Anti-Semitism In France!

[Ron Cusano 0]

Don't be so sarcastic! That is not what I am saying at all and you know it. I am saying let the Bible interprete itself.

What your really saying is "Either believe in Ron's interpretation of the Bible or your not a good Christian. "

[wavydaby 1]

What I see as the problem is that you are pick and choosing the laws. You want laws based on God's biblical principals, but not all of them.

I am not a political person, I can not quote laws. But it seems that people are trying to create laws to prevent the marriage of homosexual people. Where are those right winger creating laws against other sins in the bible?

Thats all fine and good until they infringe upon people that dont follow those principals.

The fact remains, as much as I am saddened by it, there are some people that DO NOT believe in God.

In a free country you can not have laws that are a direct component of a religion.

And, dont go off the deep end and start saying that if we didnt have God's laws, we'd have to allow murder.

That is a red-herring jump in logic and you know it.

[wavydaby 1]

Premarital sex in the bible = BAD

period.

Thats what I said.

period.

And that verse is FREQUENTLY used to show where is says that premarital sex is bad.

[anonemouse 1]

Ron, I have been informed by several people on this site that God considers all sin to be equal. If that is true, then all things considered "sinful" in the Bible would be against the law if we allowed our laws to be made based on biblical standards. Pus, if that were true, you would have to punish all sins equally. Which basically means that a murderer and an adulterer would receive the same punishment.

[ousooner 1]

Don't be so sarcastic! That is not what I am saying at all and you know it. I am saying let the Bible interprete itself.

Yes, that was sarcasm, but the fact remains that you are very critical if others make a different interpretation of it than you do. It's easy to say "let the Bible interpret itself". but if that were the case and it was that easy, then why are there so many denominations of Christianity. Many of them I consider to be conservative? While I believe that my interpretation is accurate, I am open to the fact that I could be wrong on some points. I really believe that when I meet my maker, I will find out no denomination is 100% accurate. My feeling from you is that you are absolutely correct and there is no room for the possibility that you could be wrong on some points. Just my 2 cents.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Well I guess those "right-wingers" must have been around a very long times, since homosexual marriage has been banned by law since this country was founded. I don't know, I think this country did OK, don't you?

What I see as the problem is that you are pick and choosing the laws. You want laws based on God's biblical principals, but not all of them.

I am not a political person, I can not quote laws. But it seems that people are trying to create laws to prevent the marriage of homosexual people. Where are those right winger creating laws against other sins in the bible?

Thats all fine and good until they infringe upon people that dont follow those principals.

The fact remains, as much as I am saddened by it, there are some people that DO NOT believe in God.

In a free country you can not have laws that are a direct component of a religion. We have had laws that have been based upon Judio-Christian principals, morals and ethics for the last 200 years or so, and they never infringed on anyone practicing or not practicing their choice of religion as far as I know. Has something changed??

And, dont go off the deep end and start saying that if we didnt have God's laws, we'd have to allow murder.

Tell me then, if our laws were not based upon Judeo-Christian principals, morals and ethice, what do YOU think they should be based upon? There has to be some foundation on which to determine right and wrong! What would yours be????

That is a red-herring jump in logic and you know it.

[wavydaby 1]

The NASB version also has an AND in that verse

gross immorality

and

went after strange flesh

The WNT

gross fornication

and

having gone astray in pursuit of unnatural vice

NAB

sexual promiscuity

and

practiced unnatural vice

Im sorry. I see TWO bad things in that verse

[Wheetsin 714]

Lisa, if you happen to have lots of spare time laying around, I thought you might find these passages interesting. A lot of them echo what you've been saying.

From Reverend Mel White: I've spent more than 50 years reading, studying, memorizing, preaching, and teaching from the sacred texts. I earned my master's and doctoral degrees at a conservative biblical seminary to better equip myself to "rightly divide the word of truth." I learned Hebrew and Greek to gain a better understanding of the original words of the biblical texts. I studied the lives and times of the biblical authors to help me know what they were saying in their day so I could better apply it to my own.

Even when we believe the scriptures are without error, it's a risk to think our understanding is without error."

This same kind of biblical ignorance is all too present around the topic of homosexuality. Often people who love and trust God's Word have never given careful and prayerful attention to what the Bible does or doesn't say about homosexuality.

For example, many Christians don't know that:

• Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior.
  
• The Jewish prophets are silent about homosexuality.
  
• Only six or seven of the Bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way -- and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it's understood today.

Most people who are certain they know what the Bible says about homosexuality don't know where the verses that reference same-sex behavior can be found. They haven't read them, let alone studied them carefully. They don't know the original meaning of the words in Hebrew or Greek. And they haven't tried to understand the historical context in which those words were written. Yet the assumption that the Bible condemns homosexuality is passed down from generation to generation with very little personal study or research. The consequences of this misinformation are disastrous, not only for God's gay and lesbian children, but for the entire church.

Over the centuries people who misunderstood or misinterpreted the Bible have done terrible things. The Bible has been misused to defend bloody crusades and tragic inquisitions; to support slavery, apartheid, and segregation; to persecute Jews and other non-Christian people of faith; to support Hitler's Third Reich and the Holocaust; to oppose medical science; to condemn interracial marriage; to execute women as witches; and to support the Ku Klux Klan. Shakespeare said it this way: "Even the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."

The Bible is the story of God's love for the world and the people of the world. It tells the history of God's love at work rescuing, renewing, and empowering humankind. It was never intended to be a book about human sexuality. Certainly, you will agree.

In fact, the Bible accepts sexual practices that we condemn and condemns sexual practices that we accept. Lots of them! Here are a few examples.

• DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
  If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
  
• DEUTERONOMY 22:22
  If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
  
• MARK 10:1-12
  Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
  
• LEVITICUS 18:19
  The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
  
• MARK 12:18-27
  If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
  
• DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
  If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.

The Bible says clearly that sex with a prostitute is acceptable for the husband but not for the wife. Polygamy (more than one wife) is acceptable, as is a king's having many concubines. (Solomon, the wisest king of all, had 1,000 concubines.) Slavery and sex with slaves, marriage of girls aged 11-13, and treatment of women as property are all accepted practices in the Scriptures. On the other hand, there are strict prohibitions against interracial marriage, birth control, discussing or even naming a sexual organ, and seeing one's parents nude.

Over the centuries the Holy Spirit has taught us that certain Bible verses should not be understood as God's law for all time periods. Some verses are specific to the culture and time they were written, and are no longer viewed as appropriate, wise, or just.

Now what does the creation story say about homosexuality? Because the text says it is "natural" that a man and a woman come together to create a new life, some people think this means gay or lesbian couples are "unnatural." They read this interpretation into the text, even though the text is silent about all kinds of relationships that don't lead to having children:

• couples who are unable to have children
  
• couples who are too old to have children
  
• couples who choose not to have children
  
• people who are single

Are these relationships (or lack of relationships) "unnatural"? There's nothing said here that condemns or approves the love that people of the same sex have for each other

PASSAGE 2, GENESIS 19:1-14, THE STORY OF SODOM

Now let's consider the second biblical text used by some people to condemn God's gay children. You remember the ancient story of Sodom. First, what does the story of Sodom in Genesis 19 say about God? Once again, this story is not primarily about sex. It is primarily about God. Some people say the city of Sodom was destroyed because it was overrun by sexually obsessed homosexuals. In fact, the city of Sodom had been doomed to destruction long before. So what is this passage really about?

Jesus and five Old Testament prophets all speak of the sins that led to the destruction of Sodom -- and not one of them mentions homosexuality. Even Billy Graham doesn't mention homosexuality when he preaches on Sodom.

Listen to what Ezekiel 16:48-49 tell us: "This is the sin of Sodom; she and her suburbs had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not help or encourage the poor and needy. They were arrogant and this was abominable in God's eyes."

Whatever teaching about sexuality you might get out of this passage, be sure to hear this central, primary truth about God as well. God has called us do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with our Creator. Sodom was destroyed because its people didn't take God seriously about caring for the poor, the hungry, the homeless, or the outcast.

But what does the story of Sodom say about homosexual orientation as we understand it today? Nothing.

It was common for soldiers, thieves, and bullies to rape a fallen enemy, asserting their victory by dehumanizing and demeaning the vanquished. This act of raping an enemy is about power and revenge, not about homosexuality or homosexual orientation. And it is still happening.

The sexual act that occurs in the story of Sodom is a gang rape -- and homosexuals oppose gang rape as much as anyone. That's why I believe the story of Sodom says a lot about God's will for each of us, but nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today.

Leviticus 18:6 reads: "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination." A similar verse occurs two chapters later, in Leviticus 20:13: "A man who sleeps with another man is an abomination and should be executed." On the surface, these words could leave you feeling rather uneasy, especially if you are gay. But just below the surface is the deeper truth about God -- and it has nothing to do with sex.

Leviticus is a holiness code written 3,000 years ago. This code includes many of the outdated sexual laws we mentioned earlier, and a lot more. It also includes prohibitions against round haircuts, tattoos, working on the Sabbath, wearing garments of mixed fabrics, eating pork or shellfish, getting your fortune told, and even playing with the skin of a pig. (There goes football!)

So what's a holiness code? It's a list of behaviors that people of faith find offensive in a certain place and time. In this case, the code was written for priests only, and its primary intent was to set the priests of Israel over and against priests of other cultures.

What about this word abomination that comes up in both passages? In Hebrew, "abominations" (TO'EBAH) are behaviors that people in a certain time and place consider tasteless or offensive. To the Jews an abomination was not a law, not something evil like rape or murder forbidden by the Ten Commandments. It was a common behavior by non-Jews that Jews thought was displeasing to God.

Jesus and Paul both said the holiness code in Leviticus does not pertain to Christian believers. Nevertheless, there are still people who pull the two verses about men sleeping together from this ancient holiness code to say that the Bible seems to condemn homosexuality.

But wait, before we go any further, let's ask: What does this text say about God? Even if the old holiness codes no longer apply to us as Christians, it's important to remember that in every age, people of faith are responsible for setting moral and ethical standards that honor God. But we people of faith must be very careful not to allow our own prejudices to determine what those standards should be.

Instead of selecting one item from an ancient Jewish holiness code and using it to condemn sexual or gender minorities, let's talk together about setting sexual standards that please God -- standards appropriate for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike, standards based on loving concern, health, and wholeness for ourselves and for others.

Now what do the Leviticus passages say about homosexuality?

I'm convinced those passages say nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today. Here's why. Consider this single Bible passage that was used for centuries to condemn masturbation:

"He spilled his seed on the ground... And the thing which Onan did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also" (Genesis 38:9-10).

For Jewish writers of Scripture, a man sleeping with another man was an abomination. But it was also an abomination (and one worthy of death) to masturbate or even to interrupt coitus (to halt sex with your spouse before ejaculation as an act of birth control). Why were these sexual practices considered abominations by Scripture writers in these ancient times?

Because the Hebrew pre-scientific understanding was that the male semen contained the whole of life. With no knowledge of eggs and ovulation, it was assumed that the man's sperm contained the whole child and that the woman provided only the incubating space. Therefore, the spilling of semen without possibility of having a child was considered murder.

The Jews were a small tribe struggling to populate a country. They were outnumbered by their enemy. You can see why these ancient people felt it was an abomination to risk "wasting" even a single child. But the passage says nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today.

Now what do the writings of Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 say, first, about God, and then about homosexuality? These are the last two places in the Bible that seem to refer to same-sex behavior. We can combine them because they are so similar.

Paul is exasperated. The Christians in Ephesus and Corinth are fighting among themselves. (Sound familiar?) In Corinth they're even suing one another in secular courts. Paul shouts across the distance, "You are breaking God's heart by the way you are treating one another."

Like any good writer, Paul anticipates their first question: "Well, how are we supposed to treat one another?" Paul answers, "You know very well how to treat one another from the Jewish law written on tablets of stone."

The Jewish law was created by God to help regulate human behavior. To remind the churches in Corinth and Ephesus how God wants us to treat one another, Paul recites examples from the Jewish law first. Don't kill one another. Don't sleep with a person who is married to someone else. Don't lie or cheat or steal. The list goes on to include admonitions against fornication, idolatry, whoremongering, perjury, drunkenness, revelry, and extortion. He also includes "malokois" and "arsenokoitai."

Here's where the confusion begins. What's a malokois? What's an arsenokoitai? Actually, those two Greek words have confused scholars to this very day. We'll say more about them later, when we ask what the texts say about sex. But first let's see what the texts say about God.

After quoting from the Jewish law, Paul reminds the Christians in Corinth that they are under a new law: the law of Jesus, a law of love that requires us to do more than just avoid murder, adultery, lying, cheating, and stealing. Paul tells them what God wants is not strict adherence to a list of laws, but a pure heart, a good conscience, and a faith that isn't phony.

That's the lesson we all need to learn from these texts. God doesn't want us squabbling over who is "in" and who is "out." God wants us to love one another. It's God's task to judge us. It is NOT our task to judge one another.

So what do these two texts say about homosexuality? Are gays and lesbians on that list of sinners in the Jewish law that Paul quotes to make an entirely different point?

Greek scholars say that in first century the Greek word malaokois probably meant "effeminate call boys." The New Revised Standard Version says "male prostitutes."

As for arsenokoitai, Greek scholars don't know exactly what it means -- and the fact that we don't know is a big part of this tragic debate. Some scholars believe Paul was coining a name to refer to the customers of "the effeminate call boys." We might call them "dirty old men." Others translate the word as "sodomites," but never explain what that means.

In 1958, for the first time in history, a person translating that mysterious Greek word into English decided it meant homosexuals, even though there is, in fact, no such word in Greek or Hebrew. But that translator made the decision for all of us that placed the word homosexual in the English-language Bible for the very first time.

In the past, people used Paul's writings to support slavery, segregation, and apartheid. People still use Paul's writings to oppress women and limit their role in the home, in church, and in society.

Now we have to ask ourselves, "Is it happening again?" Is a word in Greek that has no clear definition being used to reflect society's prejudice and condemn God's gay children?

We all need to look more closely at that mysterious Greek word arsenokoitai in its original context. I find most convincing the argument from history that Paul is condemning the married men who hired hairless young boys (malakois) for sexual pleasure just as they hired smooth-skinned young girls for that purpose.

Responsible homosexuals would join Paul in condemning anyone who uses children for sex, just as we would join anyone else in condemning the threatened gang rape in Sodom or the behavior of the sex-crazed priests and priestesses in Rome. So, once again, I am convinced that this passage says a lot about God, but nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today.

The biblical authors are silent about homosexual orientation as we know it today. They neither approve it nor condemn it.

We've looked closely at the six biblical texts used by some people to condemn homosexuality. But we must also remember that Jesus, the Jewish prophets, and even Paul never even comment on the responsible love a gay man or lesbian feels for another.

The Bible is completely silent on the issue of homosexual orientation. And no wonder. Homosexual orientation wasn't even known until the 19th century.

The discovery that some of us are created and/or shaped in our earliest infancy toward same-gender attraction was made in the last 150 years. Biblical authors knew nothing about sexual orientation. Old Testament authors and Paul assumed all people were created heterosexual, just as they believed the earth was flat, that there were heavens above and hell below, and that the sun moved up and down.

Although the prophets, Jesus, and other biblical authors say nothing about homosexual orientation as we understand it today, they are clear about one thing: As we search for truth, we are to "love one another."

We may not be able to use the Bible as our final authority on sexual orientation. But as we search for the truth, we can and should use the Bible as our final authority on how we should treat one another along the way.

A young Jewish scholar asked Jesus, "What is the greatest commandment?" Quoting the prophets, Jesus replied, "The great commandment is this... to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength, and the second command is like it, to love your neighbor as you love yourself."

"This is my commandment," Jesus said, "that you love one another, as I have loved you." On this the Bible is explicitly clear. Even if we disagree about what the Bible seems to say about homosexuality, we can agree that above all else we are commanded by the Scriptures to love God and to love one another.

Since God is the God of truth, since Jesus himself told us that the truth would set us free, one way that we love God and love one another is by seeking the truth about sexual orientation wherever we can find it.

There is a growing body of evidence from science, psychology, history, psychiatry, medicine, and personal experience that leads to a clear verdict: Homosexuality is neither a sickness nor a sin. Unfortunately, the church has always been slow, if not the last institution on earth, to accept new truth.

In 1632 the scientist Galileo (who was a man of faith) dared to support the radical 15th-century idea of Copernicus that all planets, including the earth, revolve around the sun. Immediately, Galileo was proclaimed a heretic by the Pope who quoted Scriptures in his attempt to disprove what science was proving.

Earlier, Protestant heroes had joined in quoting Scriptures condemning Copernicus. These weren't evil men. But they couldn't admit that the Bible was a book about God, not about astronomy -- just as good men and women today have trouble admitting that the Bible is a book about God, not about human sexuality. Martin Luther said, "This fool C

opernicus wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture in Joshua 10:13 tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth."

John Calvin quoted Psalm 93 in his attack on Copernicus. "The earth also is established. It cannot be moved." Calvin added, "Who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above that of the Holy Spirit?"

Melancthon, one of Luther's closest allies, used Ecclesiastes 1:4-5 to condemn Copernicus. "The sun also rises, and the sun goes down and hurries to the place from which it came." Then he added these dangerous words: "It is the part of a good mind to accept the truth as revealed by God and to obey it." In other words, believe what the Bible says -- even if science disproves it.

Because Christians refused to let their understanding of God's Word be informed by science, Copernicus was condemned and Galileo was declared a heretic and placed under house arrest for the remainder of his life. In 1992, 359 years later, Pope John Paul II finally admitted the church had been wrong to ignore science and to interpret the Bible literally.

The Pope said something we must never forget: "Recent historical studies enable us to state that this sad misunderstanding now belongs to the past." Unfortunately, the apology came too late to relieve Galileo of his suffering. What if the biblical scholars of Galileo's day had said to Galileo, "We don't agree with your Copernican theories, but we love and trust you. As long as you love God and seek God's will in your life, you are welcome here."

Imagine the suffering that could be avoided if the church could say this to their lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender children: "We don't understand your views about sexual orientation, but we love and trust you. As long as you love God and seek God's will in your life, you are welcome here."

Instead, well-intentioned Christian are driving their own children away from the church, using Scripture passages that may not even pertain to sexual orientation as we understand it.

Please consider one last thing. I love the Bible. I read God's Word in it and hear God's Word through it. But the United States is not a nation governed by the Bible. Our nation is governed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Our laws were created to protect an individual's right to disagree. If the Bible (or someone's view of the Bible) replaces the Constitution as the law of the land, we undermine the great foundation upon which this country was built.

When I was a guest on a talk show in Seattle, I saw what might happen to me and to millions like me if a genuine literalist gained political power over this country. The other guest on the show was an independent Presbyterian pastor. When I told him that I was gay, he said without hesitation, "Then you should be killed." A Christian brother sentenced me to death, guided only by his literal understanding of Leviticus 20:13.

I asked him, "Who should do the killing, you church folk?" He answered, "No, that's the civil authorities' job. That's why we need to elect more good men of God into government." I sat there in stunned silence, until he added, "I know it must be hard for you to hear it, Dr. White -- but God said it first and it's our job to obey."

I hope we can agree that all of us must stand together against those who would replace the Constitution with biblical law. That's why, when I lecture on a university campus, I carry a Bible in one pocket and a Constitution in the other.

Can we support full civil rights for all... even if we disagree?

In this last premise, I'm asking you who disagree with my stand on homosexuality to support my stand on full civil rights for all people, including gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans.

[anonemouse 1]

Well I guess those "right-wingers" must have been around a very long times, since homosexual marriage has been banned by law since this country was founded.

Actually, it hasn't. Otherwise, there wouldn't be this rush to push through laws specifically banning homosexual marriage. You don't need to ban something that is already against the law.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Yes, in the eyes of God, sis is sin, and the "wages of sin is death"! We are not talking about the law of God that demands perfection, we are talking about man's law.

We are not talking about making everything that is sinful against the (man's) law, we are talking about man's law sanctioning and condoning what the Bible say's is an abomination. If we lived in a Christian Theocracy with laws based entirely upon the Bible, which we don't nor does the Bible advocate, what you said would be true. But that is not the case or the issue. We are told to obey man's law, unless it is in contridiction with the laws of God.

Ron, I have been informed by several people on this site that God considers all sin to be equal. If that is true, then all things considered "sinful" in the Bible would be against the law if we allowed our laws to be made based on biblical standards. Pus, if that were true, you would have to punish all sins equally. Which basically means that a murderer and an adulterer would receive the same punishment.

[Ron Cusano 0]

I know you are smarter that that! There is only none state in the union that sanction homosexual marriage, and I believe that will be overturned. Gay people cannot get married in this country. They are seeking a constitutional ammendment to keep it that way.

Actually, it hasn't. Otherwise, there wouldn't be this rush to push through laws specifically banning homosexual marriage. You don't need to ban something that is already against the law.

[wavydaby 1]

In a free country you can not have laws that are a direct component of a religion. We have had laws that have been based upon Judio-Christian principals, morals and ethics for the last 200 years or so, and they never infringed on anyone practicing or not practicing their choice of religion as far as I know. Has something changed??

As a matter of fact we have infringed on other people!!!

We didnt Divorce, based on what somone said is in the bible - was changed

We allowed Slavery, based on what someone said is in the bible -was changed

We didnt allow Interracial marriage based on what someone said is in the bible - was changed

Even not recognising other religions. As a matter of fact, Wiccans are still having a heck of a fight to have thier symbol placed on the tombs of soliders who died in Iraq. -- YET TO BE CHANGED

There are states that do not allow anything other than the missonary position, based on what is in the bible. -- YET TO BE CHANGED

So, tell me again, how we dont infringe on others based on their beliefs or non beliefs?

[Ron Cusano 0]

This wasn't directed to me with a question so I am only going to say this . . . This Reverend claims to be educated at a Conservative school but his whole argument is full of false liberal Christian argument, reeking with lies and misrepresentations. If I remember correctly, he claims that paul only mentions homosexuality twice in Ephesians, I think he said, and it is never described as we know homosexuality today! What a pile of dung! Apparently he has never read Romans Chapter 1. I know many people who have been teaching and studying the scriptures for 50 years who are clueless about them.

Lisa, if you happen to have lots of spare time laying around, I thought you might find these passages interesting. A lot of them echo what you've been saying.

From Reverend Mel White: I've spent more than 50 years reading, studying, memorizing, preaching, and teaching from the sacred texts. I earned my master's and doctoral degrees at a conservative biblical seminary to better equip myself to "rightly divide the word of truth." I learned Hebrew and Greek to gain a better understanding of the original words of the biblical texts. I studied the lives and times of the biblical authors to help me know what they were saying in their day so I could better apply it to my own.

[anonemouse 1]

No one tried to marry another person of the same sex until recent times, which is why there hasn't been a law banning homosexual marriage before. Homosexual marriage was not illegal in most cases, just so far outside the norm that no one thought to ban it before now.

The fact remains that there is no need for a constitutional amendment to ban something that is already illegal. So either lawmakers are tying to amend the constitution because they know that gay marriage isn't illegal, or they are wasting their time because it is already illegal. Either way, they're idiots.

[Ron Cusano 0]

The problem with that argument is, none of those things are addressed in the Bible, except divorce, and that was allowed under Mosaic Law and in the New Testament, if adulty was involve. People may THINK those laws came from the Bible, but that did not.

[/i][/color]

As a matter of fact we have infringed on other people!!!

We didnt Divorce, based on what somone said is in the bible - was changed

We allowed Slavery, based on what someone said is in the bible -was changed

We didnt allow Interracial marriage based on what someone said is in the bible - was changed

Even not recognising other religions. As a matter of fact, Wiccans are still having a heck of a fight to have thier symbol placed on the tombs of soliders who died in Iraq. -- YET TO BE CHANGED

There are states that do not allow anything other than the missonary position, based on what is in the bible. -- YET TO BE CHANGED

So, tell me again, how we dont infringe on others based on their beliefs or non beliefs?