were part of the society.  It did feel odd selling rum and coke for schools.  However, once I left Key West, I never forgot the genuine warmth of the people I knew, their generosity of spirit and their truly democratic way of life with no condemnations and little crime.

Live and let live is a good maxim, DK. The problems in the Middle East or Northern Ireland show how divisive sectarianism can be. The gay rights movement is heading towards sectarianism. The obsessiveness of the activists will be their own downfall. The Gay Parades are the new Orange Parades. The gay community are already calling anyone who disagrees with them a bigot. Throughout history, homosexuals have gained and lost ground. Flamboyant lifestyles are nothing new. Eventually, the gay community will be marginalised and rejected as they have always been. We are not going through a period of enlightenment; this is just one more period of history when alternative lifestyles are allowed to flourish. True acceptance comes when people blend in and become part of the mainstream community. Then it doesn't matter about sexual preferences because everyone in the community shares the same values.