Should Jeff Lemire out Storm as LGBT?

[rutog98]

Except when you don't. This question is a perfect example. You have done nothing but tell us how you really feel.


This entire time. Everyone here sees it. Let's not pretend you didn't. From doomsday cults to a father getting arrested for not leaving a property he was ordered to leave. You have done nothing but tell us how you feel.

I thought Christians were killed because different Roman emperors were looking for scapegoats and rounded up a bunch a martyrs and killed them. Christians set aside their very Christianity every day when they lust after someone of the opposite or same sex. They set aside their Christianity when they focus on homosexuality over helping the poor. They set aside their Christianity when they stop loving their enemies and choose to curse others, instead of forgive. They set aside their Christianity every day because they are human and imperfect and any idea that somehow those habits immediately stop just because of faith is ridiculous.

Actually it was her discriminatory behavior, selfish desire to harm her fellow citizens and need to be self righteous that caused that situation and also breaking the law.

1) The roman caesars had introduced the Caesar Worship Cults which were meant to unify the people of the Roman Empire. As the Roman Empire grew by conquering diverse peoples, there was natural division amongst the various cultures. The idea was in giving them a common religion, by making Caesar a god that all had to worship, that would unite all the peoples of the empire. The Christians, of course, could not worship Caesar as it would have been the sin of idolatry and Caesar was committing blasphemy in claiming divinity. The Christians also did not worship any of the other pagan dieties of the day. Its because of these factors they were not only killed, but targeted and blamed for things they did not do. God commands His people to live for Him by keeping His commandments even at the expense of their very lives.

Also, I meant to say that people who worshipped the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were killed for not complying with the law because doing so would have been sin. Look at Meshac, Shadrach, and Abendigo. They were cast into that firey furnace when the King of Babylon commanded that everybody worship a statue. The penalty of non-compliance was death. Read the story about Daniel being thrown in the lion's den because he would not stop worshipping The Great I Am. Look at how the Jews were going to be wiped out in the day of Queen Esther because they would not comply with the law. Look at how Paul and Silas were jailed for casting a demon out of a woman. (Albeit, the woman was a psychic that made people wealthy. When she was dispossesed by the evil spirit, those who benefitted from her abilities lost that source of income and it turned them against Paul and Silas). Christians for stoned to death, beheaded and crucifed for their beliefs. While Christianity originated with the Jews, eventually, the Europeans accepted it. Look at what happened in Europe during the Inquisition. Anyway, I can go on with this, but I've said enough.

2) Kim Davis wasn't thinking to herself, "I hate gay people and I am going to hurt them." She was genuinely fearful of sinning herself in signing her name and position on those forms to approve of the marriage of gay couples. Again, the Bible teaches that even the approval of homosexual behavior is a sin. This problem was an easy fix, as Govenor Bevin proved. It was the incompetence on the part of the judicial system that this became a problem in her case.

3) I never said that Christians don't sin. They do sin, but they have godly sorrow for committing their sins and they work repentance through that godly sorrow. They screen their thoughts and deeds all the time to try and avoid sinning. They pray to God for strength to not sin and rely on the power the Holy Spirit gives them to strengthen them to resist sin. Also, many Christians out there are concerned about the poor and are actually trying to do something about it. Though Christians are concerned with all of the issues in society that are contrary to God, they still have their issues they have to work through. While they are perfected through Christ, they have to point back to Calvary daily. Like I said much earlier in this debate, if a Christian isn't wrestling with homosexual impulses, there is something they are wrestling with as nobody is THAT good. The reason so many are up in arms about homosexuality is people today are being pressured to approve of homosexual behavior, which is a sin. Tolerance is fine. There is no sin in tolerance (I mean, Christians tolerate people who practice other faiths in this country, but they don't approve of the practice of those other gods or doctrines contrary to the Word), but society is pushing for more than tolerance on this issue. That's the rub, right there.

Anyway, I think we've covered all our bases at this point.

[Carabas]

2) Kim Davis wasn't thinking to herself, "I hate gay people and I am going to hurt them." She was genuinely fearful of sinning herself in signing her name and position on those forms to approve of the marriage of gay couples. Again, the Bible teaches that even the approval of homosexual behavior is a sin. This problem was an easy fix, as Govenor Bevin proved. It was the incompetence on the part of the judicial system that this became a problem in her case.

She was genuinely fearful of losing a cushy paycheck is what she was. She could have just done the proper thing and removed herself and her religion from the position that issues marriage licenses.

And govenor Bevin's fix, alter the law to facilitate her religion, is on very shaky 1st amendment grounds, and if somebody ever choses to challenge those marriages in court a legal can of worms will be opened.

[rutog98]

She was genuinely fearful of losing a cushy paycheck is what she was. She could have just done the proper thing and removed herself and her religion from the position that issues marriage licenses.

And govenor Bevin's fix, alter the law to facilitate her religion, is on very shaky 1st amendment grounds, and if somebody ever choses to challenge those marriages in court a legal can of worms will be opened.

You can't deny a person public office because they are Christian. Its illegal to pass a law that says Christians cannot run for and be elected into office. What you are talking about literally amounts to just that. You can't be a Christian in church and in your home and then not be a Christian outside of those places. Such a person who lives like that is not a Christian. One's Christianity is with them in all aspects of their lives. The people in the state of Kentucky elected Kim Davis into office and those voters overwhelmingly support her. If what you say is true and the new forms are found invalid if contested in a court of law, then this is yet another example of why Christianity and gay marriage cannot coexist in the same society with both sides retaining all of their rights.

Also, if Christians stopped running for office, that means that the laws of the land will turn more and more against Christianity. The people in power would start to criminalize it making it impossible to lead a Christian life outside of one's church and home without breaking the law. Heck, if some could, they would even make it impossible to be a Christian in church.

[t hedge coke]

You can't deny a person public office because they are Christian. Its illegal to pass a law and say Christians cannot run for and be elected into office. What you are talking about literally amounts to that.

No, it doesn't. It's not special for Christians. It shouldn't be special for them in either direction.

Christians don't get a pass to ignore the law and hurt other people in entirely voluntary ways. That's not denying them anything.

And, again, we're not talking about someone unfairly persecuted for anything. She broke the law and she was punished for it. And, she used it as an opportunity to lie to people and to self-aggrandize. "I had an audience with the Pope and he fully supports me," and other such BS.

Christians, like anyone, are allowed to run for office and hold any government office in America, but they are not permitted to hold that office and use it to break the law or deprive others of their rights.

Also, if Christians stopped running for office, that means that the laws of the land will turn more and more against Christianity. The people in power would start to criminalize it making it impossible to lead a Christian life outside of church and home without breaking the law. Heck, if some could, they would even make it impossible to be a Christian in church.

That's not only false, it's insulting and derogatory.

[rutog98]

No, it doesn't. It's not special for Christians. It shouldn't be special for them in either direction.

Christians don't get a pass to ignore the law and hurt other people in entirely voluntary ways. That's not denying them anything.

And, again, we're not talking about someone unfairly persecuted for anything. She broke the law and she was punished for it. And, she used it as an opportunity to lie to people and to self-aggrandize. "I had an audience with the Pope and he fully supports me," and other such BS.

Christians, like anyone, are allowed to run for office and hold any government office in America, but they are not permitted to hold that office and use it to break the law or deprive others of their rights.



That's not only false, it's insulting and derogatory.

The point I'm making is if the law compels a Christian to sin, a Christian who is truly living for God cannot obey that law. This is what the Bible teaches. This is the problem when a country creates laws that are in contradiction to the Word of God and then tries to compel everyone to abide by it. This situation is unique. In the Christian faith, for example, it is also a sin to worship other gods or to follow a doctrine contrary to the gospel as taught in the Bible. However, because the way the laws are set up, people can come here and worship Buddha, or the Hindu faith, etc and Christians don't have trouble with it because they are not forced to approve of it of worship those other dieties. All they have to do is tolerate it (and those who practice those other faiths, in turn, must tolerate the Christians). The gay issue is unique from the other religion issue because law is being passed in many places that seek to force everyone to not only tolerate, but approve of homosexual behavior.

[DDM]

You can't deny a person public office because they are Christian. Its illegal to pass a law that says Christians cannot run for and be elected into office. What you are talking about literally amounts to just that. You can't be a Christian in church and in your home and then not be a Christian outside of those places. Such a person who lives like that is not a Christian. One's Christianity is with them in all aspects of their lives. The people in the state of Kentucky elected Kim Davis into office and those voters overwhelmingly support her. If what you say is true and the new forms are found invalid if contested in a court of law, this is yet another example of why Christianity and gay marriage cannot coexist in the same society with both sides retaining all of their rights.

Also, if Christians stopped running for office, that means that the laws of the land will turn more and more against Christianity. The people in power would start to criminalize it making it impossible to lead a Christian life outside of one's church and home without breaking the law. Heck, if some could, they would even make it impossible to be a Christian in church.

I don't believe the world can take this much irony. Kim Davis is not the victim whose rights were violated in this scenario, she was quite literally the perpetrator illegally denying the rights of other real victims. She put her belief system above the law (and also above the belief systems of her staff and her constituents) and faced the proper legal consequences. As should happen when anyone uses their chosen mythological bias as an excuse to deny the agency and rights of others. Those are the actions of a coward and a criminal, not a christian.

We have separation of church and state for these very reasons; freedom of religion but also freedom from religion. And while your narrow definition of christianity may not allow any room for that fortunately most Americans disagree and can look at these issues more fairly and comprehensively. That why while the majority in the state of Kansas identify as christian and disagree with gay marriage, the majority also believe that Kim Davis was wrong and should've performed her civic duty by issuing those same sex licenses. Again, all her illegal protest really accomplished was denigrating the standing of herself, her church and her defenders in the eyes of most Americans. It exposed her hypocrisy and her hatefulness, and worse it subscribed those values to her faith and it's followers. She's toxic and your continual attempted defense here really does your own positions no favors. Stop while you're behind.

[t hedge coke]

The point I'm making is if the law compels a Christian to sin, a Christian who is truly living for God cannot obey that law.

And, they can cope with that by not taking government jobs where they'd be forced to do so. This is one of the reasons we no longer have a Draft in America. It's generally considered, now, bad form to force such a violent occupation on the unwilling or ethically opposed, above and beyond what used to be covered by conscientious objector status.

She chose her job. If she chose a different job, with different responsibilities, she wouldn't have any occasion to "condone" a gay marriage by filing paperwork on it, but she chose to take a job that did require such.

This is what the Bible teaches. This is the problem when a country creates laws that are in contradiction to the Word of God and then tries to compel everyone to abide by it. This situation is unique. In the Christian fait, for example, it is also a sin to worship other gods or to follow a doctrine contrary to the gospel as taught in the Bible. However, because the ways the laws are set up, people can come here and worship Buddha, or the Hindu faith, etc and Christians not have trouble with it because they are not forced to approve of it of worship those other dieties. All they have to do is tolerate it (and those who practice those other faiths, in turn, must tolerate the Christians). The gay issue is unique from the other religion issue because law is being passed in many places that seek to force everyone to not only tolerate, but approve of homosexual behavior.

As far as the US goes, all y'all Christians? You came over just like everyone else. Or, you're Indians, and you're converts. That's the only options there are. All you Eastern Hemisphere peoples are people who come over. No difference there between Buddhists and Baptists.

But, as far as homosexuality goes, it is the same as tolerating other religions, or integration of schools, or fans of sports teams you hate or whatever. You're not being asked to engage in homosexual behavior, you're not being asked to sit politely at a wedding you don't approve of. You just can't let your prejudice, and it is a prejudice, be an excuse for depriving someone of their rights as a citizen.

She would have been breaking the law if she'd refused to process papers on two Buddhists getting married or a tall man and a short women, an Asian man and a white woman, two fat people, and so on. It's not her place, as a government official and paper pusher, to condone or not condone. No one's asking her personal opinion because it's immaterial. No one wants to know a cop's personal feelings when he's handing out traffic tickets, either, nor can he get a pass for only ticketing black drivers or cars with odd numbers on their license plates. Even if he has a religious diktat in regards to those horrible odd numbers.

[Carabas]

You can't deny a person public office because they are Christian.

But you absolutely can deny a person public office if they don't actually want to do their job.
Want to be a christian? Great. But you do not get to complain about having to issue marriage licenses if you are the person that won an election for the one sibgle job that is required to issue marriage licenses.

Its illegal to pass a law that says Christians cannot run for and be elected into office.

Christians can run for office. They do it a lot. I kinda wish they'd stop, actually.

What you are talking about literally amounts to just that. You can't be a Christian in church and in your home and then not be a Christian outside of those places. Such a person who lives like that is not a Christian. One's Christianity is with them in all aspects of their lives. The people in the state of Kentucky elected Kim Davis into office and those voters overwhelmingly support her. If what you say is true and the new forms are found invalid if contested in a court of law, then this is yet another example of why Christianity and gay marriage cannot coexist in the same society with both sides retaining all of their rights.

The vast majority of christianity seems to have little to no problems with this...

Also, if Christians stopped running for office, that means that the laws of the land will turn more and more against Christianity. The people in power would start to criminalize it making it impossible to lead a Christian life outside of one's church and home without breaking the law. Heck, if some could, they would even make it impossible to be a Christian in church.

Your 1st Amendment prevents this.

Christians on the other hand seem to have absolutely no qualms about passing laws that make non-christian lifestyles exeedingly difficult in America.

[rutog98]

But you absolutely can deny a person public office if they don't actually want to do their job.
Want to be a christian? Great. But you do not get to complain about having to issue marriage licenses if you are the person that won an election for the one sibgle job that is required to issue marriage licenses.


Christians can run for office. They do it a lot. I kinda wish they'd stop, actually.


The vast majority of christianity seems to have little to no problems with this...


Your 1st Amendment prevents this.

Christians on the other hand seem to have absolutely no qualms about passing laws that make non-christian lifestyles exeedingly difficult in America.

1) You are oversimplifying the situation. It wasn't she just didn't want to issue marriage licenses. She didn't want her name and position on the forms approving of gay marriage. Now that her name and position no longer appears on those forms, she's not getting in the way of the people working under her to issue those licenses.

2) The first amendment is present, however, it is only valid as long as it is enforced. People who are against the practice of Christianity will find ways to try and chip away at the freedom of religion rights if they can. They would try and restrict it to one's church and home (and even try and dictate which scriptures the church can and cannot teach if they can). This is why its important to have people in office who will make sure the first amendment is protected.

[rutog98]

And, they can cope with that by not taking government jobs where they'd be forced to do so. This is one of the reasons we no longer have a Draft in America. It's generally considered, now, bad form to force such a violent occupation on the unwilling or ethically opposed, above and beyond what used to be covered by conscientious objector status.

She chose her job. If she chose a different job, with different responsibilities, she wouldn't have any occasion to "condone" a gay marriage by filing paperwork on it, but she chose to take a job that did require such.



As far as the US goes, all y'all Christians? You came over just like everyone else. Or, you're Indians, and you're converts. That's the only options there are. All you Eastern Hemisphere peoples are people who come over. No difference there between Buddhists and Baptists.

But, as far as homosexuality goes, it is the same as tolerating other religions, or integration of schools, or fans of sports teams you hate or whatever. You're not being asked to engage in homosexual behavior, you're not being asked to sit politely at a wedding you don't approve of. You just can't let your prejudice, and it is a prejudice, be an excuse for depriving someone of their rights as a citizen.

She would have been breaking the law if she'd refused to process papers on two Buddhists getting married or a tall man and a short women, an Asian man and a white woman, two fat people, and so on. It's not her place, as a government official and paper pusher, to condone or not condone. No one's asking her personal opinion because it's immaterial. No one wants to know a cop's personal feelings when he's handing out traffic tickets, either, nor can he get a pass for only ticketing black drivers or cars with odd numbers on their license plates. Even if he has a religious diktat in regards to those horrible odd numbers.

1) On the bolded part, they are teaching kids as young as 4 to approve of homosexuality in some schools across the country. Even if a person does not act on homosexual impulses, the mere approval of it is still defined as sin in the Bible.

2) On the last point you raised, the Bible defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. It doesn't matter about the skin color, religion, height, or weight of the couple. The factors I just listed do not define marriage from an ecclesiastical viewpoint. The Bible does caution against interfaith marriages, though, simply because there is a risk of the believer leaving the faith to follow the belief system of their spouse. However, even if two Buddists wanted to get married, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob recognizes that marriage. This is why if the Buddhist couple converts to Christianity, their marriage is still valid. There is no sin in a tall man and a short woman getting married, or people of different skin tones getting married (Moses married an Ethopian woman. When Aaron and Mariam challenged him because of his marriage, in anger, God cursed Mariam with leprosy. You can read about this in Numbers chapter 11 or 12).

[Arya]

Rutog,

You need a more complex understanding of Roman history regarding Christian persecution. Christians were killed because they were an easy target. Caesar cults had little to do with it. Nero killed them to cover for his crazy. He decided to burn Rome to the ground to get more tax money and build a better palace.... He used Christians as a scapegoat. So he had them burned alive blaming them for the fire he sat. Many Roman emperors were crazy and truly evil people. They were killed not because they wouldn't worship other gods but because they wouldn't renounce Christ.

I am so glad you read your bible. Persecution isn't what Christians in the states are going through. The conservative ones are slowing learning that they no longer have power and standing in this society. They don't like it and so they bully anyone that disagrees with them. That has nothing to do with Christianity and everything to do with what they truly worship, power. That's why so many conservative Christians have found an answer in Trump.

What you described above was the height of selfishness. Her fear of sinning against God cannot trump her job responsibility. She didn't stop to think how much pain she caused those couples by her childish actions. This is why conservatives are losing power. They only focus on their own standing before God at the expense of the people they hurt. Until they develop some basic sense of compassion and empathy they will always suffer on the losing side of history. The world is leaving you all behind. It's about time. That is a good thing.

[t hedge coke]

The myth of early Christians being excessively persecuted is just that, anyway, myth. It's a good sell.

The whole fed to the lions thing, etc, it's all fiction. Most of it is stuff Eusebius just made up and various hagiographers and later politically-minded historians exacerbated.

Which is how we end up with today, where some sects of Christianity are more than comfortable persecuted and dehumanizing others, and claim that even being held accountable for such is tantamount to persecution or an erasure of their culture.