Defending Biblical Marriage (?)

[Shattered Soul]

A friend sent this to me (knowing I think that whatever kind of couple wants to get married should be able to), and I thought I'd pass it on to you folks.



Draft of a Constitutional Amendment to Defend Biblical Marriage


As certain politicians work diligently to prevent marriage between
two people of the same sex, others of us have been busy drafting a
Constitutional Amendment codifying all marriages entirely on
Biblical principles. After all, God wouldn't want us to "pick and
choose" which of the Scriptures we elevate to civil law and which we
choose to ignore:


Draft of a Constitutional Amendment to Defend Biblical Marriage:


* Marriage in the United States of America shall consist of a union
between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam
3:2-5.)


* Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in
addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron
11:21)


* A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a
virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut
22:13-21)


* Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden.
(Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30, 2Cor 6:14)


* Since marriage is for life, neither the US Constitution nor any
state law shall permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9-12)


* If a married man dies without children, his brother must marry
the widow. If the brother refuses to marry the widow, or deliberately
does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be
otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen.
38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)


* In lieu of marriage (if there are no acceptable men to be found),
a woman shall get her father drunk and have sex with him. (Gen
19:31-36)


I hope this helps to clarify the finer details of the Government's
righteous struggle against the infidels and heathens among us.

[BrianR]

Damn, that's the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.

I have, somewhere in the depths of my hard drive, a document similar to this one in which the Ten Commandments have been updated for the times.

It shows them, chiseled onto stone tablets as usual, with one exception. The familiar, "Thou Shalt Not" has been replaced with the applicable sections of the US Code, complete with references.

It's sad that this "updated" version, which codifies ALL of the Commandments in different words, is completely permissible in courtrooms, classrooms and most anyplace else, but the archaic wording version is not only banned, but villified.

Sometimes, I think I'll never understand politics, religion and law.

Brian

[staceyv]

so when is my execution?

[Clodfobble]

I've been lurking for more than a year here, but I guess this proves I have a really hard time letting inaccurate information go by...

Now, personally, I think marriage is just as much a secular institution as a religious one and therefore anyone who wants to marry anyone else is fine in my book.

But almost all of those references (with the exceptions of some in the fourth and fifth items) are from the Old Testament, which is *not* the same as the Bible as a whole. The New Testament spends a great deal of time directly countermanding the Old Testament, but the Old Testament is still part of the Bible because you can't say "make it x plus 2" unless you know what x was to begin with. Christians by definition believe in the New Testament.

Incidentally, the first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), where a lot of those references come from, are also sometimes called another document--the Torah. Obviously orthodox Jews aren't trying to make constitutional amendments as such, but my point is Christians don't actually believe in many of those passages, as they are specifically disregarded in later books.

So was that worth registering for, or should I have kept quiet for another few years?

[wolf]

Now was as good a time as any to jump in.

Welcome, and congrats on breaking the lurk barrier.

[lumberjim]

are there more of you out there? .....watching?

[wolf]

hundreds.

lying in wait.

they will catch you unawares.

you weren't really needing that spleen, now, were you?

[Clodfobble]

I'm pretty sure most of us get connected by way of the IOTD. You can thank UT later.

[Radar]

Here is a great article entitled "Here's How to Defend Marriage" by Harry Browne which is an amusing and eloquent description of how "marriage" can best be saved. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

When you're done, you also might want to check out another of his articles called "The Bush Doctrine"... " which is an excellent look at Bush and his policies and how laughable it is when he claims to be a defender of freedom.

[Elspode]

Originally posted by Clodfobble
<snip>...Christians don't actually believe in many of those passages, as they are specifically disregarded in later books.

I figure, hey, Jehovah changed his mind once, maybe he'll do it again...

[Shattered Soul]

Originally posted by Clodfobble
I've been lurking for more than a year here, but I guess this proves I have a really hard time letting inaccurate information go by...

Now, personally, I think marriage is just as much a secular institution as a religious one and therefore anyone who wants to marry anyone else is fine in my book.

But almost all of those references (with the exceptions of some in the fourth and fifth items) are from the Old Testament, which is *not* the same as the Bible as a whole. The New Testament spends a great deal of time directly countermanding the Old Testament, but the Old Testament is still part of the Bible because you can't say "make it x plus 2" unless you know what x was to begin with. Christians by definition believe in the New Testament.

Incidentally, the first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), where a lot of those references come from, are also sometimes called another document--the Torah. Obviously orthodox Jews aren't trying to make constitutional amendments as such, but my point is Christians don't actually believe in many of those passages, as they are specifically disregarded in later books.

So was that worth registering for, or should I have kept quiet for another few years?

Oh, pitch in, by all means!

I'm a pagan, so all that christian stuff doesn't apply to me

[Radar]

Some Christians think the new testament invalidates the old or somehow erases it. They act as though the Old Testament weren't even part of the bible and they ignore the many gaping holes in the bible.

I've had a few Christian fundamentalists try to tell me how dangerous Muslims are and they claimed the Quran teaches hate, and to kill Christians and they mention some harsh punishments under Muslim Law. When I mention the harsh penalties in the bible such as death by stoning for adultury, disobedient children, beastiliaty, or even planting more than one crop in the same field, they say "that was the old testament" as though the old testament were not in the bible.

Luckily for us, The United States of America is not now, now has it ever been a Christian nation. It was founded by Diests and Unitarians who believe in a generic natural higher power that was called a "god" for lack of a better word. But they certaily didn't believe in the judeo-christian mono-theistic concept of "God" with a capital G.


"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." -George Washington

[Happy Monkey]

Originally posted by BrianR
I have, somewhere in the depths of my hard drive, a document similar to this one in which the Ten Commandments have been updated for the times. ... It's sad that this "updated" version, which codifies ALL of the Commandments in different words, is completely permissible in courtrooms, classrooms and most anyplace else, but the archaic wording version is not only banned, but villified.

Dig it up. I'd be curious to see it, especially the first commandment.

[99 44/100% pure]

Originally posted by Clodfobble
But almost all of those references (with the exceptions of some in the fourth and fifth items) are from the Old Testament, which is *not* the same as the Bible as a whole.

Um, there's about 1.5 % of the US population which would disagree with you on that. I thought the whole point of having a split representational democracy was to avoid the tyranny of the majority. Just because YOU (and 90-something % of the US population) combine the T'Nach (five books plus other writings which comprise the "Old Testament") and the "New Testament" and call it THE BIBLE doesn't make it so.

PS, just out of curiosity; if the New Testament is predicated upon a "new covenant" with God, which relegates the old testament to historical footnote status, are Christians still beholden to following the 10 commandments (since most of the 603 other commandments are off the table)?

[Kitsune]

I'm a pagan, so all that christian stuff doesn't apply to me

Is that how it works? If I just drop the whole "religion thing" or change to another one, the rules no longer apply? Hot damn!