Black churches conflicted on Obama's gay marriage decision
Some churches were silent on the issue. At others, pastors spoke against the president's decision Wednesday — but kindly of the man himself. A few blasted the president and his decision. A minority spoke in favor of the decision and expressed understanding of the president's change of heart.
Bishop Timothy J. Clark, head of the First Church of God, a large African-American church with a television ministry in Columbus, Ohio, was perhaps most typical. He felt compelled to address the president's comments at a Wednesday evening service and again Sunday morning. He was responding to an outpouring of calls, e-mails and text messages from members of his congregation after the president's remarks.
What did the bishop tell his congregation? He opposes gay marriage. It is not just a social issue, he said, but a religious one for those who follow the Bible. "The spiritual issue is ground in the word of...
Conflict? There should NO conflict whatsoever! I agree with the commentator Lady Virtue. I am also Africa American and did not vote for Obama and will not this time also. It doesn't matter about race but only about following Christ.
There should be no conflict. American Christians should not have voted Obama into office in the first place. In my own eyes the gay marriage issue is only a small part of the liberal attack on the family. The biggest attack is abortion. When democrats are in office our American tax dollars fund training for abortion doctors overseas. Look it up. When Republicans are in office our money isn't spent this way. I can not see how any Christian can vote for this guy. There is no excuse for him.
Ambrosia wrote: I believe that Obama's decision was not rooted in religious beliefs, although those are where the conflicts lie. Furthermore, the fact that church and state are constitutionally seperate seems reason enough for Obama to make this stand, despite of the unreligious nature of this decision. As a President, his job is more in line with equal rights, which homosexuals, heterosexuals, and other sexual genders should be entitled to
If as a nation which Obama represents you actively send people to hell then you fall under the condemnation of Romans Chapter 1:18-32.
If you are a real Christian you will seek to "Love thy neighbor" - that being so you will not choose to send your neighbor to hell, by suggesting they can continue in their sins and abominations. The Bible witness and the Christian witness is to teach people not to sin because it results in punishment in hell.
This is not politics this is the work of all Christians - the Work of our Father in heaven. There is no compromise in Scriptures with sin. If you really are a Christian then like God you will fervently abhor sin to the extent that you will witness to all that homosexuality removes you from access to the Kingdom of God. Gal 5:19-21.
Ambrosia wrote: I believe that Obama's decision was not rooted in religious beliefs, although those are where the conflicts lie. Furthermore, the fact that church and state are constitutionally seperate seems reason enough for Obama to make this stand, despite of the unreligious nature of this decision. As a President, his job is more in line with equal rights, which homosexuals, heterosexuals, and other sexual genders should be entitled to. The right to marry is included with these constitutional rights, so Obama should be primarily under it's authority; not the "authority" of religious beliefs. God loves all of us, and would want Obama, as a leader to have the same attitude. The actual choice to marry is that of the person, so I feel this transfers the issue out of Obama's hand. The consequences of homosexual marriages will be the consequences of the homosexual.
Their Founding Fathers gave them "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Now, two centuries later, they're still giving everyone liberty so they can pursue happiness. Gay marriage is just the next request coming down the pike. Next week -- who knows -- it'll be polygamy, etc.
I believe that Obama's decision was not rooted in religious beliefs, although those are where the conflicts lie. Furthermore, the fact that church and state are constitutionally seperate seems reason enough for Obama to make this stand, despite of the unreligious nature of this decision. As a President, his job is more in line with equal rights, which homosexuals, heterosexuals, and other sexual genders should be entitled to. The right to marry is included with these constitutional rights, so Obama should be primarily under it's authority; not the "authority" of religious beliefs. I am a Christian, and I do not feel great about his decision, BUT, as the leader of American, Obama is being fair to the homosexuals in our country. God loves all of us, and would want Obama, as a leader to have the same attitude. Afterall, homosexuality will continue to exist, and I do not think it is Obama's "fault" that he has to extend rights to everybody. The actual choice to marry is that of the person, so I feel this transfers the issue out of Obama's hand. The consequences of homosexual marriages will be the consequences of the homosexual.
"That said, "I believe the statement the president made and his decision was made in good faith. I am sure because the president is a good man"
"good faith" sticks to the Bible and the laws of God which condemns homosexuality to abomination.
"good man" There are billions of so called "good men" in hell. This description comes from sinners at a time of apostasy and fails to uphold the "Good Book."
"Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
Jesus teaches; "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Mat 5:18.
There is no need for any conflict here. Allegiance to Christ trumps any loyalty to one's race, ethnicity, or culture. I am black but did not vote for Obama in 2008 and will not vote for him this year either. It is just something I simply cannot do in good Christian conscience.
Paul Washer | 2/17/2011
COMMENTS | 
