Supreme Court l favor of Christian signer gay weddg webse se | The Hill

Contents:

• IS WRONG FOR A CHRISTIAN TO ATTEND A GAY WEDDG?
• SHOULD I ATTEND THE WEDDG OF A GAY FRIEND OR FAY MEMBER?
• THE MAN NAMED THE SUPREME COURT’S GAY RIGHTS LG SAYS HE DIDN’T REQUT A WEDDG WEBSE
• ENRE: IS IT LOVG FOR A FAHFUL CHRISTIAN TO GO TO A “GAY WEDDG”?
• SUPREME COURT L FAVOR OF CHRISTIAN SIGNER GAY WEDDG WEBSE SE
• HIGH URT’S ‘GAY WEDDG WEBSE’ CISN BRGS HOPE TO PHOTOGRAPHER, BAKER, OTHER CREATIV
• GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

IS WRONG FOR A CHRISTIAN TO ATTEND A GAY WEDDG?

Wh that clarifyg ment, we n addrs the qutn head-on: Why would a Christian feel nscience bound not to attend or participate a gay weddg? Which is why—as much as I might want to build bridg wh a lbian iend or reassure a gay fay member that I re for him and want to have a relatnship wh him—I would not attend a same-sex weddg ceremony. And, as paful as may be for and for those we love, celebratg and supportg homosexual unns is not somethg God or His Word will allow to do.

SHOULD I ATTEND THE WEDDG OF A GAY FRIEND OR FAY MEMBER?

We believe that homosexual unns are nsistent wh God’s sign for human sexualy as set forth the openg pag of the Bible and the words of J Himself: “From the begng of creatn, God ma them male and female.

Gay marriage has been legalized by vote, legislative actn, or (more often than not) judicial fiat 36 stat at the time of this wrg, wh many more still qutn.

Acrdg to Peter Ould, a “post-gay” Anglin prit, we n’t unt a weddg the same tegory as eatg wh Matthew and his iends.

THE MAN NAMED THE SUPREME COURT’S GAY RIGHTS LG SAYS HE DIDN’T REQUT A WEDDG WEBSE

For many, is not enough for homosexualy to be allowed; is not enough for be accepted; is not enough for gay marriage to be legal. J teracted often wh tax llectors and prostut, so do that give ee re to attend a gay weddg or provi a gut room for a child or grandchild and their unmarried partner or gay spoe?

ENRE: IS IT LOVG FOR A FAHFUL CHRISTIAN TO GO TO A “GAY WEDDG”?

One might argue, “But why sgle out gay weddgs, when there are heterosexual marriag that vlate God’s sign for marriage? Our sfulns and human ailti will get our way when we try to figure out answers to disputable qutns like gog to gay weddgs. Based on this reasong, then, we might nclu that Christians should have no problem attendg a gay weddg, even if they do not agree wh .

For eight years, his blog, An Exercise the Fundamentals of Orthodoxy, chronicled his journey out of homosexualy. A cisn not to attend a same-sex weddg tak place the same universe as gay-bashg, bullyg, and the long grd of ntempt toward gay men and women. In a feat for gay rights, the Supreme Court’s nservative majory led Friday, June 30, 2023, Smh who wants to sign weddg webs n refe to work wh same-sex upl (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File).

In a feat for gay rights, the Supreme Court’s nservative majory led Friday, June 30, 2023, Smh who wants to sign weddg webs n refe to work wh same-sex upl. Supreme Court led Friday uld refe to make weddg webs for gay upl ced a requt om a man who says he never asked to work wh requt dispute, om a person intified as “Stewart, ” wasn’t the basis for the feral lawsu filed preemptively seven years ago by web signer Lorie Smh, before she started makg weddg webs. But as the se advanced, was referenced by her attorneys when lawyers for the state of Colorado prsed Smh on whether she had sufficient grounds to revelatn distracts om Smh’s victory at a time when she might have been baskg her w, which is wily nsired a setback for gay rights.

SUPREME COURT L FAVOR OF CHRISTIAN SIGNER GAY WEDDG WEBSE SE

Some Evangelil lears today who claim to accept (or at least once accepted) the scriptural view that homosexual practice is a s do not see the answer as a certa “No. ” Timothy Dalrymple, the CEO and Print of Christiany Today, formerly the flagship magaze of Evangelilism, actually attend a “gay weddg” 2019, where he engaged activi that uld only be characterized as celebratory. Prton Sprkle, a biblil scholar who heads up his Center for Fah, Sexualy & Genr, thks that sayg “y” to an vatn to attend a “gay weddg” is one of the optns that “n be fahful to the biblil view that marriage is between two sexually different persons—as long as you don’t send mixed signals to the uple gettg married.

He even advis parents to attend their child’s “gay weddg” lt they be shut out of their child’s life forever (and grandkids! Megachurch pastor Andy Stanley is reported by one pastor as sayg at a meetg wh pastors (rroborated by other pastors prent), “I don’t do gay weddgs, but I n’t say I would never do a gay weddg.... Stanley, who has been driftg toward acceptance of homosexual unns for at least a , employs unselors like Debbie Csey who direct Christians stgglg wh same-sex attractn to mistri that affirm homosexual practice.

Attendg a “gay weddg” is not “a Romans 14 issue” where believers n agree to disagree over matters of difference like eatg meat or not, which do not terme entrance to the kgdom of God (Rom. Those who thk otherwise eher have difficulty reasong analogilly on this matter or else have parted some way om the scriptural view of homosexual practice.

HIGH URT’S ‘GAY WEDDG WEBSE’ CISN BRGS HOPE TO PHOTOGRAPHER, BAKER, OTHER CREATIV

They e arguments like wantg to stay relatnship wh a “gay” fay member or iend; imatg J’ practice of eatg wh sners; or parg attendg a “gay weddg” to attendg a weddg of a divorced believer. All the arguments n easily be seen as wantg if one par attendg a “gay weddg” to s most appropriate analogue: Attendg an ctuo weddg between nsentg adults “mted” to one another—for example, a man and his mother, or a woman and her brother. Inctuo unns are parable to homosexual unns terms of gree of severy (though om a biblil perspective homosexual practice is even worse) and problematic aspect (sex wh another who is too much of an embodied same, whether as regards kship or genr).

Pl’s rponse to the ctuo man 1 Corthians 5 giv a good ditn of what Pl’s rponse to attendg a “gay weddg” would have been. Try any of the arguments that some Christians e to jtify attendance at a “gay weddg” and see if they work well for an ctuo “weddg.

GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

” Obvly, J’ eatg wh sexual sners did not volve attendg a rual that celebrated the immoral sexual activy (least of all, ct and homosexual practice) of those whom he was tryg to reclaim for the Kgdom of God that he was proclaimg.

The same appli to those who argue om willgns to attend the weddg of a divorced person to a willgns to attend a “gay weddg. If the exc would be unacceptable grounds for attendg an ctuo “weddg, ” they would be jt as unacceptable the se of a “gay weddg. In fact, as noted above, a “gay weddg” is even worse than an ctuo “weddg” om Pl’s perspective, and the perspective of J, sce homosexual unns challenge the very foundatn of human sexual ethics, the male-female prerequise ensnced sce creatn (Gen.