News24

No same-sex marriage rule in church

2013-05-21 20:31

Cape Town - The Methodist Church did not have a rule prohibiting its members or ministers from marrying someone of the same sex, the Western Cape High Court heard on Tuesday.

Annemarie de Vos said the church only recognised heterosexual marriages, but this did not mean her client, Ecclesia de Lange, 43, contravened the church's laws and disciplines.

"The decision by the church... was unconstitutionally unfair. As long as there is no specific rule by the church forbidding same-sex marriages, she's entitled to enter into a marriage.

"How do they justify discrimination if they don't know it's right or wrong?... .You can't discriminate if you can't decide."

De Lange was ordained as a minister in the church in 2006. In December 2009 she announced to the church her intention to marry her woman partner.

Two disciplinary committees found her guilty of contravening the church's policies, practices and usages, and she was discontinued as a minister.

This meant she did not lose her position, but she could not exercise any ministerial powers and did not receive financial compensation.

After numerous delays, the parties concluded an agreement for arbitration in June 2011.

De Lange since approached the court to ask for the church's decision to be set aside, to be re-instated and compensated retrospectively, and to bypass the arbitration process.

She contends the arbitration agreement was one-sided and that the arbitrator was a member of the church and thus not objective.

Balancing act

The church's legal team argued it had a rule preventing any of its members from taking a "positive step" towards same-sex marriages, until a final policy decision had been made on the sensitive matter.

Isabel Goodman said the church's conference had been grappling with whether to recognise same-sex marriages since 2000.

"The church has therefore provided platforms for debate and engagement, allowing the process to unfold in a controlled environment conducive to reconciliation of divergent doctrinal beliefs, and in line with the church’s commitment to open and ongoing discussion, balanced and considered decision-making."

Goodman said De Lange breached the oath she took to accept and obey the conference's decision. She had known such a rule existed by being a member and a minister, yet chose to contravene it anyway.

Goodman asked the court to be aware the church was entitled to make decisions to safeguard its members and doctrinal beliefs.

It was caught in the careful act of balancing constitutional rights and religious freedom.

The church asked for the matter to be referred for arbitration, instead of being considered by a court.

It had appointed Gerald Bloem, a senior counsel of the Grahamstown Bar, to independently weigh the merits of the case as an arbitrator.

Goodman asked for De Lange's application to be dismissed with costs, especially since she had since divorced.

"A minister who is involved in divorce proceedings is immediately suspended pending an investigation and possible disciplinary proceedings... In those circumstances an order of reinstatement is futile, and impedes the church' s ability to discipline its ministers."

Judge Anton Veldhuizen reserved judgment.

Comments
  • Cane Corso - 2013-05-21 20:36

    But her Bible does and thus her God.

      Ahava Shapiro - 2013-05-21 22:32

      Everyones evading the question you asked, conveniently.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 22:44

      She is projecting her own views of God into the Bible. Like many modern day televangelists, they get their instructions directly from Heaven and God, no need for scriptures...

  • Mfaniseni Thusi - 2013-05-21 20:47

    South Africa where are we going? People including myself made a lot of comments and suggestions were made. You'll never find heterosexual people crowding homosexuals why for Gods sake are they busy trying to invade our space especially a place of worship? Gays and Lesbians please start your organizations or churches and leave us alone. When you marche especially in CT we stand and look without any interference so please enough is enough.

      Phoenixx - 2013-05-21 21:14

      Why do you think heterosexual people "own" the church and religion. In Australia, 58% of gay people are religious. Recently, the New York Post published an piece about census results in the Western world, showing that more gay people identify as being religious than heterosexual people. Irrespective of the accuracy of these reports, it shows that MANY gay people are religious. Why do YOU think you own God?

      Mfaniseni Thusi - 2013-05-21 22:37

      @Ms Dilligaf & Phoenix - Your argument is totally unfounded. My point is if you don't agree with an organization especially if it has existed for so many years move on. Find a place where you'll be welcomed. If I don't agree with Hinduism, Buddhism, ZCC, Islam, Rastafarism it is my responsibility to move on or move to Australia. Look at the scandals of child abuse that have followed certain churches due to homosexuality, I am sure you know what I am talking about. If I don't agree with AWB do I have to take them to court? No no no. Any Jewish synagogue will dismiss the Rabbi or Priest once he discloses his status immediately. I could tell you more but let me stop here.

      Phoenixx - 2013-05-21 22:51

      Ah the homosexuals are child abusers things again. Paedophiles do not identify with adult sexuality; and in general the gender of the child is not important - the accessibility of the child is. Gay people are as much child abusers as what straight people are. Please get your facts straight and educate yourself. If you 'told more' as you threatened, I fear you will just reveal your lack of education on matters of human sexuality.

      Mfaniseni Thusi - 2013-05-21 22:53

      @ Mallory I truly have a life wherever I go I am accepted. I have a wonderful family my children are proud of me. People don't look at me and when I look at them shy away. I love being straight it makes me walk straight. You need to get a life by thinking straight.

      Mfaniseni Thusi - 2013-05-21 23:43

      Ooooh Phoenixx!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't be a coward and involve education, this issue evolves around common sense. Thank you.

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-22 00:58

      Mfaniseni Thusi: So, if we use your logic, everyone should have just left the old NP government to continue as they see fit - seeing as the rules have already been set, even though they infringed on so many human beings dignity? You should get a life, and an education. I don't think your idea of "common sense" is cutting it. PS - There is PLENTY of interference from christians at events like CT Pride etc. Protestors on the day as well as resistance leading up to the event. Do a bit of research on people like Errol Naidoo before you make statements about matters of which you know very little.

      Michael Micky De Beer - 2013-05-22 03:46

      Let those who wants to be vile, let them get viller. Thus says The Word Of The Lord ,but those that wants to be Devine I will Glorify.

  • Jack Bullard - 2013-05-21 20:49

    This is what happens when lawyers no longer have to learn Latin. They remain ignorant of the roots of their civilisation.

  • Sipho Masango - 2013-05-21 21:01

    i really dont know what to say

  • James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 21:01

    The church no doubt did not have any policy on same sex marriage, because biblical (and until recently civil) marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a woman. The church made the first mistake by contradicting the Biblical instructions on leadership in the church and even appointing de Lange as a minister in the first place. Never the less, what a horrible and utterly blinded woman. Most Pastors, even council members resign the moment they no longer can serve an example to the rest of the congregation. Here is a pastor that cannot possible preach from the Bible, agreed to arbitration, but now still wants more from the church! Who and what is she putting first? Her own needs or that of the church?

      Farai Chitokomere - 2013-05-21 22:00

      The church has it The bible it's just that the lady does not study the word I wonder where she is coming from

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 22:20

      @Dilligaf I couldn't agree more. There are a great number of churches and pastors whose motives are self serving and use the scriptures to their benefit. Televangelists virtually all fall in this category. Matthew 7v21.

      SarcasticHeathen - 2013-05-22 09:13

      Then the churches should not be shocked if they are called homophobes, right? I myself don't mind. The world needs more atheists.

  • Linda Galanakis - 2013-05-21 21:11

    As a Methodist I am ashamed to think that my church could be this conservative and prejudiced.

      Cane Corso - 2013-05-21 21:16

      Then so must be your God too? What does his scriptures have to say on this issue?

      Farai Chitokomere - 2013-05-21 21:42

      Linda to you study the bible??

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 22:25

      Linda, as a Christians (i.e. follower of Christ) does Jesus's views on homosexuality also bring you to shame?

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 23:01

      @Blinding Must be another GayAtheist account.

      SarcasticHeathen - 2013-05-22 09:15

      Linda, these guys are right. The bible is very clear on homosexuality. Come. Join the dark side. We have cookies. With rainbow sprinkles.

      Taufiq Sithole - 2013-05-22 10:16

      The Methodist Church hasn't taken a position on the matter, its officially in limbo (regardless, or rather in spite of what anyone may say). Therefore since it is in limbo objectively, legally speaking or from a common sense perspective they can't make a decision based on a policy they have yet to decide on. This is not my opinion but objective fact, so to clear this up and any other potential issues of a related or similar nature they should make up their minds one way or another and decide on a policy. My personal opinion though, which is of limited or no consequence since I'm not even Methodist, is that people should learn to be a little more open minded and less judgmental. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" John 8:7 I think. I'm certainly in no position to but feel free to cast stones all you want gentlemen.

      Kaydee Booysen - 2013-06-26 17:21

      Linda you must be Lesbian too, you obviously don't read the Bible, you study these forums, and agree with the majority.

  • Sello Papo - 2013-05-21 21:20

    its not abt church rule its abt God rule methodist church does believ in Jesus christ nd his resurection, nd so all principles aligned with word of God must b obeyed. Thn if ppl decide to take another let thm do tht bt as for methodist church nd followers of christ shal serve God

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-23 00:00

      James: I don't understand why you would have a problem with people thinking something, yet choosing not to act on it? Have you never felt so angry that you felt you could throw a punch, yet you chose not to because doing so would violate another person? We're all faced with those kind of choices on a daily basis - and that's what sets us apart from criminals who choose to prey on their victims. You haven't answered any of the questions I posed to you, without using the bible as evidence to prove it's own ridiculous claims. If you want to infringe on the human dignity of others, if you want to be able to deny certain people certain rights - then the burden of proof falls on YOU as to why you should be allowed to do so. Just by the way - the bible provides no proof for anything. Even within modern day christianity it's considered to be filled with fables that are to be used as guidelines at best. PS - since you're asking about necrophilia, you're in a better position than anyone to shed some light on the subject. Ritualistically drinking the blood of jesus and ingesting his body and all...

  • Aubsz - 2013-05-21 21:30

    You can't be religious and gay...just choose one damn it. They contradict each other.

      Lourens van Niekerk - 2013-05-21 22:15

      Ah but the bible is full of contradictions, have you read it? Therefore a gay person claiming to be religious will fit right in. And also, being gay is not a damn choice. No straight person wake up one morning thinking, hey, let's be gay for the day and see how that works out? Honestly! People thinking that this is how it works are narrow minded morons.

      WildCatSal - 2013-05-21 22:27

      Aubsz.. FO!

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 22:49

      @Lourens Please answer: 1. Is bisexuality a choice? 2. Is homosexuality a choice? 3. Is heterosexuality a choice? 4. Is paedophilia a choice? 5. Is zoophilia a choice? 6. Is dendrophilia a choice? It seems man can be attracted to woman, men, woman and men, children, animals or trees. Please explain to me in which cases are people 'born that way' and if so, please provide evidence to support your view.

      Lourens van Niekerk - 2013-05-21 23:23

      James... James. Seems to me that you're up to speed with google, so you wil be able to do that search for evidence yourself. I really don't care what you want to have sex with.To each his own. I don't care what you want to have sex with, as long as you don't violate innocent children or animals. You should not force your sexuality on anyone.

      Lourens van Niekerk - 2013-05-21 23:41

      James. Coming back to the article. I am not condoning what this woman is doing. If you are a christian and you follow scripture to the letter, as you should, women shouldn't even be allowed to be preachers. Divorce is a mortal sin. Breaking a promise made before god. Etc, etc. In that other string where you challenged me that were deleted for some reason, you suggested that om gay in a very eloquent way. What made you think that in gay. Haha I'm happily married, my head just isn't stuck up my ass.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-22 00:29

      @Lourens. Lourens, you claimed that people that questioned your view (re. homosexuality not being a choice) were narrow minded morons. You provided no proof to support that view. In my experience, simply claiming someone is a 'narrow minded moron' does not constitute proof. Again I ask you, please explain to me based on your view (which you've not explained), why homosexuality is NOT a choice, but paedophilia, zoophilia, or bisexuality might be. I don't know your view on either of these, so let's try an actual discussion/debate here? I consider someone narrow minded when they cannot objectively support an argument. Can you? Please refer to my previous question.

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-22 01:06

      James Blacksmith: So, you, a person who believes an omnipresent zombie birthed by a virgin, who now lives up in the clouds and a book filled with stories about men traveling underwater in the stomach of a whale, oceans parting etc - is asking for PROOF? You're having a laugh mate. Tell us another one...

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-22 01:16

      Also James: Is heterosexuality a choice? You tell me? When did you choose to be straight? If you haven't, then your argument is invalid and you should accept that some people are just born differently than you were. What makes you so special that you're qualified to be an authority on the lives of others or do you have homosexual tendencies that you are suppressing, and how is that working out for you? The alarming rate of pastors, ministers etc that have been caught with gay lovers worldwide suggests that an attraction to the same sex is an inherent part of a person that cannot successfully be changed. The key to the rest of your concerns about sexual behavior lies in the fact that homosexuality and bisexuality are practices between two consenting adults. All the others would have one predatory partner and another that, due to the nature of what they are, cannot consent.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-22 09:51

      @Andries By all means fill in where Lourens decided to quite the debate. Please also understand that the terms specified (1-6) indicate an attraction. One does not need to act upon one's urges to be classified as a paedophile. In fact many paedophiles state they cannot help their urges. Heck do we believe one day they wake up and say "I'm attracted to kids"? But sure, let's add #7 Necrophilia. Would you also consider that something you're born with? Eagerly awaiting your responses. 1-7 please, thanks.

      Lourens van Niekerk - 2013-05-22 11:39

      Oh. My. God! That is such a sexy cadaver...let's do the nasty. James, why do you feel the need to debate this any further. My suspicion is, sir, you ask these questions but you already know the answers. Why would one be born that way and the other a choice. Don't be daft.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-22 12:44

      @Lourens I'm not the one calling you a narrow minded moron's for disagreeing with me. I'm merely asking you to explain your view in light of other sexual attractions in a rational manner. As you can't, that makes your argument irrational and your opinion of those that oppose your view, intolerant. That my friend is paints you a bigot.

      Lourens van Niekerk - 2013-05-22 13:13

      I did not, James, my friend, disagree with you. Nowhere in your comments did you make a statement of your beliefs. What are they btw. I told you, one cannot be born that way and the other is a choice. You didn't accept that, and that is your choice. I am not going to paste all the links to the websites where studies have been done regarding this topic. You know how to use google. And calling me a bigot is also your opinion, which you are entitled to. And I'm also almost certain what your reply will be to this. And that is fine by me. Good day sir.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-22 14:04

      @Lourens: "People thinking that this is how it works are narrow minded morons. " You don't need to ask me what my opinion is, you're already called me (and everyone who differs from your opinion) a narrow minded moron. I'm pretty sure you can infer my opinion now. I can only assume if the others are 'choices', a normal person wakes up one morning and thinks "Hey, let's be paedophile, look for dead folk or fancy farm animals, heck even tree while we're at it for the day and see how that works out"? Without even having to get into the history of the APA and homosexuality (FYI: http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexual-activists-intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removing-homosexuality-from-list-of-disorders/) , it is entirely illogical to suggest that any of us are hard-wired to fancy anything but the opposite sex. A single biology lesson on Darwinian evolution should be enough to convince even the most vehement 'born this way' advocate that homosexuality would have died out the moment the first dolphin like creature stepped fin on land. But hey, who am I to argue Lady Gaga followers?

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-23 00:00

      James: I don't understand why you would have a problem with people thinking something, yet choosing not to act on it? Have you never felt so angry that you felt you could throw a punch, yet you chose not to because doing so would violate another person? We're all faced with those kind of choices on a daily basis - and that's what sets us apart from criminals who choose to prey on their victims. You haven't answered any of the questions I posed to you, without using the bible as evidence to prove it's own ridiculous claims. If you want to infringe on the human dignity of others, if you want to be able to deny certain people certain rights - then the burden of proof falls on YOU as to why you should be allowed to do so. Just by the way - the bible provides no proof for anything. Even within modern day christianity it's considered to be filled with fables that are to be used as guidelines at best. PS - since you're asking about necrophilia, you're in a better position than anyone to shed some light on the subject. Ritualistically drinking the blood of jesus and ingesting his body and all...

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-23 00:04

      James: You're using a site called "conservative colloquium" as a reliable reference to substantiate your bigoted views? You're funny!

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-23 12:35

      @Andries There is no burden of proof on me. Lourens claimed that homosexuality is by birth. We know there is no such evidence so to support his claim, he would need to qualify that statement with proof. You continued where Lourens left off claiming the difference between homosexuality and other sexual interests are that the other sexual interests involve a victim, but that is a moot point and has no basis on the discussion. Just because a man enjoys raping a woman and the woman is classified as a victim has absolutely no bearing on whether 'rape' is an condition you're born with. Please read carefully: As already stated, paedophilla, zoophilla or necrophilla do not actually imply a person actually has sex with a child, animal or dead corpse, but rather whether a person finds these things sexually attractive (there is no victim). As such, please try answer your question again, why do these 'mental disorders' differ from homosexuality. Why are THEY not something you're born with, but homosexuality IS? PS, if you question the reference site, simply research 'Frank Kameny'.

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-23 14:59

      James: Of course the burden of proof lies with you. Obviously you feel strongly about the subject and you'd like to shape the way that these people are being treated by society with your point of view (as has been the case throughout much of modern history) I'll ask you again - since there's no victim when it comes to homo or bisexuality, what's it to you whether someone was born that way or not? Why do you feel the need to understand and approve someone else's nature, when it isn't harming you or anyone else? Do you also obsess over why someone was born male or female, or left or right handed, or an endo or ectomorph? Do you ask for inconclusive proof on whether those factors could have been changed? PS - Once again, try and keep the bible out of it, because it's not relevant to his discussion.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-23 19:51

      Andries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof "When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim" Please follow with me. Lourens claimed the following: "And also, being gay is not a damn choice" The burden of proof in this claim lies with Lourens. If you wish to take over from Lourens (who it seems you do), and support this claim, the burden of proof falls on you. #Andries "I'll ask you again - since there's no victim when it comes to homo or bisexuality, what's it to you whether someone was born that way or not?" We're simply entertaining a debate here Andries. Lourens stated that anyone that disagrees with his claim (see above) is a "narrow minded moron". I don't consider myself either a moron, nor narrow minded. I asked you a question regarding what the difference was between a sexual attraction to people of the same sex and sexual attraction to other 'things', such as a tree and you responded that the latter involved a victim. Well that didn't really make sense as: 1. An attraction doesn't necessitate a victim 2. A Tree cannot really be a victim, can it ;) ? 3. Schizophrenia/Major depressive disorder are mental disorders. There also are no outside 'victims' as in paedophilia. I thus can only conclude that the only reason homosexuality is not considered a mental disorder (in comparison to say folk that fancy animals), is because homosexuals wielded more political clout.

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-24 01:04

      James: I don't have any interest in your debate with James. What I'm interested to know, you're clearly not willing to answer - what's it to you whether a person was born bi or homosexual, and what does it matter even if it WAS a choice? What's it to you if two consenting males or females choose to act on their impulses and have sex? It seems as if you have an unhealthy preoccupation with what goes on in strangers bedrooms.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-24 10:42

      Andries, in your initial response to me, you concurred with Lourens's view that homosexuality is not a choice. You claimed: "attraction to the same sex is an inherent part of a person that cannot successfully be changed." You incorrectly answered my question comparing homosexuality to a number of other sexual attractions by stating "All the others would have one predatory partner and another that, due to the nature of what they are, cannot consent. ", which I've already illustrated to be flawed for various reasons. I can thus only assume, (like me) you cannot answer my question and cannot tell me why homosexuality is 'normal', but paedophilia 'abnormal', why one is a disorder, but not the other. You further criticised my explanation of the above fact by questioning my reference source. If you have done your homework on Frank Kameny, it might give you a clue. Next you attempt a number of ad hominem arguments which suggest I have some ulterior motive. The simple answer lies in this article where a pastor sues a church that cannot support her lifestyle and recently: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Gay-couple-may-take-on-farm-owners-20130504 My concern is not with what two adults do in their spare time, but rather their actions towards others that don't agree with their lifestyle, which (if trend is followed) will restrict one's freedom of religion and speech. If it follows suit with countries like the UK, it will certainly be a big problem.

      Andries Greeff - 2013-05-29 00:35

      James, your posts are so peppered with the typical kind of churchy brainwashing one has come to expect that you seem incapable of grasping the very simple point I'm making. Let's say that it is proven without a doubt that homosexuality IS a choice between two consenting adults. Why would that concern you? Keeping in mind the criminal history of the church when it comes to the dignity of human beings, why would you think that your "religious freedom" (read bigotry) should give you the right to deny homosexuals, or anyone else, certain rights that are available to others?

  • Farai Chitokomere - 2013-05-21 21:38

    Does she study the bible and which bibl is she teaching her followers its not about church but the bible as the church is governed by the word of GOD

  • Bra N'Darkie - 2013-05-21 21:40

    Homosexual ppl must just leave the church alone. I get that God is good for us all, but churches r guided by the bible and the one that I read discourages homosexuality

      Cane Corso - 2013-05-21 21:55

      Maybe then the church must leave gays and non believers alone... Stop selling your wares and pushing your agendas.

      Jerry Pres - 2013-05-21 22:09

      So why your stupid god made people homosexual in first place? Your bible word of the god, discourages homosexuality, but promoting slavery, rape and killing.Do me favor, take your bible and showed.

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 22:38

      @Cane Please tell me what our 'agenda' re: homosexuality is? Is it US that hold any gay-pride parades? Is it US that sues businesses because they won't let us marry on their property? Is is US that wants to redefine the very definition of marriage, an institution that has lasted centuries? What exactly does 'the church' do to homosexuals and non-believers?

      Steven Da Costa Pereira - 2013-05-22 05:05

      All are welcome in the church, if they allow God to change them, he will.we must submit fully to God, then He can work in us.

  • Richardnealejohn Neale Underwood - 2013-05-21 21:47

    What a disgrace .

  • Garrick Dunstan - 2013-05-21 21:49

    We are all born sinners aren't we, according to christianity, and no single sin is more sinful than another, a sin is a sin not so, so the pope, or tutu for that matter are equally as sinful as a gay, a robber, a murderer and so on, and let's not forget that we should shook take the log out of or own eye before removing the spec from smothers including the pope and everyone. I am just glad that we live in a country where we can say what I have said without being stoned to death, although I suppose I am being judgemental, forgive me God, for I have sinned

      James Blacksmith - 2013-05-21 22:40

      The problem Garrick is that a church leader can only lead by example. If and when they contradict the scriptures (i.e the foundation of their faith), they cannot and should not continue to 'preach' to others.

      Steven Da Costa Pereira - 2013-05-22 05:19

      This is true, there in no small sin, sin is sin, we are all sinners, but we cannot have an openly gay person leading a church,it is against Gods word, what bible does she read, and she is clearly not a true born again christian, how can she LEAD others?

  • Cane Corso - 2013-05-21 21:49

    I'm a sociopath. When I realised my ideologies clashed with the fundamentals of the reborn I opened my own church. A private shooting range with a bar. I suggest gays do the same.

  • jungleboy - 2013-05-21 22:06

    Most churches are lost somewhere in 297AD. Frozen in time. Judgemental and dogmatic

  • Farai Chitokomere - 2013-05-21 22:13

    I agree with you Garrick we are all sinners but the church is what I would liken to a hospital where sin sick people come to get solutions to their sin problem I believe wen the pulpit is being used to promote agendas and doctrine opposed to what the word of GOD stands for then I think the son of desolation The prophet Daniel spoke about in 9:24 and Mathew 24:15 stand in the holy place then know yeah the end is nigh

  • Steven Da Costa Pereira - 2013-05-21 22:15

    We don't need to decide one way or the other, but we must turn to the LORDS word, read leviticas 20:13, stop trying to justify this lifestyle, and do what the Bible tells us.

      Phoenixx - 2013-05-21 22:55

      Read Lev 11:13!!! Stop eating crayfish and prawns! It is an ABOMINATION!

      WildCatSal - 2013-05-21 23:22

      Well SAID Phoenixx!

      Psalm O'Nella - 2013-05-22 06:48

      Typical xtian hypocrisy. Picking the tasty morsels from your fairy tale book and completely ignoring all the other rather unpalatable stuff.

      Mahlako Kekana - 2013-05-22 07:19

      Well said Steven,we r in the end of times nw ppl r deceiving others to fulfil teir evil ways.God dd created Adam nd Eve nt Adam n John or Eve n MarIa.Lev 20:13 says it all.nd is high time we study the bible ourselves some ministers only dish out wht suits dem!

      SarcasticHeathen - 2013-05-22 09:18

      Mahlako, just a shame there is no evidence for this event. In fact, the evidence found so far indicates that whole "magic garden"-story is a fairy-tale.

  • WildCatSal - 2013-05-21 22:34

    Lol! Maybe she should rather of went for multiple husbands..? That's seems more acceptable to all you homophobic! How DARE you judge anyone? I thought your so called good book taught you otherwise..

      Steven Da Costa Pereira - 2013-05-22 05:12

      No one is judging here, we are just saying that she can't be a leader in the Church, as she will be giving Fals teaching, there will be a lot more false teachers in the future, as it is written.

      SarcasticHeathen - 2013-05-22 09:19

      These guys are right. The bible is very clear on homosexuality. Come. Join the dark side. We have cookies. With rainbow sprinkles.

  • Chris Du Toit - 2013-05-22 00:52

    Gay people should be respected and allowed to do what they want to. just like people that have sex with kids and their moms and dogs.fair is fair

      Steven Da Costa Pereira - 2013-05-22 04:55

      That's fine, just not as a leader in Gods holy place.

      Psalm O'Nella - 2013-05-22 06:50

      Chris, just how tf did you reach that conclusion?

      SarcasticHeathen - 2013-05-22 09:19

      I think he hit his head on his "slippery slope".

  • Kobus Hattingh - 2013-05-22 06:51

    2Ti 3:5 They will appear to have a godly life, but they will not let its power change them. Stay away from such people.

  • Leonard Fox - 2013-05-22 15:44

    The ones that the demand the most tolerance usually are the least tolerant of other's religious beliefs.

  • Tharina Van Der Westhuizen - 2013-05-22 22:23

    The church is supposed to accept everyone.

      SarcasticHeathen - 2013-05-23 09:25

      You don't seem to understand religion...

      Leonard Fox - 2013-05-24 09:57

      Sarcasticheathen has, in his/her ignorance hit the nail right on the head. The person must accept God and abide by His commendments, not the otherway round. And of course the church is not the religion.

      Leonard Fox - 2013-05-24 22:26

      The Bible is clear on this topic. You will find a lot of churches marrying divorced people and it is not right. Organised religion is the biggest nonsense there is today. They would rather protect someone's feelings than to protect the sanctity of God's Word. Rather changing their god to suit their lives than to change their lives to suit God.

      SarcasticHeathen - 2013-05-25 10:30

      *Don't forget the churches that marry non-virgins, *and churches that allows women to speak in church, wear jewelry in church, and wear expensive clothes in church.

      Akilimali Safari - 2013-05-27 08:40

      No same sex marriage rule in church, absolutely, I agree with that .

  • pages:
  • 1