Archived Story

Slavery and homosexuality aren’t comparable [UPDATED]

Published 9:38am Wednesday, September 26, 2012 Updated 11:40am Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Regarding Carol Pagel’s comments in the article “Group discusses marriage amendment” in Friday, Sept. 14 paper, I want to say that her equating the Bible’s discussions of slavery and homosexuality is incorrect. Both the Old and New Testaments say that homosexuality is universally wrong in the eyes of God, for reasons that go to the heart of who God is and not for mere cultural reasons (Romans 1, Leviticus 18:22, together with the multitude of passages that discuss “fornication,” which must be understood in light of Leviticus and Romans).

The Old Testament never mandates that anyone enter slavery or purchase slaves.

A “slave” in Israel was supposed to be released at a Divinely specified point in time, and this “slavery” provided more freedom and standard of living than our modern day minimum wage jobs if it was implemented according to the standards of God.

Now with extremely high taxation, the state takes care of those who fall on hard times but it wasn’t God’s will for the governments to take so much money as we learn in 1 Kings where God warns the Israelites that if they insist on having a human king then the king will tax them at a mind blowingly inappropriate 10 percent (mind-blowingly inappropriate in the eyes of God).

Regarding Jan Wally’s comment that amendments usually give more freedom rather than taking away freedom, we must ask what is her definition of “freedom.”

The freedom to live however one wants as long as one doesn’t physically harm someone and everything’s consensual would seem to be her definition.

The Bible gives many examples of civilizations that embraced that type of “freedom,” and the freedom that God utilized in punishing them.

My prayer is that the ELCA will stop having the flock vote on the meaning of God’s Word.

The Bible’s teaching on homosexuality is so extremely clear: God loves homosexuals, He’s against homosexuality in an intense way, and he wants them to repent and find forgiveness.

There’s a world of difference between declassifying a sin so that you can embrace it and “live in it” versus the way Christian’s sin — they fall, they are convicted that they sinned, they repent and ask God’s forgiveness, and they ask Him to give them the strength to not sin that sin again, and the try their best to not commit it again.


Michael Page

Fergus Falls

  • camobabe

    Well and truly said.

  • Richard Olson

    A few quotes for you cafeteria Christians who like to pick and choose what you will obey in the bible.

    Just because someone gains something you’ve always had, does not mean you’ve lost anything.

    Do you seriously believe God will judge someone for loving a person of the same sex but will not judge you for hating someone you’ve never met?

    I don’t think the people opposed to gay marriage get how things work. If your religion say you can’t watch Dr. Who on Sunday, that doesn’t mean you try to outlaw Dr. Who. It means “YOU” can’t watch Dr. Who on Sunday.
    I can watch all the Dr. Who I want. If your religion is against gay marriage,, that doesn’t mean you outlaw it, it means you cannot marry someone of the same gender. Basically, don’t force your beliefs on others.

    • crucified

      Mr. Olson,

      1) Who is it that’s hating someone?

      Warning a sinner to turn from sin is not hate speech, it is the most loving and compassionate thing that one person can do for another person.

      2) Who is trying to force their beliefs on who?

      If the people of a nation love God and want to uphold His values in order that their nation continue to prosper and be blessed, that is a good thing. It is clearly the minority who are trying force the majority to accept and endorse their corrupted life style. If these degenerates (like Ellen Degenerate) want to live a life that is an abomination to God, they can do so without getting the stamp of approval from all of society.

      3)Which group is trying to change the laws?

      It isn’t Christians who are trying to outlaw the perversion of same-sex marriage, (it is already against the law).

      The majority of people, in every state which marriage has been put on the ballot, have chosen to preserve the current definition of marriage. The means which liberals use to force their agenda on the majority is getting immoral judges legislate from the bench.

      • Richard Olson

        Merle Hexum, all of your questions make the same fatal assumption. You assume everyone agrees that just because you consider being gay as a sin, everyone else does. Since we don’t, we don’t consider anti behavior to be loving and compassionate.

        Clearly you fail to understand even the basic values involved when you say “ It is clearly the minority who are trying to force the majority to accept and endorse their corrupted life style”. No one is asking you to do anything at all, other than to mind your own business. Stop forcing your religious beliefs on the rest of society. Did society get to vote on your marriage?

        As far as I’m concerned the viewpoint of Christians on this issue is not worthy of consideration in as much as Christians pick and chose which parts of the bible they want to obey and disregard others, thus the term cafeteria Christians. For instance, I wonder how many Christians who are anti gay marriage also hold that marriage must be between people of the same faith? Or that the wife must be stoned to death if she is not a virgin. How many believe that marriages should be arranged. How many anti gay marriage Christians understand that Christian women must marry their dead husbands brother if her original husband died with a male heir and have sex with him until they produce a son. The excuses Christians produce to explain why they don’t follow the bible on all issues, shows them to be hypocrites on the issue they will follow.

        So now you know my answers to your questions. Which won’t matter to you anyway because your mind is clouded by the fog of faith.

        • Richard Olson

          My third sentence from the end should have said “ died without a male heir” rather than “with”.
          This site is the only site that I know of that allows comments but allows no chance for editing.

      • CT1010

        To Merle Hexum and fellow readers,

        Can we look at this issue as reasonable, adult, American citizens? Here’s my bit.

        It should come as no surprise to you that one of the most resonant statements and core values established in the beginning of this fine country, was that “all men are created equal.” That was said in the Declaration of Independence by Thomas Jefferson, a founding father. Freedom is a common adjective or noun an average American citizen will associate with their country. We are fortunate enough to live in a place where (for the most part, but that’s a whole different discussion) we can choose to do mostly as we please.

        You bring up religion and the christian-judaeic God’s word against homosexuality. Within the context of the bible and it’s message as to how you perceive it, you are correct. It is a sin. To a non religious person, your convictions may come off as hate. That to me is bold, because you seem truly concerned about turning a sinner away from sin. Which is good for you, but as a grown man in the year 2012, it makes you like highly ignorant, and is unbecoming in my humble opinion.

        Why is it ignorant though?
        1) You argue the sanctity of marriage from a highly subjective standpoint. Subjective meaning based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
        2) Your source of evidence is a book of supernatural, superstitious, and miraculous anecdotes, parables, non-empirically verified witness accounts written thousands of years ago by many different authors, and retranslated hundreds of times.
        3) You seem to imply it is a choice to be LGBT (I may be wrong), and if so, this has in no way been proven. The biological studies themselves are still inconclusive (that’s science for ya!) but the evidence seems to show clearly already that a human is born gay. I can vouch for this, having been friends with gay people myself. With such polarizing views and religious guilt today, why would anyone want to choose that anyway? Do you know about LGBT suicide, and how particularly in MN it has been happening?

        Let’s bring it back full circle.
        Your religious convictions in your opinion come from a good place. Good for you and your conscious. As American citizens though, we must only look toward the First Amendment to find the logical and rightful answer to this controversial topic. It reads,
        “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

        Merle, the beginning part in particular clearly establishes a separation of church and state. Congress and our nation from the beginning clearly drafted these sentiments so that no one religion (We’re not Iran or Pakistan the last time I checked) is favored over another. In other words, we are fundamentally a secular nation. Your argument, and the argument against LGBT marriage in general, comes from an exclusionary, highly religious and oppressive standpoint. One might be so bold to say, very un-American. It limits the freedoms we rightfully inherit by simply being born into this country.
        Now sure, you may counter and say “but the constitution and declaration all mention god! the founding fathers were all christian! we are a christian nation!”
        This is a common fallacy. Again, look only to the 1st amendment to see we are not a monotheistic (country based or founded upon one religion) nation.
        And the founding fathers? Almost all were Deists, a completely different thing from a christian, or Theist. This again, is another huge discussion for another time.

        To conclude,
        religion should have no say in legislation, as the founding fathers intended. Opposition to gay marriage coming from a religious point of view holds zero merit in this discussion.
        To look at it briefly from a reasonable and some other subjective standpoints, let’s think about this.
        How will a man and a man getting married in, say, Minneapolis personally affect your life and well being? How will it infringe upon your own rights and civil liberties? How does it oppress you?
        What gives us heterosexual citizens a right to deny fellow citizens the right to marriage when we’re divorcing at or nearly over a 50% rate? If it boils down to the sanctity of the institution, what kind of example are we setting? Look at celebrity publicity stunt marriages in the media that last for a day or a week. Can you imagine how insulting that is to a gay person?

        I hope this can change your own and any other readers perspective on the issue. I am in no way attacking you, I’m simply calling it like I see it. You seem to get in many political arguments with the fellow commenters. I highly recommend you read United States History, by Newman and Schmalbach. I recommend anyone read it! Non-biased, concise and articulate, and loads of historical documents and letters from none other than the men and women from history itself.

        • Walt Henry

          One correction or addition–there is Zero, as in NO evidence in the New Testament that same sex, committed, relationships are a sin. ZERO. NONE! (Note the word committed) Promiscuity is frowned upon whether is it between people of the same sex or opposite sex. Remember we are not voting on promiscuity, we are voting on committed partnerships.

    • holly

      Cross-posting quotes from your hateful bigoted blog. You must be a joy to live with, Richardmunk, with all of your hate for others who are not like you.

      • Richard Olson

        You mean internet trolls?

  • Walt Henry

    There is an episode from the original Star trek series called Amok Time. The theme and action is centered on Mr. Spock’s biological clock and it is driving him to mate. During this time his eyes are crossed and his mind can focus on nothing but possessing his betrothed; a Vulcan women who was promised to him at a young age but has since “fallen in love” with someone else. To end his fever and regain control over his mind Spock must “kill” Captain Kirk.
    Who among us has not felt driven at sometime in our life by some inner passion as strong and all-consuming as was Mr. Spock? Granted, it might not be a young love but is could very well be the desire for a new job or a new object to purchase or an extra dollar or two, maybe even a loss of a loved one; whatever it might be, most of us at sometime in our lives have felt almost pushed or pulled beyond the capabilities of our natural states.
    There is a Commandment that says, “Thou shall have no other god’s before me.” In the New Testament Paul also issues that caution when he suggests men should not marry and women should not attempt to lead the church. Paul believed both marriage and the responsibilities of womanhood would interfere with the command to place nothing/allow nothing to come between ourselves and God.
    To correct the letter writer, Jesus said nothing about the “sin” of homosexuality and Paul’s comments were made in the context I alluded to above.
    You must remember, folks, just after “In the beginning” God gave each of us the right to choose. And, yes, even to make choices that cause us conflicts. It is through those conflicts we come to know a living and loving God. I for one would not willingly choose to hold myself more righteous than God or to demand from others a higher standard than does God.
    (Sometime, in this land of separation between church and state, we should talk about the fairness of granting civil benefits to one form a union and not another when the basis of those benefits is the gender of the two who entered into the partnership.)

    • crucified

      HELLO Larry,

      1) There is a difference between a suggestion and a command.

      1 Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband…… 6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.

      1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

      2) What kind of twisted belief system to you embrace? You seem to be accepting of the words in the bible that are typed in red (in the red-letter edition), but do not accept the other words of the bible which were inspired by God (Holy Ghost) and penned by the servants that God chose to write them.

      2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

      3) You guys need to read & re-read Romans chapter 1 over and over again.

      Romans 1:

      22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

      23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

      24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

      25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

      26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

      27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

      28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

      • Walt Henry

        Merle, I’m surprised you agree with me for you have not done anyting to dispute the context of Paul’s opinion. As for your judgement, remember that is the opinion of someone still earth bound. :)

      • benny

        it’s not even worth offering much input here. on one side, we have reasonable people. on the other side, we have narrow minded fools who live their lives in accordance with *what they think* almost-prehistoric sheep herders wrote.

        it’d be hilarious if they weren’t spreading hate and being jerks. the same thing we don’t allow school children to do. they’ll tell you all day long they “don’t hate anyone, it’s love.” buuuuuut, their judgement is impaired and like an arthritic dog that can’t help but lay on the floor and mess all over itself, so are these folks.

        if you’re going to believe and continue to reiterate stupid things, at least have some conviction. don’t say garbage like, “I don’t hate gay people but….” or “nothing against gays as long as they…” yes you do and yes you do, i’m calling you as you are, fool.

        the really funny thing is that the anti-gay fools are blind to what’s going on in the real world. i’m from a small town but i’ve lived in four states and three large metro areas and worked/met/known interesting, successful, and professional people from all walks of life. yep, gays included. without any hesitation, whatsoever, i would entrust my children to their care for an entire year before allowing them to spend 5 minutes alone with some religious idiot. god knows what sick, skeleton filled mind those judgmental, self righteous dummies have going on.

        one thing smart people have in common is that they don’t cite the nap-inducing old testament as reason or justification for *anything*.

        god help you if you’re teaching your children this garbage. i can say with certainty that raising a hate monger is the most sure fire way to socially and mentally stunt your kids. not living in the real world should probably be categorized as child abuse.

        if a copy/paste from leviticus is the best argument you have, then you have no argument and should stop being disruptive and leave the table so the big people can talk. shoo fly, go away.

        the good news is that we, as a society, are moving forward, and gay marriage will soon be legal everywhere. it makes me happy because it’s fair, and it makes me happy because it will fluster uptight morons i find annoying.

Editor's Picks

Prayer vigil in FF for jailed pastor [UPDATED]

Calvary Chapel Fergus Falls pastor Tim Molter is organizing a prayer vigil for an American pastor who has been imprisoned in Iran for nearly two ... Read more

One-man play about war coming Saturday: Color Guard to open event with ceremony [UPDATED]

The Accidental Hero is “an enthralling, humorous and heartwarming tale of miraculous escapes and astonishing coincidences,” according to The Minneapolis Star Tribune. This one-man play ... Read more

Multiple thefts at Glendalough State Park [UPDATED]

Multiple items were stolen Friday night at Glendalough State Park in what the Otter Tail Sheriff’s Office believes was a string of connected thefts. A ... Read more