LETTER: President is wrong on gay marriage

Posted by

in Opinions

Friday, May 25. 2012

Comments (63)

Dear Editor:

President Obama’s statements recently regarding the legitimacy of “gay marriage” has ignited a storm of discussion across the country.

His move to this position is really not that surprising considering the direction that our country, and the world as a whole, has been going in the area of sexual attitudes and behavior.

In reality, no one has the authority or power to change the definition of marriage from one man to one woman (which, by the way, President Obama held to just 48 hours before his television statement) to any other definition.

I wonder what would have happened if the president had given other opinions about marriage? What if he had said that multiple wives or husbands is legitimate? This position has been held by some, even here in America, in the not so distant past and is still held to by a small minority. Or what if he had said that marriage, by any definition, is not really that important, but living together with a “genuine commitment” is just as legitimate.

Is living together without actually getting married just another definition for “marriage?” What about marrying your next of kin or your pet? No one with a serious attitude would really suggest these are legitimate.

Only God’s plan for the home as outlined in the Bible is approved and beneficial for mankind. In our day, unfortunately, many have thrown off “one man for one woman” and prefer to live in fornication, adultery and many other sorts of sexual perversion. While some reading this may resent these words, this is not my opinion: it is truth from God’s word. If you have a Bible at home, I encourage you to read these passages: Matthew 19:3-6, Mark 10:6-9, Romans 1:21-32, I Corinthians 7:1-5, Hebrews 13:4.

While the husband-wife relationship is wonderful, the greatest relationship we can have is with God through Jesus Christ his son. Only when we have had our sins forgiven (for all of us have broken God’s law) can we enjoy fellowship with our Maker. Then we will see the blessings of God’s plan for the home.

Sincerely,

Mark A. Jenkins

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 Bill on 05/25/12 at 11:27 AM [Reply]

Amazing that in the year 2012, Mark A. Jenkins would have the audacity to pen such a letter. Even more so that the Madison Journal would allow it to see the light of day.

In the past, those who have supported the inequitable treatment of citizens due to their personal religion, bigotry, or downright meanness have been remembered by history exactly in the manner they deserve to be.

Today, Mark A. Jenkins and the Madison Journal have sadly added their own names to that legacy. How proud you must be.

#1.1 Virginia Moss on 05/25/12 at 02:09 PM [Reply]

"In the past, those who have supported the inequitable treatment of citizens due to their personal religion, bigotry, or downright meanness have been remembered by history exactly in the manner they deserve to be."

I support your statement above 100%! However, Mr. Jenkins' letter raises some interesting questions about marriage. What is it, really? Maybe it is time we stepped back and reassessed marriage for the twenty-first century.

More importantly right now, people's opinions that are printed in the Madison County Journal do not reflect the opinions of the Madison County Journal. Perhaps the editor printed it in order to start discussions similar to yours or, maybe, to see how many folks here would add their names to that legacy you mentioned. Or maybe the editor practices reasonable censorship, you know, freedom of expression and all that, which is so fundamental to our way of life.

#1.2 Alexander on 05/26/12 at 01:54 AM [Reply]

Bill, You completely missed the point of the letter. Instead of seeing what is written, all you see is "he hates gays", when nothing he suggested says that. I don't care what year it is dude, 2012, 1775, 2104, wrong is wrong. Suggesting that what year we are in decides whether we accept something or not is true ignorance, and can open some very dangerous doors. If people who enjoy having sex with people of the same sex are allowed to marry, then why not allow multiple person marriages, or even allow a brother and a sister to be married?

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Legal unions are there for anyone else who does not believe that fact.

#1.2.1 Virginia Moss on 05/27/12 at 03:03 PM [Reply]

Your comment is quite correct about Mr. Jenkins and thanks for pointing it out. However, I take issue with your following quote:

"Suggesting that what year we are in decides whether we accept something or not is true ignorance, and can open some very dangerous doors."

So, do you mean the opened door to end slavery after accepting it for thousands of years, so acceptable that the Bible takes it for granted, thereby not even addressing it? The opening of the door to civil rights? The open door to blacks marrying whites? Maybe it is time that the door open for homosexual people to marry homosexual people. Or maybe it is even time for government to not be involved in marriage at all. Let that be the affair of religion and personal choice only. There may come a time for that sooner or later, you know; too much government interferance in our personal lives.

#1.2.2 E.J. on 05/27/12 at 09:39 PM [Reply]

“If people who enjoy having sex with people of the same sex are allowed to marry, then why not allow multiple person marriages, or even allow a brother and a sister to be married?”

Well, then, why not? Is marriage only about sex? Is there anything wrong with a man and a woman getting married because they are just the very best of friends and want to build a life together, but don’t have the desire for sex with each other or at all? Instead, they have sex with others of the opposite sex outside their marriage and those partners just never seem to give them the emotional support they get from each other, but they do attract the two people sexually. We need to set aside our habitual, unexamined views of marriage and try to see marriage more fundamentally, right down to the psychological and socialogical roots.

BTW, sibling-paired offspring are in no danger unless it continues in the same family for many generations like in royal families of the past. Still, it seems to be a natural taboo in nature, so then we have to ask whether it should be outlawed, which then requires the question, “Where is the harm to the siblings, the offspring or others in society?” The answer is, “None”. One less thing government needs to worry about.

“Marriage is between a man and a woman. Legal unions are there for anyone else who does not believe that fact.”

Legal unions are also there for a man and a woman who don’t want to come under the existing laws governing “marriage”. What do the existing marriage laws do that civil unions or just simply drawn-up legal documents can’t do? What is the difference between civil unions, legal marriage and no marriage? If a man and woman sincerely commit to living together for the purpose of having and raising children without any “marriage”, how does that hurt or interfere with anyone? Why does the government need to be involved except to protect the children from neglect or abuse? We have laws for that and they are not included in marriage laws. We have proof of paternity (and maternity) so we know who to hold liable for proper support of the children; if they don’t step up, we sadly have to remove the children to foster care. If the couple splits after the children reach adulthood, if either or both have failed to protect their interests, then, just like in a business partnership, they suffer the consequences. No need for government to be involved; such was their personal responsibility. These are questions that can help clarify the true meaning of legal marriage, religious marriage and spiritual marriage.

#2 J.Farrell on 05/25/12 at 11:46 AM [Reply]

Lord, save me from your followers.

#3 Ben Had on 05/25/12 at 02:10 PM [Reply]

Obama is the President,not the Pope.

Cast your vote for Romney if you want a good Bible-thumping, God-fearing man in the White House!
Oh, wait a minute...he's a mormon!
Maybe he will send a space mission to planet Kolob, where the mormons say God lives.

This is much better than reality TV.
Pass the popcorn.

#3.1 Ms.K on 05/31/12 at 05:52 PM [Reply]

Thanks for making that very fundamental and important distinction!

And thanks for the chuckle. Another good one for you.

#4 runningdeer on 05/25/12 at 09:49 PM [Reply]

The only arrogance here is that of bill on who thinks that all must subscribe to their liberal leaning view and support this poser in the White House. I support what Mr. Jenkins said and am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ which doesn't preach or teach one trashy word of what this current administration and so many sick souls wants to pass off as enlightened , fair, or (sick) love!

#4.1 E.J. on 05/27/12 at 10:10 PM [Reply]

“The only arrogance here is that of bill on who thinks that all must subscribe to their liberal leaning view and support this poser in the White House. I support what Mr. Jenkins said and am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ which doesn't preach or teach one trashy word of what this current administration and so many sick souls wants to pass off as enlightened , fair, or (sick) love!´

Then don’t support the current White House or liberal leanings; you are perfectly free to do so. As a Christian, you are also perfectly free to not be one of your sick souls by never participating in homosexual “(sick) love”. I don’t see that you have a problem here, especially regarding sex, unless you are a homosexual person struggling to deny your given sexual drives. If you want to stop same-sex sexual activity, then you are interfering in the rights of others, especially those who are not Christians. Regarding the latter, why do you feel obligated to mind other people’s business about anything religious? They do not come under your jurisdiction or your church’s or your minister’s. You have no say! And why are you so interested in other people’s bedrooms? Voyeurism, perhaps? No? Then tell us who gets harmed as a result of homosexual activity. Tell us!

As to your view of homosexuality, it is inborn due to genetics and embryonic development; this is generally accepted. Just like with left-handedness, it happens to about 10% of the population. There were significantly more homosexual men than average whose mothers were pregnant during the Blitz of London during World War II. Evidently, maternal stress causes embryonic development to go wrong as well as genetics. It is the delicate change from female to male that goes wrong during development; female is the default in nature and all men start out that way, in spite of that silly story about Adam and Eve. Please open both your heart and your mind. Believe what you want but keep it in your church.

#5 Ben Had on 05/26/12 at 07:58 AM [Reply]

Just curious; what does the Bible have to say about owning slaves, and women speaking in church? What is the punishment for adultery? What is the punishment for marrying a woman that isn't a virgin?
Class warfare,you say? From what I have been able to ascertain, the Bible/Jesus would prefer something more similar to communism than capitalism. Good luck,Job Creators.
What if Jesus returned today? Is your heart in the right place?
Hate War,not the poor. Despise the greedy,not the needy.(yeah,I know)

#6 T Smith on 05/26/12 at 09:40 AM [Reply]

I couldn't agree more with Bill And J. Farrell.

The organized religion we have in our country has for far to long touted that their religious freedom has been denied or that they are being attacked. While all the time being politically active in denying others their freedom and attacking their liberty along with thinking they have been given the role of playing God and casting judgement upon others. By what measure you use to judge others so shall you be judged. I have great concern that these radical nuts have taken over our Government and the end result will surely be nothing but tyranny brought upon a Supposedly Free Nation of supposed Free people born with unalienable rights. Religious freedom does not mean that it trumps the rights of others. You only have that freedom so long as its not used to take away or violate the freedoms and liberty of others and that's where it stops period . Another reason no church should be tax exempt.

#6.1 Ben Had on 05/28/12 at 06:44 AM [Reply]

Amen. Well said.

#6.2 E.J. on 05/28/12 at 04:12 PM [Reply]

Hear, hear, Mr. Smith!

#6.2.1 Not ashamed on 06/15/12 at 10:47 AM [Reply]

As a christian we should understand that what is right is not poular, so it is not surprising to see that so many here fail to understand that the Biblical principles that should be adhered to are tossed aside and ridiculed. Oh how surprised these same people that ridicule the word of God will be when they stand before him. It is then and only then they will understand the truth. Until then christian be strong in the Lord, fight the good fight, and continue to stand for the beliefs that we know are right and true. On a side note please note that it is not with hate that any of this is said. I am more than full of love for all brethren, however I also live with the Holy Spirit dwelling within and I know that I must discern between right and wrong. As a christian I also understand that the world will not understand or like me (John 15:19 If ye were of THE world, THE WORLD would love his own: but because ye are not of THE world, but I have chosen YOU out of THE world, therefore THE WORLD hateth you.) and that is okay, the love of Jesus Christ is enough for me.

#6.2.1.1 Ms.K on 06/16/12 at 04:27 PM [Reply]

".... the love of Jesus Christ is enough for me."

Fine; then why make it your business to berate others for not believing what you believe? If you didn't do that, no one would bother you about your faith. Does that make sense to you? Churches have been losing members right and left; if there are any GLBTGs left in your faith, the treatment they have recieved by the church and as an extension of that will drive them completely out along with those of us who support them. That's a lot of tithers. Keep it up and soon there will be no church, like that church that gave their property to Rising Sun.

#6.3 Mr.K on 05/31/12 at 05:58 PM [Reply]

Thanks for your level-headed remarks. It does seem organized religion does more harm than good in this world, stirring up passions and dividing humanity against one another. We should adhere to and respect our government's constitution in order to avoid that discord.

#7 Anonymous on 05/27/12 at 01:01 AM [Reply]

Mark Jenkins just full o' hate!

#7.1 baf20 on 05/30/12 at 11:55 AM [Reply]

I have followed the comments to Mark's letter to the editor and speak in response to the accusation he is "full o'hate." Nothing is further from the truth. Those who know Mark personally know he rather is full of the Gospel of Christ, which commands love yet always with Truth. The Truth of the Gospel, however, is as unpopular today as it was in Jesus' time. I'm quite certain Mark anticipated the firestorm. In the 1st Century, the Apostle Paul wrote to fellow-Believers, "I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus ... preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry." (2 Timothy 4:1-5)

#7.1.1 Anonymous on 05/31/12 at 01:31 PM [Reply]

Naw...Jenkins just fulla hate! Right there for all to see.

#7.1.2 Ms.K on 05/31/12 at 06:02 PM [Reply]

I appreciate your reasonable comment. Contrary to some posters' opinions here, Mr. Jenkins' letter is hardly full of hate and I doubt seriously that he, himself is.

#8 Alexander on 05/27/12 at 06:37 PM [Reply]

Talking about the old testament and calling that the entire message of the Bible is like reading only the part about how Americans treated blacks prior to the civil rights movement and saying America is a savage country towards people of color. And frankly it sickens me when people compare a persons sexual desire to those who are of different color. No one is born gay, they choose who they want to have sex with. A white man or black man cannot choose their color, a person born without limbs cannot choose to suddenly have arms and legs, a person born with downs syndrome does not have a choice, only those people have a right to say they were "born that way".

Opening the door to civil rights for people of all races is not comparable to allowing someone legal rights because they want to have sex with someone, that is just poor logic with no substance. There is no comparison.

#8.1 E.J. on 05/28/12 at 03:53 PM [Reply]

" No one is born gay, they choose who they want to have sex with."

I'm trying to be calm here but I'm right on the edge. Forgive my getting personal, Alexander, but please tell us how you first knew of your sexual attraction(s). Did you feel sexual desire in your teens and then say, "Gee, I think I want to have sex somehow. Let's see, what are all my choices? Should I try them all first in order to know which I like best?" (I cleaned that up significantly from my original words; like I said, I am on the edge here.) Did you make a conscious choice? Did you, Alexander?! I didn't; did anyone else here make a conscious choice? Please tell us.

I'll share with you something very personal about myself that indicated to me with absolutely no question whatsoever that sexual orientation is inborn. I'm a heterosexual female in my 60s. After dating/marriage/divorce/dating men again for 20 years, I gave up. Men were not worth fooling with especially with AIDS out there. I was celibate for a while then decided to try the other side. As I thought it through, I knew a woman would understand me better, but the ultimate obstacle was that thre was no "spark" to get things rolling; therefore, there was nowhere to go. It wouldn't work and I knew it. At that point I very much envied bi-sexual people and still do. Sexual orientation is not a choice, Alexander!

The community of reasonable and intelligent people in the developed world know and accept that homosexuality is not a choice. There has been intense brain reseach in the past twenty years that has brought indepth understanding of how our brains work. We know why homosexuality is inborn and we know it is partly genetic. There is no question that sexuality is inborn and hereditary. Now, you can believe that homosexuality is a sin. You can believe that you yourself should not have sexual relations with the same sex. You can believe that Christians should not have sexual relations with the same sex. You cannot tell others what to believe and you cannot ever say that sexual orientation is a choice, ever! You can condem and despise all people who don't engage in sex exactly like you do; that is your perogative, but you will be wrong. I better stop there.

#8.1.1 Anonymous on 05/29/12 at 01:51 PM [Reply]

Sex is a choice, whether with someone of the same gender or otherwise. Your preference or "spark" can be attributed to environmental/behavioral/psychological influences. Living a celibate life does not affect your sexual orientation or preference. Unless raped, one chooses who they have sex with.
Your other points on government interference, I agree with, but I must respectfully disagree with the "inborn" position of sexuality.

#8.1.1.1 Ben Had on 05/30/12 at 08:03 AM [Reply]

"Sex is a choice, whether with someone of the same gender or otherwise. Your preference or "spark" can be attributed to environmental/behavioral/psychological influences."
That's just your opinion, based merely on what you believe to be true. Do you also believe that man walked with the Dinosaurs,and the planet is only 6000 years old? There may be a pattern here.

#8.1.1.2 E.J. on 05/30/12 at 02:26 PM [Reply]

Thank you for your respectful opinion. So all the well-done brain research of the past twenty years and its conclusions by highly intelligent and well-trained researchers are nothing but hogwash. Okay.

I never indicated that celibacy had anything to do with sexual orientation; good grief. Yes, one chooses the particular person one wants to share sexual relations with, obviously.

Environmental circumstances do seem to influence certain aspects of attraction. It's well-known that both men and women have a tendency to be attracted to sexual partners who are like their opposite-sex parents in both physical appearance and personality. The field of psychology has further noted that the attraction to a particular body type is established by whatever type person was around when the person was about age two.

I thought that was silly until I thought about my sister and me. She has always been attracted to guys who have our father's tall, slightly plump, round-shouldered body. I am "turned on" by very tall, square-shouldered, thin and lanky men. When I was two, in my third year of life, my father had to go to New York City for job training for 11 months. The family went to live with my grandparents until his return. My grandfather was 6'-4", square-shouldered, thin and lanky and very handsome. Gotta be something to this.

Again, homosexuality is not a choice.

#8.1.1.2.1 Alexander on 06/08/12 at 08:24 AM [Reply]

Again, homosexuality IS a choice. A child born blind is BORN that way, and does not have a choice, a child born with down syndrome is BORN that way, and does not have a choice, a man who wants to have sex with another man is NOT BORN that way, it his CHOICE to do so.

#8.1.1.2.1.1 Ben Had on 06/08/12 at 09:21 AM [Reply]

Could you post some links to scientific data that supports your point? Are you a scientist?
If not, you are just giving your opinion,which on today's market has no value whatsoever.

#8.1.1.2.1.2 E.J. on 06/08/12 at 12:05 PM [Reply]

And your religious brainwashing is total and complete. But that's okay. As your church and your religion continue to lose sheep over the years, remember this issue among others so you will know why when Christianity finally dwindles away.

#8.1.2 Alexander on 06/07/12 at 04:49 AM [Reply]

"After dating/marriage/divorce/dating men again for 20 years, I gave up. Men were not worth fooling with especially with AIDS out there."

THAT is why you are gay, a CHOICE you made, not because you were BORN that way. Because you got tired of the men in your life. A child born blind is BORN that way, a child born with no limbs is BORN that way, a child born with down syndrome is BORN that way. Sexual desire is a choice. Grow a spine and admit it!

#8.1.2.1 E.J. on 06/08/12 at 08:20 PM [Reply]

Do you have reading comprehension problems? I am not gay; I have often wished I were. Bisexual would be great. I guess you have made an assumption as to why I gave up on men. It wasn't for lack of sexual attraction to men, unfortunately. It was, among many other things, for the way men my age and older wanted me to be subserviant to them. They wanted me in the old-fashioned role rather than the independent role that younger men easily accept and expect for the most part today. What younger man is going to be interested in a woman past age 40? None, and I refused to accept a "he'll do" type. Celibacy is not that big a deal, really. I can and have gotten along by myself just fine for decades, emotionally, financially and physically. So, unless a man is a near-perfect Mr. Right (who I have been blessed to have found 4 years ago), I have no use for him.

"Sexual desire is a choice. Grow a spine and admit it!"

We're not talking about desire here, Alexander; I have plenty of desire. Do you mean to tell me you can turn on and off your sexual desire like a light switch? That you can rigidly schedule your amourous feelings for 9 pm on Saturdays like clockwork and keep them off the rest of the week? If so, I think some researchers would like to study you. The issue here is sexual orientation. You have yet to answer my question:

"Did you make a conscious choice? Did you, Alexander?!"

#8.1.2.1.1 Ben Had on 06/11/12 at 09:57 AM [Reply]

You're my kind of people, E.J.
It can be hard, living in a world full of fools.

#8.1.2.2 Anonymous on 06/09/12 at 04:58 PM [Reply]

Being a hateful religious bigot is a choice.

#8.1.2.2.1 Ben Had on 06/11/12 at 09:52 AM [Reply]

Best comment so far!

#8.1.2.3 kep on 06/11/12 at 09:06 AM [Reply]

I used to agree with you-that gay was a choice..until I observed 2 boys that went to school with my grandchildren. Both of these boys had very effeminent traits starting as early as kindergarten and they are now very productive members of society that happen to be gay. There may be some that choose, but I believe that most do not.

#8.1.2.3.1 E.J. on 06/16/12 at 06:02 PM [Reply]

Thank you for your anecdote. However, not all homosexual children display effeminate characteristics. Similarly, not all adult homosexual people appear effiminant. The whole range of human sexuality is a compendium with tangential offshoots of all kinds, primarily in men, precisely because of the delicate embrionic change from female to male. Very few adult females experience alternative sexual or gender characteristics.

#9 SardonicVeracity on 05/27/12 at 11:11 PM [Reply]

There wasn't anything "hateful" in his letter. It was an opinion based on his interpretation of scripture. I see more "hate" in the responses.

He had the "audacity" to submit a letter to the editor outlining his belief. How dare he!

Give me a break and drop the moral outrage.

He only offered you heathens a glimpse into the Biblical idea of marriage. I might caution you to not stop at verse 5 ...but also read 7-10 in 1 Corinthians 7!

St Paul would rather none of us get married...but woe to us who are weak in the flesh.

#9.1 Ms.K on 05/31/12 at 05:46 PM [Reply]

"There wasn't anything "hateful" in his letter. It was an opinion based on his interpretation of scripture. I see more "hate" in the responses."

I have to agree with you there! The rest of your post, not so much. Whose "moral outrage"? The only posters basing their opinions on morality are religious ones. Most of the rest are simply practical and they make sense to me.

#10 E.J. on 05/28/12 at 12:00 AM [Reply]

“Is living together without actually getting married just another definition for “marriage?” What about marrying your next of kin or your pet? No one with a serious attitude would really suggest these are legitimate.”

Yes, living together with the same commitment to one another is one kind of marriage. How would you define marriage, Mr. Jenkins? I suspect in your mind it is the Christian, Biblical definition, whatever that is exactly. Does that mean that only Christians can marry? All others would have to do the civil union thing or nothing at all? Is sex a requirement of marriage; is it? If not, then marrying your sibling or pet would be your business and nobody else’s, especially the government’s because there is no harm to anyone or anything nor interference with rights. If it is required, well get your nose out of my bedroom and the government’s prying eyes, too! How else would the sex requirement be proven? Is it about sex or is marriage about commitment to care for children? Please see my posts replying to Alexander and to Runningdeer. Then please join this discussion and answer these questions.

#11 Ms.K on 05/31/12 at 06:47 PM [Reply]

The problem with Mr. Jenkins' letter is that he makes sweeping generalizations about our world and arrogant assumptions about the people he is addressing (everyone). If he simply said "as a Christian, this is what I believe" or "my view is" or "basing my advice on the Bible" it would have come off far less preachy and intolerant.

"In reality, no one has the authority or power to change the definition of marriage from one man to one woman (which, by the way, President Obama held to just 48 hours before his television statement) to any other definition."

That might be Mr. Jenkins' wish within his own reality, but our government can define marriage any way it wants or needs to including not at all. And no one knows what's inside Mr. Obama's mind; politicians say whatever they need to to get elected. In this case, such an announcement will probably hurt him more than help him, but he had the courage to take a stand regardless. I respect that.

"I wonder what would have happened if the president had given other opinions about marriage? What if he had said that multiple wives or husbands is legitimate? This position has been held by some, even here in America, in the not so distant past and is still held to by a small minority. Or what if he had said that marriage, by any definition, is not really that important, but living together with a “genuine commitment” is just as legitimate."

What if? Those would be his personal opinions and they are interesting questions to consider as it relates to government in modern times. You have to ask why government (society) cares enough about personal relationships to make laws about those personal connections. I think most people would agree that the parental relationship is of paramount concern because the child is powerless and vulnerable in society. Though through most of history, women were also vulnerable due to being physically weaker and burdened with babies, they no longer need protecting. Women are economically, politically and domestically equal to men now.

"Is living together without actually getting married just another definition for “marriage?” What about marrying your next of kin or your pet? No one with a serious attitude would really suggest these are legitimate."

A serious attitude about what? Seems this E.J. has some very serious and passionate ideas! A bit radical, but they make one think outside the box. And as she said, sibling marriage poses no immediate threat to the offspring. Still that just feels weird and uncomfortable to me.

"Only God’s plan for the home as outlined in the Bible is approved and beneficial for mankind. In our day, unfortunately, many have thrown off “one man for one woman” and prefer to live in fornication, adultery and many other sorts of sexual perversion. While some reading this may resent these words, this is not my opinion: it is truth from God’s word."

This IS Mr. Jenkins' opinion in that he is agreeing with it. I do not agree that what is best for mankind is only in the Bible. For nearly everthing in that resource there is an opposite pronouncement. All it does is cause controversy and open everything to personal interpretation, encouraging followers to simply pick and choose what works for them.

Homosexual and transgendered people are our neighbors, coworkers, friends and family. They should never have been regarded as anything other than different. But because of religion fostering dispersions on them, people have felt free and even obligated to hate them, exclude them, harm and kill them. Thanks, Christianity.

#11.1 One American For All . on 06/08/12 at 11:26 AM [Reply]

The establishment of organized religion seems to have become to political and feels it has the authority and political freedom and will to deny others their freedom while screaming they are being attacked.
Its like a thief trying to rob you and you start beating them about the head and then they begin to yell stop, why are you attacking me . The Church has no authority over anyone and should not believe that it does. They have their freedom of religion and those who choose have freedom from it . The only people who become angry by the truth are the ones telling the lies . For far to long we have had judicial activism where personal opinion and ideology rule the day rather than Constitutional and Case Law that is bound to protect individual liberty and freedom FOR ALL and this happens with in both political parties.

Ben Franklin wrote this letter
( You desire to know something of my religion. It is the first time I have been questioned upon it. But I cannot take your curiosity amiss, and shall endeavour in a few words to gratify it. Here is my creed. I believe in one God, Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His providence. That He ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable service we render Him is doing good to His other children. That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental principles of all sound religion, and I regard them as you do in whatever sect I meet with them.
"As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of Morals and his Religion, as he left them to us, the best the World ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes, and I have, with most of the present Dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the Truth with less trouble. I see no harm, however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequence, as probably it has, of making his doctrines more respected and better observed; especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in His government of the world with any particular marks of His displeasure.

"I shall only add, respecting myself, that, having experienced the goodness of that Being in conducting me prosperously through a long life, I have no doubt of its continuance in the next, without the smallest conceit of meriting it... I confide that you will not expose me to criticism and censure by publishing any part of this communication to you. I have ever let others enjoy their religious sentiments, without reflecting on them for those that appeared to me unsupportable and even absurd. All sects here, and we have a great variety, have experienced my good will in assisting them with subscriptions for building their new places of worship; and, as I never opposed any of their doctrines, I hope to go out of the world in peace with them all."

[Benjamin Franklin]

Thomas Jefferson's Finial Letter To John Adams on the Fifty Year Anniversary.
May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government. That form which we have substituted, restores the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.

In my opinion more can be learned from the founders about what true spirituality is rather then from a preacher these days .

Organized Religion is as much an enemy of Liberty and Freedom today just as the government and all its instruments within its system . We fought to free ourselves from the chains they bound us with . Will we have to spill blood of the tyrants again in order to take back and preserve that Freedom.
I believe that is the question most of us are asking ourselves today.
I believe we must . We are willing to send our youth around the world to die for the supposed Freedom and Liberty of others and in defense of our own . Yet we allow those institutions right here with in our borders to rob us of that same inalienable right. This is insanity which in my opinion just can not be allowed . If we are to truly honor those who bare the scars mentally and physically along with those who have died in the defense of that Liberty and Freedom .

#12 mm on 06/02/12 at 06:45 PM [Reply]

What did Jesus have to say about homosexuality? No, really, someone please tell me his exact words. The words of Jesus, not anyone else. I await with great enthusiasm to discover the truth about the attitude of Jesus Christ towards homosexuals.

#12.1 Anon. on 06/04/12 at 07:22 PM [Reply]

"What did Jesus have to say about homosexuality? No, really, someone please tell me his exact words. The words of Jesus, not anyone else..."

Jesus only wrote in the sand, that I recall, about a woman 'caught in the very act of adultery' and is quoted as saying "go and sin no more." This says to me He is saying she should stop and repent of her way of life.

If a man had been brought to Him and the claim was he was caught in the very act of laying with another man the answer would have been the same. It seems to me.

If Jesus was and is the Word of God, then the Bible is what He says and this Word says that homosexuals that do not repent as with many other sins that are listed in the same verse, will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.

The simple truth is the Gospel. Either we accept it as truth or we reject it as a myth.

#12.1.1 E.J. on 06/05/12 at 06:54 PM [Reply]

Who is your "we"? Does this mean that homosexual people can feel okay about themselves if they refrain from being Christians? Well now, there's a simple solution for them. They can just come join the rest of us sensible heterosexuals where they will be fully accepted with respect, support, love and caring because we think they are decent people with just as much to contribute to society as anyone else. Y'all just stay huddled up in your churches and believe whatever you want, but keep it there; we're tired of hearing it.

#12.1.2 Done Ben Had on 06/07/12 at 02:19 PM [Reply]

The Church has no true creed other than the Bible and that can be interpreted to mean what ever any individual wants it to . What did Jesus say? He who is without sin cast the first stone and that all people are sinners and fall short of the Glory of God . Another passage is that by that measure in which you judge others so shall you be judged and another is to the least one of mine that you do this you have also done it to me. So take your pick . I can only say animosity and hate is not of God . Judgement of others according to the scripture will be done by God not by man . So what teachings are you following ? When and where in the Bible does it say the Church has the right to judge anyone and God has delegated his exclusive right of judgement to anyone or anything other than himself ? I was raised in the church but have gotten away from it just for that reason that most people in it today are so pretentious , judgmental, hypocrites who have no personal spiritual relationship with God . They carry their bible to Church and let some Man behind a pulpit interpret to them what the word of God is. When the time comes most will be told you never knew me so I don't know you. That's written as well . Then through their collective group they seek to treat others as less than children of God and seek to refuse to treat them with dignity. Where did those people come from ? Who created them ? Did not God create all things? Maybe it might be an abomination to God and go against the laws of Nature but who are you to judge anyone?

#12.1.2.1 Ben Had on 06/08/12 at 09:34 AM [Reply]

Good post. Do hypocrites go to Hell when they die?
I've heard somewhere that only 250,000 will be allowed into Heaven when they die. At the time, I thought this was crazy. How could so few be allowed in? Now, I'm much older and realize that if it is true, there are probably a good 200,000 vacancies still remaining.

#12.1.2.2 Virginia Moss on 06/16/12 at 05:26 PM [Reply]

Excellent and instructive comment, Done Ben Had! Thank you for offering reasonable and insightful ideas here. So needed.

#12.1.3 oh heavens on 06/11/12 at 02:56 PM [Reply]

Jesus also said "let those of you without sin cast the first stone" and what happened? No one threw a stone. But, from the comments, that's all I'm seeing. People casting stones at things they don't understand. Homosexuality is not a choice. I have many gay friends, and I can assure you, if they had a CHOICE they sure wouldn't choose to be slammed and disrespected for who they love. I'm sure you didn't decide that you were going to love your wife/girlfriend/significant other, it just happened. Well, same situation just with the same sex. Everyone is going to have their own specific beliefs on this situation. I say what someone else does in their own bedrooms is their business, not ours.

#12.2 Ben Had on 06/05/12 at 12:41 PM [Reply]

Uh, you're not playing fair.

#12.3 Sarah on 06/07/12 at 04:02 PM [Reply]

Actually, his father taught us about this. He explicitly stated that man should not lay with another man. You can be a homosexual, and you can be Christian, but you can not be both if you have a sexual partner. God created man and woman to mate. Not man and man or woman and woman.

#13 Sarah on 06/07/12 at 04:10 PM [Reply]

The answer, Mr. Jenkins, is simple. It's election year, and he needs all the votes he can get. You see how late in life he came to the decision, and only after talking to his uninformed and inexperienced daughters. He is a tall drink of hypocracy and lies. Remember, all his campaign promises from 2008. He, like most of his predecessors, changed their tune once elected. He will say anything and promise anything to get back into office. However, it won't be my vote that gets him there. I'm voting for Mickey and Goofey ticket again.

#14 OH WOW on 06/08/12 at 08:49 AM [Reply]

Most of you people are just SCARY!! You will have to bow before Our Lord and savior. This is a requirement for both the believers AND the non-believers. Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess. So Rave-ON you will have to give an account. I am not preaching I am stating facts. I choost to follow the Lord, not the president. You better wake up and study up. YOU WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE!!

#14.1 OH WOW on 06/11/12 at 08:40 AM [Reply]

Made a type-o I choose.

#14.2 Ben Had on 06/11/12 at 09:34 AM [Reply]

There are 20 major religions in the world, and many others that have fewer followers. You believe in one of them,so that doesn't make it or you very special at all.
Heaven and Hell exist only between your ears.
Boo!

#14.2.1 Ms.K on 06/17/12 at 06:09 PM [Reply]

:D :D :D

#15 Madison on 06/10/12 at 03:13 PM [Reply]

My issue is with finding out that some one called a swinger has opened a snapfitness in our area and we as a southern church going state is allowing this person to teach our children about health when they are having relations with others not their spouse keeping this in your bedroom is your choice but now its being put out there for all to see.we have enough stuff put on TV for our children to see and for us as parents to control.teens having babies is at a all time high and now we have this person showing that its ok to go against gods wish and teaching .

#15.1 Ben Had on 06/11/12 at 09:48 AM [Reply]

Well, if what you say is true, we should light the torches and gather the townspeople to run this scoundrel out of our "southern church going state" immediately!

Bring a hangman's noose, and just to be on the safe side,we better include a silver bullet and wooden stake in our arsenal.

#15.2 Ms.K on 06/11/12 at 10:33 AM [Reply]

What?! This is interesting. Why don't you just go ahead and name names here. How in the world do you or anyone else know anything of the sex lives of anybody and why would you want to know it? How, exactly, are the participants "putting it out there for all to see" and "showing that it's ok"? If you are going to make such accusations and share with the public on this forum, then you need to verify how you came to know and confirm this piece of information and how, exactly, children are being taught to be sexual swingers at a fitness center. Good grief!

#16 Anonymous on 06/11/12 at 02:13 PM [Reply]

Seems like every month there is another idiotic letter from the most ignorant Mark Jenkins. Mark Jenkins pen is is always in his hand.

#16.1 Ms.K on 06/16/12 at 05:17 PM [Reply]

Mr. Jenkins writes a regular and informative column on our weather which is essential in an agricultural area such as ours. This is the first letter to the editor I have seen from him, though I could have missed all those others you mention. While I very much don't agree with him regarding this letter, he has the right to express himself just as you do and has done so without hatred.

#17 I Have a Question ? on 06/11/12 at 03:35 PM [Reply]

Does the acceptance of God or Jesus have to be freely accepted or do we have to be beaten down until we accept it . Is it suppose to be a free will choice or what ? Just asking.

#17.1 E.J. on 06/16/12 at 05:36 PM [Reply]

Good guestion. What I find almost abusive is the indoctrination of children into religious belief. They are never given the opportunity to even ask for spiritual guidance before they have religion rammed down their throats beginning at age two or three. Whether it be Christianity, Islam, Judaism or whatever, they are unwilling captives to the beliefs and doctrines. That upsets me deeply!

#18 smackdad6 on 06/17/12 at 09:08 PM [Reply]

I am so surprised to learn that I have abused my children by taking them to church. I am disappointed in my parenting skills as, to this logic, I have lead them by example to eat certain foods, talk a certain way and follow laws, all which must be abuse as I have rammed them down their throats. To all my 6 children, I am so sorry for the guidance. Please forgive me for the private educations, nice cars, clothes, and any other extravagant luxuries given to you as a child. I should have known better. The correct path is to simply let you make all your own choices at age 4 and let the chips fall where they may. You are obviously better off when left alone to make all your own decisions. Sorry!!! Come to think, maybe I'll just ask my government what to do, they seem to make all the right moves.

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment: E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.

Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
Phone*

What is eight minus three?
: Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry
: Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

LETTER: President is wrong on gay marriage

MadisonJournalTODAY

LETTER: President is wrong on gay marriage

Recent Stories

Recent Comments

Sister Sites

Archives

Community

Keyword Tags