NationStates Jolt Archive

Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that?

Given that Christ's condemnation of divorce was much more decisive than his condemnation of homosexuality.

Probably the same reason they disdain Jesus's exhortation of pacifism.

perhaps because if they insulted people by suggesting that doing something specifically mentioned by jesus as being unacceptable how would they ever pay for those big ass churches??

Wow, this is one hell of a cynical thread.:p

Because that would be logical.

Becuase the brand of "Christianity" ascribed to by a great majority of American "Christians" is designed to mollify their feelings of guilt, and allow them to be self-righteous without ever changing a single thing. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with Christ, his teachings, faith, or God unless they happen to serve their purpose at that given moment, and let them do what they want to do, without guilt.

So divorce is ok, because people want to be divorced without being blamed. But homosexuality isn't, because people think it's gross. It's not about what's true, it's about what they want.

(i.e. they're not Christians at all, they just use religion to get their way.)

Divorces (as % of marriages)

Belarus 68%
Russia 65%
Sweden 64%
Latvia 63%
Ukraine 63%
Czech Republic 61%
Belgium 56%
Finland 56%
Lithuania 55%
United Kingdom 53%
Moldova 52%
United States 49%
Hungary 46%
Canada 43%
Norway 43%


(p.s., secondary note, in the countries where same-sex marriages are allowed, male-male marriages are 1.5 times as likely to divorce as heterosexual couples and female-female marriages are twice as likely to divorce as their heterosexual counterparts).

Your point still stands though, divorce is a sin and a problem and society should deal with it better than they are.

Consider the size of the problem, approximately only 4% of any given population is homosexually inclined, whereas, nearly the entire population will likely get married at some time during their lifespan. 50% of the population will eventually be divorced or be immediately affected by a divorce and 96% of the population will never be gay. The issues are not comparable., no matter that the topic of marriage can't be discussed around this forum without a bunch of DFL mascots trying to insert same-sex issues into the discussion because they maintain a disproportionate amount of coverage around here.

and Muhammud never said anything about murder...


Christians never claimed to be free of sin.



Flame on hypocritical and ignorant morons, flame on.

<snipsnip>
Your point still stands though, divorce is a sin and a problem and society should deal with it better than they are.

no the point isnt about society. obviously GOVERNMENT should allow divorce. its nutz not to. this thread is about the various churches and THEIR allowing their members to get divorced against the direct prohibition by jesus.

The loud, obnoxious ones are too busy worried about teh Queer Menace.

The quiet, unassuming ones are too busy minding their own business.

That's why.

(i.e. they're not Christians at all, they just use religion to get their way.)[/QUOTE]

some people dont use there religion to get there way though.........

and Muhammud never said anything about murder...


Christians never claimed to be free of sin.



Flame on retards, flame on.
whats your point?

while christians acknowlege that everyone sins, they dont find OTHER sins acceptable. why is divorce OK?

Because King Henry VIII said divorce was A-ok!

(i.e. they're not Christians at all, they just use religion to get their way.)

some people dont use there religion to get there way though.........[/QUOTE]

pssst

i believe those would be the good christians.

"Why do US Christians appear not to regard divorce as a sin?"

They do, but they consider staying married worse than hell.

Because Christians like to present themselves as sin-less but then go off and make porn when they have no money because every job out there helps the devil. :)

...retards...

Many sects of Christianity don't view divorce as a sin. Ergo, most American Christians, especially those in said sects of Christianity, wouldn't view it as a sin.

Simple enough?

and Muhammud never said anything about murder...


Christians never claimed to be free of sin.



Flame on hypocritical and ignorant morons, flame on.
Wow, what a great total and complete dodge of the question! Set up a strawman, and then another! And then issue a random personal attack against everyone who disagrees with you!

Okay, let's go over this.
"and Muhammud never said anything about murder..."
And what, exactly, does that have to do with the bit where the Bible does speak out against divorce? You're just randomly attacking Islam.

"Christians never claimed to be free of sin."
Of course Christians don't claim to be free from sin, but last time I checked, they did believe sin was wrong...
How come, then, many churches are allowing divorces, while focusing a lot on homosexuality? Surely, if they're both condemned, they ahould both be discouraged by those churches?

Simonist']Many sects of Christianity don't view divorce as a sin. Ergo, most American Christians, especially those in said sects of Christianity, wouldn't view it as a sin.

Simple enough?
no thats not simple enough. those sects are run by christians who think that divorce is not a sin. why DONT they?? its not like jesus went on and on about what is and isnt a sin. this one he mentioned specifically. where do they get off ignoring it??

Flame on hypocritical and ignorant morons, flame on.

Flame on retards, flame on.

Two flames for the price of one, while casting aspersions on others for flaming. Nice.

Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that?

Given that Christ's condemnation of divorce was much more decisive than his condemnation of homosexuality.

I myself have wondered the same thing. My uncle has very right wing views, and has voted for Bush twice, he has been married three times and strongly voices his opinions on anti-homosexuality.

and Muhammud never said anything about murder...


Christians never claimed to be free of sin.



Flame on hypocritical and ignorant morons, flame on.

Care to enlighten why it's hypocritical to ask these questions about Christianity? Before you answer, consider the ramifications of what you might accidentally say about yourself in the process, considering your very vocal views of Islam.

Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that?

Given that Christ's condemnation of divorce was much more decisive than his condemnation of homosexuality.
Because gay sex is icky to them, and condeming it does not affect them personnally.

If they made a bid deal about divorce they would actually have to look at their own sins instead of casting off stones upon other's perceived sins. It's not nearly as much fun.

no thats not simple enough. those sects are run by christians who think that divorce is not a sin. why DONT they?? its not like jesus went on and on about what is and isnt a sin. this one he mentioned specifically. where do they get off ignoring it??
Yes. Unfortunately, many modern Christians don't feel the need to adhere to Christ's words so much as their own confused views. It's a tragic downfall of many modern Protestant churches, whereas the Catholic church will usually kick your jive ass out if you should choose to divorce. There are, however, hypocrites all over the globe, not just America. It's not as if the Christians are the only ones getting divorced. It's not enough to say "America has the highest divorce rate, and America has a lot of Christians, therefore all these Christians are getting divorced and breaking Christ's law" because there's no way it's just the Christians.

Like I said, it's not just an American problem. It's just that the rest of the world seems to have their blinders on.

How come, then, many churches are allowing divorces, while focusing a lot on homosexuality? Surely, if they're both condemned, they ahould both be discouraged by those churches?
Let us all remind ourselves that Jesus never said anything was wrong with guys shagging guys, or girls shagging girls.

Paul and some random pope in the medieval ages did. Still not worth the son of God's word, if you ask me.

Jesus mentions adultery plenty of times though. Never mind divorce: I can understand that two persons who want to go their separate ways can be tolerated. But think of all the unfaithfulness that goes around in Christian marriages; I think that's a key issue.

Becuase the brand of "Christianity" ascribed to by a great majority of American "Christians" is designed to mollify their feelings of guilt, and allow them to be self-righteous without ever changing a single thing. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with Christ, his teachings, faith, or God unless they happen to serve their purpose at that given moment, and let them do what they want to do, without guilt.

So divorce is ok, because people want to be divorced without being blamed. But homosexuality isn't, because people think it's gross. It's not about what's true, it's about what they want.

(i.e. they're not Christians at all, they just use religion to get their way.)

Go find a bible beleiving christian and ask them what they think of divorce.

DOn't go to a panty waisted church, go to a real one.


And yes, most christians are pacifists. However, we do not sit back and let our children die for peace. We go out and take care of it ourselves.

I myself have wondered the same thing. My uncle has very right wing views, and has voted for Bush twice, he has been married three times and strongly voices his opinions on anti-homosexuality.
I would personnally call that hypocrisy, but your uncle would probably disagree with me.

Because gay sex is icky to them, and condeming it does not affect them personnally.

If they made a bid deal about divorce they would actually have to look at their own sins instead of casting off stones upon other's perceived sins. It's not nearly as much fun.


Sodom and Gommorah in the Old Testament is where we get the word Sodomy from. S&G was a cities of queers.

Not trying to Bash gays, but it's wrong.

Let us all remind ourselves that Jesus never said anything was wrong with guys shagging guys, or girls shagging girls.

Or girls shagging guys and girls :rolleyes: .

Because King Henry VIII said divorce was A-ok! Got it in one.
Simonist]Many sects of Christianity don't view divorce as a sin. Ergo, most American Christians, especially those in said sects of Christianity, wouldn't view it as a sin.

Simple enough? Matthew 19:
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"

4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'[a] 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'[b]? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

7"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

No, not simple enough.

Sodom and Gommorah in the Old Testament is where we get the word Sodomy from. S&G was a cities of queers.

Not trying to Bash gays, but it's wrong.
In the original texts, the larger point of the destruction of Sodom and Gommorah was that the angels were offended/assaulted, not that the homosexual activities were taking place.

Just a technicality.

Sodom and Gommorah in the Old Testament is where we get the word Sodomy from. S&G was a cities of queers.

Not trying to Bash gays, but it's wrong.
No it's not. I don't feel like starting a debate here, as it's not the point of this thread. But Sodom and Gomorrah were burned because their inhabitants lacked hospitality and wanted to rape the visiting angels. Gay or straight, rape is bad, and must be punished.

Remember Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. If it had been at all important to him, I'm sure he would've found a minute to talk about it. I stand by the words of the son of God, not an outdated Old Testament or Paul or some random european Pope of the dark ages.

The loud, obnoxious ones are too busy worried about teh Queer Menace.
But that's only the beginning.

Gay Wars Episode I: The Queer Menace
Gay Wars Episode II: Attack of the Queers
Gay Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Queers
Gay Wars: Episode IV: A New Queer
Gay Wars: Episode V: The Queers Strike Back
Gay Wars: Episode VI: The Return of the Queer

Got it in one.
Matthew 19:
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"

4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'[a] 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'[b]? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

7"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

No, not simple enough.
Well, would've trumped me, except I never said anything about them not actually following the words of the Bible. I just said that the individual sects don't view it as a sin. Citing the Bible in that situation doesn't really argue against my point, because everybody knows it's been a good long time since a great many Christians cared what the Bible said.

Or girls shagging guys and girls :rolleyes: .
Or guys shagging girls and guys.

My apologies to all bisexuals who might have been offended by my previous comment's lack of inclusivity.

Or guys shagging girls and guys.

My apologies to all bisexuals who might have been offended by my previous comment's lack of inclusivity.
It's so hard to include everyone nowadays. That's why I don't want to win a grammy or something - I'm sure I'll forget someone.

Simonist']In the original texts, the larger point of the destruction of Sodom and Gommorah was that the angels were offended/assaulted, not that the homosexual activities were taking place.

Just a technicality.
Damn, you beat me to it.

Probably the same reason they disdain Jesus's exhortation of pacifism.

and the 'holding all things in common' bit, or the 'sell all you own and give it to the poor' thing.

Damn, you beat me to it.
pwnd

That's all I have to say about that.

and the 'holding all things in common' bit, or the 'sell all you own and give it to the poor' thing.
Yeah. I just wonder how one could actually stay poor under those conditions; y'know, what with all the rich guys trying to give you their suff.

Simonist']Yes. Unfortunately, many modern Christians don't feel the need to adhere to Christ's words so much as their own confused views. It's a tragic downfall of many modern Protestant churches, whereas the Catholic church will usually kick your jive ass out if you should choose to divorce. There are, however, hypocrites all over the globe, not just America. It's not as if the Christians are the only ones getting divorced. It's not enough to say "America has the highest divorce rate, and America has a lot of Christians, therefore all these Christians are getting divorced and breaking Christ's law" because there's no way it's just the Christians.

Like I said, it's not just an American problem. It's just that the rest of the world seems to have their blinders on.
the catholic church never kicks anyone out for divorce. it simply does not recognize that is has taken place. (they have however loosened way up on getting an annullment within the church). as long as you dont remarry, you are fine. if you remarry and pledge to the priest that you are living as brother and sister (and really are) you are FINE. if you remarry without an annullment and have a real marriage, you are committing adultery and may not partake in the sacraments.

The problem of Christians not doing as Christ did is an ancient problem.

"Christian, n. One who believes that the New Testament is a divinely inspired book admirably suited to the spiritual needs of his neighbor. One who follows the teachings of Christ in so far as they are inconsistant with a life of sin."

Matthew 19:
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"

4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'[a] 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'[b]? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

7"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

No, not simple enough.

Interestingly enough, based on this quote, the sin is committed if a new marriage takes place. A man and woman could "divorce" and cease living together with no problem. It is only if either of them tries to marry another that adultery is committed (or, I suppose, if they just sleep with someone else).

whats your point?

while christians acknowlege that everyone sins, they dont find OTHER sins acceptable. why is divorce OK?


Are you that thick? What evidence supports your claim thatyou think any faith considers one type of sin more acceptable than another? And what the fuck does being in the States have to do with anything?

the catholic church never kicks anyone out for divorce. it simply does not recognize that is has taken place. (they have however loosened way up on getting an annullment within the church). as long as you dont remarry, you are fine. if you remarry and pledge to the priest that you are living as brother and sister (and really are) you are FINE. if you remarry without an annullment and have a real marriage, you are committing adultery and may not partake in the sacraments.
That's not the way our Archdioces handle things, I suppose. As divorce isn't recognized by the Catholics, should you choose to still go through with a divorce, especially if you then remarry, the usual punishment is excommunication. Annullments cost considerable money to the Church and most people either can't afford it or just don't give a damn, which, in my mind, is the reason that couples therapy is always going to be my choice of solutions.

Wow, what a great total and complete dodge of the question! Set up a strawman, and then another! And then issue a random personal attack against everyone who disagrees with you!

Okay, let's go over this.
"and Muhammud never said anything about murder..."
And what, exactly, does that have to do with the bit where the Bible does speak out against divorce? You're just randomly attacking Islam.
If you can't see the hypocracy of condemming one and not the other there is no useful purpose for me to discuss with you.

"Christians never claimed to be free of sin."
Of course Christians don't claim to be free from sin, but last time I checked, they did believe sin was wrong...
How come, then, many churches are allowing divorces, while focusing a lot on homosexuality? Surely, if they're both condemned, they ahould both be discouraged by those churches?
On what evidence do you consider that Churches are in a position to allow or not allow anything in the US? Considering how many churches offer marriage counseling compared to 'gender preference counseling' I find your claim dubious.

That said - I do agree that many parishoners and congregations (read - not 'churches'), world wide, have myopia when it comes to this issue. God hates sin, not sinners. Too many so called 'believers' are stuck in the old sliver/log parable.

Sodom and Gommorah in the Old Testament is where we get the word Sodomy from. S&G was a cities of queers.

Not trying to Bash gays, but it's wrong.

Care to show us where homosexuality is mentioned in the Bible in connection with Sodom or Gommorah? IIRC the problem was that the people wanted to have sex with angels. (Genesis 19:1-5)

Divorces (as % of marriages)

(p.s., secondary note, in the countries where same-sex marriages are allowed, male-male marriages are 1.5 times as likely to divorce as heterosexual couples and female-female marriages are twice as likely to divorce as their heterosexual counterparts).From whence come thy stats, and which countries? For example, many countries have only had legal SSM for a year or two, which I would think is a relatively short term for looking at these things. Especially since Canada has just recently had its first homosexual divorce - which is nowhere near the 43% percente divorce rate in Canada.

I would expect that we'd need a few more years before we could figure out what divorce rates for SSM would actually be like - and to find out what the average lengths of a SSM marriage is before divorce. Stuff like that.

Are you that thick? What evidence supports your claim thatyou think any faith considers one type of sin more acceptable than another? And what the fuck does being in the States have to do with anything?

Hey, BOzzy, a word to the wise: you might want to brush up on your Catholic theology here, particularly those parts involving the distinction between venial sins and mortal sins.

Simonist']That's not the way our Archdioces handle things, I suppose. As divorce isn't recognized by the Catholics, should you choose to still go through with a divorce, especially if you then remarry, the usual punishment is excommunication. Annullments cost considerable money to the Church and most people either can't afford it or just don't give a damn, which, in my mind, is the reason that couples therapy is always going to be my choice of solutions.
where do you LIVE?? most parishes have support groups for divorced catholics (cant pay for a bigass church if you offend all the divorced people) no one is EVER excommunicated for remarriage. no more than couples living "in sin" are ever excommunicated. they are just barred from receiving the sacraments until their status changes

there was even a case where jaqueline kennedy onassis was given COMMUNION while she was married to onassis (he was divorced). there was not the merest mention of her being excommuncated for marrying a divorced man (givng her communion was an error of course)

when you move to another diocese you are going to be amazed at how the church really works.

where do you LIVE?? most parishes have support groups for divorced catholics (cant pay for a bigass church if you offend all the divorced people) no one is EVER excommunicated for remarriage. no more than couples living "in sin" are ever excommunicated. they are just barred from receiving the sacraments until their status changes

there was even a case where jaqueline kennedy onassis was given COMMUNION while she was married to onassis (he was divorced). there was not the merest mention of her being excommuncated for marrying a divorced man (givng her communion was an error of course)

when you move to another diocese you are going to be amazed at how the church really works.
When I move to another diocese is when I enter the convent (edit: for study, not sure on whether to go all the way yet), so I certainly hope that's the result.

where do you LIVE?? most parishes have support groups for divorced catholics (cant pay for a bigass church if you offend all the divorced people) no one is EVER excommunicated for remarriage. no more than couples living "in sin" are ever excommunicated. they are just barred from receiving the sacraments until their status changes

there was even a case where jaqueline kennedy onassis was given COMMUNION while she was married to onassis (he was divorced). there was not the merest mention of her being excommuncated for marrying a divorced man (givng her communion was an error of course)

when you move to another diocese you are going to be amazed at how the church really works.As long as you get your previous marriage annuled, you can take communion. At least, this is what happened to a friend of mine who married a divorcee. I can't really claim to know exactly what happens in the Catholic church.

Annulment sounds like revisionist history to me, but if Catholics are comfortable with it, that's the main thing.

As a side note, I'd kind of like to see exactly where people are coming up with the figure that 49% of married couples divorce. As I understand it, the whole notion of a 50% divorce rate started when some dumbass reporter with a good grasp of big headlines and a low understanding of math looked at the number of marriages each year, compared with them with the number of divorces each year, and saw that the latter was half of the former. The problem, of course, is that the two statistics are almost completely unrelated: very few people who are married in any given year also contribute to the divorce statistics.

Since then, it's simply become popular wisdom, but that doesn't make it accurate. It would be far more accurate to compare the number of divorces with the total number of married couples in the country, and if you compare those numbers, I believe that you will find a pretty steady ratio: if you are married on January 1 of any given year, there is about a 98% probability that you will still be married to the same person on Dec. 31, making the divorce rate 2%, not 50%. Of course, one just makes a whole hell of a lot less of a bang.

Are you that thick? What evidence supports your claim thatyou think any faith considers one type of sin more acceptable than another? And what the fuck does being in the States have to do with anything?
well lets see. using only the examples of divorce and homosexuality and ignoring the venial/mortal sin thing....

in most protestant churches in the US (although not all) you can get divorced and remarried any number of times. in direct prohibition of the words of jesus christ.

you will never be considered a sinner for doing so or receive any "punishment" from that church. they will marry you in church as many times as you request.

if a loving committed GAY couple show up at that same church's door asking to be married ONCE they are quite likely to be rejected immediately (although not all churches would do this) jesus never said one word against homosexualtiy. he NEVER said a gay couple cant be married

if you are a CHRISTIAN which couple should be denied the right to marry in the church? the couple made of 2 divorced people or the couple made of 2 men?

if you are a CHRISTIAN which couple should be denied the right to marry in the church? the couple made of 2 divorced people or the couple made of 2 men?

Let us not forget the couple made of two divorced men.*


* or women for that matter.

As long as you get your previous marriage annuled, you can take communion. At least, this is what happened to a friend of mine who married a divorcee. I can't really claim to know exactly what happens in the Catholic church.

Annulment sounds like revisionist history to me, but if Catholics are comfortable with it, that's the main thing.
the annullment takes the marriage off the records (so to speak)

many people are quite offended by the notion that you can be married for 20 years and have a dozen children but still get an anullment.

but as long as it works out religiously thats whats important.

but anyway if you get an anullment you arent "divorced" so you are in good standing with the church.

As a side note, I'd kind of like to see exactly where people are coming up with the figure that 49% of married couples divorce. As I understand it, the whole notion of a 50% divorce rate started when some dumbass reporter with a good grasp of big headlines and a low understanding of math looked at the number of marriages each year, compared with them with the number of divorces each year, and saw that the latter was half of the former. The problem, of course, is that the two statistics are almost completely unrelated: very few people who are married in any given year also contribute to the divorce statistics.

Since then, it's simply become popular wisdom, but that doesn't make it accurate. It would be far more accurate to compare the number of divorces with the total number of married couples in the country, and if you compare those numbers, I believe that you will find a pretty steady ratio: if you are married on January 1 of any given year, there is about a 98% probability that you will still be married to the same person on Dec. 31, making the divorce rate 2%, not 50%. Of course, one just makes a whole hell of a lot less of a bang.
thats how i understand it to be calculated too.

but surely someone has done a study by now that at least does a "of the people who got married in 1995, how many were still married on 1/1/06?" kinda study...

the curve is thrown off by having some people who get divorced several times. serial marriers so to speak.

the annullment takes the marriage off the records (so to speak)

many people are quite offended by the notion that you can be married for 20 years and have a dozen children but still get an anullment.

Yeah, IIRC, annullments were originally confined to (a) marriages that had never been consummated or (b) marriages that were carried out under some false pretense.

Ah well.

thats how i understand it to be calculated too.

but surely someone has done a study by now that at least does a "of the people who got married in 1995, how many were still married on 1/1/06?" kinda study...

the curve is thrown off by having some people who get divorced several times. serial marriers so to speak.
I know that somebody around here posted the study results from Massachusetts about marriage...it was originally about comparing straight marriages to gay marriages (in terms of divorce rate), and if memory serves it found that about 20% of the straight couples that got married within the last 5 years have since gotten divorced. Now, granted that is only for one state, but Mass has one of the lowest divorce rates in the US.

Divorce is a sin, but so is a whole bunch of other stuff, as far as I can tell sometimes it's necessary for the parties involved.(like in cases of an abusive spouse)

Divorce is far too common now though, I think people get married thinking that they can always get a divorce later if they change their mind, but I come from a state with a super high divorce rate, I think we are almost top in the nation. I have volunteered for the marriage program that is run by the state, and counseled a lot of people before they get married to try and help them decide if it's a good idea. I have been shocked at the amount of crap people don't discuss before they get engaged, I had a couple once who couldn't tell me where they would live, who would work, if they would have a joint checking account, what religion the other one was and how important it was to them, if they wanted to have kids, when they wanted to have kids, how they wanted to budget the money, or even eachother's parents names. It was crazy. I think marriage as an institution is in HUGE trouble, I really wish that my fellow Christians would worry less about what the gay population was doing and work on strengthening their own families. That being said, I am sure that divorce isn't great for anyone, but sometimes it's the only way out of a horrible decision that you have made.

First of all... it is stupid that divorce is a sin, forcing people to be couples could cause much suffering, unneccesary suffering. Sometimes it is just best for couples to divorce. If it is God's will to categorize prevention of unneccesary pain a sin then he is a goddamn sadist. If I remember it right, this "sin" comes from the old testament, in the time it was written men were always the more powerful partner in a relationship and with making divorce a sin they made the womens completely powerless, leaving them defenceless against the men's oppression. I really think the reason behind making divorce a sin was not god's will, just one of his "messenger's" will. How can we know that all the prophets were completely true?

you will never be considered a sinner for doing so or receive any "punishment" from that church. they will marry you in church as many times as you request.
I don't know of any churches that regularly punish people for their sins, it's not the church's job to do that. In my denomination if you have been divorced you can't be a deacon, but I don't really see that as a punishment. What do you think the punishment for divorce should be? death penalty? what about the punishment from the church for other sins, like lying or cheating? what should the church prescribed punishment for those be?

Divorces (as % of marriages)

Belarus 68%
Russia 65%
Sweden 64%
Latvia 63%
Ukraine 63%
Czech Republic 61%
Belgium 56%
Finland 56%
Lithuania 55%
United Kingdom 53%
Moldova 52%
United States 49%
Hungary 46%
Canada 43%
Norway 43%

Sorry, I made a rash assumption. Just the US divorce rate appears so high here (I live in Ireland).

But it is worth noting that America has a much higher rate of practising Christians than most of these other countries.

and Muhammud never said anything about murder...

Christians never claimed to be free of sin.

Flame on hypocritical and ignorant morons, flame on.
What's got the bee in your bonnet?

Simonist']Many sects of Christianity don't view divorce as a sin. Ergo, most American Christians, especially those in said sects of Christianity, wouldn't view it as a sin.

How could any church calling itself Christian be OK with divorce?

Are you that thick? What evidence supports your claim thatyou think any faith considers one type of sin more acceptable than another? And what the fuck does being in the States have to do with anything?
I'm just wondering why the evangelicals who devote energy to fighting gay marriage don't spend more time fighting the tide of divorce.

I don't know of any churches that regularly punish people for their sins, it's not the church's job to do that. In my denomination if you have been divorced you can't be a deacon, but I don't really see that as a punishment. What do you think the punishment for divorce should be? death penalty? what about the punishment from the church for other sins, like lying or cheating? what should the church prescribed punishment for those be? The churches that are against divorce don't generally have punishments for divorce, because there is no such thing as divorce. They refuse to actually divorce the marriages they give.

I don't know of any churches that regularly punish people for their sins, it's not the church's job to do that. In my denomination if you have been divorced you can't be a deacon, but I don't really see that as a punishment. What do you think the punishment for divorce should be? death penalty? what about the punishment from the church for other sins, like lying or cheating? what should the church prescribed punishment for those be?
i used the word punishment but i wasnt sure what the correct word should be. as you say, the church doesnt punish. but if you cant be a deacon, its a kind of punishment.

doesnt your denomination frown on those who live in sin (unmarried people sleeping together) and treat them somehow differently from those who at least TRY to live a moral life?

Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that?

Given that Christ's condemnation of divorce was much more decisive than his condemnation of homosexuality.


Very good point. I have no idea why they are concerned with the Old Testament than the New Testament (which is what this amounts to). I'm gonna go rant about Americans and Christianity (well their perverted version of it).

i used the word punishment but i wasnt sure what the correct word should be. as you say, the church doesnt punish. but if you cant be a deacon, its a kind of punishment.
not really, it's more like you don't meet the requirements. It's no more of a punishment than me not letting my little sister drive my car because she is under 25.

doesnt your denomination frown on those who live in sin (unmarried people sleeping together) and treat them somehow differently from those who at least TRY to live a moral life?
we frown on all types of sin, but we try not to judge therefore we treat everyone the same, it's not our place to treat people differently on what we may percieve of how they are living their life.

First of all... it is stupid that divorce is a sin, forcing people to be couples could cause much suffering, unneccesary suffering. Sometimes it is just best for couples to divorce.

Of course it is sometimes best for couples to divorce - to be apart, for all sorts of reasons. However, most of these reasons probably come from sin - from flaws in the people involved. A marriage is supposed to be a pledge for life. Usually, when it isn't, it is because one or other of the two either went into the arrangement without fully thinking it through first, or because one or the other has not been true to the marriage.

I don't think Christ would suggest that a person should stay in an unhealthy situation, and I think there are all sorts of ways a person can be unfaithful - actually cheating only being one of them.

we frown on all types of sin, but we try not to judge therefore we treat everyone the same, it's not our place to treat people differently on what we may percieve of how they are living their life.

you belong to a church that doesnt condemn divorce and has no problem with people living together without being married but soundly rejects homosexuality??

doesnt the hypocrisy of it get on your nerves?

you belong to a church that doesnt condemn divorce and has no problem with people living together without being married but soundly rejects homosexuality??

doesnt the hypocrisy of it get on your nerves?
I didn't say we don't have a problem with it, in fact if we know that one of the members is sinning we try to counsel them. I was saying that we don't treat them differently or punish them, in the sense that there isn't a "sinning section" where they have to sit or anything like that. It is very much between you and God, we will help you if you need it, more like acountability, not so much a punishment or like we will kick you out of church over something.

There is a saying at our church "we are a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints", since we believe that in God's eyes one sin is not any worse than the other, why would we as sinners have any right to "punish" someone for sins? We can go to them in love and try to help them, but we would never try to punish someone.

I didn't say we don't have a problem with it, in fact if we know that one of the members is sinning we try to counsel them. I was saying that we don't treat them differently or punish them, in the sense that there isn't a "sinning section" where they have to sit or anything like that. It is very much between you and God, we will help you if you need it, more like acountability, not so much a punishment or like we will kick you out of church over something.

There is a saying at our church "we are a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints", since we believe that in God's eyes one sin is not any worse than the other, why would we as sinners have any right to "punish" someone for sins? We can go to them in love and try to help them, but we would never try to punish someone.
and you do the same for gay couples? let them live as they wish?

and you do the same for gay couples? let them live as they wish?
I doubt we would ever get any gay couples at our church and if there are some there I doubt they would 'come out' to us, just because of the rep we have (no thanks so the idiot bigots who think they speak for us) I am sure if they did come though they would be counseled just like the couple who was living together unmarried.

Sodom and Gommorah in the Old Testament is where we get the word Sodomy from. S&G was a cities of queers.

Not trying to Bash gays, but it's wrong.

No, they were destroyed because of their lack of hospitality to visitors.

Oh, and it wasn't a gay city, just a city of people who pratices pagan rituals.

So before you make stupid statements, how about making sure they're correct.

I doubt we would ever get any gay couples at our church and if there are some there I doubt they would 'come out' to us, just because of the rep we have (no thanks so the idiot bigots who think they speak for us) I am sure if they did come though they would be counseled just like the couple who was living together unmarried.
are your unmarried couples living together forced into councilling or are they offered it and left alone if they dont want it? what if they refuse?

Got it in one.
Matthew 19:
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"

4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'[a] 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'[b]? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

7"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

No, not simple enough.

*claps* thank you for quoting the most god-awful translation of the bible that has ever been concieved.

Next time, don't use bibles translated by the gay hating entourage that call themselves Southern Baptists/Protestants.

Divorces (as % of marriages)

Belarus 68%
Russia 65%
Sweden 64%
Latvia 63%
Ukraine 63%
Czech Republic 61%
Belgium 56%
Finland 56%
Lithuania 55%
United Kingdom 53%
Moldova 52%
United States 49%
Hungary 46%
Canada 43%
Norway 43%


(p.s., secondary note, in the countries where same-sex marriages are allowed, male-male marriages are 1.5 times as likely to divorce as heterosexual couples and female-female marriages are twice as likely to divorce as their heterosexual counterparts).

Your point still stands though, divorce is a sin and a problem and society should deal with it better than they are.

Consider the size of the problem, approximately only 4% of any given population is homosexually inclined, whereas, nearly the entire population will likely get married at some time during their lifespan. 50% of the population will eventually be divorced or be immediately affected by a divorce and 96% of the population will never be gay. The issues are not comparable., no matter that the topic of marriage can't be discussed around this forum without a bunch of DFL mascots trying to insert same-sex issues into the discussion because they maintain a disproportionate amount of coverage around here.

Would you care to cite on the gay marriage figures? The stats I saw were 1% divorce rate (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/15/D8EGT8A80.html) "By the end of 2004, a total of 7,549 same-sex couples had entered civil unions in Vermont, the first state to offer gay couples nearly all the rights and privileges of marriage. There have been 78 dissolutions." That's only so low since gay marriage/civil unions are so new though. For a long-term study, I heard in Denmark the divorce rate among same-sex couples was half that of the heterosexual population. Homosexuals were also only half as likely to marry. It seems homosexuals have taken the conservative mantra to heart: marriage is a sacred instution that should not be entered into lightly, and once entered, not dissolved easily.

From whence come thy stats, and which countries? For example, many countries have only had legal SSM for a year or two, which I would think is a relatively short term for looking at these things. Especially since Canada has just recently had its first homosexual divorce - which is nowhere near the 43% percente divorce rate in Canada.

I would expect that we'd need a few more years before we could figure out what divorce rates for SSM would actually be like - and to find out what the average lengths of a SSM marriage is before divorce. Stuff like that.

The quesiton I want to know is how many heterosexual marriages simply occur because there was a fuck up in the fucking department one night, and the wife, who the boyfriend really didn't like, got pregnant, she laid the guilt trip and he simply crumpled and said, "yeah, I'm marry you".

We have civil unions in New Zealand, and from the 'fellow gays' I have spoken to, they treat the ceremony as being VERY serious, and thus, some are holding off until they're truely sure of committment.

Maybe if there weren't so many accidental births, and thus, 'marriage out necessity, there wouldn't be the high divorce rate!

Im an American and a Christian and Jesus plain spelled it out, don't get divorced except for maritial unfaithfulness or your commiting adultery, that's what He said and im sticking to it, but trying to generalize all U.S. Christians really doesn't work, like almost every denomination in the world has at least one church here, and many of them are quite different on things unfortunently.

Let us all remind ourselves that Jesus never said anything was wrong with guys shagging guys, or girls shagging girls.

Paul and some random pope in the medieval ages did. Still not worth the son of God's word, if you ask me.

Jesus mentions adultery plenty of times though. Never mind divorce: I can understand that two persons who want to go their separate ways can be tolerated. But think of all the unfaithfulness that goes around in Christian marriages; I think that's a key issue.

Jesus said lots about divorce:
"Mark 10
2 Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"
3 "What did Moses command you?" he replied.
4 They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away."
5 "It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied.
6 "But at the beginning of creation God `made them male and female.'
7 `For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,
8 and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one.
9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this.
11 He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.
12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."
http://www.ph.unimelb.edu.au/~jlc/stuff2.html

Sodom and Gommorah in the Old Testament is where we get the word Sodomy from. S&G was a cities of queers.

Not trying to Bash gays, but it's wrong.

Right, because God was more pissed about guy-on-guy sex as he was that the crowd was trying to rape the angles. It was a bout rape, not homosexuality.

and you do the same for gay couples? let them live as they wish?
there isn't really a "church mandate" about what to do. I can only speak from experience, and I haven't had much in this area. Basically we try to go by Matthew 18 rules, if someone is screwing up, go talk to them alone, if they don't listen, then go talk to them with a few friends, if they still don't listen bring it before the church, if they still don't listen then disfellowship them (ie kick them out) until they are ready to come back and act right. Usually I have seen that most change their behavior after the one comes to talk to them, I haven't ever seen it get past the 2 or 3 friends. Well, except once, and I got kicked out of church, I never did go back there. ;)

Like I said though there is no "set rule" as to what to do so I figure bad stuff happens, and likewise nothing happens, depending on where and who you are dealing with. I haven't ever seen anyone "forced" into counseling, mostly it's a case of you are supposed to confront your brother with his sin, kinda an accountability thing (like in AA when they give you a sponsor).

Then again I have been kicked out of church before, so I don't know, sometimes things do get bad.

Money, money, money. It's all about the money. The more marriages performed, the more money they get. Can't put all that gold in the churches without money.

The church secretly knows that gay marriages will last longer. Plus, take Woman A who marries Man B. Man B can't have children, so Woman A leaves Man B and marries Man C (more money), have six children and get them baptised (more money). Woman A finds out Man C is having an affair and divorces him. Woman A marries Man D (more money), Man C marries Woman E (more money) and those six children grow up, marry and start the cycle all over again (lotsa money)!

Oh yeah. Whatever happened to Man B? He realized he was gay after his wife left him and has a life-partner.

Wow, what a daunting place to begin trying to figure out how forums work...

Regarding the original question "Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that? Given that Christ's condemnation of divorce was much more decisive than his condemnation of homosexuality."

I don't fully understand why Americans were singled out here. It was my impression that American opinions responses to these issues, whatever religion, were not especially unique from opinions or responses of other nations around the globe regardless of respective divorce rates (although I too have seen evidence that these rates are somewhat misleading).

I would like to point out that the apparent discrepency between attitudes towards divorce and homosexuality could be due to the fact that Jesus recognizes a case for which divorce is permissable (i.e. sexual immorality); however, in no instance throughout the Bible will you find a place where homosexuality is considered acceptable. Therefore, it is not accurate to state that His condemnation of divorce is "much more decisive." It's just much more explicit. I would say that in modern American culture, it is my observation marriage is frequently a religious issue whereas divorce tends to be more of a legal issue. I don't know about all religions and faiths, so I won't state this as particularly strong evidence, but at least in the churches I am familiar with, the divorce is strongly discouraged, but seeing as how the church itself does not actually conduct the divorce like they do the marriage ceremony, there is not much they can do but provide solace to those going through or recovering from what is no doubt a very distressful process.

In regards to whether or not Christ spoke of homosexuality or permitted homosexual marriage, in the passage that has been previously referred to, Christ defined marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." Any sexual relations outside of this married union between a man and a woman, regardless of gender, therefore falls under the category of sexual immorality (or "adultery"), which Jesus does explicitly speak to.

As for the history of Sodom and Gomorrah, God stated clearly that the two cities were full of wickedness and would be destroyed before the Angels ever visited. After the angels travel to Sodom, we see just what exactly the wickedness is... including demanding to have sex with the Angels visiting Lot.
The issue of rape cannot be separated clearly from the issue of homosexuality in this passage. They are intwined here and both serve as examples of the "wickedness" found in the city. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed not because they were going to rape the Angels sent there, but because they were a mob out of control indulging in many things they shouldn't have been doing including rape and homosexuality.

Finally, I would like to comment on labeling anyone who disapproves of homosexuality as "homophobic," "gay-bashing," ignorant and fearful, or the like. There are things I disapprove of that I'm scared of (e.g. rape), things I disapprove of that I'm not scared of (e.g. stealing), things I disapprove of that I'm ignorant about (e.g. accounting fraud). Likewise, there are things in similar categories which I do not disapprove of (e.g. I have neither fear nor understanding of abstract algebra). Most people would hesitate to label someone a "pedophile-basher" because they believe pedophilia is wrong and harmful to society or label anyone who disapproves of stealing a "cleptophobe." I have no doubt that there are those who are scared of homosexuality due to ignorance or otherwise, but those who assume all or even most people who oppose homosexuality are "homophobic" are not proving to be any more openminded than those they are accusing.

As for me, I'm a conservative American Christian (in case you couldn't tell...;) who has had more than one openly gay friend, and I find myself neither "homophobic" nor prone to "gay-bashing," nor do I see this in any of my conservative christian friends. I consider homosexuality to be a lifestyle that ought not to be encouraged nor legalized. Divorce I consider a choice that ought not to be encouraged, although I recognize there are instances in which it is regrettably necessary. Both of these I consider to be largely damaging to the perpetuation of a healthy society.

And now, I think this post has gone on a lot longer than I expected it to, so I'll stop myself here and go to bed.

whats your point?

while christians acknowlege that everyone sins, they dont find OTHER sins acceptable. why is divorce OK?

Divorce isnt OK. And if you look at when the divorce laws were being considered to make it easier, you will proberbly find that they were kicking up a stink about it. But they lost that battle. Many churches will still preach against divorce but to push the battle back, to stop the vast flow of divorces that now happen is much more difficult in terms of a legal sense. Now most churches will go to the people themselves to offer ways to help stop their marriages from breaking down, or appeal to soceity to change the way it looks at marriage. Christians still regard divorce as a serious issue. Its just that the way it is delt with now in Christian circles is not as public as the way homosexuality is being delt with

Divorce might be a sin, but murder is a bigger sin. :p

I'm just wondering why the evangelicals who devote energy to fighting gay marriage don't spend more time fighting the tide of divorce.

You have demonstrated your foolish ignorance about christian religion with that statement. Churches, evangelican or otherwise, all spend considerable resources on pre and post marriage counseling.

You really should know your subject before you start making claims which illustrate your ignorance so fully.

Hey, BOzzy, a word to the wise: you might want to brush up on your Catholic theology here, particularly those parts involving the distinction between venial sins and mortal sins.


Catholic? Oh - I thought we were talking about christians. ;)

You have demonstrated your foolish ignorance about christian religion with that statement. Churches, evangelican or otherwise, all spend considerable resources on pre and post marriage counseling.

You really should know your subject before you start making claims which illustrate your ignorance so fully. Please tell me why so many Protestant churches in America allow the marriages they give people to be divorced.

well lets see. using only the examples of divorce and homosexuality and ignoring the venial/mortal sin thing....

in most protestant churches in the US (although not all) you can get divorced and remarried any number of times. in direct prohibition of the words of jesus christ.


Really? You can get a divorce at a protestant church? Drive thru or only inside? Do they give you a certificate? How about a t-shirt too? "My folks got divorced at 1st assembly and all I got was this lousy t-shirt". You dufus - no churches have juristiction over divorce. and very few deal in annullments.

you will never be considered a sinner for doing so or receive any "punishment" from that church. they will marry you in church as many times as you request.

So now churches are in the business of 'punishing' sin? Gawd your knowledge on this subject is fucked up.

if a loving committed GAY couple show up at that same church's door asking to be married ONCE they are quite likely to be rejected immediately (although not all churches would do this) jesus never said one word against homosexualtiy. he NEVER said a gay couple cant be married

not only are you wrong, but your logic is also flawed. I'm pretty sure Jesus never said you couldn't marry an iguana either.

if you are a CHRISTIAN which couple should be denied the right to marry in the church? the couple made of 2 divorced people or the couple made of 2 men?
Considering a church is free to set their own agenda - whoever the church wants to can get married or be excluded there. It is nobodys business to tell them otherwise. Viva freedom! Considering the Christian bible establishes marriage as a union 'between one man and one woman' - any 'real' christian church (one which follows the doctrine set out by the bible) would be limited to that definition. That does not mean that gays should be excluded from attendace, communion, counseling, recreation or any other church activity. No more so than alcoholics, liars or drug adicts. I personally would not attend any church which did. Sadly, there are plenty of churches I will not attend. There is a far cry from endorsing sin and forgiving it. For a church to offer gay marriage they would also have to offer 'Open Keg Friday' - drunkenness is also against biblcal doctrine - don't mean people who drink to excess are excluded - just not endorsed.

-There - I explained it nicely without too many big words. Not sure what got into me. Dang.

Please tell me why so many Protestant churches in America allow the marriages they give people to be divorced.

Fool. First of all - why is your query exclusive to the states? Second - what choice do they have? Third - you really don't know much about the doctrine of the new testaments if you don't know what forgiveness...

The church is not the enforcement agency of God. Where would you get such a fucked up idea?


OK< maybe I shouldn't be so hard on you. I suppose your leading question is really your attempt to learn. In that case I applaud you. If you were just trying to make a point - it was quite invalid and foolish - particulary considering you felt the need, for some reason, to make it exclusive to the states.

Fool. First of all - why is your query exclusive to the states? Because the churches in the States tend to be more strict on other matters than, say, the CoE, which takes a slightly fuzzy line on most things. Second - what choice do they have? They have the choice to not perform divorces if they don't want to. Third - you really don't know much about the doctrine of the new testaments if you don't know what forgiveness...

The church is not the enforcement agency of God. Where would you get such a fucked up idea? I never said it was the "enforcement agency" and it has nothing to do with forgiveness. Simply put, if the Churches believe that Christian marriage cannot be broken, as Jesus said, then why do they perform divorces? I'm not talking about people getting civil divorces from the government and the Church trying to stop it - that'd be stupid - but the Churches performing their own divorces of their own marriages, and recognising divorces as valid.[/QUOTE]

that's just the way we Americans are you dolt.....why do you even care ? Do you vote here ? it would appear you do not. So why are you worrying yourself with our problems. Go get a haircut, get in a drug rehab program, and read a bible......and get a gun...you got to have a gun if your gona be an Americam....a gun and a bible......thats about all you really need.......you silly people make me sick :headbang:

Please tell me why so many Protestant churches in America allow the marriages they give people to be divorced.

Can you propose how they would enforce them staying togther? Divorce is a legal arangement now, the church institution has no power to stop it.

Can you propose how they would enforce them staying togther? Divorce is a legal arangement now, the church institution has no power to stop it. Don't most Churches have the power to marry people by themselves, and divorce people, not just doing the ceremoney?

It's also the fact that the Churches recognise divorces as valid.

...They have the choice to not perform divorces if they don't want to. ...


ROFLMAO!!!!


hahahahahahahaha


Really, did you mean that or are you TRYING to be funny?

Don't most Churches have the power to marry people by themselves, and divorce people, not just doing the ceremoney?

It's also the fact that the Churches recognise divorces as valid.


No, churches do not 'perform' divorces - but it is funny to image what one would be like if they did. Would there be cake? Instead of
'kiss the bride' would it be "kick the bastard in his nuts!" What color would they wear? Black and blue?

Wow, what a daunting place to begin trying to figure out how forums work...

Regarding the original question "Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that? Given that Christ's condemnation of divorce was much more decisive than his condemnation of homosexuality."

I don't fully understand why Americans were singled out here. It was my impression that American opinions responses to these issues, whatever religion, were not especially unique from opinions or responses of other nations around the globe regardless of respective divorce rates (although I too have seen evidence that these rates are somewhat misleading).

I would like to point out that the apparent discrepency between attitudes towards divorce and homosexuality could be due to the fact that Jesus recognizes a case for which divorce is permissable (i.e. sexual immorality); however, in no instance throughout the Bible will you find a place where homosexuality is considered acceptable. Therefore, it is not accurate to state that His condemnation of divorce is "much more decisive." It's just much more explicit. I would say that in modern American culture, it is my observation marriage is frequently a religious issue whereas divorce tends to be more of a legal issue. I don't know about all religions and faiths, so I won't state this as particularly strong evidence, but at least in the churches I am familiar with, the divorce is strongly discouraged, but seeing as how the church itself does not actually conduct the divorce like they do the marriage ceremony, there is not much they can do but provide solace to those going through or recovering from what is no doubt a very distressful process.

In regards to whether or not Christ spoke of homosexuality or permitted homosexual marriage, in the passage that has been previously referred to, Christ defined marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." Any sexual relations outside of this married union between a man and a woman, regardless of gender, therefore falls under the category of sexual immorality (or "adultery"), which Jesus does explicitly speak to.

As for the history of Sodom and Gomorrah, God stated clearly that the two cities were full of wickedness and would be destroyed before the Angels ever visited. After the angels travel to Sodom, we see just what exactly the wickedness is... including demanding to have sex with the Angels visiting Lot.
The issue of rape cannot be separated clearly from the issue of homosexuality in this passage. They are intwined here and both serve as examples of the "wickedness" found in the city. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed not because they were going to rape the Angels sent there, but because they were a mob out of control indulging in many things they shouldn't have been doing including rape and homosexuality.

Finally, I would like to comment on labeling anyone who disapproves of homosexuality as "homophobic," "gay-bashing," ignorant and fearful, or the like. There are things I disapprove of that I'm scared of (e.g. rape), things I disapprove of that I'm not scared of (e.g. stealing), things I disapprove of that I'm ignorant about (e.g. accounting fraud). Likewise, there are things in similar categories which I do not disapprove of (e.g. I have neither fear nor understanding of abstract algebra). Most people would hesitate to label someone a "pedophile-basher" because they believe pedophilia is wrong and harmful to society or label anyone who disapproves of stealing a "cleptophobe." I have no doubt that there are those who are scared of homosexuality due to ignorance or otherwise, but those who assume all or even most people who oppose homosexuality are "homophobic" are not proving to be any more openminded than those they are accusing.

As for me, I'm a conservative American Christian (in case you couldn't tell...;) who has had more than one openly gay friend, and I find myself neither "homophobic" nor prone to "gay-bashing," nor do I see this in any of my conservative christian friends. I consider homosexuality to be a lifestyle that ought not to be encouraged nor legalized. Divorce I consider a choice that ought not to be encouraged, although I recognize there are instances in which it is regrettably necessary. Both of these I consider to be largely damaging to the perpetuation of a healthy society.

And now, I think this post has gone on a lot longer than I expected it to, so I'll stop myself here and go to bed.

/signed

Don't most Churches have the power to marry people by themselves, and divorce people, not just doing the ceremoney?

It's also the fact that the Churches recognise divorces as valid.

Divorce is possible acording to the Bible. For reasons of unfaithfulness (which of its nature includes abuse). Churches do not have the power alone to divorce people. Thats partly carried out by the state.

but the Churches performing their own divorces of their own marriages, and recognising divorces as valid.

Divorce is allowed in the Bible. Look it up. Only for reasons of unfaithfulness

Obviously, men who love men are more harmful to a nations moral fibre than quicky drive-thru marriages with a side of fries and daily bombing the living shit out of countries whose names you cannot pronounce.

Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that?

Given that Christ's condemnation of divorce was much more decisive than his condemnation of homosexuality.

There are several demoninations that view divorce as a sin. Church of God of Prophecy, Church of Christ, Pentecostal Holiness, First Congregational Holiness, etc... The views of most liberal christians do not assign literal value to the "RED" words of Jesus nor bible writings. Liberal christianity is a great platform for socialism and pacifism. The focus is on the teachings of Christ being a guide (not life or death to adherents/non-adherents) to live our lives in harmony with neighbor, family, community and society. This is true in all countries, not just USA.

The negative view of homosexuality follows the same lines, with moderate christians weighing in on the repulsed side, more so than with divorce. The church (christian) has changed as society has changed. The conservatives are slower to come around. Even the conservative christian in America doesn't think some passages are for today because society has changed its perceptions on slavery, womens' rights and racial equality.

Bigots are the way they are whether religious or not and inhabit every part of society.

rather than go point by point with different posters ill just restate the obvious

churches dont grant marriages or divorces, the state does that. FINE.

the church does, however, perform marriage and recognize marriage.

if *I* (meaning me) dropped into a church and asked to be married to "joe" they would refuse me as i am already married. if i were unmarried and asked to be married to "jane" they would also reject me as they dont recognize gay marriage. (although some sects do and would be glad to perform the ceremony)

if i get divorced and want to marry "joe", a church may reject my request because, while i am actually divorced in the eyes of the state, THEY do not recognize my divorce and consider me to still be married.

since jesus christ himself denied the reality of divorce, where do YOU get off saying its OK? jesus said if i get divorced and remarry, i am committing adultery. why would ANY church certify that sin???

as to gay marriage. its not so much that i think gays should be married in the church (even though i do) but the hypocrisy of saying gays are miserable sinners while accepting divorced and remarried people as perfectly FINE.

hypocrisy got on jesus's nerves too.

But that's only the beginning.

Gay Wars Episode I: The Queer Menace
Gay Wars Episode II: Attack of the Queers
Gay Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Queers
Gay Wars: Episode IV: A New Queer
Gay Wars: Episode V: The Queers Strike Back
Gay Wars: Episode VI: The Return of the Queer

ROFLMAO

there isn't really a "church mandate" about what to do. I can only speak from experience, and I haven't had much in this area. Basically we try to go by Matthew 18 rules, if someone is screwing up, go talk to them alone, if they don't listen, then go talk to them with a few friends, if they still don't listen bring it before the church, if they still don't listen then disfellowship them (ie kick them out) until they are ready to come back and act right. Usually I have seen that most change their behavior after the one comes to talk to them, I haven't ever seen it get past the 2 or 3 friends. Well, except once, and I got kicked out of church, I never did go back there. ;)

Like I said though there is no "set rule" as to what to do so I figure bad stuff happens, and likewise nothing happens, depending on where and who you are dealing with. I haven't ever seen anyone "forced" into counseling, mostly it's a case of you are supposed to confront your brother with his sin, kinda an accountability thing (like in AA when they give you a sponsor).

Then again I have been kicked out of church before, so I don't know, sometimes things do get bad.

gee, i consider getting kicked out of the church to be a punishment.

but, to the point of the thread, would they EVER council a married couple consisting of people who had been married and divorce to get a civil divorce because they cannot possibly be married in the eyes of god? im gonna be so bold as to say that has never ever happened. that no matter what the direct command of jesus saying that they are committing adultery, they will never be councilled that way.

it can only be called hypocrisy when a church will completely accept couples committing adultery in this way but drive a loving gay couple from their midst for consistantly sinning.

Yes the divorce rate among couples in Western countries are high but it's probably because of the freedom of choice practiced by these nations. Divorce was meant to end an abusive marriage but right now it's all Hollywood. People are now quick to divorce over sex, money, property and I believe that's the sinful part of divorce. Did you know that divorce was created by King of England and Ireland name Henry VIII, because his wive could not give him a son. This one you can't blame on women fellas.:D

Despite having the world's highest divorce rate, Americans seem to make a much bigger deal about homosexuality while treating divorce as normal. What's up with that?
Because they aren't Christians. They're idolators who have procured and corrupted Christian symbols to suit whatever agenda they see fit - for the most part, telling other people how to live and think.

You have demonstrated your foolish ignorance about christian religion with that statement. Churches, evangelican or otherwise, all spend considerable resources on pre and post marriage counseling.

You really should know your subject before you start making claims which illustrate your ignorance so fully.
Then why don't they talk about it as much as they talk about homosexuality? Why can't you address me politely?

Because they aren't Christians. They're idolators who have procured and corrupted Christian symbols to suit whatever agenda they see fit - for the most part, telling other people how to live and think.
Keruvalia? Is that you?

Like others have said, I figure its because they percieve the topic as something that doesn't as directly effect their lives (mostly), and can thus be easily condemned as "other". This will change slowly as more and more christian youngsters come out as gay and force their religious communitied and families to accept it.

Keruvalia? Is that you?

Like others have said, I figure its because they percieve the topic as something that doesn't as directly effect their lives (mostly), and can thus be easily condemned as "other". This will change slowly as more and more christian youngsters come out as gay and force their religious communitied and families to accept it. Probably. Henry VIII came out as divorced and forced his country to accept it.

Then why don't they talk about it as much as they talk about homosexuality? Why can't you address me politely?


Demonstrate to me that they don't. I have already illustrated that churches expend a considerable amount of effort promoting marriage. Have you ever looked in a christian bookstore? Compare the section on marriage related issues to the section on homosexuality. Look at any church's website and compare the marriage related services compared to the homosexual ones. That shouldn't be too hard for ya, no?

You are using assumptions which fit your agenda rather than providing evidence of any substance. Your only evidence is your bias. You expect me to treat you like my best bud when you act like that? I don't care what group you want to discuss - using agenda ridden assumptions (read - stereotypes) as facts will get you my scorn. It is no different than saying 'why do all gays feel the need to dress like freaks and parade around'. It is untrue, unfounded, and unfair.

When you are ready to treay the subject with respect rather than stereotypes then you will get treated like a bud. Till then - ptptptptbtbtbttt!:p

Demonstrate to me that they don't. I have already illustrated that churches expend a considerable amount of effort promoting marriage. Have you ever looked in a christian bookstore? Compare the section on marriage related issues to the section on homosexuality. Look at any church's website and compare the marriage related services compared to the homosexual ones. That shouldn't be too hard for ya, no?

You are using assumptions which fit your agenda rather than providing evidence of any substance. Your only evidence is your bias. You expect me to treat you like my best bud when you act like that? I don't care what group you want to discuss - using agenda ridden assumptions (read - stereotypes) as facts will get you my scorn. It is no different than saying 'why do all gays feel the need to dress like freaks and parade around'. It is untrue, unfounded, and unfair.

When you are ready to treay the subject with respect rather than stereotypes then you will get treated like a bud. Till then - ptptptptbtbtbttt!:p
What's my agenda? I don't expect you to treat me as your "bud", just not getting flamebaited would be nice. It might even be conducive to an intelligent discussion, but since you're about the most partisan hack on this board, you don't want that. (how d'ya like them apples? ;) )

I don't care about Christian bookstores or church counselling in America. If you want consistency, why can't the conservative Christians keep their issues with homosexuals within their churches and bookstores? If they're going to drag homosexuality onto the public - even the political - stage then they should also give divorce similar treatment.

What's my agenda? I don't expect you to treat me as your "bud", just not getting flamebaited would be nice. It might even be conducive to an intelligent discussion, but since you're about the most partisan hack on this board, you don't want that. (how d'ya like them apples? ;) )

I don't care about Christian bookstores or church counselling in America. If you want consistency, why can't the conservative Christians keep their issues with homosexuals within their churches and bookstores? If they're going to drag homosexuality onto the public - even the political - stage then they should also give divorce similar treatment.

So, using your same argument, then homosexuals should keep marriage issues within their own little space too, right? OOoo, double standard. Call me a hack for exposing it. GO ahead. You still have failed to demonstrate that churches spend a disportionate amout of time on the topic of homosexuality vs any other topics. Seems to me the homosexuals spoend considerably more time discussing it than the churches do. Maybe they should shut up also?

O - and - btw - goddam that was fast! I just barely logged in and posted. I'm going to be logging out soon too.

Also, if you can't take alittle attitude with your serving of facts to refute your stereotypes - well. :p ptptptptptbbttbtbtt!! Sorry I don't take your and others insulting stereotypes like a good little conservative. (actually libertarian - but whatever) The amount of shit flung at the minority here does make my temper short and outlook sour. Don't take it personal - just try to be a bit more sensitive about your stereotypes. Ask instead of challenge. You will find the responses more in line with your desires.

rather than go point by point with different posters ill just restate the obvious

churches dont grant marriages or divorces, the state does that. FINE.

the church does, however, perform marriage and recognize marriage.

if *I* (meaning me) dropped into a church and asked to be married to "joe" they would refuse me as i am already married. if i were unmarried and asked to be married to "jane" they would also reject me as they dont recognize gay marriage. (although some sects do and would be glad to perform the ceremony)

if i get divorced and want to marry "joe", a church may reject my request because, while i am actually divorced in the eyes of the state, THEY do not recognize my divorce and consider me to still be married.

since jesus christ himself denied the reality of divorce, where do YOU get off saying its OK? jesus said if i get divorced and remarry, i am committing adultery. why would ANY church certify that sin???

as to gay marriage. its not so much that i think gays should be married in the church (even though i do) but the hypocrisy of saying gays are miserable sinners while accepting divorced and remarried people as perfectly FINE.

hypocrisy got on jesus's nerves too.


THIS is an example of the right way. Note it is not challenging so much as asking. Asking in a respectful and thoughtful way. In fact - as questions go I find this one magnificent. It is not too wordy, states and supports the presumptions, then asks the query without assigning a presumptive and offensive answer to it's own question. As theological questions go this has to be about the best I've ever seen here at NS. It makes me think, it makes me research, it makes me question. Note - it does not offend.

I intend to look into an answer. I think I know it - but Ash deserves better than an educated guess to this question. I am eager to confirm or adjust my expectation of the answer. I look forward to it. - but for now I must log off. Not feeling well....

I should add - a good many churches these days do not simply wed on command. I learned this the hard way ten years ago on the 13th of this month.

My wife is not a citizen and wanted to be married in her homeland. Concerned about immigration issues, we got married in a US courthouse, then flew to her country for a church wedding. We had only a week. We never considered that just about every church we went to would require pre-marital counseling - taking anywhere for three to six weeks.

Thank goodness my brother in law had some pull at his church, and considering we were already married (and only because of that and his influence) they agreed to give us a church ceremony.

So I can say first-hand that I have been rejected by a church for marriage - more than once. And I'm not even gay or divorced!!!

So, using your same argument, then homosexuals should keep marriage issues within their own little space too, right? OOoo, double standard. Call me a hack for exposing it. GO ahead. You still have failed to demonstrate that churches spend a disportionate amout of time on the topic of homosexuality vs any other topics. Seems to me the homosexuals spoend considerably more time discussing it than the churches do. Maybe they should shut up also?
Way to dodge my points! Of course homos spend more time talking about it. Their own marriage directly concerns them. If Christians want to talk about homosexuality on the political stage, that's OK. But they should also talk about divorce. There seems to be a lack of consistency here. Last I checked, gay marriage is a bigger political issue than divorce in America, despite it being rather less widespread than the latter.

Also, if you can't take alittle attitude with your serving of facts to refute your stereotypes - well. :p ptptptptptbbttbtbtt!! Sorry I don't take your and others insulting stereotypes like a good little conservative. (actually libertarian - but whatever) The amount of shit flung at the minority here does make my temper short and outlook sour. Don't take it personal - just try to be a bit more sensitive about your stereotypes. Ask instead of challenge. You will find the responses more in line with your desires.
You don't have any facts. Only insults. Why can't you just calm down, keep your emotions under control and act civilly like most other posters? I also lack your compassion for the "oppressed conservative minority". At least in some little insignificant space they know how it feels to be oppressed rather than the oppressors for once.

No, you're not conservative. You're just outrageously defensive of them. Oh and you hate liberals too. (I've seen your other posts.)

Keruvalia? Is that you?

Nope, just an aging SubGenius Minister with a cable modem.

rather than go point by point with different posters ill just restate the obvious

churches dont grant marriages or divorces, the state does that. FINE.

the church does, however, perform marriage and recognize marriage.

if *I* (meaning me) dropped into a church and asked to be married to "joe" they would refuse me as i am already married. if i were unmarried and asked to be married to "jane" they would also reject me as they dont recognize gay marriage. (although some sects do and would be glad to perform the ceremony)

if i get divorced and want to marry "joe", a church may reject my request because, while i am actually divorced in the eyes of the state, THEY do not recognize my divorce and consider me to still be married.

since jesus christ himself denied the reality of divorce, where do YOU get off saying its OK? jesus said if i get divorced and remarry, i am committing adultery. why would ANY church certify that sin???

as to gay marriage. its not so much that i think gays should be married in the church (even though i do) but the hypocrisy of saying gays are miserable sinners while accepting divorced and remarried people as perfectly FINE.

hypocrisy got on jesus's nerves too.


OK Ash, sorry it took me a while. Considering I have an anniversary soon I figured it was best to be a bit discreet researching this particular subject. ;)

Here is about the best link I found;
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/topics/divorce_remarriage/div_rem_bbc.html

There is TONS of catholic stuff out there - most of which condemns remarriage. I am a bit surprized. Remarriage is not nearly so accepted by churches as I had expected. I have been fortunate to have never had firsthand experience with this.

I chose this link because it illustrates the difficulty churches have in setting policy about remarriage. Most allow divorce, but remarriage is the stickler. This essay discusses how this particular church came to their policy decision. Other churches may follow different doctrines.

One other article I found made mention that part of why their church softened on the position was they were concerned about children of these couples being excluded from the church - a factor considerably less common with homosexuals.

So, essentially, the church does not seem to be as easy on remarriage (not to be confused with divorce) as you (and I) both presumed.

Because "it's not a sin unless it's something I'd never do anyway" is the prevalent mentality.

Way to dodge my points! Of course homos spend more time talking about it. ..(snip)...
You don't have any facts. Only insults.


Any one else find that as funny as I do?