Voting Our Conscience
- Print print this page
- Discuss 33 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
As a person of faith, I believe that basic human dignity comes from God without exclusion or favor. Excluding some of God’s children from full legal protections is an affront to God’s call to do justice.
As people of faith, we are called to be a prophetic voice to speak God’s truth and educate others on the real harms of Amendment One, which is on the May 2012 primary ballot.
Amendment One supporters claim it represents God’s will and then condone its harms. Faith communities throughout North Carolina are exercising the power to speak out against this injustice and continue a tradition of leading people away from harmful division and toward higher moral ground of unity and love.
As people of faith, we support all families joined together by love and commitment. All families deserve legal protections regardless of one’s theological positions. People of faith cannot stand by and do nothing when the ability for some to provide for and protect their loved ones is threatened.
We must vote our conscience, share our stories and donate our time, money and talent to defeating Amendment One.
Vote against harming children and unmarried families. Vote against Amendment One.
Maurice B. Holland Jr.
Aberdeen
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
visigrad 1 year ago
Yes I too am a person of faith....and I will vote my conscience. To learn all the facts ant truth about what this amendment does and does not do..please listen to
http://www.weeb990.com/playpodcast.php?toplay=podcasts/Steve and Tim In The Morning/Interview with Dr Robert Deucher (Marriage Admendment)-042412.mp3
emb6683 1 year ago
The podcast does a good job dispelling the myths about what is not Amendment 1, as well as the important second sentence that is rarely mentioned.
I will also vote my conscience.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
I was born a Catholic, the first part of my religious education came from CCD classes and Sunday church from St. Anthony's of Padua in downtown Southern Pines. Currently I attend Aberdeen First Baptist Church. I do not claim to be a Catholic or a Baptist, in my Bible Study classes I am usually the voice of modernism, I believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost. I also believe in science, mathematics, and morality.
This article summarized the theological aspects of my beliefs very well. Christians as a whole are as bigoted as any other religious population. Excluding the religion of Islam, all major worldwide religions believe in peaceful enlightenment and ascension to a higher plain of existence based on the ideas of human morality, good deeds, faith, and love.
This amendment is not the work of GOD, nor are the creators of the law speaking for GOD, The GOD of the christian faith is no longer the wrathful god of the old testament, his wrath has been tempered by the death of his son. While it is one of the fundamental aspects of Christianity is to spread the word of GOD to those who do not believe or have not heard the word, it is also a fundamental aspect to cherish and love all humans of all creeds, faiths, backgrounds, colors, and sexual orientation. Love is unconditional, if it is not, then it is no longer love, we as Christians speak to the unconditional love of our GOD for his creation, we relish in the teachings of Jesus who showed us that all people are our family.
And in the end if we read and understand our Bible then we will learn that it is not the place of any human to ever judge another human, that role is left explicitly to the creator. For us to deny someone life, liberty or happiness based on sexual orientation not only violates the constitutional fundamentals that we hold so dear, it also violates the basic fundamental principles of our faith by denying another human the ability to participate in one of the most basic aspects of human culture, the ability to have a family.
While the context of my argument here can and most likely will be argued for positive and negative, in the end I know that I am right for I understand what unconditional means.
coffecreme 1 year ago
Dr Deucher? Seriously?
CC85 1 year ago
The_AnonymusProfit - outstanding commentary.
visigrad 1 year ago
First of all the God of the New and Old Testament is the same God.....Jesus came to fulfill the Law not change it. And this amendment will not change the existing law. What it will do is not allow marriage to be redifined. I am really tired of people assuming that if one is in favor or marriage remaining defined as it has always been they are therefore hateful and bigoted.
I am not perfect and neither is any other human being. Please ... can we not discuss this issue reasonably, charitably with our all the viscious name calling....please !!
DoubleHeroides 1 year ago
@visigrad: I agree with you, reasonable discourse is a must on issues like this one but other than coffecreme’s comment above I didn’t see anything in the letter or comments so far that is “vicious name calling”. (I might add @coffecreme that I thought the same thing, that poor fellow must have had a bad time in middle school).
Further The_AnonymousProfit did not say that the Old Testament God was a completely different god from the New Testament God, he just said that he was changed, more compassionate and understanding. I think we can agree on that, the amount of smiting went down considerably in the New versus the Old.
I appreciate your comment and look forward to a good ecumenical discussion about this issue if one evolves out of these comments.
visigrad 1 year ago
@double I was referring to all of the blogs and letters in The Pilot on this issue not just this one.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
But you made the comment on this article Visigrad, yes Jesus came to fullfill the prophices of the old testament and complete the word that God had laid forth. What we do know is that Jesus, presented with a homosexual married couple would not have scorned them, he would have shown them love.
As for Jesus's personal stance on homosexuality, he never spoke on this matter.
lakeview 1 year ago
TAP- the bible says He made male and female and that a man should leave his father and mother and join his wife and they shall be one flesh, He sure didnt say a man shall leave his father and mother and join his husband. Matt 19-4
lakeview 1 year ago
And by the way, you are not right TAP. You merely have an opinion.
visigrad 1 year ago
And.....Jesus always loves the sinner..but He hates the sin...... To allow someone to remain in sin would be anything but loving ! Because it is sin that separates us from HIm.
All that being said I was not addressing the sciptural issue in referrence to the amendment. Simply making a point that one cannot separate the Old from the New Testament..one sheds light upon the other.
As for the amendment...see earlier posts.
getreal 1 year ago
Thank you Maurice, for a thoughtful and honest letter. I couldn't have said it better. There is hope for this area after all. One can only hope that those who want the rights of others denied, based on their beliefs, real or imagined, will someday face the kind of rejection and bigotry that they support for others.
DoubleHeroides 1 year ago
@lakeview: Essentially everything discussed here online is an opinion and we have discussed this before on a previous article: Having an opinion doesn’t make you right but that also does not at all mean that it prevents you from being wrong. Defending your position by stating that you can’t be told you are wrong because it is your opinion and you have a right to an opinion is a worthless argument and has no place in discourse. If it did it would be the end of civilized discussion and debate.
Please stop defending or opposing a view based on an argument that basically calls for people to keep their opinions to themselves.
DoubleHeroides 1 year ago
@visigrad: You are correct, as Christians by faith and doctrine the elimination of sin should be a major goal. If that is indeed the goal then why are there not more amendments to the constitution proposed to address all sins found in the Bible and not just this one? Will there be future amendments to the constitution that address topics such as infidelity? If not then why single out this one issue for all this angst and arguing?
Further, in order to not appear that Christians are taking an a la carte approach to their religious teachings and not separating the Old from the New Testament we would have to institute a policy of stoning sinners and forcing rape victims to marry their rapist because that is found in the Old Testament. How do we address that as a body of believers and incorporate those archaic “law” found in the Bible into our modern lives? Is it morally justifiable?
Nezumi 1 year ago
DH - I've always been amused at the selective interpretation (a la carte, as you mentioned) of the bible by some. I can imagine a lot of these anti-homosexual discussions happening in this part of the country over a nice dinner of BBQ pork and shrimp.
JD 1 year ago
Faith does not belong in politics. If that is the basis of your rationing system fine. But don't impose it on others who do not share your belief in SkyGods. Voting in a bigoted way should have people think of Jim Crow laws and Women's Suffrage. You are denying rights to citizens based on your belief in a book written by desert dwellers from 3,000 years ago.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
lakeview 15 hours, 21 minutes ago TAP- the bible says He made male and female and that a man should leave his father and mother and join his wife and they shall be one flesh, He sure didnt say a man shall leave his father and mother and join his husband. Matt 19-4
Jesus himself is actually silent on homosexuality, while he endorses the laws of GOD, he understood that Love for each other was the most important thing he could teach.
visigrad 14 hours, 21 minutes ago And.....Jesus always loves the sinner..but He hates the sin...... To allow someone to remain in sin would be anything but loving ! Because it is sin that separates us from HIm. All that being said I was not addressing the sciptural issue in referrence to the amendment. Simply making a point that one cannot separate the Old from the New Testament..one sheds light upon the other.
This is true Visigrad, but I am sure that you understand that the old law was not to be practiced any more by Christians. If we were still to practice this, we would sacrifice animals every day etc etc. Jesus was the final sacrifice.
Lakeview I did not say I was correct about my Opinion I stated I was correct on my definition of the word Unconditional - without conditions or limitations; total
Now We also understand that our church leaders are supposed to be representatives of GOD and his word. If we dont believe this then why do we listen to anything our church says? If we take this as so which we understand by the promises of Peter, then what the church states as doctrine is biblicaly sound.
Examples- 1. The Catholic Church endorses evolution as a possible act of GOD.( The Catholic church has stated that it can not deny the factual evidence of evolution, it has stated that if evolution is true it is merely the means that God created us.) 2. The Episcopalian Church(Anglican) Has Ordained Female Ministers. 3. The Presbyterian Church(Of shoot of the protestant church includes Lutherans, Baptists.) Has ordained Gay ministers.
These are just 3 examples.
DoubleHeroides 1 year ago
The_AnonymusProfit brings up a very interesting point. To support this amendment on Christian religious grounds begs the question of whose Christianity are we using? Like it or not there are very different practices within the Christian faith itself on all manner of issues. Some Southern Baptists don’t drink based on moral reasons tied to the Bible about intemperance while a Methodist minister might have a beer with a parishioner, both Christians but both with differing opinions on alcohol consumption. The same holds true regarding homosexuals. Get a Lutheran and a Catholic to say the Lord’s Prayer and even that simple, basic, fundamental element of the religion isn’t the same (I think the Lutherans say it differently, if not then just replace Lutheran with whatever denomination says it differently from the Catholics and my point is still made). So the question becomes to those arguing based on faith, who’s Christianity are we going to pick as the “right” denomination to start using in our laws?
Easygoing 1 year ago
As a New York Senator said recently to explain why he supported gay marriage, "I put my hand on the Bible and swore to support the Constitution, I did not put my hand on the Constitution and swear to support the Bible". PS he is a conservative Republican.
lakeview 1 year ago
The AP- Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
Very good point Easygoing, and very true DH, according to a survey in the year 2000, there were 33,820 different variations of Christianity with 3.5 million churches.
Beyond this the point that I have stressed most is the point Easygoing makes, over the course of many generations we have shed our views on color, we have realized that a white man is no greater a man then a black man. We have realized that we have no right to own another human.
Yet we refuse to evolve to a point where our religious and sexual beliefs reflect our views on color. The Unites States Constitution grants GOD given rights that cant not be taken by ANY man. Life, Liberty, Happyness. This is why the death penalty is considered by many unconstitutional, because it is 1 man taking away a God given right. Again we have no right to take away the happyness of another.
We like to think that we are a moral nation, yet we segregate people based on sexual orientation. We deny them the proverbial fountain based on who they choose to love. This is as hateful and immoral as slavery and jim crow.
This amendment should not be passed, as well an amendment should be made allowing all Americans the right to marry whoever they want. Our constitution was based on the laws of the bible, however we do not operate our government based on church doctrine. We are a secular nation with a large christian population.
This is not Iran, yet I fail to see the difference in this "Shinning light" of a country in many areas.
I am a conservative, while I no longer consider myself a republican, I am also a christian, and I firmly believe that it is against what my GOD would want for me to tell 1 man what he may or may not do in his own life.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
To Lakeview
I dont not need biblical reference, I understand the bible very well. I also understand that the bible tells me to bring my peace to a house, if that house chooses not to accept my peace I should thank them for their meal and move on.
It is not my right to judge, nor is it yours, nor is it yours to deny an American Citizen a right.
MidwayResident 1 year ago
I am heartened to see the generally civil discussion of my letter. A couple of issues that I would like to address further are first that these type of amendments are on the ballots of several states to combat a non-issue. Same sex marriage is not pernitted now in NC and if this amendment is defeated it STILL will not be permitted in NC unless there is a change in current state law. Secondly this is a federal issue now in that several states have contrasting laws and the US Constitution has a clause that states that each state must recognize contracts that are legal in other states. Passage of this amendment to the NC Constitution would, as was pointed out by Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton, throw NC into the litigation that is headed to the US Supreme Court and mean that we (NC Taxpayers) would be spending tax dollars in a legal battle that was not initiated by parties in NC. It does not make sense to me for Atty. General Roy Cooper to spend time and NC Treasury dollars in a legal battle that was stated by other states. Lastly the current leadership of the General Assembly ran on a platform of making State Government more efficent by cutting waste and cutting taxes now I am only a graduate of Pinecrest High School, Sandhills Community College and St. Andrew's Presbyterian College and I might be a little slower than the powers that be in Raleigh but what does Same Sex marriage have to do with taxes and government efficiency? The best way to illustrate what this amendment will do is through parody and I think this skit does the job.
NC Amendment One: The Musical!! by Jordan Imbrey
jimt 1 year ago
It is people like TAP that motivates a significant push to enshrine anti-gay legislation, of all types, in law. Poll after poll show that people under 40 are far more "gay tolerant" than their elders; and people under 30 regardless of thier political affiliation, literally can not fathom what this fuss is all about. Every year the demographics get worse for the homophobes, and they know it!!
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
hmm. can you resay that jimt, I think I got what you said but am not 100% sure
lakeview 1 year ago
To TAP- Was your post to me suppose to have some logic?
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
My post was very logical and straight to the point.
jimt 1 year ago
I'm saying that the bible thumpers like Creech fear you amd millions of like minded individuals, most of whom are under 30. Collectively, you are religious Christians, you are very, very conservative, but you do more than "tolerate" gay men and women, you embrace them as part of our society and would, if you could, insure that that society does not discriminate against them in any way.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year ago
Ahh yes thank you JimT.
DoubleHeroides 1 year ago
@wdd101st: Easy. And I’ll explain before your comment throws the discussion off on a weird tangent. Pedophilia is a mature adult pursuing sexual congress with a minor which by definition is not old enough to consent to sexual activity. Unless you have compelling reasons for someone to believe that any and all state or federal laws will redefine the role of a minor or the age of consent for sexual activity then pedophilia has no place in the discussion of homosexual marriages.
DoubleHeroides 1 year ago
@lakeview: I appreciate the input from the Bible quotations but that does not address some of the ecumenical issues that I raised in one of my previous posts. Should we use your denomination or beliefs in Christianity or someone elses in determining state law?
Bflat 1 year ago
When you vote for the State Senator of your choice, just remember that the language used in the Bill needs to be carefully considered as to what effect it will have if passed. And , again Tillman was a sponsor of the Bill. Without getting in to the religious reasons, consider why anyone should discriminate against a human being who makes a choice. Getting along in society is about love and respect for other people (and of course that is getting into religion...right?) However, I don't have to love what a person does or how he or she dresses or acts. That is what the person chooses. As and as long as that person is not breaking any laws, becoming a nuisance and so on, it doesn't bother me one bit. I can choose to be in the company of the person or not to be. Too many freedoms are being taken away already by some archaic law or rule. I'm not the One certain people will have to answer to anyway. Opps, there's the religion again....