FC Community
Discussion Boards => Off-Topic => Topic started by: koderz006 on May 08, 2009, 02:10:08 pm
-
It is 2009 people..everyone is different.I think it should be the persons choice, if they wanna be with the same sex, why deny them or make them feel like they are different.
My uncle recently came out to my family, he got 4 kids, had a wife, but got divorced and also served in the military. very big shocker to the family, but we love him the same......
-
:thumbsup: I'm straight, but I'm an artist, so I know a lot of gay men, and women in this industry. They are good people, and kind to everyone. I hope they CAN marry soon, and find love like the 'normal' people.
-
I really don't see the big deal. If that is the way they want to live their lives then let them. It doesn't change anything in my life, so to be honest it doesn't bother me. They are still people, they just have a different sexual preference. Live and let live.
-
All for it. If you love someone, why shouldn't you be able to marry them?
-
I have to say that I am for Gays having the same rights as any one. We live in America and should all have the same rights.
-
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
-
i believe everyone is entitled to the life they want for themselves. just because a person is attracted to the same sex, doesn't mean they should be treated as an outcast and told they can never have the same things a "normal" person can. who am i to tell someone else that they're love for another person isn't "natural", therefore they aren't allowed to express it? i think the entire argument is completely archaic and outdated. there are so many bigger issues in this world.
-
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
So if you believe they should be able to have relationships why shouldn't they be able to get maried and be happy and an love just like others?
-
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
i believe something along these lines. i definitely don't believe in treating anyone badly because of their sexuality.. i think they deserve the same respect as anyone else.. they're people, just the same.
but i was raised in a christian home and don't really believe that gay marriage is "right" i suppose?
but that's my opinion and how i feel..
i think gay marriage is a risky and controversial topic.. it's hard to talk about your own beliefs without someone telling you that you're wrong, regardless of what you actually think.. you know?
-
My neighbors are gay. I'd never known any gay people till they moved in. A few years ago, they asked me if I would sign their marriage papers as a witness so they could have a wedding ceremony up in Quebec, where this is legal. I gladly did so, and I was touched to see how much it meant to them to finally be getting married. These are the most decent, respectable, nice ladies you could ever hope to meet. They are wonderful neighbors. My husband and I both think it's cruel to keep denying these people these people the right to marry in most states in this country!
-
i don't think it matters. all people should want in life is HAPPINESS.
-
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
i believe something along these lines. i definitely don't believe in treating anyone badly because of their sexuality.. i think they deserve the same respect as anyone else.. they're people, just the same.
but i was raised in a christian home and don't really believe that gay marriage is "right" i suppose?
but that's my opinion and how i feel..
i think gay marriage is a risky and controversial topic.. it's hard to talk about your own beliefs without someone telling you that you're wrong, regardless of what you actually think.. you know?
How can one truly believe in respecting everyone equally and no one being treated badly just because of something as trivial as sexual orientation, but at the same time latch onto ideas that precisely and purposely disrespect a group of people and propose nothing but treating people differently solely because of sexual orientation?
Perhaps you could explain that to me, as it's extremely confusing.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just would like to understand the logic behind such a stance (because it is so often a stance of those who oppose same sex marriage)...to me, it completely contradicts itself, but maybe I'm missing something.
On a side note, frankly this really doesn't have much to do with religion. Trying to justify certain moral views by using religion often produces very weak, illogical, irrational views. Not to mention the major religions don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral. Along with the fact that marriage is technically carried out and approved by the state, not the church. The church does not have to approve of any marriage, it is a civil act done by the state. No one is married unless the state approves it.
-
It is 2009 people..everyone is different.I think it should be the persons choice, if they wanna be with the same sex, why deny them or make them feel like they are different.
My uncle recently came out to my family, he got 4 kids, had a wife, but got divorced and also served in the military. very big shocker to the family, but we love him the same......
I think what you're probably trying to ask is: "do you believe gays should get the same government cheese as straights do?
I think the more important question is: do you trust the government with your cheese?
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
i believe something along these lines. i definitely don't believe in treating anyone badly because of their sexuality.. i think they deserve the same respect as anyone else.. they're people, just the same.
but i was raised in a christian home and don't really believe that gay marriage is "right" i suppose?
but that's my opinion and how i feel..
i think gay marriage is a risky and controversial topic.. it's hard to talk about your own beliefs without someone telling you that you're wrong, regardless of what you actually think.. you know?
How can one truly believe in respecting everyone equally and no one being treated badly just because of something as trivial as sexual orientation, but at the same time latch onto ideas that precisely and purposely disrespect a group of people and propose nothing but treating people differently solely because of sexual orientation?
Perhaps you could explain that to me, as it's extremely confusing.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just would like to understand the logic behind such a stance (because it is so often a stance of those who oppose same sex marriage)...to me, it completely contradicts itself, but maybe I'm missing something.
On a side note, frankly this really doesn't have much to do with religion. Trying to justify certain moral views by using religion often produces very weak, illogical, irrational views.
The morality and legality of gay marriage are not necessarily the same issue here.
Not to mention the major religions don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral.
Same as "the state."
Along with the fact that marriage is technically carried out and approved by the state, not the church. The church does not have to approve of any marriage, it is a civil act done by the state. No one is married unless the state approves it.
There goes "the power of the people"...
-
I believe we are all the same. Just wanna look for someone to share our lives to be happy with.
-
I really don't see the big deal. If that is the way they want to live their lives then let them. It doesn't change anything in my life, so to be honest it doesn't bother me. They are still people, they just have a different sexual preference. Live and let live.
I absolutely agree 100%......I'm straight and have plenty of gay friends and they are my best friends.It's not for us to judge but rather love no matter what a person chooses to do.
-
People are people. I don't care. Who you love shouldn't be based on the physical (gender). You love the person for who they are inside.
-
I do believe that all people have the right to marry whomever they maybe in love with, be they heterosexual, gay, etc.
The so called heterosexual world isn't a good guiding rule to go by. Just look at the number of divorces going on everday. People are people and who made those of us who judge others think that we are God.
-
It is very frustrating to see open prejudices. My son is in Kindergarten and the older children, his "big buddies" as the school calls it, are trying to influence my five year old that gays are bad. This is ridiculous! Theses children's parents are brain washing their children and they are trying to do the same thing to my child. It is completely unacceptable. How dare they bring this into schools!
This is 2009, wake up people, everyone, and I do mean everyone, should have the same rights. What ever happened to "All men are created equal"? I don't recall an added line saying "unless you are gay".
If you truly want to stand up for equal rights, I strongly encourage you to check out the following link: http://www.eqca.org
If we all educate our neighbors and stand up to this injustice, our children will have a chance at equality!
-
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
i believe something along these lines. i definitely don't believe in treating anyone badly because of their sexuality.. i think they deserve the same respect as anyone else.. they're people, just the same.
but i was raised in a christian home and don't really believe that gay marriage is "right" i suppose?
but that's my opinion and how i feel..
i think gay marriage is a risky and controversial topic.. it's hard to talk about your own beliefs without someone telling you that you're wrong, regardless of what you actually think.. you know?
How can one truly believe in respecting everyone equally and no one being treated badly just because of something as trivial as sexual orientation, but at the same time latch onto ideas that precisely and purposely disrespect a group of people and propose nothing but treating people differently solely because of sexual orientation?
Perhaps you could explain that to me, as it's extremely confusing.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just would like to understand the logic behind such a stance (because it is so often a stance of those who oppose same sex marriage)...to me, it completely contradicts itself, but maybe I'm missing something.
On a side note, frankly this really doesn't have much to do with religion. Trying to justify certain moral views by using religion often produces very weak, illogical, irrational views. Not to mention the major religions don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral. Along with the fact that marriage is technically carried out and approved by the state, not the church. The church does not have to approve of any marriage, it is a civil act done by the state. No one is married unless the state approves it.
WOW! You really hit the nail on the head! I have wondered the same thing for many, many years. To me, the religion excuse is a way for these people to influence others about their belief systems. I don't understand why it is OK for people to feel the need to tell me their religious views but shut down when they are questioned regarding their reasoning behind their beliefs. Not sure I will ever understand how people can convince themselves that it is OK to discriminate against another human being, simply because they do not have the same religious beliefs. You know the saying "ignorance is bliss"? Their ignorance may keep them in a blissful mood, but it infuriates me! It is inexcusable to discriminate against another person. I am hopeful that the next generation will be able to start anew and not have to deal with such ridiculousness!
-
Gender has nothing to do with marriage. LOVE does. Imho. Unfortunately, not many people around me seem to think that same way. There are a rare few though, thank GOODNESS. ;)
-
People are and their rights to have sex with whomever they want as long as they other person want to and they are not under age. I think soon more people are going to start to accept it. : :)
(http://www.fusioncash.net/sig.php/c6f8ffef2643.png) (http://www.fusioncash.net/?ref=sweetbaby_2006us)
-
The morality and legality of gay marriage are not necessarily the same issue here.
I don't know how that answered my concerns/questions. You took the very last sentence and thought up the generic response? I don't get it.
Either way, both the moral and legal standpoints point toward allowing same sex marriage. Discrimination isn't moral or legal.
Same as "the state."
Please do elaborate. The "state" certainly has had a more logical, rational, and typically understandable stance on and approach toward most moral issues from the past. The "state" going to war, is not the same as the church slaughtering heretics because they blew on their soup before eating it, which inherently makes them a witch! Not to mention that the majority of "states" that carried out heinous, brutal actions in the past were largely motivated by religious ideologies and beliefs akin to "my god(s) want me to do this so I must."
There goes "the power of the people"...
The "power of the people" has little to no place in determining civil rights. The "people" are overwhelmingly ignorant, prejudice, egotistical, gullible, stuck on ridiculous old ideas, and so on. I guess the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1850s/1860s (and prior). Maybe then we wouldn't have to deal equally with those pesky, vastly inferior people from Africa (not stating this as fact, stating as sarcasm to prove the point). Maybe the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1920s so women would just keep quiet and do their cooking and cleaning (again, sarcasm).
I fail to see how the power of the people diminishes anyway. Again, no church can be forced to marry any couple...they can turn down any couple they wish right now, why would it change? The government cannot and shouldn't determine who the church gives the traditional ceremonial marriage. The fact remains, however, that it is plainly immoral and illegal for the state to discriminate against a minority and deny them a civil marriage. It is also immoral (and hypocritical) for the church to do so, but again, their level of hypocrisy on the vast majority of issues is overwhelming, so I don't expect much different and they can do their own thing.
-
I have a lot of gay friends and I wish they could get married. For most of them, it is not solely about the marriage. It is about protecting the assets they have acquired together and their children. I have the right to protect my family, I think that gay people should have those same rights. Who am I to judge?
-
i support gay marriage.... everyone is guaranteed to equal rights
-
I personally am very against it...for spiritual reasons. However if I ever run into you and you are homosexual I will accept you and love you just like anyone else, we are all God's children. However I do not believe it is something that God looks lightly on or appreciates. Our job is not to judge but to forgive and to love our neighbors as ourselves.
-
the real issues are two different things.....
first.... should two people, who want to be in a monogomous relationship, commiting the rest of their lives to each other, be allowed to have the same rights no matter what their sexual orientation.... the answer is yes
second... should the "label" be the same.... this is the one most people struggle with...
marriage by definition has been between a man and a woman to procreate....
the religious types believe it was sanctioned by God to be that way....
an alternative label was suggested (civil union) to allow the same rights that "married couples" get... the old "separate but equal argument"
and this idea wasn't well recieved....
my suggestion is simple.... NO STATE SANCTIONED "MARRIAGES".... make all of the state recognized unions.... "civil unions"..... make that the requirement for all the benefits, that should come with the choice to spend the rest of your life with someone...
then people who want to express themselves in a religious "marriage ceremony" could still call themselves "married" as an expession of their belief system and not as a requirement for benefits...
-
the real issues are two different things.....
first.... should two people, who want to be in a monogomous relationship, commiting the rest of their lives to each other, be allowed to have the same rights no matter what their sexual orientation.... the answer is yes
second... should the "label" be the same.... this is the one most people struggle with...
marriage by definition has been between a man and a woman to procreate....
the religious types believe it was sanctioned by God to be that way....
an alternative label was suggested (civil union) to allow the same rights that "married couples" get... the old "separate but equal argument"
and this idea wasn't well recieved....
my suggestion is simple.... NO STATE SANCTIONED "MARRIAGES".... make all of the state recognized unions.... "civil unions"..... make that the requirement for all the benefits, that should come with the choice to spend the rest of your life with someone...
then people who want to express themselves in a religious "marriage ceremony" could still call themselves "married" as an expession of their belief system and not as a requirement for benefits...
Correct. This would be one of the more simple, realistic solutions.
Although I disagree slightly on the definition of marriage. The definition of marriage has changed drastically over the ages and it has a lot more to it than just a man/woman union.
Also, the civil unions weren't equal. Not just because of the "separate but equal is inherently unequal" stuff, but because they simply didn't provide equal benefits to those under civil union.
-
Live and let live.
i'm tired of hearing about the religion factor being thrown into this. state and church??? one will not take action over the other. therefore...keep the government out of this - they can't make laws that forbid people in love to get married.
-
shouldnt happen
-
I think of myself as a Christian, but I have seperated myself from most of the organized religions as they focus on the crucified Christ and his death for our sins. Most of the time they completely ignore his teachings in favor of old testament hell fire and brimstone. I don't know what the Christian agenda is these days, but I think it parted ways with Jesus a long time ago. Seems to me Jesus spoke an awful lot about loving each other, forgiving sins, and not judging others. I would like to go to a protest with a sign saying Jesus loves Gays, because I beleive he loves all of us regardless. If he supported persecution he certainly had the chance to throw stones at Mary Magedelin. Some might argue, that Christ thought her sin was not worthy of a death sentence, but her sin was never recorded and I think purposely so, as it could be anything one might consider sin. Jesus dod not erase the Old testament, he refined it. The Old Testament said let the punisment fit the crime, Jesus said raise yourself above that which is simply required and forgive it. I don't know who put homosexuality is an abomination unto God in the Bible, but I do know who said,"He who is without sin may cast the first stone." Regardless of what I might and might not think of as a sin, our country was founded on the single premise of freedom and not merely freedom for those who think, act, or with the same values as myself, but for everyone. Our country has stumbled and failed many times on rights issues, and religion has always been there to fight against civil rights. Christians fought against women's rights, minority's rights, it is only natural they would fight gays rights. Religion in general has always been behind the times, the Vatican didn't admit that Mary Magdeline might not have been a prostitute or an adutlterer unitl the 1970's-- about 2000 years too late, about the same time they admitted that Jean d'arc might not have been a witch.
-
I'm a pretty open minded individual, at least I like to think that I am. Whenever I'm asked about this, I point to here first:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y04wYfgWxeA
-
I'm a pretty open minded individual, at least I like to think that I am. Whenever I'm asked about this, I point to here first:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y04wYfgWxeA
Usually I can't stand listening to him and MSNBC typically annoys the hell out of me....but this video pretty much sums up the whole debate.
-
The morality and legality of gay marriage are not necessarily the same issue here.
I don't know how that answered my concerns/questions. You took the very last sentence and thought up the generic response? I don't get it.
Either way, both the moral and legal standpoints point toward allowing same sex marriage. Discrimination isn't moral or legal.
If discardedheart were to simply say, "The Bible says that homosexuality is wrong," then it is not really a valid argument against the legal institution of gay marriage in a free nation. If she believed pre-marital sex is wrong, then should it be outlawed?
Don't mistake the two as being the same issue.
Same as "the state."
Please do elaborate.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time because I'm not interested in which has a better track record.
My point is simply that, unless we live in the Utopia, I don't see a wonderful track record from either.
Though, I would be very interested if you could give us concrete elaborate historical examples of how the state has had a more logical, rational, and typically understandable stance on and approach toward most moral issues from the past and how the church don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral.
There goes "the power of the people"...
The "power of the people" has little to no place in determining civil rights. The "people" are overwhelmingly ignorant, prejudice, egotistical, gullible, stuck on ridiculous old ideas, and so on. I guess the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1850s/1860s (and prior). Maybe then we wouldn't have to deal equally with those pesky, vastly inferior people from Africa (not stating this as fact, stating as sarcasm to prove the point). Maybe the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1920s so women would just keep quiet and do their cooking and cleaning (again, sarcasm).
I fail to see how the power of the people diminishes anyway. Again, no church can be forced to marry any couple...they can turn down any couple they wish right now, why would it change? The government cannot and shouldn't determine who the church gives the traditional ceremonial marriage. The fact remains, however, that it is plainly immoral and illegal for the state to discriminate against a minority and deny them a civil marriage. It is also immoral (and hypocritical) for the church to do so, but again, their level of hypocrisy on the vast majority of issues is overwhelming, so I don't expect much different and they can do their own thing.
?
I want to be sure we're talking about both gay and straight people.
Who do you think I meant when I said "the power of the people?"
-
Times Change we now have a black president life will go on
-
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
i believe something along these lines. i definitely don't believe in treating anyone badly because of their sexuality.. i think they deserve the same respect as anyone else.. they're people, just the same.
but i was raised in a christian home and don't really believe that gay marriage is "right" i suppose?
but that's my opinion and how i feel..
i think gay marriage is a risky and controversial topic.. it's hard to talk about your own beliefs without someone telling you that you're wrong, regardless of what you actually think.. you know?
Thank you for your opinion. I too believe it is wrong for religious reasons, and people who tell you that your religion has nothing to do with gay marriage are not being very open minded. For me it is God's opinion not a 'pastors' opinon that counts. It even says in the bible that two cities (sodom and gomorah) were entirely destroyed by God's hand because they practiced homosexuality. (Christian Bible, 1st James Version).
-
Seems to me Jesus spoke an awful lot about loving each other, forgiving sins, and not judging others. I would like to go to a protest with a sign saying Jesus loves Gays, because I beleive he loves all of us regardless.
I agree with the sign except for a little clarification. My sign would say something more like 'Jesus loves gays, but does not appreciate their actions'. Then again I am one of 'those christian' people you were talking about. With the sign I would not want to imply that Jesus wants us all to be gay, but that he expects all of us to forgive others and not judge and to love each other as he loves each of us.
-
Seems to me Jesus spoke an awful lot about loving each other, forgiving sins, and not judging others. I would like to go to a protest with a sign saying Jesus loves Gays, because I beleive he loves all of us regardless.
I agree with the sign except for a little clarification. My sign would say something more like 'Jesus loves gays, but does not appreciate their actions'. Then again I am one of 'those christian' people you were talking about. With the sign I would not want to imply that Jesus wants us all to be gay, but that he expects all of us to forgive others and not judge and to love each other as he loves each of us.
Not trying to offend anyone and I have nothing against gays or lesbians, some of my friends are just that. I just feel that it is very UNNATURAL! God did create 1 man and 1 woman and told them to go out and multiply!
-
I am open to a lot of things in this world, because I feel if it is not harmful to me or if it does not affect me personally, I have nothing negative or positive to say about it. If a gay couple wants to get married, by all means, let them try marriage. I honestly think by just allowing gay marriage, we can improve the economy - really, just think about the expense some gay couples would go through if they could get married legally anywhere.
-
just a reminder.....
this discusion is about "Gay Marriage".....
it's not about whether your church teaches that homosexuality is wrong or right.....
remember not all people have the same beliefs.....
and once we allow the government to disciminate against one group (even if you don't agree with that group) it starts a slippery slope.....
what happens when the government feels that no one should be a Christian.... or people who follow Christianity deserve less rights than some one who doesn't?
that's more what this is about than what one group teaches about another group....
-
The morality and legality of gay marriage are not necessarily the same issue here.
I don't know how that answered my concerns/questions. You took the very last sentence and thought up the generic response? I don't get it.
Either way, both the moral and legal standpoints point toward allowing same sex marriage. Discrimination isn't moral or legal.
If discardedheart were to simply say, "The Bible says that homosexuality is wrong," then it is not really a valid argument against the legal institution of gay marriage in a free nation. If she believed pre-marital sex is wrong, then should it be outlawed?
Don't mistake the two as being the same issue.
Same as "the state."
Please do elaborate.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time because I'm not interested in which has a better track record.
My point is simply that, unless we live in the Utopia, I don't see a wonderful track record from either.
Though, I would be very interested if you could give us concrete elaborate historical examples of how the state has had a more logical, rational, and typically understandable stance on and approach toward most moral issues from the past and how the church don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral.
There goes "the power of the people"...
The "power of the people" has little to no place in determining civil rights. The "people" are overwhelmingly ignorant, prejudice, egotistical, gullible, stuck on ridiculous old ideas, and so on. I guess the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1850s/1860s (and prior). Maybe then we wouldn't have to deal equally with those pesky, vastly inferior people from Africa (not stating this as fact, stating as sarcasm to prove the point). Maybe the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1920s so women would just keep quiet and do their cooking and cleaning (again, sarcasm).
I fail to see how the power of the people diminishes anyway. Again, no church can be forced to marry any couple...they can turn down any couple they wish right now, why would it change? The government cannot and shouldn't determine who the church gives the traditional ceremonial marriage. The fact remains, however, that it is plainly immoral and illegal for the state to discriminate against a minority and deny them a civil marriage. It is also immoral (and hypocritical) for the church to do so, but again, their level of hypocrisy on the vast majority of issues is overwhelming, so I don't expect much different and they can do their own thing.
?
I want to be sure we're talking about both gay and straight people.
Who do you think I meant when I said "the power of the people?"
first of all, Stealth3si deserves a 'thank you' for obvious reasons :wave:
the question stated in the poll is "do you believe in gay marriage?" and all i did was answer that question. i should've known, in fact i DID know, that someone would try to make an *bleep* out of me by asking me to "explain" so that they could pick apart anything i replied with.. which is why i didn't bother replying. i don't really see the point in looking for an argument.
religion is different for everyone.. MY religion is what I believe, and i don't try to force that upon everyone else. i didn't say "YOU SHOULDN'T SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE." i didn't try to push any buttons. i answered the question. and i'm not on fusioncash to argue my views to certain users who like to use big words and who think their keyboards make them cool. there's really not much to gain from constantly trying to demean others.
i'm christian. not everyone else is. like aspenl i believe in the bible, that's WHY i stated the opinion that i did. i know the story of sodom and gomorrah very well. but because everyone else doesn't believe the same, i didn't bother going into that.
for those of you who keep reminding us that everyone isn't christian.. no, everyone isn't. but some of us ARE. and for some of us the issues go hand in hand. just because you don't believe the same, doesn't mean you need to constantly keep trying to prove that we're wrong. are you not doing the exact same thing that you accuse us of? yeah, you pretty much are.
i'm not here to argue.
i gave my opinion on the matter.
everyone else is free to do the same.
end of story.
-
first of all, Stealth3si deserves a 'thank you' for obvious reasons :wave:
You are welcome. :)
i should've known, in fact i DID know, that someone would try to make an *bleep* out of me by asking me to "explain" so that they could pick apart anything i replied with.. which is why i didn't bother replying. i don't really see the point in looking for an argument.
I wouldn't feel ashamed of not being able to answer that question. It's a dishonest question, at least it seems that way to me because to me it just looks like liljp617 is more simply being sarcastic to prove his point than wanting to learn. But I could be wrong.
Anyway, a skeptic asking you that question in a way that dismisses religious views altogether would just be proving how ridiculously little he cares about understanding your faith, so why would you try to justify to him something he cares nothing about?
-
I sincerely apologize for asking you to help me understand your stance. What a rude person I am.
Give me a break -.-
I even explicitly stated I was not saying you're wrong nor did I say anything specifically to make you "look like an *bleep*." I asked, pretty politely from my point of view, if you would generously explain your logic or rationale behind your stance, because so many people in opposition to same sex marriage share your exact view. And I am thrown the generic response of "I don't want to have a discussion, I just wanted to give my opinion on the subject and leave it at that. I don't want my opinion questioned or scrutinized by people who don't understand the reasoning behind it." Frankly, not surprised, but I hoped you would be different.
I mean, you're on a discussion board. If you want to toss your opinion out, at least have the willpower or courage to step up and explain it if asked to.
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
i believe something along these lines. i definitely don't believe in treating anyone badly because of their sexuality.. i think they deserve the same respect as anyone else.. they're people, just the same.
but i was raised in a christian home and don't really believe that gay marriage is "right" i suppose?
but that's my opinion and how i feel..
i think gay marriage is a risky and controversial topic.. it's hard to talk about your own beliefs without someone telling you that you're wrong, regardless of what you actually think.. you know?
Thank you for your opinion. I too believe it is wrong for religious reasons, and people who tell you that your religion has nothing to do with gay marriage are not being very open minded. For me it is God's opinion not a 'pastors' opinon that counts. It even says in the bible that two cities (sodom and gomorah) were entirely destroyed by God's hand because they practiced homosexuality. (Christian Bible, 1st James Version).
It also says that if a child is disobedient to his/her parents, the child should be taken to the town elders and stoned by them.
It also says eating seafood is an abomination.
It also says to stone witches.
It also says to stone women who lose their virginity prior to being married.
It also says that if a man is caught raping a woman, he must pay 50 silver pieces to her father then marry the woman because he violated her.
It also okays slavery.
The list goes on and on...
If this is the same book you're trying to derive morals on homosexuality from, why don't you follow or promote the previously mentioned orders?
(I suppose I'll get yelled at for asking questions again or even daring to criticize a religion!)
-
If discardedheart were to simply say, "The Bible says that homosexuality is wrong," then it is not really a valid argument against the legal institution of gay marriage in a free nation. If she believed pre-marital sex is wrong, then should it be outlawed?
Don't mistake the two as being the same issue.
I didn't say they were. I simply stated that both the moral and legal discussions point toward allowing same sex marriage.
There's nothing moral about discriminating against a group of people who are not imposing on other people's freedoms.
It is illegal for the state or federal government to discriminate based on a person's sexuality.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time because I'm not interested in which has a better track record.
My point is simply that, unless we live in the Utopia, I don't see a wonderful track record from either.
Though, I would be very interested if you could give us concrete elaborate historical examples of how the state has had a more logical, rational, and typically understandable stance on and approach toward most moral issues from the past and how the church don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral.
I don't see the purpose in bringing up a counterpoint against someone and then refusing to elaborate on it because you "don't care." If you don't care, then why bring it up as though you strongly support the stance?
Would it be fair for me to say "I don't care if you would like an example of how the state has more rational approaches to moral issues?" No, it wouldn't.
Governments over the ages do not have flawless records, nor would I ever make such a claim. They do have stronger records however. They haven't burned hundreds to thousands of people at the stake for being "witches" for instance. They don't uphold and promote millennium old books that openly state clearly immoral things. Their proposed laws and laws currently set in place are typically based on rational approaches, not emotional feelings or spiritual feelings that have no basis in reality.
I'll stop here so as to not waste yours or my time, since you probably don't care.
I want to be sure we're talking about both gay and straight people.
Who do you think I meant when I said "the power of the people?"
The voting citizens of this country.
-
i'm christian. not everyone else is. like aspenl i believe in the bible, that's WHY i stated the opinion that i did. i know the story of sodom and gomorrah very well. but because everyone else doesn't believe the same, i didn't bother going into that
for those of you who keep reminding us that everyone isn't christian.. no, everyone isn't. but some of us ARE. and for some of us the issues go hand in hand. just because you don't believe the same, doesn't mean you need to constantly keep trying to prove that we're wrong. are you not doing the exact same thing that you accuse us of? yeah, you pretty much are.
just a reminder.....
this discusion is about "Gay Marriage".....
it's not about whether your church teaches that homosexuality is wrong or right.....
remember not all people have the same beliefs.....
and once we allow the government to disciminate against one group (even if you don't agree with that group) it starts a slippery slope.....
what happens when the government feels that no one should be a Christian.... or people who follow Christianity deserve less rights than some one who doesn't?
that's more what this is about than what one group teaches about another group....
It sounds like you are taking about me....
First... let me clarify..... I AM A CHRISTAIN!!! I BELIEVE THE BIBLE TO BE TRUE!!!
but as i stated this is NOT about my personal religious beliefs....
the bible has numerous examples of being in a country that does not support your personal beliefs...
at this point we are heading that way....
time and time again this country has taken a stand against, what they "say" is a threat to them, only to use that, to expand the rule, to include others that weren't meant in the "law" to be affected.... every time they take away any freedom of expression i see us heading one step closer to a country that doesnt have..... freedom of speech......or freedom of religion...
In short I'd rather live in a country where people have the "free will" to sin and choose not to... than in a country that dictates what sins are acceptable and which ones aren't.... now before you start blasting...
i'm not saying we should live in a lawless society.... anyone who hurts or infringes on another persons rights should be punished.... and the aspect of sin is part of my personal beliefs.
-
I am open to a lot of things in this world, because I feel if it is not harmful to me or if it does not affect me personally, I have nothing negative or positive to say about it. If a gay couple wants to get married, by all means, let them try marriage. I honestly think by just allowing gay marriage, we can improve the economy - really, just think about the expense some gay couples would go through if they could get married legally anywhere.
Excellent point you made here! The population definitely decreases and children in orphanages would get a home as well, which benefits the economy in many ways.
-
For what's its worth I clicked the "I don't care" on the poll and leave it at that. :)
-
i honestly believe that God made man for a woman and a woman for a man. there should not be anything other than that. now without a biblical perspective, you cant say much either, because all you can say is that is changes the definition of marrige as we have thought about it for thousands of years...i dont think it is right.
-
Thank you discardedheart. I too was not trying to start an argument or force my views onto anyone. I merely wanted to make sure that all sides of the situation were viewed at the same time. I also tried to only bring up christian issues with people who stated that they were christian. I am not trying to make everyone christian or believe the same way I do.
-
It also says that if a child is disobedient to his/her parents, the child should be taken to the town elders and stoned by them.
It also says eating seafood is an abomination.
It also says to stone witches.
It also says to stone women who lose their virginity prior to being married.
It also says that if a man is caught raping a woman, he must pay 50 silver pieces to her father then marry the woman because he violated her.
It also okays slavery.
The list goes on and on...
If this is the same book you're trying to derive morals on homosexuality from, why don't you follow or promote the previously mentioned orders?
(I suppose I'll get yelled at for asking questions again or even daring to criticize a religion!)
Thank you for your opinion. I have mine and you have yours. I didn't try to bash what you believe nor was I trying to make you believe in the bible. I will not go further because it is clear you are not interested in my opinion.
-
I come from a extremely strong Christian familing and I am a Christian. I do not believe in gay marriage. This (oo) and this (--) just don't fit. It doesn't work that way. The way I see it, women and men are differnet for a reason. They fullfill the differences that women and men have and complete the circle to carry on life. Homosexuallity ends that. It doesn't work. My sister recently came out that she was gay and I am just hoping this is a stage she is going through. This day in age it seems like people just find anyone to have a relationship just to have one regardless of gender. I understand that no matter what I say or how I believe their will continue to be homosexuals that will continue their relationships, and in most cases their families abandon them and the only people they have are each other. I do not believe that they should be able to marry. Marriage comes from the bible and it is stated that it is to be between a man and a woman. With saying that I do not feel that they should be denied the right to decide medical attention for each other, nor should their property be kept from each other if something should to someone in the relationship, but all of these things can be taken care of by a living will.
-
Its sad when people say it's genetic. If so, then why are twins not always both gay or both straight. Fail.
-
I don't know how to quote, but the comment about God creating humans for the purpose of "breeding" is irrelevant. Straight couples have just as much trouble in relationships as gay couples. And the multiplying part, as far as it goes, we all know that gay couples can't have children, but if you look at the orphan rate, and take into consideration the fact that many children can't find home after a certain age, I think that allowing gay marriage should be allowed, followed by adoption. I mean the fact that gay couples can't have children is a blessing in itself. Using religion in this topic can go either way. Yes, your God made men and women different, but if it wasn't for men and women having children and for reasons all their own, not being able to care for them or what not, then we wouldn't have abandoned children out there. Gay marriage and relationships decrease this. (I know that this is a forum on marriage...) As said before, to each his/her own. I just don't think a lot of things are taken into consideration when discussing this. I respect everyone's opinion on this matter, and it is a touchy subject, but I myself believe it is going to be another, and pardon this analogy, but a type of "civil...war??" type of conflict. By denying any one any type of civil freedoms, aren't we becoming a type of communism? On the other hand though, it does take patience and I completly understand gay couples not wanting to be so any longer, but the truth is that even though written up as seperation of church and state, the government has not yet seperated them. The church still controls a rather large portion of things. If the church suddenly said it was ok, don't you think that the state would legalize it? And not all religions are the same, there are some that believe in homosexual relationships!
-
I don't know how to quote, but the comment about God creating humans for the purpose of "breeding" is irrelevant. Straight couples have just as much trouble in relationships as gay couples. And the multiplying part, as far as it goes, we all know that gay couples can't have children, but if you look at the orphan rate, and take into consideration the fact that many children can't find home after a certain age, I think that allowing gay marriage should be allowed, followed by adoption. I mean the fact that gay couples can't have children is a blessing in itself. Using religion in this topic can go either way. Yes, your God made men and women different, but if it wasn't for men and women having children and for reasons all their own, not being able to care for them or what not, then we wouldn't have abandoned children out there. Gay marriage and relationships decrease this. (I know that this is a forum on marriage...) As said before, to each his/her own. I just don't think a lot of things are taken into consideration when discussing this. I respect everyone's opinion on this matter, and it is a touchy subject, but I myself believe it is going to be another, and pardon this analogy, but a type of "civil...war??" type of conflict. By denying any one any type of civil freedoms, aren't we becoming a type of communism? On the other hand though, it does take patience and I completly understand gay couples not wanting to be so any longer, but the truth is that even though written up as seperation of church and state, the government has not yet seperated them. The church still controls a rather large portion of things. If the church suddenly said it was ok, don't you think that the state would legalize it? And not all religions are the same, there are some that believe in homosexual relationships!
I was not only talking as you refer to it as "breeding" I was also talking about the different ways that men and women think to their counter parts. I feel as if men and women complement each and complete each other in a heteralsexual relationship unlike a homosexual.
-
I believe in Gay marriage. I don't understand why it should be any different than straight marriage. A man or woman is gay, they're still human and as such should have the same rights as other humans. There is a seperation of church and state for a reason. Love is love, there shouldn't be any boundries.
-
Whether or not you believe in it, nothing needs to be said in public about it especially by beauty queens. :bunny:
-
gay people are still people. if they want to be with someone of the same sex it's up to them. it's not something i wanna try, but i'm not going to think less of people because they're gay. why should they be denied the same rights straight people get? doesn't make sense.
-
I think gay people should have just as much right to be miserable as the rest of us. :D
On a more serious level:
As far as religion and faith go, I'm not going to look down on those who practice and believe. That is because America is a melting pot of faiths and religions - not one is better than another. For this reason, no one faith should be placed on high and used as a reasoning and backing for laws of any sort.
An a-theist approach to governing is the best approach as it includes everybody and excludes none.
When it comes to gay marriage, I see absolutely no reason why two men or two women cannot be treated the same as a man and woman would. It is well within your moral convictions to feel that "homosexual marriage" should not be legal - whether for religious or other reasons.
With saying that I do not feel that they should be denied the right to decide medical attention for each other, nor should their property be kept from each other if something should to someone in the relationship, but all of these things can be taken care of by a living will.
Trying to sound as polite as possible (with such a heated topic, I'd like it to remain civil), America has tried the "separate but equal" approach. It failed in the past; it fails today.
For your statements, why should two men or two women have to jump through legal hoops just so that one can see the other inside the hospital or make medical decisions? Even with a living will, a living family member (even from one of those families that abandon their children for this) can come in at any time and trump that living will and put the partner out in the cold.
Families already do this with heterosexual marriages and sometimes win - the rate for homosexual "partnerships" being much higher. Sadly, I've seen first hand what happens when a god-fearing judge makes the ruling on such cases.
Marriage comes from the bible and it is stated that it is to be between a man and a woman.
In America, marriage is a legal institution. That is why there are people capable of marrying couples without a church. That is also why there are some pastors/preachers/religious figures who do not have privilege to enter a couple into a legally-binding marriage.
My marriage, for instance, was void of religion and religious connotations.
However, if people want marriage to remain a religious institution, would it be fair to change all legally-binding marriages into civil unions and therefore let homosexuals partake in such civil unions? This would then end the separation between homosexuals and heterosexuals.
In the end, if my husband was blessed with female parts, I would love him/her all the same.
-
Marriage comes from the bible.
Plain and simple, no it doesn't. Neither in its history nor in the present laws of the United States. Marriage in the United States is entirely a legal right. You're not married because a random priest says so, you're married because the state approves it and hands you your marriage license. Please do some reading on the history of marriage as well before stating factually that marriage has any origin at all in the Bible. It was around centuries and centuries before your book and the definition and purpose of marriage has changed dozens upon dozens of times throughout history.
Its sad when people say it's genetic. If so, then why are twins not always both gay or both straight. Fail.
It's more sad when people completely deny it could even be genetic (nobody knows at the moment, it's entirely up in the air) and follow that up by using fundamentally flawed logic and questions that have been answered many times by educated specialists.
i honestly believe that God made man for a woman and a woman for a man. there should not be anything other than that. now without a biblical perspective, you cant say much either, because all you can say is that is changes the definition of marrige as we have thought about it for thousands of years...i dont think it is right.
The definition of marriage has changed even in the last few decades. In 1967, over a dozen states barred blacks from marrying. Interracial marriages (of all kinds, not just blacks and whites) were socially and legally barred for decades. Over 50% of marriages end in divorce. Celebrities and average people alike are getting married three and four times (or more) in their lifetimes. Marriage used to have little purpose except for a dynasty to keep power. It used to have little purpose outside of a man acquiring the woman's dowry from her father.
Marriage -- socially, morally and legally -- has changed dozens and dozens of times in history...it has not, in any form or fashion, maintained the same definition and purpose for thousands of years. It is consistently changing quite frequently.
Regardless, again, religious convictions have no place in determining laws of this country. Your moral convictions due to your religion are your own problem and you're free to have them all you want, but they're not justification for legally barring a minority from equal rights or for excusing discrimination of a minority by the majority.
It also says that if a child is disobedient to his/her parents, the child should be taken to the town elders and stoned by them.
It also says eating seafood is an abomination.
It also says to stone witches.
It also says to stone women who lose their virginity prior to being married.
It also says that if a man is caught raping a woman, he must pay 50 silver pieces to her father then marry the woman because he violated her.
It also okays slavery.
The list goes on and on...
If this is the same book you're trying to derive morals on homosexuality from, why don't you follow or promote the previously mentioned orders?
(I suppose I'll get yelled at for asking questions again or even daring to criticize a religion!)
Thank you for your opinion. I have mine and you have yours. I didn't try to bash what you believe nor was I trying to make you believe in the bible. I will not go further because it is clear you are not interested in my opinion.
You don't have to try to make me believe the Bible...what I believe is irrelevant on this topic. I'm asking you a question...a simple one in my opinion. Perhaps I'll ask again:
If this is the same book you're trying to argue the morals of homosexuality from, why do you completely decline using the morals clearly outlined above (or any number of other acts of brutality from the Bible)? Are they not the laws of the same god? Are these laws not as infallible as the ones supposedly against homosexuality? Are there varying degrees of infallibility? Why are you cherry picking "the word of God" to fit your own agenda (which appears to be oppressing a minority, for whatever reason)?
Do you have an answer to this? Why would I ask the question if I didn't want an answer, from you specifically?
-
im straight but i really dont see the big deal why gay's cant marry they are people too. on this issue i think gay's are treated like they are some kind of animal or something out of this world. its not really fare if they love eachother they should have the right to say "I do".
-
Regardless, again, religious convictions have no place in determining laws of this country. Your moral convictions due to your religion are your own problem and you're free to have them all you want, but they're not justification for legally barring a minority from equal rights or for excusing discrimination of a minority by the majority.
not to open yet another can of worms.... but this countrys laws were based on the religious convictions of the founders....
-
I believe Gay people have the right to be in love if they so choose. But Marriage is a religous thing and I dont know any religion that teaches or preaches in homosexuality. So maybe there needs to be gay "union" laws or something but marriage...I dont agree
-
Thank you for your opinion. I have mine and you have yours. I didn't try to bash what you believe nor was I trying to make you believe in the bible. I will not go further because it is clear you are not interested in my opinion.
You don't have to try to make me believe the Bible...what I believe is irrelevant on this topic. I'm asking you a question...a simple one in my opinion. Perhaps I'll ask again:
If this is the same book you're trying to argue the morals of homosexuality from, why do you completely decline using the morals clearly outlined above (or any number of other acts of brutality from the Bible)? Are they not the laws of the same god? Are these laws not as infallible as the ones supposedly against homosexuality? Are there varying degrees of infallibility? Why are you cherry picking "the word of God" to fit your own agenda (which appears to be oppressing a minority, for whatever reason)?
Do you have an answer to this? Why would I ask the question if I didn't want an answer, from you specifically?
I do have answers to all of your questions. I am not 'cherry picking' I can show you proof and explanation for everything in your list and I will explain if you want. You are judging my religion without even knowing what religion I am, or anything about what I believe. I never said homosexual marriages should not be legalized whether I believe it or not. I merely said I am against the consept of gay. If you are interested in learning about my religion and why I believe the way I do, I will be glad to share (however not here). It is not the topic of this forum nor is it a topic I feel should be discussed through this site. If you would like to honestly learn about what I believe then tell me so, and we will meet somewhere else. However I do not believe you are sincerely interested in what I believe, you simply want to change what I believe and have a battle of words. I am not here for an argument. Again, thank you for your opinion and I hope you have a fabulous day! ;)
-
I believe black people have the right to be in love if they so choose. But Marriage is a religous thing and I dont know any religion that teaches or preaches in black marriages. So maybe there needs to be black "union" laws or something but marriage...I dont agree
I fixed your post.
How many people must be corrected on the fact that marriage DOES NOT have its origins or anything close to its roots in any religion? How many people must be corrected on the fact that marriage is inherently a legal institution approved by the state, not a religious institution approved by Father Joe?
Thank you for your opinion. I have mine and you have yours. I didn't try to bash what you believe nor was I trying to make you believe in the bible. I will not go further because it is clear you are not interested in my opinion.
You don't have to try to make me believe the Bible...what I believe is irrelevant on this topic. I'm asking you a question...a simple one in my opinion. Perhaps I'll ask again:
If this is the same book you're trying to argue the morals of homosexuality from, why do you completely decline using the morals clearly outlined above (or any number of other acts of brutality from the Bible)? Are they not the laws of the same god? Are these laws not as infallible as the ones supposedly against homosexuality? Are there varying degrees of infallibility? Why are you cherry picking "the word of God" to fit your own agenda (which appears to be oppressing a minority, for whatever reason)?
Do you have an answer to this? Why would I ask the question if I didn't want an answer, from you specifically?
I do have answers to all of your questions. I am not 'cherry picking' I can show you proof and explanation for everything in your list and I will explain if you want. You are judging my religion without even knowing what religion I am, or anything about what I believe. I never said homosexual marriages should not be legalized whether I believe it or not. I merely said I am against the consept of gay. If you are interested in learning about my religion and why I believe the way I do, I will be glad to share (however not here). It is not the topic of this forum nor is it a topic I feel should be discussed through this site. If you would like to honestly learn about what I believe then tell me so, and we will meet somewhere else. However I do not believe you are sincerely interested in what I believe, you simply want to change what I believe and have a battle of words. I am not here for an argument. Again, thank you for your opinion and I hope you have a fabulous day! ;)
When you bring it up as a defense/reason for your stance on the subject of the thread, it is relevant to the thread. You're an individual who believes in the Bible and has clearly stated and implied that you don't accept homosexuality because of the moral convictions found in the Bible. What more do I need to know to ask the question I asked? That's plenty of information to ask why you follow what the Bible says on the morality of homosexuality, but don't follow what the Bible says on the morality of how to treat rapists, disobedient children, etc. It's certainly relevant to the topic of this thread...surely you believe it's relevant as you (and others) brought it up to begin with.
I don't care what you believe, as in you can believe as you wish. I just don't understand the inconsistency. Therefore, I asked the question -- twice. I can't do anything but assume you don't have an answer, as you refuse to answer the question with not so great excuses.
-
not to open yet another can of worms.... but this countrys laws were based on the religious convictions of the founders....
And to close that can of worms, all one needs to do is read the Treaty of Tripoli (Article 11 thereof). Then again, not all laws currently on the books are based off of the religious convictions of our Founding Fathers. If so, we'd still have public flogging and interracial marriages would not be allowed. Good thing we've microevolved as a society, right?
Either way - marriage is a LEGAL INSTITUTION in this country. Where it derives from has no bearing on what the current status of marriage is. All ordained religious figures must receive state permission in order to issue legal marriage certificates. People do not even need to go to church/synagogue/etc in order to get married - I'm sure there's a licensed person who can marry people affiliated with your local courthouse.
-
I am a woman happily married to a man, on that same note I think that gay people should have that same opportunity. I is for the most part them just wanting to be with the person they love. I know that it offends alot of people, but it's not like they are asking you to be gay with them. They just want it to be on paper like everone else. How would you feel if it was the other way around? If gay people could be married and we couldn't. I've got to tell you that I would be heartbroke it someone told me that I couldn' t marry my husband just because I'm straight.
-
I know some of you are going to have red faces after I'm done, but I'm going to say what I have to say. If some of you would read your Bible more you would know that this sort of relationship is an abomination against God. Also small g in God refers to a false god, G should be always capitalized. You are talking about two men living together, one or hell both taking the place of the woman and same goes for two women, I mean how is any of this okay; and don't tell me they were born this way, they made a choice and as always the choices we make have consequenses. Some of you are saying they should get this and that like any other couples but guess what they are not like any other couples. They want benefits from their partner let them have it, they get to flaunt their relationship in public, props to them, but marriage is a whole other thing. For those of you who are married or have been to a wedding you should try and remember what the exact words to those vows are... Think about it. And those of you that say religion or the Bible has nothing to do with it you are soo wrong. We should try and remember what our true purpose is and who we owe our lives too.
It seems everyday we find ways to dissappoint God some more. May He have mercy on us. :)
-
Also small g in God refers to a false god, G should be always capitalized.
Firefly, I didn't end up with a red face after reading your post. However, it should be noted that certain faiths/religions require that god be lowercased or even written as G-d. Typing it out in full with capitalization makes whatever you've written it on to be sacred. As a sign of respect to those people, that is why you'll see me write it as such.
If some of you would read your Bible more you would know that this sort of relationship is an abomination against God.
I have read the (not my) Bible. In fact, I've read several versions of it... and even in a few different languages. I've read the Old Testament and New Testament alike. For the record, my readings of Sodom and Gomorrah are that the city was burned down because of rape, gluttony, and inhospitality.
"Genesis 18:20-21, NIV"
Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."
People consenting to homosexual "relations" would not cry out to the lord against their partner. Somebody who has been raped (as the townsmen were attempting to do with the angels in Lot's home) would cry to the lord.
"Luke 10:10-12, NIV"
But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 'Even the dust of your town that sticks to our feet we wipe off against you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God is near.' I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.
Which, this reads to me that if a town is not hospitable towards you, they will suffer worse than Sodom.
-
not only am i against gay marriages but , also against gays period. it literally is right in a persons face to know that its completely wrong.not only does it goes beyond the laws of nature but also the principles of ethics and religion. i mean how the heck do we procreate if there where only gays? :BangHead:
if it was the right way of living why is it that both sex males and females where made , why not only males and only females.
and this is not only in humans its also in everything from insect to animals.
then they say that they were made that way, please, everyone has a choice, the choice to stay singles for the rest of your life or married (unfortunately today to the same sex :BangHead:).
they are either mentally ill or plain stupid to not know that this is wrong.
-
"We must obey God as ruler rather than men", Do you agree LittleDebbieG? With that being said; We are talking about gay marriage not Sodom and Gomorrah. I am not hating or bashing gays, all I am saying is their sexual practice is wrong. In the Bible when they speak of man and wife, they were refering to one man and one woman. Since you are familiar with the Bible then you have no problem checking these out. Leviticus chp 18 (the commandments), Romans chp 1, 1 Corinthians chp 6: 9-10 and Hebrew chp 13. Need I say more? :)
-
Not to totally tick you off, but don't you think that they feel the same way about us? Several of my friends are gay and they are the nicest people I have ever encountered. The concept of one man and one woman totally grosses them out so we just avoid the subject out of respect for each other. That is all they really want. They have feelings too. You talk about them like they are a disease. What does that say for you to judge them? What is the scripture about not being the one to cast the first stone? oh and the one about not judging unless you want to be judged? Isn' that God's job? I think we should just accept people for who they are and in the end it will be up to God to judge. :thumbsup:
-
What is the scripture about not being the one to cast the first stone? oh and the one about not judging unless you want to be judged? Isn' that God's job? I think we should just accept people for who they are and in the end it will be up to God to judge. :thumbsup:
John 8:7:
"So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."
Luke 6:37:
"Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven" :thumbsup:
Sounds like we on the FC Forum may best be left to filling out offers and not doctrine interpretation. :female: :female: / :male: :male:/ :female: :male:? :dontknow:
-
I believe Gay people have the right to be in love if they so choose. But Marriage is a religous thing and I dont know any religion that teaches or preaches in homosexuality. So maybe there needs to be gay "union" laws or something but marriage...I dont agree
liljp617
I fixed it back. It is what I believe....and this is my opinion. Its not up to you to fix anything I have to say as there is nothing broken. Being Black is not religous...duh. Its really bad when you have to stoop to making comparisons that really have nothing to do with the other. I do not agree with gay marriage. Not for anyone, not for any reason. Theres alot of people who feel that way too. End of story.
Stop trying to be a bully. You were probably mad that Miss California had an opinion other than your too huh. Too bad.
Its not legal now. Too bad.
Just out of curiosity....
Are you Gay and trying to be married? This seems to be getting to you more than most.
-
Those of us that believe in the bible will never feel that gay marriage is right, and those that don't believe will always think that it is okay. There will never be an end to this conversation.
-
I believe Gay people have the right to be in love if they so choose. But Marriage is a religous thing and I dont know any religion that teaches or preaches in homosexuality. So maybe there needs to be gay "union" laws or something but marriage...I dont agree
liljp617
I fixed it back. It is what I believe....and this is my opinion. Its not up to you to fix anything I have to say as there is nothing broken. Being Black is not religous...duh. Its really bad when you have to stoop to making comparisons that really have nothing to do with the other. I do not agree with gay marriage. Not for anyone, not for any reason. Theres alot of people who feel that way too. End of story.
Stop trying to be a bully. You were probably mad that Miss California had an opinion other than your too huh. Too bad.
Its not legal now. Too bad.
Just out of curiosity....
Are you Gay and trying to be married? This seems to be getting to you more than most.
Being gay is not religious either. Nothing is religious unless that individual adheres to [insert religion] and gives credence to [insert religion]. It was quite the valid comparison, as it was merely pointing out that you could toss any group of people into that instead of gays and it would read just the same and would be just as prejudiced.
How many people believe it is irrelevant. Millions of people believed slavery was fine, millions believed burning people at the stake was fine, millions believed the Earth was flat, millions believed it rained because they slayed a bull and sacrificed it to [insert any of the thousands of gods], millions believed Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11 for years after the attack, etc. Hopefully we can agree that the masses believing something does not give it any more credence than if only one person believed it.
I personally don't care what any beauty pageant contestant says. The vast majority of them are ignorant on any subject they're asked a question on and they almost always have generic answers that do not fit the questions at all. What they say has little relevance or significance on the world. I'm more interested in the fact that she breached a short (12 page), clear contract that stated what she could and could not do both during and after the pageant and nothing happened because she gave some teary eyed speech about how she's being persecuted and her freedoms are being invaded. I just thought that was slightly ironic.
No, I'm not gay. I don't have any family members or friends that are gay. I frankly have no personal stake in any of this outside of being a citizen of a country that prides itself on freedoms and the pursuit of happiness. I'm a big fan of allowing people to do as they please as long as it does not impose on the freedoms and pursuits of happiness of others. I'm what you would refer to as a person in opposition to blatant prejudice hiding behind contradictory, outdated principles from books written 2,000 years ago. I'm what you would refer to as somebody who forms moral views based on reality and present times.
-
Regardless, again, religious convictions have no place in determining laws of this country. Your moral convictions due to your religion are your own problem and you're free to have them all you want, but they're not justification for legally barring a minority from equal rights or for excusing discrimination of a minority by the majority.
not to open yet another can of worms.... but this countrys laws were based on the religious convictions of the founders....
Let's make note that this country was not founded upon Christianity, or any organized theistic religion. This country was founded upon secular ideologies/laws and a separation of supposed divine forces and government. This country was founded largely by deists, secularists (some of whom WERE Christians, although not close to the sense of modern Christians), agnostics, and atheists...the vast majority of whom were very opposed to Christianity being interrelated with the federal government; many of whom were very opposed to the organized Christian religion and the Bible as a whole.
There is no can of worms here. It's plain, easy-to-find historical fact that disagrees with your claim. The subject of this country's foundation is not one of opinion.
-
"We must obey God as ruler rather than men", Do you agree LittleDebbieG? With that being said; We are talking about gay marriage not Sodom and Gomorrah. I am not hating or bashing gays, all I am saying is their sexual practice is wrong. In the Bible when they speak of man and wife, they were refering to one man and one woman. Since you are familiar with the Bible then you have no problem checking these out. Leviticus chp 18 (the commandments), Romans chp 1, 1 Corinthians chp 6: 9-10 and Hebrew chp 13. Need I say more? :)
I suppose I'll ask you the same question I asked someone else above, since that person refuses to answer for whatever reason.
Why do you pick and choose which rules and moral views to uphold from the Bible and throw out the others?
This same book says blatantly immoral things such as:
1) Stone disobedient children
2) If a man rapes a woman, the man must pay the woman's father 50 silver pieces and then marry the woman because he violated her
3) Slavery is fine
4) A woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night should be stoned
Sadly, some of these are found just a few verses before or after the verses you're referring to (the first one is just THREE verses before Leviticus 20:13, which many Christians use as "support" for their stance against homosexuality). And there are dozens and dozens more just like this everywhere in the Bible.
It says plain silly things such as:
1) Eating shellfish is an abomination (how about that, eating shellfish and homosexuality are both abominations...real logical)
2) Wearing wool-blended clothing is wrong
3) Deport any male and female who have sex while the female is on her period
This list also goes on and on.
So, again, why don't you follow these "rules/laws," but you feel it necessary to quote other verses from the same books of the Bible and uphold them as though they're infallible? Why don't you even promote what they say?
On a side note, the Bible condones polygamy and many significant OT males practiced polygamy (David, Solomon, and so on), so the view that marriage is strictly "one man, one woman" doesn't seem to hold up as strongly as one would think.
-
I am straight, but I believe people should be allowed to be who they are. If 2 people truly love each other, they should have the opportunity to announce that love in front of their friends & family & exchange wedding vows...it's 2009...about time for some much needed tolerance!!
To all those who fall back on the "bible" keep this in mind: the "bible" was written by a group of scholars, all MEN, mostly pagans..if U don't know what a pagan is, enlighten yourself & google it! There is no factual proof the "bible" is even a book handed down by this "god" you put so much stock into!!!!
I'm not trying to start a theological debate here, just stating facts...sorry if this offends anyone!
-
I truly believe that everyone has the freedom to choose what they want to be or who the want to be with. I respect gay people and I have always respected them. I have a few family members who are gay and so what!! :thumbsup:
But there are many other IMPORTANT ISSUES going on in this country that should be taken care of instead of trying to agree or disagree with the gay marriage.
That's what I think... :dontknow:
(http://www.fusioncash.net/sig.php/c09ae0b417f7x7.png) (http://www.fusioncash.net/?ref=chchtati)
-
Maybe having gay marriages will allow more people to come out, which may result in a slowdown in the over population we are heading towards. Just a thought.
-
On the basis of religion, here's a question that I have never understood: If homosexual practice is indeed such a grevious sin, then why have homosexuals been allowed to exist through these thousands of years? If they were such an abomination, would not they have gone "exinct" with the great flood?
-
Good one :thumbsup: I too would like to know the answer to that.
-
I find it interesting that people use a religious excuse to be against Gay Marriage being as how America is supposed to be a secular nation. If it is not religious based, why is this even an issue? Moreso, why does it effect anyone else? Statistically, gay marriages actually have a lower divorce rate than straight marriage. I just do not understand why the effort to pursue happiness by gay couples is anyone else's business but their own.
I think if this country truly wants to live up to it's word of being secular as well as a free nation, gay marriage should be permitted and, like it or not, it most likely will someday.
-
Do you think it's right? To me marriage is between a man n woman,
-
Why is their happiness up to you, and what you think is right?
-
Homosexuals only have a life span of 40-45 years because they die from so many diseases. God meant for this to happen, the reason people are getting STD's and what not is because you should wait until you are married to have sex. Think about it, if you wait till you are married, you won't get any diseases. Its God's way of saying, no matter what happens, I control. And Homosexuals also have a much higher separation rate.
-
I believe in Gay marriage. I don't understand why it should be any different than straight marriage. A man or woman is gay, they're still human and as such should have the same rights as other humans. There is a seperation of church and state for a reason. Love is love, there shouldn't be any boundries.
If love is love, then shouldn't we allow humans to marry dogs and cats or horses? Like you said, "Love is love, there shouldn't be any boundaries"
-
On the basis of religion, here's a question that I have never understood: If homosexual practice is indeed such a grevious sin, then why have homosexuals been allowed to exist through these thousands of years? If they were such an abomination, would not they have gone "exinct" with the great flood?
You're being too logical for them. They don't like being asked questions that require they think about their beliefs.
Homosexuals only have a life span of 40-45 years because they die from so many diseases. God meant for this to happen, the reason people are getting STD's and what not is because you should wait until you are married to have sex. Think about it, if you wait till you are married, you won't get any diseases. Its God's way of saying, no matter what happens, I control. And Homosexuals also have a much higher separation rate.
Married people get STDs. I don't know if you're aware of that.
Your God is omniscient and the Bible clearly implies there is determinism/predestination. Based on Christian logic, he created these people fully knowing what they would do with their lives and there is nothing an individual can do to "choose" against the knowledge of an omniscient being. Blame your god.
I believe in Gay marriage. I don't understand why it should be any different than straight marriage. A man or woman is gay, they're still human and as such should have the same rights as other humans. There is a seperation of church and state for a reason. Love is love, there shouldn't be any boundries.
If love is love, then shouldn't we allow humans to marry dogs and cats or horses? Like you said, "Love is love, there shouldn't be any boundaries"
If they truly desire to. Does it make a difference in your life what somebody 3000 miles away does with their life? If it does, you have some problems of your own. If something this minuscule somehow "degrades your marriage," then your marriage probably wasn't much to begin with.
Either way, if this is the logic you're using to oppose same sex marriages, then it's pretty weak. There are no benefits to being married to an animal as there are being married to another human being.
And I know I'm making a mistake by trying to have a discussion with someone who shares common views with Jerry Falwell.
-
Homosexuals only have a life span of 40-45 years because they die from so many diseases. God meant for this to happen, the reason people are getting STD's and what not is because you should wait until you are married to have sex. Think about it, if you wait till you are married, you won't get any diseases. Its God's way of saying, no matter what happens, I control. And Homosexuals also have a much higher separation rate.
You can't get any diseases if you wait to have sex until you are married? check the cdc... i don't think waiting to have sex until you are married can equate to 100% protection. where are you getting your statistics from? (please send me a link) life-span of 40-45 years??? some back woods church? is that what they are teaching now?
-
I find it interesting that people use a religious excuse to be against Gay Marriage being as how America is supposed to be a secular nation. If it is not religious based, why is this even an issue? Moreso, why does it effect anyone else? Statistically, gay marriages actually have a lower divorce rate than straight marriage. I just do not understand why the effort to pursue happiness by gay couples is anyone else's business but their own.
I think if this country truly wants to live up to it's word of being secular as well as a free nation, gay marriage should be permitted and, like it or not, it most likely will someday.
I completely and 100% agree, I've said it before and I'll say it again...There is a seperation of church and state for a reason.
-
Marriage comes from the bible.
Plain and simple, no it doesn't. Neither in its history nor in the present laws of the United States. Marriage in the United States is entirely a legal right. You're not married because a random priest says so, you're married because the state approves it and hands you your marriage license. Please do some reading on the history of marriage as well before stating factually that marriage has any origin at all in the Bible. It was around centuries and centuries before your book and the definition and purpose of marriage has changed dozens upon dozens of times throughout history.
Let me ask you this. Where in the world do think that our judicial system started from, who originally gave us the list of things that was wrong. Because if it did not come from God then where did it come from.
-
I don't know what Bible you're reading from, whatever. The Old Testament is there for us to know what happened and to learn from them, like learn from others and your mistakes. The New Testament applies to us, the present and the future. Nobody's dissecting any thing, we're talking about gay marriage/relationships so I gave info on what it pertained too; not jumping off topic and talking about something that has nothing to do with the issue. And don't we all remember certain versus that we feel we should remember? Don't some of us only take what we want from the Bible and discard the rest like it's irrelevant. Let's just leave it as am a do me and you do you, how about that. By the way I'm not affiliated with any church, when I was younger, I went to all of them. I have no preference, but it seems everyone has a different way of doing the same thing. Don't see how you get different versions from the same Bible. So Good luck to you all and peace out! :wave:
-
One more thing you all don't know me like that so don't accuse me of not reading or following the laws of the Bible. I treat people well, I'm still a virgin and that's by choice(trust me there's plenty who tempted me), I pray, read my Bible and continue to do what's needed of me. Nobody's perfect but I do my best.I'm not trying to get any body to do anything, I stated my views and beliefs and I'm standing firm behind them. You all are grown folks with enough common sense, and knowledge and have the resources to back you up to make right and moral choices.
If you all read your bibles you would not ask why there are gay people. Why is there hunger?, homeless people?, sickness? and death? Earthquakes?, tornados?,floods?. You all should know the answers to these questions and shame on you if you don't. I'm a young adult I should be getting support for at least having what I believe are moral values, for believing in God, and trusting in the Word. Most teens and young adults have a don't care attitude and get into situations they get into because of it. I feel sorry for our future generation if what we all have is a everybody do what you want attitude. :(
-
Quote:
This same book says blatantly immoral things such as:
1) Stone disobedient children
2) If a man rapes a woman, the man must pay the woman's father 50 silver pieces and then marry the woman because he violated her
3) Slavery is fine
4) A woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night should be stoned
Sadly, some of these are found just a few verses before or after the verses you're referring to (the first one is just THREE verses before Leviticus 20:13, which many Christians use as "support" for their stance against homosexuality). And there are dozens and dozens more just like this everywhere in the Bible.
It says plain silly things such as:
1) Eating shellfish is an abomination (how about that, eating shellfish and homosexuality are both abominations...real logical)
2) Wearing wool-blended clothing is wrong
3) Deport any male and female who have sex while the female is on her period
This list also goes on and on.
You sound like the Church of Christ you only remember the versuses want to remember.
You just copied and pasted what the other person did and you are almost all wrong.
1. It does not say that, it says they should be punished
2. He did violate her...people go to prison for raping people. Are you an ignorant?
3. It does not say "slavery is fine". The whole chapter of Exodus is condemning slavery.
4. Do you realize back then our culture wasn't as pathetic as it was now? Rarely would anyone lose their virginity out of wedlock. It was a very big deal then. Many people came up to Jesus and asked if they could stone a girl who did this and Jesus replied, "The first one of you who has done no wrong may throw the first stone." None of them were sinless and did not stone the girl.
1. It is only saying you shouldn't eat fish that don't have scales and fins.
2. It is wool and linen
3. Its not like anybody does this anyways
-
You sound like the Church of Christ you only remember the versuses want to remember.
That's precisely what people who believe in the Bible do. This thread is a perfect example. People are quoting random stuff from the Bible about the morals of homosexuality and how it shouldn't be accepted because the Bible says so. So, again, I ask why those same people don't follow the other moral guidelines very clearly outlined throughout the Bible. The point is that you can't quote the Bible and try to take morals on homosexuality away from it unless you're also prepared to promote the other morals such as stoning adulterers and disobedient children.
-
You just copied and pasted what the other person did and you are almost all wrong.
1. It does not say that, it says they should be punished
2. He did violate her...people go to prison for raping people. Are you an ignorant?
3. It does not say "slavery is fine". The whole chapter of Exodus is condemning slavery.
4. Do you realize back then our culture wasn't as pathetic as it was now? Rarely would anyone lose their virginity out of wedlock. It was a very big deal then. Many people came up to Jesus and asked if they could stone a girl who did this and Jesus replied, "The first one of you who has done no wrong may throw the first stone." None of them were sinless and did not stone the girl.
I didn't copy and paste anything. I'm the same person who asked the same question to someone else earlier in the thread.
1) It says it very clearly:
"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of the town. They shall say to the elders, 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.' Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death..." (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
Not stoning, but carries the same weight:
"For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9)
2) I don't know what your point is. The point is that you can't take moral views from certain passages of the Bible then completely ignore other passages that promote specific moral views. The consequences of rape in this instance are clear: He who rapes a woman is not to be put in prison; he who rapes a woman is to pay her father 50 silver pieces, then must marry the woman (by default, the woman must marry her attacker). Stated very clearly in the Bible...yet we don't follow it. Why?
3) Great...except for:
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)
Notice how they can get a male Hebrew slave to become a permanent slave by keeping his wife and children hostage until he says he wants to become a permanent slave.
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
(Notice, Exodus/NT)
Etc. etc. There are many more...
4) How "pathetic" our culture was is irrelevant. This is the "infallible word of God." Surely it should have universal relevance.
To my knowledge, she was an adulterer, not a woman who simply was not a virgin on her wedding night. An adulterer is very different than someone who has lost their virginity.
1. It is only saying you shouldn't eat fish that don't have scales and fins.
2. It is wool and linen
3. Its not like anybody does this anyways
1) Hence the use of the word "shellfish" ???
2) Hence, "wool-blended clothing" ???
3) Anybody does what? Has intercourse while the woman is on her period? Sure they do... -.-
If you're referring to the fact that people who do this aren't deported...precisely my point.
All in all, the question remains:
Why don't you follow the other moral guidelines clearly laid out everywhere in the Bible, but you feel no problem with quoting the Bible and speaking in opposition to the act of homosexuality and same sex marriage using the Bible as your support? The Bible is "the word of God," doesn't that mean it's all equally as important and should be followed all the same? If it came from God, why would he say to stone adulterers if that's not what he wanted to happen?
-
Let me ask you this. Where in the world do think that our judicial system started from, who originally gave us the list of things that was wrong. Because if it did not come from God then where did it come from.
Which judicial system? Mankind's first judicial system, or the judicial system of the United States?
What you're asking is: Where does human morality come from? Correct?
As a whole, it certainly doesn't come from the Bible or any other holy book if that's what you're implying. If it did, the US wouldn't have any laws based different morals than the Bible (or any other "infallible" holy book) states, and morals worldwide would be much more similar than they currently are. If it was based on the Bible, we would stone adulterers instead of simply frowning upon them. We would stone disobedient children instead of trying to discipline them with rather softer methods. We wouldn't put rape victims in prison, we would make them pay a fine and marry the woman they raped, and make the woman marry her rapist. And so on.
On the topic of the US's judicial system, there clearly hasn't always been judicial systems of this nature. Logical judicial systems based on evidence and fair trial by juries are fairly new developments in the grand scheme of mankind's existence. The judicial systems found in many democracies around the world gradually evolved over time. For centuries, "justice" relied solely on retributive justice, or eye-for-an-eye. It took a long while for people to move out of this phase and develop civilized methods for acquiring justice against criminals and wrongdoers. People didn't just wake up one day and have the brilliant idea of having organized trials based on evidence, testimonies, and judgment from peers...
If we're discussing the very earliest morals from mankind, there are hundreds of books on the subject and it would take hours upon hours to even break the ice on that subject. There are numerous suggestions on how/why morality developed. One of the many is that when mankind lived in very small, secluded villages, it was absolutely mandatory to operate with altruistic motives and help their fellow villagers simply to make it through the night alive. Those who did not operate with these altruistic motives did not receive help from their peers, for obvious reasons. They died of starvation or were killed by wild animals, for instance. Clearly, most people wouldn't want that to happen to them, so most, if not all, were altruistic to their fellow people.
Obviously this is a very short explanation of even that single suggestion...there is plenty of reading available on the subject if you really wish to understand it fully. I don't think you'll be convinced by anything I say, so I won't go on and on unless you really want me to (I have no problem doing so, I just don't feel like writing forever if people aren't interested).
-
I don't know what Bible you're reading from, whatever. The Old Testament is there for us to know what happened and to learn from them, like learn from others and your mistakes. The New Testament applies to us, the present and the future. Nobody's dissecting any thing, we're talking about gay marriage/relationships so I gave info on what it pertained too; not jumping off topic and talking about something that has nothing to do with the issue. And don't we all remember certain versus that we feel we should remember? Don't some of us only take what we want from the Bible and discard the rest like it's irrelevant. Let's just leave it as am a do me and you do you, how about that. By the way I'm not affiliated with any church, when I was younger, I went to all of them. I have no preference, but it seems everyone has a different way of doing the same thing. Don't see how you get different versions from the same Bible. So Good luck to you all and peace out! :wave:
So the morals found in the OT shouldn't be followed in the present world?
Unfortunately, you still have people who want to take this stance, then turn right around and want to quote the OT on issues such as homosexuality. If it is irrelevant to the present world in terms of moral views, then it is irrelevant to moral views. You can't say the morals promoted in the OT are irrelevant to the present, then try to use the OT to form current moral views or support a specific moral stance on something. It doesn't work that way; you can't have your cake and eat it too.
On the subject, however, Jesus clearly states in numerous places in the NT that he did not come to abolish the OT or the "old ways." He confirmed many of the historical accounts of the OT, referred to it as the "word of God," and stated "the scripture cannot be broken." He stated: "Until Heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the law, until all is accomplished."
I'm not jumping off topic. I'm asking how people can use the Bible (the OT specifically) as support for their stance in opposition to homosexuality, but they refuse to carry out or even promote the other moral guidelines in the OT.
If you all read your bibles you would not ask why there are gay people. Why is there hunger?, homeless people?, sickness? and death? Earthquakes?, tornados?,floods?. You all should know the answers to these questions and shame on you if you don't. I'm a young adult I should be getting support for at least having what I believe are moral values, for believing in God, and trusting in the Word. Most teens and young adults have a don't care attitude and get into situations they get into because of it. I feel sorry for our future generation if what we all have is a everybody do what you want attitude. :(
I have read it. More than once. Along with Biblical scholarly works from both Christians and non-Christians. Honestly, I'm going to have to argue that's more than the vast majority of Christians have done with THEIR book.
May I ask what the answer is to why there are "homeless people, sickness," etc.? The Bible clearly states and implies that the Christian God is omniscient (all knowledgeable) and that he carries out predestination/determinism. If your answer is going to be "free will" (which it likely is), then you open a new issue.
Why do you deserve some kind of special treatment because you're a Christian or believe in God? What makes that something worthy of being put on a pedestal? Do you enjoy being lumped into an organization responsible for thousands upon thousands of deaths, suppression of knowledge and progress, and oppression of many groups over centuries, among other things? Why does it matter if you "trust the word?" You should get special credit for believing "the word" of a 2000 year old book written by uneducated, ignorant individuals and edited by the hands of thousands of people with agendas over thousands of years?
Your spiritual beliefs deserve no more extra respect or credit than your favorite sports team or favorite food dish. Drop the ego infesting your religion.
-
Why can't we just allow others to be happy? no one asked you to turn gay, they just want to have rights like everyone else. :thumbsup:
-
Intended for liljp617:
(On the stance that the bible contradicts itself.)
In my bible there is both an old testament and a new testament. The old testament in name referring to the old covenant made between the Lord and the people or in other words the law of Moses. The new testament refers to the new covenant established when Christ reined on the earth or the law of Christ. As far as I can tell you are only including the old testament in your judgments and not any of the new testament. You have been referring to the law of Moses, let me explain why this is not valid.
The higher law (the law of Christ) was given to Moses by the Lord before the ‘law of Moses’ was given. The reason for the law of Moses was because the people would not heed the higher law and therefore needed a stricter law. Israel rebelled and manifest such gross unworthiness that their God took from them the power whereby they could have become a kingdom of priests and of kings and gave them instead a lesser law, a law of carnal commandments, a preparatory gospel, a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ and the fullness of his gospel. He gave them instead the law of Moses. The standards behind both laws are the same, God still expects the same thing from us whether it be under the law of Moses or the law of Christ. If we follow the law of Christ we will also be following the law of Moses.
The particular things spoken of in the scriptures as the law of Moses were the ordinances and performances that were “added because of transgressions.” (Gal. 3:19)
They were “the divers washings and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.” (Heb. 9:10)
They were “the law of commandments contained in ordinances.” (Eph. 2:15)
Israel was given “a very strict law of performances and of ordinances, a law which they were to observe strictly from day to day, to keep them in remembrance of God and their duty towards him.” The law of Moses was given to point the attention of the people forward to Christ and that all things in it “were types of things to come.” For instance in the old testament the first born lamb without blemish was sacrificed as a testament of repentance, whereas the new testament does away with that tradition and teaches that Christ is the sacrifice and we take bread and wine to symbolize our acceptance of that sacrifice.
Paul said “The law (of Moses) was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ.” (Gal. 3:24)
It was “the law of carnal commandments”(Heb 7:16) because it was given to teach those belonging to the chosen race to bridle their passions, to overcome the lusts of the flesh to triumph over carnal things, and to advance to the place where the Spirit of the Lord could have full flow in their hearts.
Let me illustrate again. In one of your examples you stated that the bible teaches it is okay to stone.
In the story of the woman taken in adultery. The Pharisees (religious leaders who still followed the law of Moses) brought a woman to Christ and said “Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?” Christ replied “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” (St. John 8:4-7) Now there is no person in the entire history of the world who has not sinned in some small way except Christ himself. Therefore none of them could say they had not sinned and therefore could not cast the first stone. The woman had sinned and been brought before the Lord yet she was not stoned. Christ is teaching us a higher law and it is not okay to stone people for their sins because we are not without sin. Therefore it is only his place to judge someone for a sin because he is the only without sins. Christ is the only one who can ‘cast a stone.’
On the stance of homosexuality. Gen 19:5 refers to Sodom. Later in the same chapter it speaks of the city being destroyed.
“With the male you shall not lie as one lies with the woman.” (Lev 18:22)
“And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (Rom. 1:27)
It also says eating seafood is an abomination.
It also says that if a man is caught raping a woman, he must pay 50 silver pieces to her father then marry the woman because he violated her.
It also okays slavery.
As for the items listed above. You may be correct ‘we Christians’ may not know our bible. Please give me references to where you found this information in our bible so that I may be ‘better educated.’ Best regards. :)
-
And don't we all remember certain versus that we feel we should remember? Don't some of us only take what we want from the Bible and discard the rest like it's irrelevant.
I feel sorry for our future generation if what we all have is a everybody do what you want attitude
Again, not trying to sound rude, but how can you feel sorry for the current and future generations for their do-what-you-want attitude... yet say that you will pick which parts of the Bible you wish to follow (discarding the rest)? Does that not make you a part of the problem that you speak of?
Perhaps that in itself is the biggest reason why religious beliefs should never be used to create/defend laws. The parts you wish to follow, somebody else may want to discard... yet the parts that others wish to follow, you have discarded.
On the stance of homosexuality. Gen 19:5 refers to Sodom. Later in the same chapter it speaks of the city being destroyed.
But if Sodom was destroyed because of homosexuality, then what does this passage mean:
"Luke 10:10-12"
But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 'Even the dust of your town that sticks to our feet we wipe off against you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God is near.' I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.
As for the items listed above. You may be correct ‘we Christians’ may not know our bible. Please give me references to where you found this information in our bible so that I may be ‘better educated.’ Best regards. :)
Here are a few:
"Leviticus 19:27"
Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.
"Leviticus 19:19"
Keep my decrees.
Do not mate different kinds of animals.
Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.
Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
"Leviticus 15"
The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'When any man has a bodily discharge, the discharge is unclean. Whether it continues flowing from his body or is blocked, it will make him unclean. This is how his discharge will bring about uncleanness:
" 'Any bed the man with a discharge lies on will be unclean, and anything he sits on will be unclean. Anyone who touches his bed must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whoever sits on anything that the man with a discharge sat on must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'Whoever touches the man who has a discharge must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'If the man with the discharge spits on someone who is clean, that person must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'Everything the man sits on when riding will be unclean, and whoever touches any of the things that were under him will be unclean till evening; whoever picks up those things must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'Anyone the man with a discharge touches without rinsing his hands with water must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'A clay pot that the man touches must be broken, and any wooden article is to be rinsed with water.
" 'When a man is cleansed from his discharge, he is to count off seven days for his ceremonial cleansing; he must wash his clothes and bathe himself with fresh water, and he will be clean. On the eighth day he must take two doves or two young pigeons and come before the LORD to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting and give them to the priest. The priest is to sacrifice them, the one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement before the LORD for the man because of his discharge.
" 'When a man has an emission of semen, he must bathe his whole body with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Any clothing or leather that has semen on it must be washed with water, and it will be unclean till evening. When a man lies with a woman and there is an emission of semen, both must bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening.
" 'When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening.
" 'Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. Whoever touches her bed must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whoever touches anything she sits on must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, he will be unclean till evening.
" 'If a man lies with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean.
" 'When a woman has a discharge of blood for many days at a time other than her monthly period or has a discharge that continues beyond her period, she will be unclean as long as she has the discharge, just as in the days of her period. Any bed she lies on while her discharge continues will be unclean, as is her bed during her monthly period, and anything she sits on will be unclean, as during her period. Whoever touches them will be unclean; he must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the LORD for the uncleanness of her discharge.
" 'You must keep the Israelites separate from things that make them unclean, so they will not die in their uncleanness for defiling my dwelling place, which is among them.' "
These are the regulations for a man with a discharge, for anyone made unclean by an emission of semen, for a woman in her monthly period, for a man or a woman with a discharge, and for a man who lies with a woman who is ceremonially unclean.
"Leviticus 11"
The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, "Say to the Israelites: 'Of all the animals that live on land, these are the ones you may eat: You may eat any animal that has a split hoof completely divided and that chews the cud.
" 'There are some that only chew the cud or only have a split hoof, but you must not eat them. The camel, though it chews the cud, does not have a split hoof; it is ceremonially unclean for you. The coney, though it chews the cud, does not have a split hoof; it is unclean for you. The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a split hoof; it is unclean for you. And the pig, though it has a split hoof completely divided, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you.
" 'Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams, you may eat any that have fins and scales. But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales-whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water-you are to detest. And since you are to detest them, you must not eat their meat and you must detest their carcasses. Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be detestable to you.
" 'These are the birds you are to detest and not eat because they are detestable: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.
" 'All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest.
" 'You will make yourselves unclean by these; whoever touches their carcasses will be unclean till evening. Whoever picks up one of their carcasses must wash his clothes, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'Every animal that has a split hoof not completely divided or that does not chew the cud is unclean for you; whoever touches the carcass of any of them will be unclean. Of all the animals that walk on all fours, those that walk on their paws are unclean for you; whoever touches their carcasses will be unclean till evening. Anyone who picks up their carcasses must wash his clothes, and he will be unclean till evening. They are unclean for you.
" 'Of the animals that move about on the ground, these are unclean for you: the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon. Of all those that move along the ground, these are unclean for you. Whoever touches them when they are dead will be unclean till evening. When one of them dies and falls on something, that article, whatever its use, will be unclean, whether it is made of wood, cloth, hide or sackcloth. Put it in water; it will be unclean till evening, and then it will be clean. If one of them falls into a clay pot, everything in it will be unclean, and you must break the pot. Any food that could be eaten but has water on it from such a pot is unclean, and any liquid that could be drunk from it is unclean. Anything that one of their carcasses falls on becomes unclean; an oven or cooking pot must be broken up. They are unclean, and you are to regard them as unclean. A spring, however, or a cistern for collecting water remains clean, but anyone who touches one of these carcasses is unclean. If a carcass falls on any seeds that are to be planted, they remain clean. But if water has been put on the seed and a carcass falls on it, it is unclean for you.
" 'If an animal that you are allowed to eat dies, anyone who touches the carcass will be unclean till evening. Anyone who eats some of the carcass must wash his clothes, and he will be unclean till evening. Anyone who picks up the carcass must wash his clothes, and he will be unclean till evening.
" 'Every creature that moves about on the ground is detestable; it is not to be eaten. You are not to eat any creature that moves about on the ground, whether it moves on its belly or walks on all fours or on many feet; it is detestable. Do not defile yourselves by any of these creatures. Do not make yourselves unclean by means of them or be made unclean by them. I am the LORD your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy. Do not make yourselves unclean by any creature that moves about on the ground. I am the LORD who brought you up out of Egypt to be your God; therefore be holy, because I am holy.
" 'These are the regulations concerning animals, birds, every living thing that moves in the water and every creature that moves about on the ground. You must distinguish between the unclean and the clean, between living creatures that may be eaten and those that may not be eaten.' "
Now, you mentioned:
“And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (Rom. 1:27)
So let's look at the previous passages:
"Romans 1:24-27"
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
Inflamed with lust. That is their sin.
Job 31:11-12
For lust is a shameful sin, a crime that should be punished. It is a devastating fire that destroys to hell. It would wipe out everything I own.
With these passages in mind, I have to ponder the notion that it is not-so-much the fact that they are sleeping within the same gender... but that they are sleeping around at all that they are sinners.
"1 Corinthians 6:12-18"
"Everything is permissible for me"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"—but I will not be mastered by anything. "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"—but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh." But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit.
Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.
It very well could mean that the lust itself is a sin, but that since it is for the same gender, it is made a "worse" sin. The ambiguity of translation is such that two people could read the same passage and pull several meanings to it. The problem is not-so-much in the translation... but that everytime a new translation comes out, words and phrases are manipulated and changed to match the translators feelings and possible agenda. After all, at the time of these happenings and original scriptures - there was no word or identity for homosexuality and homosexual relations. Even the word sodomite did not exist until after Christ was already gone from this world.
Even in itself, homosexual is not even Latin-based. It is a combination of Greek and Latin.
Beyond the mistranslations and ambiguity of verbage and meaning, this passage gives me this feeling that we are to love one another (no matter the gender) because it is divine will.
"1 John 4:7-12"
Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.
Also:
"1 Corinthians 13:4-8"
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails.
So who are we to say that it is wrong for two men to love each other? Who are we to say that it is wrong for two females to truly be in love?
So again, I say: If my current husband was born with female anatomy, I would love him/her no less.
-
whoa! People, chill out! the question was about "gay marriages"....
-
I stand by gay marriage 100%. Who are we as individuals to control what another person does? People are referring to the BIBLE, give me a break. The bible is man made. Another human wrote it. I go by the bible the same way I go by Dr. Suess's children books. It is just words on paper. Everyone is so concerned about the little things like gay marriage that they are missing the big things. Rapist, Murderers, Child Molesters, and things that affect everyone. I say more people should be concerned about smokers than gay marriage.
At least smoking is slowly killing everyone unlike gay marriage.
-
whoa! People, chill out! the question was about "gay marriages"....
I know. ;D I just really enjoy debating.
-
Intended for liljp617:
(On the stance that the bible contradicts itself.)
In my bible there is both an old testament and a new testament. The old testament in name referring to the old covenant made between the Lord and the people or in other words the law of Moses. The new testament refers to the new covenant established when Christ reined on the earth or the law of Christ. As far as I can tell you are only including the old testament in your judgments and not any of the new testament. You have been referring to the law of Moses, let me explain why this is not valid.
The higher law (the law of Christ) was given to Moses by the Lord before the ‘law of Moses’ was given. The reason for the law of Moses was because the people would not heed the higher law and therefore needed a stricter law. Israel rebelled and manifest such gross unworthiness that their God took from them the power whereby they could have become a kingdom of priests and of kings and gave them instead a lesser law, a law of carnal commandments, a preparatory gospel, a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ and the fullness of his gospel. He gave them instead the law of Moses. The standards behind both laws are the same, God still expects the same thing from us whether it be under the law of Moses or the law of Christ. If we follow the law of Christ we will also be following the law of Moses.
The particular things spoken of in the scriptures as the law of Moses were the ordinances and performances that were “added because of transgressions.” (Gal. 3:19)
They were “the divers washings and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.” (Heb. 9:10)
They were “the law of commandments contained in ordinances.” (Eph. 2:15)
Israel was given “a very strict law of performances and of ordinances, a law which they were to observe strictly from day to day, to keep them in remembrance of God and their duty towards him.” The law of Moses was given to point the attention of the people forward to Christ and that all things in it “were types of things to come.” For instance in the old testament the first born lamb without blemish was sacrificed as a testament of repentance, whereas the new testament does away with that tradition and teaches that Christ is the sacrifice and we take bread and wine to symbolize our acceptance of that sacrifice.
Paul said “The law (of Moses) was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ.” (Gal. 3:24)
It was “the law of carnal commandments”(Heb 7:16) because it was given to teach those belonging to the chosen race to bridle their passions, to overcome the lusts of the flesh to triumph over carnal things, and to advance to the place where the Spirit of the Lord could have full flow in their hearts.
Let me illustrate again. In one of your examples you stated that the bible teaches it is okay to stone.
In the story of the woman taken in adultery. The Pharisees (religious leaders who still followed the law of Moses) brought a woman to Christ and said “Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?” Christ replied “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” (St. John 8:4-7) Now there is no person in the entire history of the world who has not sinned in some small way except Christ himself. Therefore none of them could say they had not sinned and therefore could not cast the first stone. The woman had sinned and been brought before the Lord yet she was not stoned. Christ is teaching us a higher law and it is not okay to stone people for their sins because we are not without sin. Therefore it is only his place to judge someone for a sin because he is the only without sins. Christ is the only one who can ‘cast a stone.’
The Bible doesn't just contradict itself between the OT and NT. It contradicts itself all over the place in each individual testament. There aren't only blatantly immoral things in the OT, there are blatantly immoral things in the NT.
I predominantly bring up the OT to prove my point against people using the OT as support for their stance against homosexuality.
On another note, what do you make of the numerous times Jesus himself is quoted as saying and implying that he did not come to abolish the old ways at all, that the OT is the "infallible word of God" and should be followed as such, etc.?
I have to disagree that the standards behind both Covenants are the same. How could they be? Using just your example (and there are dozens of others I could use), one says to stone adulterers, the other implies not to.
On the stance of homosexuality. Gen 19:5 refers to Sodom. Later in the same chapter it speaks of the city being destroyed.
“With the male you shall not lie as one lies with the woman.” (Lev 18:22)
“And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (Rom. 1:27)
What I took away from your post is that the Old Covenant shouldn't be followed in any literal sense because Jesus brought a New Covenant, a higher law than in the past. Correct?
Again, how does one take this stance on the Old Covenant and OT, then immediately turn around and start quoting the Old Covenant and OT in a literal sense to support a stance against homosexuality? I've been asking this question for three pages. It doesn't seem like a hard question to me.
If Jesus brought a higher law than the Old Covenant, and this higher law is the one to be followed, then application of the OT in any literal sense to form any moral view to the present day is illegitimate. Again, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If the Old Covenant is lesser than the New Covenant, and we should follow the New Covenant, you can't use the Old Covenant as support for any moral stance on homosexuality (or anything else).
This has been my point for the past three pages.
As for the items listed above. You may be correct ‘we Christians’ may not know our bible. Please give me references to where you found this information in our bible so that I may be ‘better educated.’ Best regards. :)
On the subject of not eating shellfish:
Leviticus 11:9-12
These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
On the subject of a rapist having to marry the victim:
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
As for slavery:
Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.
Exodus 21:2-6 NLT (Notice New Testament)
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever.
Exodus 21:20-21 NAB (Notice New Testament)
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.
There are more, but I won't bore you.
But again, much of this is all really beside the point. The point is that people want to use the OT to support their stance against homosexuality (and same sex marriage in this case). But when questioned by others and shown the other heinous, brutal moral views throughout the Bible, they want to claim the OT is no longer relevant...yet they still want to uphold it only to support their stance against homosexuality. It can't and doesn't work that way.
-
In response to LittleDebbieG:
(On the topic of Christian beliefs)
I am not sure you read my whole post. As you reiterated what was said in it. Genesis through Deuteronomy states the old law, of which Exodus through Deuteronomy is the law as put forth by Moses. The many quotes posted were based in Leviticus, which is the stricter law of Moses. In the New Testament Christ teaches that that the law of Moses is put behind us and we are given a new law by which we are to be judged. “A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” (Heb 8:13) “And for this cause he (Christ) is the mediator of the new testament” (Heb. 9:15) Therefore these verses in Leviticus show just how strict the law had to be in this time, because these people would not hearken to the word of the Lord. However this law was done away with by the Lord himself so these laws do not apply to us today. Are there any references to where these laws are reinstated in the new law (the current law)?
As for Luke 10: 10-12 Christ is instructing his disciples to go and teach the gospel to all nations and people. Christ sent these people out to teach so therefore they represented Christ. Any man who rejects the servants or prophets of God, rejects God himself. “But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city.” Christ obviously views the outright rejection of God especially after being taught, to be a worse sin then even adultery and other sex immorality.
It was mentioned that the bible itself may not have been translated 100% correctly and this is therefore the reason of so many different interpretations of the doctrines therein. In this I agree, (I read from the King James Version) , it is known that prophets or men of God did not translate this version of the bible from Hebrew to English. They were men of the world who knew much of the Hebrew language and were hired by King James to translate these records into his language so he could study its contents for himself instead of taking the religious leaders word for everything they taught. We do not have a direct translation but a translation of men. If we could read it in Hebrew I’m sure we would find many topics much easier to understand.
You quoted Romans 1:24-27. Your bible reads different from mine although they read similar. The KJV of this scripture reads:
“Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”
Verses 22-23 also reads like this, “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.”
“The glory of the incorruptible God” as I take it in these verses is referring to the blessing given to mankind to be able to procreate. If you believe they are defiling this privilege by something other then homosexuality, please specify.
I agree with you on the topic of lust. Lust always prefaces adultery or any other sex immorality. Therefore it is the first sin, however not the only sin. “Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath commited adultery with her already in his heart.” (Matt 5:28) The Lord teaches here that it is not good enough to simply not commit adultery or other sex immorality, we need to cleanse ourselves completely in order to be free of the sin, this includes our mind, so therefore lusting is also a sex offense before God.
As for Job 31:11-12 the KJV reads quite differently. Although you may be right in the translation of it. KJV reads: “For this is an heinous crime; yea, it is an iniquity to be punished by the judges. For it is a fire that consumeth to destruction, and would root out all mine increase.”
From the verses before this I can see why these verses are interpreted as referring to lust. I do not disagree with you, lust is the sin that prefaces all other sex immoralities, therefore it is a sin to avoid or condone, and certainly is the “fire that consumeth to destruction” for it leads to some of the most grievous sins known to mankind.
Concerning 1 Corinthians 6:12-18 the KJV again reads differently. It reads:
“All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient; all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.
And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.
Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
What? Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? For two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.”
Above is the way the KJV initially read. The prophet of this dispensation includes a revision in the footnotes of the bible because verse 12 was not initially translated correctly. My religion reads it thus, “All these things are not lawful unto me, and all these things are not expedient. All things are not lawful for me, therefore I will not be brought under the power of any.”
The Lord views our bodies as sacred and are to only be used for the Lords purposes, not fornication. “For two…shall be one flesh.” Therefore married with one mind and one purpose. In the same breath it says, “But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.” Therefore we are to be one in mind and purpose with our spouse as well as one in mind and purpose with the Lord. The Lord describes the people as the bride and himself as the bridegroom and when we forsake all else and follow him he symbolically refers to the union as a ‘marriage.’ Both instances are referring to marriage, the first in a physical sense and the second in a spiritual sense.
As for the ‘love one another’, I agree with this statement, however with the retranslation I do not see how it is relevant to this passage.
As relating to 1st John 4:7-12. We again see a difference in texts. KJV reads:
“Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.
No man hath seen God at any time (modern revelation inserts ‘except them who believe’). If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.”
There are more types of love then those that are the base of sexual intercourse. For instance if you are a parent and say you love your child. It refers to a different kind of love then the love you may have for your significant other. The Latin base of the word love means ‘to please’ and the Old English is ‘dear.’ (Merriam Webster Dictionary) So I guess I am wondering where you get the back up that the Lord is referring to sexual love in this passage.
I too believe we are to love one another, for we are all children of God. Therefore we are all brothers and sisters and should love all as we do our siblings, of whom we forgive the many wrong acts because we love them unconditionally. We may not approve of the way our siblings offend us, but we love them anyway. To all a good day. May we show those we most care about that we truly love them today.
-
What I took away from your post is that the Old Covenant shouldn't be followed in any literal sense because Jesus brought a New Covenant, a higher law than in the past. Correct?
If Jesus brought a higher law than the Old Covenant, and this higher law is the one to be followed, then application of the OT in any literal sense to form any moral view to the present day is illegitimate. Again, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If the Old Covenant is lesser than the New Covenant, and we should follow the New Covenant, you can't use the Old Covenant as support for any moral stance on homosexuality (or anything else).
For the sake of your argument lets pretend I don't believe in the old testament (which is not true). However we will do this for the sake of your stance. I gave examples from the new testament as well that refer to the same issue. Look through those and then I would like to know if you think I am still not including the new testament in my stance on the topic, but am merely getting the foundation of my stance from a part of the bible that is 'outdated.'
On another note, what do you make of the numerous times Jesus himself is quoted as saying and implying that he did not come to abolish the old ways at all, that the OT is the "infallible word of God" and should be followed as such, etc.?
Please show me what your are referring to with this statement.
-
The Old Testament is there for us to know what happened and to learn from it,the lessons to be learned; like learn from others and their mistakes. I never said it was irrelevant. (never) "People are quoting random stuff from the Bible about the morals of homosexuality and how it shouldn't be accepted because the Bible says so. So, again, I ask why those same people don't follow the other moral guidelines very clearly utlined throughout the Bible". I gave random quotes to support my stance. You must know me from some where to say I don't follow the other moral teaching/rules from the Bible. "So the morals found in the OT shouldn't be followed in the present world?" Again I never said that"."I'm asking how people can use the Bible (the OT specifically) as support for their stance in opposition to homosexuality, but they refuse to carry out or even promote the other moral guidelines in the OT" Again you all must know me from some where to tell what I do and don't do (don't insult me)
"Why do you deserve some kind of special treatment because you're a Christian or believe in God? What makes that something worthy of being put on a pedestal? Do you enjoy being lumped into an organization responsible for thousands upon thousands of deaths, suppression of knowledge and progress, and oppression of many groups over centuries, among other things? Why does it matter if you "trust the word?" You should get special credit for believing "the word" of a 2000 year old book written by uneducated, ignorant individuals and edited by the hands of thousands of people with agendas over thousands of years?"
You lost me, I have no clue what you are talking about, nobody's taking claim or resposibility for anything, and certainly no one's looking for special treatment I was simply refering to the signs of times you all would have picked up on it with my series of such questions.
"Drop the ego infesting your religion" - Again I am not affilated with a religion and I am certainly not egotistical (friends and family can vouch for that).
"Again, not trying to sound rude, but how can you feel sorry for the current and future generations for their do-what-you-want attitude... yet say that you will pick which parts of the Bible you wish to follow (discarding the rest)? Does that not make you a part of the problem that you speak of?"
I do not do that and I did not say that, I was being sacastic and refering to religious people I met and had these experiences with.
Perhaps that in itself is the biggest reason why religious beliefs should never be used to create/defend laws. The parts you wish to follow, somebody else may want to discard... yet the parts that others wish to follow, you have discarded.
Again I have discarded nothing, what is the topic, Gay marriage/relationship. When we have a discussion of Sodom and Gomorrah, or What are the Commandments etc. I will gladly give the scriptures to support them.
Again you all don't know me so don't accuse me of things I do not do? If you do not understand what I am trying to say; then say that, but don't put words into my mouth or change up the meaning of what I am trying to say.
-
For the sake of your argument lets pretend I don't believe in the old testament (which is not true). However we will do this for the sake of your stance. I gave examples from the new testament as well that refer to the same issue. Look through those and then I would like to know if you think I am still not including the new testament in my stance on the topic, but am merely getting the foundation of my stance from a part of the bible that is 'outdated.'
I also gave a few examples from the NT, specifically one's confirming slavery is not immoral (and I could have given other examples of blatantly immoral things in the NT). I'm pretty certain you don't promote slavery or accept it or what the Bible has to say about it. Why? Why do you go against the "word of God" on that issue, but still feel no problem taking your stance on homosexuality from this exact same book?
Please show me what your are referring to with this statement.
Jesus believed that the Old Testament was divinely inspired, the veritable Word of God. He said, "The Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35). He referred to Scripture as "the commandment of God" (Matthew 15:3) and as the "Word of God" (Matthew 15:6). He also indicated that it was indestructible: "Until Heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the law, until all is accomplished" (Matthew 5:18). Clearly this is very contradictory to some of the things you've posted on the issue of Jesus bringing the New Covenant to erase the Old.
When dealing with the people of His day, whether it was with the disciples or religious rulers, Jesus constantly referred to the Old Testament: "Have you not read that which was spoken to you by God?" (Matthew 22:31); "Yea; and have you never read, 'Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babes thou hast prepared praise for thyself'?" (Matthew 21:16, citing Psalm 8:2); and "Have you not read what David did?" (Matthew 12:3). Examples could be multiplied to demonstrate that Jesus was conversant with the Old Testament and its content. He quoted from it often and He trusted it totally.
If he came to replace it with a more rational system of morals, why didn't he consistently condemn the moral system the OT puts forth?
-
The Old Testament is there for us to know what happened and to learn from it,the lessons to be learned; like learn from others and their mistakes. I never said it was irrelevant. (never) "People are quoting random stuff from the Bible about the morals of homosexuality and how it shouldn't be accepted because the Bible says so. So, again, I ask why those same people don't follow the other moral guidelines very clearly utlined throughout the Bible". I gave random quotes to support my stance. You must know me from some where to say I don't follow the other moral teaching/rules from the Bible. "So the morals found in the OT shouldn't be followed in the present world?" Again I never said that"."I'm asking how people can use the Bible (the OT specifically) as support for their stance in opposition to homosexuality, but they refuse to carry out or even promote the other moral guidelines in the OT" Again you all must know me from some where to tell what I do and don't do (don't insult me)
The OT is there for us to learn from, not take literal moral views away from?
I don't have to know you to assume you don't take part in or promote things like stoning people, enslaving people, forcing rape victims to marry their rapist, etc. If you do actually do these things, we have bigger problems. But I'm about as certain as possible that you don't. It doesn't require I know you to make such an assumption.
And seeing as how you most likely don't do those things, you're discarding moral views promoted by "the word of God." So I ask, again, why don't you uphold or even promote moral views found in the OT on issues such as adultery, rape, slavery, etc., but do uphold or promote moral views found in the OT on issues like homosexuality?
"Why do you deserve some kind of special treatment because you're a Christian or believe in God? What makes that something worthy of being put on a pedestal? Do you enjoy being lumped into an organization responsible for thousands upon thousands of deaths, suppression of knowledge and progress, and oppression of many groups over centuries, among other things? Why does it matter if you "trust the word?" You should get special credit for believing "the word" of a 2000 year old book written by uneducated, ignorant individuals and edited by the hands of thousands of people with agendas over thousands of years?"
You lost me, I have no clue what you are talking about, nobody's taking claim or resposibility for anything, and certainly no one's looking for special treatment I was simply refering to the signs of times you all would have picked up on it with my series of such questions.
You stated very clearly:
I'm a young adult I should be getting support for at least having what I believe are moral values, for believing in God, and trusting in the Word. Most teens and young adults have a don't care attitude and get into situations they get into because of it.
Why should you get support for believing in God or believing in the Bible? You put forth the idea that, because most teens and young adults have moved away from religion (which is false by the way based on current polls and studies), you should get some kind of special support for upholding these beliefs. Why do you deserve such treatment? Why shouldn't your beliefs be held under just as much scrutiny as your political beliefs, favorite sports team, favorite shoes, etc.? Why do you suppose some type of theistic belief is inherently special or good?
The rest of your post is too difficult to respond to and would take too long. It would be much easier if you didn't quote somebody, then write your reply in the middle of their post. There are quote tags for a reason and that's to keep things organized throughout a discussion so people don't have to sift through everything to find your reply.
-
i could care less what others do in their own bed so long as it isnt illegal
-
You all are grown folks with enough common sense, and knowledge and have the resources to back you up to make right and moral choices.
Like I said previously, which stated above. If we are learning from the OT I would think that what we learn we would take with us and not make the same miistakes,
having sound judgement and having the knowledge of what's right and wrong. Stoning People = Murder: thou shall not commit murder.
Enslaving People = they receiving cruel and unusual punishments, Rape = Held captive,
with inflection of pain and agony: Love thy neighbor, and treat others the way you would want to be treated. Slavery and Rape doesn't show actions of love and I don't
think any of you would like to be enslaved and raped after raping and enslaving others(treat others the same as you expect to be treated).
-
WHO CARES!!!! lol Only worry about if "YOU" are in the situation :icon_rr: :bootyshake:
-
And seeing as how you most likely don't do those things, you're discarding moral views promoted by "the word of God." So I ask, again, why don't you uphold or even promote moral views found in the OT on issues such as adultery, rape, slavery, etc., but do uphold or promote moral views found in the OT on issues like homosexuality?
I wasn't aware that we were doing a promotion. I thought we were all having a discussion onn gay marriage and relationships only and what our views are on the subject
being discussed.
Why should you get support for believing in God or believing in the Bible? You put forth the idea that, because most teens and young adults have moved away from religion (which is false by the way based on current polls and studies), you should get some kind of special support for upholding these beliefs. Why do you deserve such treatment? Why shouldn't your beliefs be held under just as much scrutiny as your political beliefs, favorite sports team, favorite shoes, etc.? Why do you suppose some type of theistic belief is inherently special or good?
Like I said before I'm not asking for any speacial treatment, but any responsible adult with some christian upbringing and proper home training like the elderly people would say;
would support a young person on that path of knowledge and truth.
Unless of course you're an atheist. Had a friend who was atheist the relationship didn't last; she was trying to get us believers to believe that God didn't exist. Sparked a big
debate in class.
And what studies do you refer too claiming that such things are false?
I have no problem being under scrutiny, I have no political beliefs, I have no favorite sports team; I enjoy playing all sports and I have no favorite shoes, they're just shoes. :)
-
Wow. There is some serious discussion going on in this thread. Just to throw in my 2cents. It doesn't take a genius to know that READING THE BIBLE does not equate knowing EVERYTHING. I support Gay Marriage and I think a God who is LOVE would do the same.
End of rant. :wave:
-
And seeing as how you most likely don't do those things, you're discarding moral views promoted by "the word of God." So I ask, again, why don't you uphold or even promote moral views found in the OT on issues such as adultery, rape, slavery, etc., but do uphold or promote moral views found in the OT on issues like homosexuality?
I wasn't aware that we were doing a promotion. I thought we were all having a discussion onn gay marriage and relationships only and what our views are on the subject
being discussed.
Why should you get support for believing in God or believing in the Bible? You put forth the idea that, because most teens and young adults have moved away from religion (which is false by the way based on current polls and studies), you should get some kind of special support for upholding these beliefs. Why do you deserve such treatment? Why shouldn't your beliefs be held under just as much scrutiny as your political beliefs, favorite sports team, favorite shoes, etc.? Why do you suppose some type of theistic belief is inherently special or good?
Like I said before I'm not asking for any speacial treatment, but any responsible adult with some christian upbringing and proper home training like the elderly people would say;
would support a young person on that path of knowledge and truth.
Unless of course you're an atheist. Had a friend who was atheist the relationship didn't last; she was trying to get us believers to believe that God didn't exist. Sparked a big
debate in class.
And what studies do you refer too claiming that such things are false?
I have no problem being under scrutiny, I have no political beliefs, I have no favorite sports team; I enjoy playing all sports and I have no favorite shoes, they're just shoes. :)
An entire post of strawman arguments and red herring fallacies :-
Again, you find some magical way to avoid the question. How can you pull one word out of a clear question and make some random comment without paying any attention to the substance of the question? That's some talent right there.
Let's recap: I've asked three people this question, none have answered. Two refuse to answer, one blatantly jumps around the question every time. Interesting.
Any person of any beliefs different from your own wouldn't go out of their way to support what you believe to be "the truth." There are plenty of people besides atheists who would raise the same concern that I did.
And what a crazy girl trying to discuss the idea that God might not exist. How dare she bring up such a notion and try to get other people to see her point. Religious people NEVER do that!
-
Wow. This post is pretty deep. I definitely believe in gay marriage. My mother is gay and has been with her partner for over 12 years. Also, my friend's aunt is gay and has been with her partner for almost 50 years. I think that's great. No harm done.
-
I worry about myself and my soul, and let God worry about others selves and souls. If God decides that that loving another person because they are the same sex is worthy enough to send another person to hell, than that's up to God to decide and not me. Seems a bit harsh to throw people in hell for that, but that's my opinion. Frankly I don't know Gods mind so I don't know if he is that harsh.
-
absolutely agree. My God is a loving God... don't know who all the haters are looking up to? I'll say it again - you don't have to like or agree with how other people live their lives, just - LIVE and let LIVE! You can go on hating and spend your time and energy doing so but, you have no right to impose your views on others or make them miserable. You so completely believe that your God is one of judgement, well then, leave the judging up to him!
-
I worry about myself and my soul, and let God worry about others selves and souls. If God decides that that loving another person because they are the same sex is worthy enough to send another person to hell, than that's up to God to decide and not me. Seems a bit harsh to throw people in hell for that, but that's my opinion. Frankly I don't know Gods mind so I don't know if he is that harsh.
Well he does have, at the very least, a six figure murder/death toll.
-
I think that cah5525 said it best! Let God be the judge and jury! Who are we to pick apart and evaluate others choices in how they choose to live THEIR lives!? :thumbsup:
-
gay marriage?? thats so gay :bootyshake:
-
Does anyone else think that this topic has ran it's course and has crossed over to boring? :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead:
-
there is no way someone is going to convince a gay person , a thief , a murderer , or even a straight person that is an adulterer, show them their wrong ,because they will find everything /argument to say that what they are doing is right.
why because the book (the bible) that has been here for thousand of years , that we actually live by but dont realize is not believed by many. (bible actually shows all these are wrong)
so this leaves us with the scientific part of things...................... and even this shows that it is wrong . you dont even have to know the deep biological aspect of things just the surface. it goes beyond the laws of nature ...has said before.
but to back up the argument of the strong sexual connection between the same sex, it is believed that there is a chemical imbalance in these individuals,so it not entirely their fault.
-
there is no way someone is going to convince a gay person , a thief , a murderer , or even a straight person that is an adulterer, show them their wrong ,because they will find everything /argument to say that what they are doing is right.
Please, never again say anything on the topic if you're going to equate homosexuality with murder, stealing, or any other capital offense. That's flat out ridiculous and if your neurons were moving, you'd realize that.
why because the book (the bible) that has been here for thousand of years , that we actually live by but dont realize is not believed by many. (bible actually shows all these are wrong)
There are 4.6 billion people in the world who do not uphold your book, obviously do not live by your book, do not care about your book, and certainly do not believe in your book. Over 2/3 of the world does not care about your book.
so this leaves us with the scientific part of things...................... and even this shows that it is wrong . you dont even have to know the deep biological aspect of things just the surface. it goes beyond the laws of nature ...has said before.
Practice of homosexuality has been documented in nature in 1,500 species, ranging from invertebrates to apes.
but to back up the argument of the strong sexual connection between the same sex, it is believed that there is a chemical imbalance in these individuals,so it not entirely their fault.
I have a hard time taking anything you say on anything related to science seriously given the blatant lack of research and obvious lack of critical thought on the subject.
-
absolutely agree. My God is a loving God... don't know who all the haters are looking up to? I'll say it again - you don't have to like or agree with how other people live their lives, just - LIVE and let LIVE! You can go on hating and spend your time and energy doing so but, you have no right to impose your views on others or make them miserable. You so completely believe that your God is one of judgement, well then, leave the judging up to him!
A round of applause for you.
If we could read it in Hebrew I’m sure we would find many topics much easier to understand.
I can actually say that I have. T'was raised a Cashew (Catholic mother, Jewish Father).
The version I am more apt to quote is the New International Version. I've also read a study done on the Greek Version (which many later translations come from) of the Bible in terms of homosexuality. It was quite interesting.
But back to topic:
The Bible (and religion, in general) cannot be used as reasoning for laws. So, aside from religious reasons, is there really any reason why homosexuals cannot be as miserable as the rest of us married folk?
-
I really don't think it is right but, people have there own way of like an person I like mens not womens but, we live our life it don't really bother me my life is straight not gay so do what you what to do we all have to go to God for ourselfs so that is it with me. :)
-
Those of us that believe in the bible will never feel that gay marriage is right, and those that don't believe will always think that it is okay. There will never be an end to this conversation.
ahh, how true this is..
-
No, it's blatantly false.
There are a multitude of Christian churches, organizations, etc. that do not oppress homosexuality and do not oppose gay marriage. Many of whom have marched alongside gay rights activists and have stated they would gladly marry a same sex couple.
On the other side, there are billions of people in the world who do not believe in the Bible (4.6 approximately), and I would venture to say a large percentage of them oppose homosexuality and/or gay marriage either for cultural reasons or other religious reasons.
The idea that one can't think rationally and in a modern sense on any issue simply because that person believes in a book of outdated principles and ideals is nonsense; many people do believe in the Bible and are perfectly content with homosexuality and gay marriage. The idea that anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible automatically feels fine with homosexuality and gay marriage is also nonsense; many people don't believe in the Bible and do not support homosexuality or gay marriage.
-
All for it. If you love someone, why shouldn't you be able to marry them?
SO TRUE AND TOTALLY AGREE!!!
-
No, it's blatantly false.
There are a multitude of Christian churches, organizations, etc. that do not oppress homosexuality and do not oppose gay marriage. Many of whom have marched alongside gay rights activists and have stated they would gladly marry a same sex couple.
On the other side, there are billions of people in the world who do not believe in the Bible (4.6 approximately), and I would venture to say a large percentage of them oppose homosexuality and/or gay marriage either for cultural reasons or other religious reasons.
The idea that one can't think rationally and in a modern sense on any issue simply because that person believes in a book of outdated principles and ideals is nonsense; many people do believe in the Bible and are perfectly content with homosexuality and gay marriage. The idea that anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible automatically feels fine with homosexuality and gay marriage is also nonsense; many people don't believe in the Bible and do not support homosexuality or gay marriage.
do you honestly think it does you ANY good to bother with yet another rant about how "irrational" and "illogical" my thinking and views are? get over it, man. i'm not trying to debate with you. quite frankly, i don't care what you have to say about it. i'm sure i'm not the only person you annoy.
have a nice evening :wave:
-
its so gay
-
No, it's blatantly false.
There are a multitude of Christian churches, organizations, etc. that do not oppress homosexuality and do not oppose gay marriage. Many of whom have marched alongside gay rights activists and have stated they would gladly marry a same sex couple.
On the other side, there are billions of people in the world who do not believe in the Bible (4.6 approximately), and I would venture to say a large percentage of them oppose homosexuality and/or gay marriage either for cultural reasons or other religious reasons.
The idea that one can't think rationally and in a modern sense on any issue simply because that person believes in a book of outdated principles and ideals is nonsense; many people do believe in the Bible and are perfectly content with homosexuality and gay marriage. The idea that anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible automatically feels fine with homosexuality and gay marriage is also nonsense; many people don't believe in the Bible and do not support homosexuality or gay marriage.
do you honestly think it does you ANY good to bother with yet another rant about how "irrational" and "illogical" my thinking and views are? get over it, man. i'm not trying to debate with you. quite frankly, i don't care what you have to say about it. i'm sure i'm not the only person you annoy.
have a nice evening :wave:
Have fun ignoring the rest of the post and the entire point of the post. To be expected? Certainly. Most of you all always hang on one word or one sentence if you can't find disagreement with the whole response. It's called a red herring and strawman.
-
No, it's blatantly false.
There are a multitude of Christian churches, organizations, etc. that do not oppress homosexuality and do not oppose gay marriage. Many of whom have marched alongside gay rights activists and have stated they would gladly marry a same sex couple.
On the other side, there are billions of people in the world who do not believe in the Bible (4.6 approximately), and I would venture to say a large percentage of them oppose homosexuality and/or gay marriage either for cultural reasons or other religious reasons.
The idea that one can't think rationally and in a modern sense on any issue simply because that person believes in a book of outdated principles and ideals is nonsense; many people do believe in the Bible and are perfectly content with homosexuality and gay marriage. The idea that anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible automatically feels fine with homosexuality and gay marriage is also nonsense; many people don't believe in the Bible and do not support homosexuality or gay marriage.
do you honestly think it does you ANY good to bother with yet another rant about how "irrational" and "illogical" my thinking and views are? get over it, man. i'm not trying to debate with you. quite frankly, i don't care what you have to say about it. i'm sure i'm not the only person you annoy.
have a nice evening :wave:
Have fun ignoring the rest of the post and the entire point of the post. To be expected? Certainly. Most of you all always hang on one word or one sentence if you can't find disagreement with the whole response. It's called a red herring and strawman.
What is the point of adding anything else when you plainly do not care how we feel and believe. You are never going to convence us that your veiws are correct.
-
Aahh still at it I see, "a dog with a bone". Agree to disagree and let it rest. We all have opinions, and we have the right to have them and stand by them. There are more urgent matters to discuss in our present time other than gay marriage/relationships. So kiss and make up and lets move on. Okay? :)
-
No, it's blatantly false.
There are a multitude of Christian churches, organizations, etc. that do not oppress homosexuality and do not oppose gay marriage. Many of whom have marched alongside gay rights activists and have stated they would gladly marry a same sex couple.
On the other side, there are billions of people in the world who do not believe in the Bible (4.6 approximately), and I would venture to say a large percentage of them oppose homosexuality and/or gay marriage either for cultural reasons or other religious reasons.
The idea that one can't think rationally and in a modern sense on any issue simply because that person believes in a book of outdated principles and ideals is nonsense; many people do believe in the Bible and are perfectly content with homosexuality and gay marriage. The idea that anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible automatically feels fine with homosexuality and gay marriage is also nonsense; many people don't believe in the Bible and do not support homosexuality or gay marriage.
do you honestly think it does you ANY good to bother with yet another rant about how "irrational" and "illogical" my thinking and views are? get over it, man. i'm not trying to debate with you. quite frankly, i don't care what you have to say about it. i'm sure i'm not the only person you annoy.
have a nice evening :wave:
Have fun ignoring the rest of the post and the entire point of the post. To be expected? Certainly. Most of you all always hang on one word or one sentence if you can't find disagreement with the whole response. It's called a red herring and strawman.
What is the point of adding anything else when you plainly do not care how we feel and believe. You are never going to convence us that your veiws are correct.
What was said was false, clearly.
This
Those of us that believe in the bible will never feel that gay marriage is right, and those that don't believe will always think that it is okay. There will never be an end to this conversation.
is not true. She said it was.
It is not true because there are very clear examples everywhere that it does not hold up in reality.
You cannot get hung up on three or four words you dislike in an entire post and ignore everything. That's precisely what she did. Again, it's a red herring.
You're right, I don't care what you believe. Believe whatever you wish...I don't care if somebody believes they're king of the world. I don't care if a person is xenophobic, homophobic, racist, prejudice in any fashion, etc. (I'm not saying you are...). That's all fine and dandy if that's how they wish to live their life. But don't bring it into public and expect not to get any backlash from people pointing out the inhumanity and lack of civility. Private beliefs are not of interest to most people UNTIL that belief is used as reasoning and justification to bar rights and freedoms from others. There's a line. At that point, the line is crossed and it should and will be met with opposition.
-
No, it's blatantly false.
There are a multitude of Christian churches, organizations, etc. that do not oppress homosexuality and do not oppose gay marriage. Many of whom have marched alongside gay rights activists and have stated they would gladly marry a same sex couple.
On the other side, there are billions of people in the world who do not believe in the Bible (4.6 approximately), and I would venture to say a large percentage of them oppose homosexuality and/or gay marriage either for cultural reasons or other religious reasons.
The idea that one can't think rationally and in a modern sense on any issue simply because that person believes in a book of outdated principles and ideals is nonsense; many people do believe in the Bible and are perfectly content with homosexuality and gay marriage. The idea that anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible automatically feels fine with homosexuality and gay marriage is also nonsense; many people don't believe in the Bible and do not support homosexuality or gay marriage.
do you honestly think it does you ANY good to bother with yet another rant about how "irrational" and "illogical" my thinking and views are? get over it, man. i'm not trying to debate with you. quite frankly, i don't care what you have to say about it. i'm sure i'm not the only person you annoy.
have a nice evening :wave:
Have fun ignoring the rest of the post and the entire point of the post. To be expected? Certainly. Most of you all always hang on one word or one sentence if you can't find disagreement with the whole response. It's called a red herring and strawman.
What is the point of adding anything else when you plainly do not care how we feel and believe. You are never going to convence us that your veiws are correct.
What was said was false, clearly.
This
Those of us that believe in the bible will never feel that gay marriage is right, and those that don't believe will always think that it is okay. There will never be an end to this conversation.
is not true. She said it was.
It is not true because there are very clear examples everywhere that it does not hold up in reality.
You cannot get hung up on three or four words you dislike in an entire post and ignore everything. That's precisely what she did. Again, it's a red herring.
You're right, I don't care what you believe. Believe whatever you wish...I don't care if somebody believes they're king of the world. I don't care if a person is xenophobic, homophobic, racist, prejudice in any fashion, etc. (I'm not saying you are...). That's all fine and dandy if that's how they wish to live their life. But don't bring it into public and expect not to get any backlash from people pointing out the inhumanity and lack of civility. Private beliefs are not of interest to most people UNTIL that belief is used as reasoning and justification to bar rights and freedoms from others. There's a line. At that point, the line is crossed and it should and will be met with opposition.
wow, you really showed me.
i bow down to you and your almighty knowledge.
:notworthy:
Aahh still at it I see, "a dog with a bone". Agree to disagree and let it rest. We all have opinions, and we have the right to have them and stand by them. There are more urgent matters to discuss in our present time other than gay marriage/relationships. So kiss and make up and lets move on. Okay? :)
siiigh, agreed.
agreed completely.
-
there is no way someone is going to convince a gay person , a thief , a murderer , or even a straight person that is an adulterer, show them their wrong ,because they will find everything /argument to say that what they are doing is right.
Please, never again say anything on the topic if you're going to equate homosexuality with murder, stealing, or any other capital offense. That's flat out ridiculous and if your neurons were moving, you'd realize that.
why because the book (the bible) that has been here for thousand of years , that we actually live by but dont realize is not believed by many. (bible actually shows all these are wrong)
There are 4.6 billion people in the world who do not uphold your book, obviously do not live by your book, do not care about your book, and certainly do not believe in your book. Over 2/3 of the world does not care about your book.
so this leaves us with the scientific part of things...................... and even this shows that it is wrong . you dont even have to know the deep biological aspect of things just the surface. it goes beyond the laws of nature ...has said before.
Practice of homosexuality has been documented in nature in 1,500 species, ranging from invertebrates to apes.
but to back up the argument of the strong sexual connection between the same sex, it is believed that there is a chemical imbalance in these individuals,so it not entirely their fault.
I have a hard time taking anything you say on anything related to science seriously given the blatant lack of research and obvious lack of critical thought on the subject.
Then as soon as we fully accept this unnatural life style, you will soon hear our civilization , accepting......incest seeing it as just an alternative life style........................beastuaility (having sex with animals) ..................rape .........................and pedophilia ............... am telling you our future aint looking too good .
i bet you would be the first to accept em too.
-
:bootyshake:
-
The gay marrage issue we have now is the same racial acceptance issue our ancestors were facing decades and centuries ago. People will look back upon this time the way we look back upon the civil rights era, the women's suffrage and the civil war and other such defining moments in history.
-
Will this debate go on forever or what? We can debate this forever, but everyone would benefit from some tolerance of other people's choices! People are going to do whatever they feel is right for them no matter what "Society" thinks! I think the issue is gay people want to be able to show their commitment to each other the same way as everyone else, Where is the shame there? I think we should as a "Society" just accept gay marriage. I mean a lot of straight people get married to cover someone else on their benefits, help people stay in this country, comfort, security, etc. Gay people just want to get married for love, where is the wrong in that?? Seriously!?!
-
ok.... i weighed in on this subject early on... i think it was day 2 of the marathon..... then it took a turn away from the subject.... it has turned into a debate on whether the bible is true or not, and if homosexuality is right or wrong..... and completely away from "gay marriage", so i stayed out of it... but i just wanted to reintroduce my previous suggestion......
the real issues are two different things.....
first.... should two people, who want to be in a monogomous relationship, commiting the rest of their lives to each other, be allowed to have the same rights no matter what their sexual orientation.... the answer is yes
second... should the "label" be the same.... this is the one most people struggle with...
marriage by definition has been between a man and a woman to procreate....
the religious types believe it was sanctioned by God to be that way....
an alternative label was suggested (civil union) to allow the same rights that "married couples" get... the old "separate but equal argument"
and this idea wasn't well received....
my suggestion is simple.... NO STATE SANCTIONED "MARRIAGES".... make all of the state recognized unions.... "civil unions"..... make that the requirement for all the benefits, that should come with the choice to spend the rest of your life with someone...
then people who want to express themselves in a religious "marriage ceremony" could still call themselves "married" as an expession of their belief system and not as a requirement for benefits...
i know that some one disagreed with MY definition of marriage but the idea would solve this debate (the one about gay marriage)....
-
Gay marriage IS WRONG, God said so in more than one place in the bible. And since he said it's wrong, they should not have the same rights as a man and a woman that get married. Remember, God made a man and a woman....not two men or two women. God accepts a marriage between a man and a woman. He DOES NOT accept a marriage between two men or two women.
-
Everyone take a deep hold it... hold it.... now release. There doesn't that feel better ;D
-
Gay marriage IS WRONG, God said so in more than one place in the bible. And since he said it's wrong, they should not have the same rights as a man and a woman that get married. Remember, God made a man and a woman....not two men or two women. God accepts a marriage between a man and a woman. He DOES NOT accept a marriage between two men or two women.
You seem to to believe deeply in what the bible says, but I'm sure that you, like so many of your sort, only choose to tout scriptures when it is convient for you, and probably defy other things said in the bible at the same time.
-
there is no way someone is going to convince a gay person , a thief , a murderer , or even a straight person that is an adulterer, show them their wrong ,because they will find everything /argument to say that what they are doing is right.
Please, never again say anything on the topic if you're going to equate homosexuality with murder, stealing, or any other capital offense. That's flat out ridiculous and if your neurons were moving, you'd realize that.
why because the book (the bible) that has been here for thousand of years , that we actually live by but dont realize is not believed by many. (bible actually shows all these are wrong)
There are 4.6 billion people in the world who do not uphold your book, obviously do not live by your book, do not care about your book, and certainly do not believe in your book. Over 2/3 of the world does not care about your book.
so this leaves us with the scientific part of things...................... and even this shows that it is wrong . you dont even have to know the deep biological aspect of things just the surface. it goes beyond the laws of nature ...has said before.
Practice of homosexuality has been documented in nature in 1,500 species, ranging from invertebrates to apes.
but to back up the argument of the strong sexual connection between the same sex, it is believed that there is a chemical imbalance in these individuals,so it not entirely their fault.
I have a hard time taking anything you say on anything related to science seriously given the blatant lack of research and obvious lack of critical thought on the subject.
Then as soon as we fully accept this unnatural life style, you will soon hear our civilization , accepting......incest seeing it as just an alternative life style........................beastuaility (having sex with animals) ..................rape .........................and pedophilia ............... am telling you our future aint looking too good .
i bet you would be the first to accept em too.
When someone replies to you, it's useful to actually read their reply. But I suppose I can repeat myself...
On the subject of natural vs unnatural:
Homosexuality has been documented and observed in 1,500 species in the wild ranging from invertebrates to apes. That, in my book, is what we refer to as "nature."
There are thousands of things in this world that humans use/do daily that are "unnatural." Any contraceptive is unnatural. The way we grow food is unnatural. The way we obtain meat is unnatural. The water we drink is unnatural (for obvious good reasons). Having sex with no intention to reproduce is unnatural. The size of the human population is unnatural. Just about every medication you've ever taken is unnatural. The list goes on for days...
Shall we persistently oppose all of these things? A lot of people are going to die (probably both you and I will be included in that) if we oppose these things, among others. Our entire civilization and daily methods of living are unnatural. We defy nature constantly to survive above our carrying capacity. Clearly, "unnatural" things are not inherently bad...(if you have a counter argument to this, I'd be glad to hear it; I have a feeling you don't even want a discussion).
The rest of your post is full of nonsense. Again, there is no relation between homosexuality and pedophilia, bestiality, rape, or incest. If there were, surely you could make a logical case for it rather than just repeating the words over and over (that means I'd like to hear your argument on their connection).
If the best opposing argument against homosexuality you can think of is that it will inevitably lead to pedophilia, rape, etc. then you haven't given this hardly any thought. Why in the hell would our laws on pedophilia, rape, etc. change because we allow same sex marriages? Our laws and negative views towards those CRIMINAL actions haven't loosened up a bit since more and more people have "come out." Please explain why they would magically change if we accept same sex marriage. (Hint: They wont, they're not related topics)
On a random note, according to your religion, mankind's current existence has it's roots in incest.
-
People do what that what to do but, like I said God made Adam and Eve not adam and steve.
-
Just curious. How do you no on gay marriage feel about breast implants? God sure didn't create those abominations! I suspect those protesting gay marriage should also oppose other "unnatural things"
-
I believe 100 % percent go gay marriage. I believe in the eyes of the government that we should all have the same rights!! Same as straight people leaving in a long term relationship. People who don't believe in gay marriage are doing mostly for religious reasons. But it has nothing to do with religion when you want to go down to the court house to get a certificate stating that you are becoming a family and want the same rights as other familys. We I've in a free and equal country we need to stand for that and and make this legal. Because right now we are not equal!!
-
People do what that what to do but, like I said God made Adam and Eve not adam and steve.
Is this really as deeply as you've thought on the issue?
This is something I've heard 6th graders say...surely you can think a bit more than a 6th grader...
-
I agree with liljp617. I am a believer in God. I was raised Catholic but instead of believing in what the priests interpreted the workings of God into I tend to take what God tells us to believe in my own believes. God has told us to love our brothers and sisters. God also made everyone and everything for a reason, yes there are man made things out there that are unnatural and should not be here. But Gay men and Woman were made by God. And this discussion is suppose to be about Gay marriage. Gay people are not asking to be "married" in the eyes of the church.(but I would agree with a gay couple if they did want to profess there love in front of God because they are made from him and in his likeness) They are asking to profess there love and get the same rights as other family's that get a license that they are becoming a family. All in all God teaches us (any God that you believe in) to love each other. We were wrong when we treated black people the way we treated them. We were wrong in treating Women the way we treated them. We are wrong for not giving Gay Americans the rights that everyone else gets. I am a straight woman but I feel very strongly about this because there is not enough love and understanding in how important human life and happiness is. I don't believe in the death penalty, I don't believe in Abortion, and I don't believe in not letting Gay people get married. It is not our choice to say what is morally right or wrong and it is not our choice to take someone elses life away from them. That is Gods he will be your last judge.
-
I'm all for people having the right to right to choose their life decisions. However, I personally do not believe in gay marriage or relationships. I am a christian and gay relations goes against my religious beliefs. Some people try to twist the Bible into saying what they want it to but the bottom line according to the Bible is gay relations are wrong and looked down upon. So again, people have the right to make their own choices but with those choices they have to deal with consequences either here or after death. :angel12:
-
I might be stepping out of line because i am a christian i do not believe in gays or gay marriages God does love everyone but he did not intend for us to marry the same sex. that is why he created Adam and Eve and you are not suppose to judge i don't stand in any ones way if they believe that but i read the bible and it tells me that it is wrong so i can't believe in it.
-
Marriage should be between a man and a woman. Period.
-
marriage is for two people who want to spend the rest of their lives together out of love. if it means same sex marriage, so be it. it's their happiness and their lives.
-
Some people say that they were born gay. So they want us to believe that as a species some of us have developed into a type of creature that would guarantee its own extinction, as same sex couples cant reproduce. Nature doesnt work this way, it evolves to ensure its survival. So in my opinion we should treat it as a disease and be looking for the cure for it.
-
AM Straight, but people do what they want to do but again God made male and female not male and male or female and female but male and female only. :thumbsup:
-
Some people say that they were born gay. So they want us to believe that as a species some of us have developed into a type of creature that would guarantee its own extinction, as same sex couples cant reproduce. Nature doesnt work this way, it evolves to ensure its survival. So in my opinion we should treat it as a disease and be looking for the cure for it.
Nature does not have a mind nor end product it's trying to reach. Evolution does not have a mind nor end product it's trying to reach. Mutations in DNA do not occur to ensure survival; in fact the overwhelming majority of mutations are harmful or are not necessarily beneficial at all (cystic fibrosis, autism, Huntington's, sickle cell disease to someone who is no longer living in malaria infested regions, and so on).
Even so, you assume nature isn't working as it should...
Not to say I'm an avid proponent of this overall view but let's throw it out just because:
The human population is clearly oversized and it hinders our survival and existence in numerous ways. We've seen our carrying capacity and stepped miles and miles beyond it through our ability to manipulate and advance technologically. Our overpopulation leads directly to starvation, poverty, death, destruction, etc. on a daily basis. Perhaps our species has developed in order to combat this and stop the rise in population/having offspring.
Regardless, even if it's not a genetic predisposition, sexual orientation is not some point decision or choice. There are dozens upon dozens of factors that go into determining sexual orientation from the very first day of that person's life. I personally didn't wake up one day and decide to be attracted to females and I can't imagine any man/woman waking up one day and deciding, "hey, I'm going to be attracted to males/females and join one of the most despised, discriminated groups throughout history and in the present."
-
I'm all for people having the right to right to choose their life decisions. However, I personally do not believe in gay marriage or relationships. I am a christian and gay relations goes against my religious beliefs. Some people try to twist the Bible into saying what they want it to but the bottom line according to the Bible is gay relations are wrong and looked down upon. So again, people have the right to make their own choices but with those choices they have to deal with consequences either here or after death. :angel12:
I've asked a few people with your same views in this thread so I'll just repeat my earlier question(s):
If you feel the judgment of homosexuality found in the Bible holds infallible truths and that you must adhere to those Biblical statements made on homosexuality, why don't you avidly uphold any number of other statements made in the Bible? Such as (and again, repeating what I said earlier):
1) Stone disobedient children
2) If a man rapes a woman, the man must pay the woman's father 50 silver pieces and then marry the woman because he violated her (and thus, the victim must marry her attacker)
3) Slavery is no big deal
4) A woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night should be stoned
5) Eating shellfish is an abomination
6) Wearing wool-blended clothing is wrong
7) Deport any male and female who have sex while the female is on her period
The list literally goes on and on...
I can only assume you don't support stoning children of any kind, slavery, etc. Why do you feel fine going against the "word of God" on these moral issues, but feel it is 100% wrong to go against the moral statements made on homosexuality? What makes the seven things (and it could easily be more) listed above any less infallible than the statements made on homosexuality in the Bible?
-
Marriage should be between a man and a woman. Period.
Thank you. Your deep critical thought into the subject is astounding on many levels. You must be a scholar of some nature?
-
Marriage should be between a man and a woman. Period.
Thank you. Your deep critical thought into the subject is astounding on many levels. You must be a scholar of some nature?
sniff..... snifff...... snifffffff........ yep that's sarcasm i smell!!!!!
and from liljp..... who would of thought......... :angel12:
-
Sorry, I don't have respect for someone who writes one sentence that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion...especially on a forum made precisely for discussion. If you want your opinion to be taken seriously, add a little substance and use those little neurons that are firing constantly to put a bit of thought into the subject. Otherwise, your opinion is baseless and could be said by a 1st grader.
-
Sorry, I don't have respect for someone who writes one sentence that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion...especially on a forum made precisely for discussion. If you want your opinion to be taken seriously, add a little substance and use those little neurons that are firing constantly to put a bit of thought into the subject. Otherwise, your opinion is baseless and could be said by a 1st grader.
i know... you seem to be very passionate about this subject....... and have spent alot of time frustrated with others.... :BangHead: :angry7:
-
:male: :male:This isn't 1940, it's 2009 and that means that everyone should have the right to be just as miserable as those who are straight. I guess my point is if they're happy and in love who gives a crap. They should get to be together too. :female: :female:
-
I'm all for equal rights for gay couples-I think that's perfectly fine. Using the term "marriage", though, isn't appropriate. I don't think it's that big of a deal! What's the matter with using the term "civil union"? Or anything else-anything by marriage!! I'm sick of having to cater to everyone else's feelings because they want to change things. What about the conservative people's feelings?
-
I'm all for equal rights for gay couples-I think that's perfectly fine. Using the term "marriage", though, isn't appropriate. I don't think it's that big of a deal! What's the matter with using the term "civil union"? Or anything else-anything by marriage!! I'm sick of having to cater to everyone else's feelings because they want to change things. What about the conservative people's feelings?
I believe we're celebrating the 55th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. I don't think it's a big deal for marriage to be a universal word having no relation to gender...is that view as legitimate as you not thinking it's a big deal to use a different term?
There's another big deal, however. And that big deal is that many people who oppose same sex marriages oppose any form of union that promotes anything except the "traditional family model." They oppose homosexuality and they oppose any promotion of homosexuality.
You're not catering to everyone's feelings at the moment, either. The people who are being barred from the liberty of getting married are the one's catering to people's feelings...discriminatory, oppressive feelings at that.
-
there is no way someone is going to convince a gay person , a thief , a murderer , or even a straight person that is an adulterer, show them their wrong ,because they will find everything /argument to say that what they are doing is right.
Please, never again say anything on the topic if you're going to equate homosexuality with murder, stealing, or any other capital offense. That's flat out ridiculous and if your neurons were moving, you'd realize that.
why because the book (the bible) that has been here for thousand of years , that we actually live by but dont realize is not believed by many. (bible actually shows all these are wrong)
There are 4.6 billion people in the world who do not uphold your book, obviously do not live by your book, do not care about your book, and certainly do not believe in your book. Over 2/3 of the world does not care about your book.
so this leaves us with the scientific part of things...................... and even this shows that it is wrong . you dont even have to know the deep biological aspect of things just the surface. it goes beyond the laws of nature ...has said before.
Practice of homosexuality has been documented in nature in 1,500 species, ranging from invertebrates to apes.
but to back up the argument of the strong sexual connection between the same sex, it is believed that there is a chemical imbalance in these individuals,so it not entirely their fault.
I have a hard time taking anything you say on anything related to science seriously given the blatant lack of research and obvious lack of critical thought on the subject.
Then as soon as we fully accept this unnatural life style, you will soon hear our civilization , accepting......incest seeing it as just an alternative life style........................beastuaility (having sex with animals) ..................rape .........................and pedophilia ............... am telling you our future aint looking too good .
i bet you would be the first to accept em too.
When someone replies to you, it's useful to actually read their reply. But I suppose I can repeat myself...
On the subject of natural vs unnatural:
Homosexuality has been documented and observed in 1,500 species in the wild ranging from invertebrates to apes. That, in my book, is what we refer to as "nature."
There are thousands of things in this world that humans use/do daily that are "unnatural." Any contraceptive is unnatural. The way we grow food is unnatural. The way we obtain meat is unnatural. The water we drink is unnatural (for obvious good reasons). Having sex with no intention to reproduce is unnatural. The size of the human population is unnatural. Just about every medication you've ever taken is unnatural. The list goes on for days...
Shall we persistently oppose all of these things? A lot of people are going to die (probably both you and I will be included in that) if we oppose these things, among others. Our entire civilization and daily methods of living are unnatural. We defy nature constantly to survive above our carrying capacity. Clearly, "unnatural" things are not inherently bad...(if you have a counter argument to this, I'd be glad to hear it; I have a feeling you don't even want a discussion).
The rest of your post is full of nonsense. Again, there is no relation between homosexuality and pedophilia, bestiality, rape, or incest. If there were, surely you could make a logical case for it rather than just repeating the words over and over (that means I'd like to hear your argument on their connection).
If the best opposing argument against homosexuality you can think of is that it will inevitably lead to pedophilia, rape, etc. then you haven't given this hardly any thought. Why in the hell would our laws on pedophilia, rape, etc. change because we allow same sex marriages? Our laws and negative views towards those CRIMINAL actions haven't loosened up a bit since more and more people have "come out." Please explain why they would magically change if we accept same sex marriage. (Hint: They wont, they're not related topics)
On a random note, according to your religion, mankind's current existence has it's roots in incest.
well i guess the supreme court thinks differently from you. lol :wave: thank god they do!!!
-
They did nothing but uphold bigotry in a country founded upon the sole principles of liberty and equality.
It won't last. The Constitution always has the last word on these issues.
-
The issue with gay marriage is so much more than just marriage. If gay marriage is allowed than for me to teach my children that being gay is against our beliefs makes me a bad person. It also makes it against the law for any church to not allow a service for a gay couple to be performed in their location. Why should we give up our right of religious freedom, and beliefs? I have a lot of gay friends, many of which are against gay marriage, I love them just as much as anyone else but would I want them to marriaged in my church absolutely not, we do not believe in gay marriage.
-
You know... We have a weird situation in my house. My husband is a Christian, quietly but still believes. Myself, not so much. I don't believe I am an athiest, but I have a tremendously hard time swallowing the Bible and the Christian teachings.
Take it at a base (not literal) level, and the Bible is great. Love your fellow man, honor your parents, don't steal or lie...etc. All of that is good and things that should be taught to children.
However, this kind of thing (gay marriage bans) ticks me off. These types of things are the REASON that I shun organized religion. "Love everyone...unless they are different from us. Then, they go straight to hell." I mean, how is this a loving way to be?
Anyway. So, my son comes home from school the other day and tells me someone called someone else a *bleep*. And he wants to know what that means. So, I tell him, that is an ugly word for someone who is gay, or homosexual. I remind him of a few couples and familes we know that are in same-sex relationships. So he is cool with it and understands.
My CHILD....grade school child, understands and immediately accepts the concept and sees no problem with it. So, who are we to judge anyone? What makes ME able to love a man and marry him but not the homoesexual guy who lives next door? Love is love. Period. I don't care what anyone says, and I don't particularly care what the Bible says about it either.
If you, a human being love another human being, that's it. It is simple. If you are willing to get married, and they are willing to marry you, so be it.
No gay couple that has ever been married, or ever will get married, will EVER have ANY impact on my own marriage. Anyone who says differently is dead wrong. Mind your own business and do what makes you happy, in my opinion.
-
It also makes it against the law for any church to not allow a service for a gay couple to be performed in their location. Why should we give up our right of religious freedom, and beliefs?
No it does not. Churches already, 100%, have the ability to deny any couple a union. They would maintain that right, as there is separation of church and state (works both ways). You would be hard pressed to find many proponents of gay marriage who want laws forcing involuntary churches to marry same sex couples.
The fact of the matter is that marriage is inherently a LEGAL union in the US, not a religious one. Again, you're not married simply because your priest says so, you're married because the state says you legally can be and provides you the legal documentation confirming your union. Thus, any two consenting adults should legally be capable of getting married by a state official and there's nothing but prejudice stopping this from happening at the state/legal level.
-
Marriage should be between a man and a woman. Period.
Thank you. Your deep critical thought into the subject is astounding on many levels. You must be a scholar of some nature?
sniff..... snifff...... snifffffff........ yep that's sarcasm i smell!!!!!
and from liljp..... who would of thought......... :angel12:
AMEN ecominvest!!!!!
-
They did nothing but uphold bigotry in a country founded upon the sole principles of liberty and equality.
It won't last. The Constitution always has the last word on these issues.
Were you awake during history class. People originally came to this country for religious freedom. I agree with the liberty part, but not equality. Remeber there were slaves back in the day.
-
I use to be bi-sexual when I was younger (husband says I'm straight) so I of course believe in gay marrige. Heck, if we can choose to get abortions why the heck can't two people who are in love get married! It's not fair for them. Who gives a heck if you don't believe in it, it should still be legal.
-
Call me too conservative, but I believe in Gay Unions. Marriage is a holy union between a man and a woman. I do not believe denying anyone the right to have a life partner, children, joint bank accounts, homes. When society denies anyone these fundamental rights, it is wrong. I hope that legislation allows unions for people that wish to enjoy rights that every citizen deserves.
-
They did nothing but uphold bigotry in a country founded upon the sole principles of liberty and equality.
It won't last. The Constitution always has the last word on these issues.
Were you awake during history class. People originally came to this country for religious freedom. I agree with the liberty part, but not equality. Remeber there were slaves back in the day.
With freedom of religion comes freedom from religion. The country was founded on secular ideals and separation of religion and government.
I think we're also forgetting:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
We may have gotten off on the wrong foot with slavery and it took a while, but we eventually took a great step forward in recognizing the right to being treated equally regardless of the divisions society places upon us.
-
it does not matter who you love. the government shouldnt be able to tell you who you can and cannot marry. marriage is about a commitment between 2 people, and no one else should get involved in those 2 people's decision to commit to one another. :female:
-
it does not matter who you love. the government shouldnt be able to tell you who you can and cannot marry. marriage is about a commitment between 2 people, and no one else should get involved in those 2 people's decision to commit to one another. :female:
There are situations (somewhat obvious ones) where they should get involved, but your point is taken.
-
WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TO PEOPLE?!?!
-
WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TO PEOPLE?!?!
Rationality and intelligence.
-
I know what you mean man I use to model and i'm straight to and I did get the cooties being around them. So I say if choose that lifestyle go for it.
-
I put yes. But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all. I feel that we can't ignore what exist. And being gay is real. My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families. The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance. So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.
-
No, i find gay marriage very displeasing.
-
Let them be married. They deserve the same benefits as straight couples.
-
The only problem I have with gay marriage is the use of the term "marriage." I was brought up in a religious home where a marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman, so said God. I fully support "civil unions" for gay couples, so that they can have the same rights and benefits as married couples as far as the law and insurance companies are concerned. I believe that it is descriminatory to deny gay persons insurance benefits or anything else based on their sexual preference.
-
The only problem I have with gay marriage is the use of the term "marriage." I was brought up in a religious home where a marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman, so said God. I fully support "civil unions" for gay couples, so that they can have the same rights and benefits as married couples as far as the law and insurance companies are concerned. I believe that it is descriminatory to deny gay persons insurance benefits or anything else based on their sexual preference.
That's good and all, except marriage is a legal union in this country by rule of the government. If you want to get married in the eyes of God in your church, be my guest. That doesn't mean other people want to...and nor do they have to considering you can get married by a court official without any religious involvement.
What about people who don't believe in your God (there are many other religions in this country as well as non-religious people)? Should they not be able to get married? Should they also be under a different category such as a civil union? Why? Marriage has been around much longer than Christianity (2000+ years or so longer), why does Christianity get a monopoly on the word marriage? Just because?
In regards to them having civil unions, it seems like you want them to be treated equal, yet you support an idea that blatantly treats them differently. It is inherently discrimination. We, once again, go back to the "separate but equal is inherently unequal."
-
To me marriage is just a legal ceremony of two people. When I got married, we had an online ordained minister conduct our ceremony. There was deliberately no mention of god in our ceremony because I am agnostic and my husband is atheist. We were married outside with no church involved whatsoever. If I didnt want the experience of a big wedding and enjoying the day with my family and friends, I would have just gone to the courthouse. Nobody gave us crap because we are the "traditional" couple. If religion did not get in our way, why does it have to keep gay marriage from occurring.
-
Yes!
It's just the plain and simple with me!
-
I didn't say they were.
I know.
I just want to be sure we're in agreement.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time because I'm not interested in which has a better track record.
My point is simply that, unless we live in the Utopia, I don't see a wonderful track record from either.
Though, I would be very interested if you could give us concrete elaborate historical examples of how the state has had a more logical, rational, and typically understandable stance on and approach toward most moral issues from the past and how the church don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral.
I don't see the purpose in bringing up a counterpoint...
I don't agree it's a 'counterpoint.'
Would it be fair for me to say "I don't care if you would like an example of how the state has more rational approaches to moral issues?" No, it wouldn't.
The question I believe you should be asking rather is 'do we have to seek approval from each other?'
Governments over the ages do not have flawless records
Don't they ever.
I want to be sure we're talking about both gay and straight people.
Who do you think I meant when I said "the power of the people?"
The voting citizens of this country.
In this case, we need to look over your previous post:
The "power of the people" has little to no place in determining civil rights. The "people" are overwhelmingly ignorant, prejudice, egotistical, gullible, stuck on ridiculous old ideas, and so on. I guess the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1850s/1860s (and prior). Maybe then we wouldn't have to deal equally with those pesky, vastly inferior people from Africa (not stating this as fact, stating as sarcasm to prove the point). Maybe the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1920s so women would just keep quiet and do their cooking and cleaning (again, sarcasm).
I fail to see how the power of the people diminishes anyway. Again, no church can be forced to marry any couple...they can turn down any couple they wish right now, why would it change? The government cannot and shouldn't determine who the church gives the traditional ceremonial marriage. The fact remains, however, that it is plainly immoral and illegal for the state to discriminate against a minority and deny them a civil marriage. It is also immoral (and hypocritical) for the church to do so, but again, their level of hypocrisy on the vast majority of issues is overwhelming, so I don't expect much different and they can do their own thing.
If we're talking about both gay and straight people as the voting citizens of this country, then who from them were you referring to in your "power of the people" commentary?
-
i believe everyone is entitled to the life they want for themselves. just because a person is attracted to the same sex, doesn't mean they should be treated as an outcast and told they can never have the same things a "normal" person can. who am i to tell someone else that they're love for another person isn't "natural", therefore they aren't allowed to express it? i think the entire argument is completely archaic and outdated. there are so many bigger issues in this world.
Exactly!
And may I add, if they want to be tied down and miserable like the rest of us, that's their choice! lol
Just kidding. But seriously, it's not like straight people take marriage seriously. Look at how high the divorce rate, infidelity, etc., is. I think the people that are against it are just scared that gay people will make them look bad by taking it more seriously than they do (which they seem to do in a lot of things...).
-
I believe that gays should be treated equally. I am not gay but my brother is. America is supposed to be the place where people have freedom to practice the religion that they choose. Freedom of speech so on and so on. Therfore it only seems fair that in America people who are gay should be allowed the same rights as those that are not.
-
I believe that gays should be treated equally. I am not gay but my brother is. America is supposed to be the place where people have freedom to practice the religion that they choose. Freedom of speech so on and so on. Therfore it only seems fair that in America people who are gay should be allowed the same rights as those that are not.
believe everyone should make there own decision
-
My brother-in-law is gay, and he is the nicest person I know! I personally believe that there's something fundamentally missing in a person who is attracted to the same sex--but I'm no psycho-analyst. If that's the way they wish to live their lives, then so be it! It's not up to me (a higher authority, maybe), to judge how a person lives his or her life.
-
I put yes. But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all. I feel that we can't ignore what exist. And being gay is real. My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families. The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance. So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.
how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say
-
I put yes. But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all. I feel that we can't ignore what exist. And being gay is real. My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families. The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance. So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.
how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say
Being gay doesn't mean your reproductive organs don't work. Gay people throughout history have reproduced. Obviously you're referring to an actual gay couple reproducing with each other...but clearly in today's age that isn't necessary to have kids. There are more ways to have kids besides "traditional" reproduction and/or adoption.
As for the rest of the post, I don't understand what it has to do with your opinion of gay marriage. Some gay people are quote, "wow," so they shouldn't be able to get married? I don't follow the thought process. A number heterosexuals are "wow," but surely you don't support banning heterosexual marriages...
Doesn't make sense.
-
As long as the Bible has a stranglehold on people's minds, there will never be an understanding reached about anything in this country.
"God says no, so I say no." Way to think for yourselves. Way to cast a stone on a gigantic portion of the HUMAN RACE because your book tells you to. Way to maintain the Golden Rule. Way to be a narrow-minded, judgemental, hateful jerk.
People are...
...black & white & brown & yellow & red.
...tall & short & fat & skinny.
...rich & poor & democrats & republicans.
...gay & straight & bisexual.
We are also scared, confused, hopeful, trying to keep a job, hoping to buy a house, wishing for a new car, worried about that 15 extra pounds, wondering where we left our glasses when we took them off. And on and on and on...
What makes someone different? Why does that make them bad, or less than you? Where do you draw the line? How far is "too much"?
We are HUMANS. All of us. And all of us are the same. Thus, we all are entitiled to EVERYTHING that the rest of of the world is.
-
I don't have objections to it ... *bleep*'s are going to ride on dinosaurs and the world is going to go into an apocalyptic stage ... :o
-
As long as the Bible has a stranglehold on people's minds, there will never be an understanding reached about anything in this country.
"God says no, so I say no." Way to think for yourselves. Way to cast a stone on a gigantic portion of the HUMAN RACE because your book tells you to. Way to maintain the Golden Rule. Way to be a narrow-minded, judgemental, hateful jerk.
People are...
...black & white & brown & yellow & red.
...tall & short & fat & skinny.
...rich & poor & democrats & republicans.
...gay & straight & bisexual.
We are also scared, confused, hopeful, trying to keep a job, hoping to buy a house, wishing for a new car, worried about that 15 extra pounds, wondering where we left our glasses when we took them off. And on and on and on...
What makes someone different? Why does that make them bad, or less than you? Where do you draw the line? How far is "too much"?
We are HUMANS. All of us. And all of us are the same. Thus, we all are entitiled to EVERYTHING that the rest of of the world is.
Who do you think gave you the brain to think with. The color of your skin and your body type cannot be chosen. But they have a choice when it comes to sexuality. You are born a specific gender and we were made man and woman. Non man and man or woman and woman.
-
I put yes. But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all. I feel that we can't ignore what exist. And being gay is real. My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families. The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance. So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.
how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say
Being gay doesn't mean your reproductive organs don't work. Gay people throughout history have reproduced. Obviously you're referring to an actual gay couple reproducing with each other...but clearly in today's age that isn't necessary to have kids. There are more ways to have kids besides "traditional" reproduction and/or adoption.
As for the rest of the post, I don't understand what it has to do with your opinion of gay marriage. Some gay people are quote, "wow," so they shouldn't be able to get married? I don't follow the thought process. A number heterosexuals are "wow," but surely you don't support banning heterosexual marriages...
Doesn't make sense.
Only for those that fall into the "wow" catagory. ;)
-
Who do you think gave you the brain to think with. The color of your skin and your body type cannot be chosen. But they have a choice when it comes to sexuality. You are born a specific gender and we were made man and woman. Non man and man or woman and woman.
My parents gave me those things. You can NOT CHOOSE TO BE GAY! This argument irritates me beyond belief!
"Okay kid...here's the deal. You can pick a lifestyle now, right? You can either be straight and marry the opposite sex. OR! You can be GAY! You will be judged and hated by a huge portion of the world. People will call you immoral and even call you evil! Isn't that awesome? You won't be able to get married and will most likely have trouble being able to provide insurance for your family. Oh, and you also won't be able to have kids without attaining outside help!"
"Omgosh, that sounds like fun! I PICK THAT ONE!"
Seriously. Get over yourself. It's not a choice. You can no more pick your sexuality than you can pick to have blue eyes or curly hair.
-
Who do you think gave you the brain to think with. The color of your skin and your body type cannot be chosen. But they have a choice when it comes to sexuality. You are born a specific gender and we were made man and woman. Non man and man or woman and woman.
My parents gave me those things. You can NOT CHOOSE TO BE GAY! This argument irritates me beyond belief!
"Okay kid...here's the deal. You can pick a lifestyle now, right? You can either be straight and marry the opposite sex. OR! You can be GAY! You will be judged and hated by a huge portion of the world. People will call you immoral and even call you evil! Isn't that awesome? You won't be able to get married and will most likely have trouble being able to provide insurance for your family. Oh, and you also won't be able to have kids without attaining outside help!"
"Omgosh, that sounds like fun! I PICK THAT ONE!"
Seriously. Get over yourself. It's not a choice. You can no more pick your sexuality than you can pick to have blue eyes or curly hair.
I will agree to disagree with you kid.
-
I will agree to disagree with you kid.
First, I am not a "kid" but I appreciate your patronizing tone.
Secondly, do you genuinely believe that you can choose to be not homosexual? Why on earth whould anyone WANT to be part of such a hated group? That makes NO sense.
Explain your reasons, please. I am interested in opposing viewpoints.
-
It's not a choice. You are just born with those genes and you cannot change the way you feel!!.
-
I will agree to disagree with you kid.
First, I am not a "kid" but I appreciate your patronizing tone.
Secondly, do you genuinely believe that you can choose to be not homosexual? Why on earth whould anyone WANT to be part of such a hated group? That makes NO sense.
Explain your reasons, please. I am interested in opposing viewpoints.
People like to be different. Instead of trying to find someone of the opposite sex they just find what they can get to have a relationship. No and I mean NO ONE will ever convense me that homosexuallity is genetic or a medical problem. We were just not designed that way. If read some of the earlier posts you would have seen that.
-
I'm not sure but, God dosen't want people to be gay. He made everyone a boy and girl. He wants more kids on this earth don't you get it? He wants next gen after next gen etc... How is that going to happen when guys like guys and girls like girls. I don't mean to be rude please for give me. I actually can't stand gay people.
I foreal can't stand a gay DUDE. I feel if i hang around that gay dude is going to try to kiss me. Thats Gross!@!!
But everyone desevers a life. Let them live as they want. God wants everyone to be happy. LET GAY PEOPLE BE HAPPY TOO. Just because there gay that dosen't mean they not human.
They are still God Kids and matter if they are over 85 and there gay STILL GOD KIDS. I have a gay friend and cuz. There good to hang around, I care for them, but im not gay.
-
It really sucks when you date someone for seven years and she's the one with the kids and you help raise them and because you can't get married you have no rights to see the children you helped raise. :(
-
I put yes. But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all. I feel that we can't ignore what exist. And being gay is real. My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families. The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance. So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.
how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say
Being gay doesn't mean your reproductive organs don't work. Gay people throughout history have reproduced. Obviously you're referring to an actual gay couple reproducing with each other...but clearly in today's age that isn't necessary to have kids. There are more ways to have kids besides "traditional" reproduction and/or adoption.
As for the rest of the post, I don't understand what it has to do with your opinion of gay marriage. Some gay people are quote, "wow," so they shouldn't be able to get married? I don't follow the thought process. A number heterosexuals are "wow," but surely you don't support banning heterosexual marriages...
Doesn't make sense.
just my personal opinion - i don't like gay people. i personally hate when there are known gay people in the locker room because then i feel REALLY uncomfortable because of a certain past experience. but thats just me, someone else may think its "hot" that another person of the same sex is checking them out in the locker room, but rest assured, that's not me :) let me explain y i dont like them - one was staring at me when i had my f***ing pants off...that's all i need to say, and it may not be the greatest reason, but i don't care. btw, r YOU gay? also let me restate something i said before - some gay people are all right. i dont mind some of them. but the others.... :dontknow:
-
I really don't see the big deal. If that is the way they want to live their lives then let them. It doesn't change anything in my life, so to be honest it doesn't bother me. They are still people, they just have a different sexual preference. Live and let live.
Someone else quoted this, but it's the exact answer I would have given had I gotten to this topic first. Well said.. er... typed.
-
i think wanda sykes said it best Why is everyone so worried about *bleep* that has nothing to do with them ,if you don't believe in same sex marriage then don't marry someone of the same sex
-
i think wanda sykes said it best Why is everyone so worried about *bleep* that has nothing to do with them ,if you don't believe in same sex marriage then don't marry someone of the same sex
That would be fine but the guy public didn't want everyone to be accpeting of them and they want to teach tolerance to our childern and I DON'T THINK SOOOOO! I will never teach my child that a guy relationship is right in any circumtance and my sister is a lesbian.
-
Does it really matter who marries who and how does it effect you personally?
-
That would be fine but the guy public didn't want everyone to be accpeting of them and they want to teach tolerance to our childern and I DON'T THINK SOOOOO! I will never teach my child that a guy relationship is right in any circumtance and my sister is a lesbian.
Yeah, let's not have TOLERANT CHILDREN in the world! Otherwise, they might grow up realizing what a narrow-minded parent they have!
I feel for your sister.
-
I foreal can't stand a gay DUDE. I feel if i hang around that gay dude is going to try to kiss me. Thats Gross!@!!
I am a woman. You are a man. Therefore, I am not safe around you, because as a heterosexual man, you will DEFINITELY be attracted to me and try to kiss me.
See how stupid that sounds when you write it out?
I'm not sure but, God dosen't want people to be gay. I actually can't stand gay people.
They are still God Kids and matter if they are over 85 and there gay STILL GOD KIDS. I have a gay friend and cuz. There good to hang around, I care for them, but im not gay.
God made them and they are his kids. But he doesn't want them. And you can't stand gay people. And you care for them.
Have you always been this confused?
-
It is 2009 people..everyone is different.I think it should be the persons choice, if they wanna be with the same sex, why deny them or make them feel like they are different.
My uncle recently came out to my family, he got 4 kids, had a wife, but got divorced and also served in the military. very big shocker to the family, but we love him the same......
:angel11: the bible says no, and the bible is important, but the bible also says to love thy neighbor.
-
That would be fine but the guy public didn't want everyone to be accpeting of them and they want to teach tolerance to our childern and I DON'T THINK SOOOOO! I will never teach my child that a guy relationship is right in any circumtance and my sister is a lesbian.
Yeah, let's not have TOLERANT CHILDREN in the world! Otherwise, they might grow up realizing what a narrow-minded parent they have!
I feel for your sister.
That is what is wrong with this world, everyone has become tolerant of everything and they do not question weather things are wrong or right. My child does not have a narrowed-minded mother, he has one that think for herself THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!!! .
-
you should be able to do what you want
-
As long as the Bible has a stranglehold on people's minds, there will never be an understanding reached about anything in this country.
"God says no, so I say no." Way to think for yourselves. Way to cast a stone on a gigantic portion of the HUMAN RACE because your book tells you to. Way to maintain the Golden Rule. Way to be a narrow-minded, judgemental, hateful jerk.
People are...
...black & white & brown & yellow & red.
...tall & short & fat & skinny.
...rich & poor & democrats & republicans.
...gay & straight & bisexual.
We are also scared, confused, hopeful, trying to keep a job, hoping to buy a house, wishing for a new car, worried about that 15 extra pounds, wondering where we left our glasses when we took them off. And on and on and on...
What makes someone different? Why does that make them bad, or less than you? Where do you draw the line? How far is "too much"?
We are HUMANS. All of us. And all of us are the same. Thus, we all are entitiled to EVERYTHING that the rest of of the world is.
Who do you think gave you the brain to think with. The color of your skin and your body type cannot be chosen. But they have a choice when it comes to sexuality. You are born a specific gender and we were made man and woman. Non man and man or woman and woman.
That's interesting. May I ask at what age you CHOSE to be attracted to males (I'm pretty sure you're a female)?
I can personally say I've never met a single person who made a point decision in their life about who they were going to be attracted to...
Again, whether it's genetic or not doesn't really matter. A person's sexuality and hormone production are not choices in the same way that you choose what type of pizza you'd like to have tonight. It's obviously a much deeper process than that and you won't find a legitimate "expert" who would agree to sexuality being some random choice a person makes when they hit a certain age. I find it depressing people still think sexual attraction is something you wake up one day and decide upon.
I put yes. But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all. I feel that we can't ignore what exist. And being gay is real. My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families. The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance. So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.
how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say
Being gay doesn't mean your reproductive organs don't work. Gay people throughout history have reproduced. Obviously you're referring to an actual gay couple reproducing with each other...but clearly in today's age that isn't necessary to have kids. There are more ways to have kids besides "traditional" reproduction and/or adoption.
As for the rest of the post, I don't understand what it has to do with your opinion of gay marriage. Some gay people are quote, "wow," so they shouldn't be able to get married? I don't follow the thought process. A number heterosexuals are "wow," but surely you don't support banning heterosexual marriages...
Doesn't make sense.
just my personal opinion - i don't like gay people. i personally hate when there are known gay people in the locker room because then i feel REALLY uncomfortable because of a certain past experience. but thats just me, someone else may think its "hot" that another person of the same sex is checking them out in the locker room, but rest assured, that's not me :) let me explain y i dont like them - one was staring at me when i had my f***ing pants off...that's all i need to say, and it may not be the greatest reason, but i don't care. btw, r YOU gay? also let me restate something i said before - some gay people are all right. i dont mind some of them. but the others.... :dontknow:
That's because you're what appears to be a homophobic teenager who's neurons aren't being utilized yet...
-
im straight but i do believe that they are allowed to be happy
-
I think that if someone wants to get married they should have that right, rather they or straight or gay. Who are we to judge? That's what the problem is everyone thinks that it should be their way, but it doesn't work like that. The only opinions that matters is those involved in the decision and God. If you are a believer in God, I am, then you should not put yourself in a postion to judge others. It is not our place to judge.
I guess I just don't understand why people are opposed. If a gay couple is getting married it doesn't affect anyone but them. If we mind our own business, it wouldn't be a problem.
Sorry, I am a rambler.
-
i support them :thumbsup:
love is love
-
As long as the Bible has a stranglehold on people's minds, there will never be an understanding reached about anything in this country.
"God says no, so I say no." Way to think for yourselves. Way to cast a stone on a gigantic portion of the HUMAN RACE because your book tells you to. Way to maintain the Golden Rule. Way to be a narrow-minded, judgemental, hateful jerk.
People are...
...black & white & brown & yellow & red.
...tall & short & fat & skinny.
...rich & poor & democrats & republicans.
...gay & straight & bisexual.
We are also scared, confused, hopeful, trying to keep a job, hoping to buy a house, wishing for a new car, worried about that 15 extra pounds, wondering where we left our glasses when we took them off. And on and on and on...
What makes someone different? Why does that make them bad, or less than you? Where do you draw the line? How far is "too much"?
We are HUMANS. All of us. And all of us are the same. Thus, we all are entitiled to EVERYTHING that the rest of of the world is.
Who do you think gave you the brain to think with. The color of your skin and your body type cannot be chosen. But they have a choice when it comes to sexuality. You are born a specific gender and we were made man and woman. Non man and man or woman and woman.
That's interesting. May I ask at what age you CHOSE to be attracted to males (I'm pretty sure you're a female)?
I can personally say I've never met a single person who made a point decision in their life about who they were going to be attracted to...
Again, whether it's genetic or not doesn't really matter. A person's sexuality and hormone production are not choices in the same way that you choose what type of pizza you'd like to have tonight. It's obviously a much deeper process than that and you won't find a legitimate "expert" who would agree to sexuality being some random choice a person makes when they hit a certain age. I find it depressing people still think sexual attraction is something you wake up one day and decide upon.
I put yes. But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all. I feel that we can't ignore what exist. And being gay is real. My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families. The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance. So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.
how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say
Being gay doesn't mean your reproductive organs don't work. Gay people throughout history have reproduced. Obviously you're referring to an actual gay couple reproducing with each other...but clearly in today's age that isn't necessary to have kids. There are more ways to have kids besides "traditional" reproduction and/or adoption.
As for the rest of the post, I don't understand what it has to do with your opinion of gay marriage. Some gay people are quote, "wow," so they shouldn't be able to get married? I don't follow the thought process. A number heterosexuals are "wow," but surely you don't support banning heterosexual marriages...
Doesn't make sense.
just my personal opinion - i don't like gay people. i personally hate when there are known gay people in the locker room because then i feel REALLY uncomfortable because of a certain past experience. but thats just me, someone else may think its "hot" that another person of the same sex is checking them out in the locker room, but rest assured, that's not me :) let me explain y i dont like them - one was staring at me when i had my f***ing pants off...that's all i need to say, and it may not be the greatest reason, but i don't care. btw, r YOU gay? also let me restate something i said before - some gay people are all right. i dont mind some of them. but the others.... :dontknow:
That's because you're what appears to be a homophobic teenager who's neurons aren't being utilized yet...
exlain the neurons thing please, & i sure as hell am not homophobic thank you very much. Seriously, who's scared of homo's? and in the words of DMX for all my hip-hop listening people: "How you gon' explain f***ing a man?" <- now that's a good question.
-
That's because you're what appears to be a homophobic teenager who's neurons aren't being utilized yet...
[/quote]
exlain the neurons thing please, & i sure as hell am not homophobic thank you very much. Seriously, who's scared of homo's? and in the words of DMX for all my hip-hop listening people: "How you gon' explain f***ing a man?" <- now that's a good question.
[/quote]
LOl, sorry liljp617, if you have to define nuerons, I think you are wasting your time. I think you have responded with logical, well thought out arguments. But when you get back "I'm not afraid of homos" and quotes from a rapper, you are wasting your breath ( or fingers) . It's like arguing with a drunk...pointless.
-
I believe if they love each other then they have the right.
-
I don't know any gays, I've really never even come across any, anywhere. I don't really like the IDEA of homosexuality, but I'm not going to say outright "Gays are sick and disgusting and blah blah blah....", simply because I have no idea if that is true. It's not really fair to build your own opinion off of the opinions of others. And that is why I cant actually talk about the people themselves. I don't belong in this argument, really. So, I'll just say I don't like the idea of being gay, and not make an opinion about people I do not know. And now I need to go find something I can relate to...
-
I completely support it, more than anything else in the entire world. Its my #1 cause in which I support.
-
idk
:thumbsup:
-
This is just an example of how the state and federal government are not separate from the catholic church. It's disturbing how big the catholic church and federal government are, and they are slowly taking away citizens freedom. They are corporations! Not to mention religion and government should not be combined! The government needs to be smaller, and let smaller private operated business take over were they have stuck their fingers in. And I believe the reason gay marriage is still illegal is that larger corporate business...like the federal government, don't want to have to pay more for their employees...i.e. when you get married your spouse is on your insurance, life insurance, 401k's, pensions, even social security. We are turning into corporate america, and it's sad. America is suppose to be about everyone having their own beliefs, independence, and freedom. Everyone should have this freedom as long as they are not physical hurting another person.
-
I am straight. I would not consider any other lifestyle. Do not forget honor your father and your mother...That is what marriage is all about...starting a family...a man and a woman.
-
I feel that you fall in love with a person not a gender and if that person happens to be of the same gender then so be it...that is just my thoughts about it.... :)
-
I am straight. I would not consider any other lifestyle. Do not forget honor your father and your mother...That is what marriage is all about...starting a family...a man and a woman.
Marriage is about honoring yourself, your feelings, and your partner. Your father and mother can accept it or whine about it; it's not their life.
-
civil union is not marriage - marriage is a contract for children - what ever people do is their business - but what people do to children is the community's concern.
-
I don't believe in gay marriage...most religions are against it...i honestly don't see how someone can fall in love with the same sex..you must have to FORCE yourself. Most ppl probably turn to their own sex b/c they get tired of being shot down by the opposite sex..thats the truth. sorry if anyone got offended ...just wanna say my opinion like everyone else on here.
-
civil union is not marriage - marriage is a contract for children - what ever people do is their business - but what people do to children is the community's concern.
Marriage is a legal union provided by the state between two consenting adults. The legal view of marriage has nothing to do with children. It is a contract between two adults, not a contract for children.
Homosexuality and gay marriage don't have anything to do with children. Homosexuals being legally allowed to marry and homosexuals being legally allowed to adopt children are two completely different debates.
I don't believe in gay marriage...most religions are against it...i honestly don't see how someone can fall in love with the same sex..you must have to FORCE yourself. Most ppl probably turn to their own sex b/c they get tired of being shot down by the opposite sex..thats the truth. sorry if anyone got offended ...just wanna say my opinion like everyone else on here.
Religions are against a lot of things. Usually when they're against something, they're on the illogical, irrational, ignorant side. Let's be blunt: What religious organizations/individuals say doesn't mean a damn thing more than what any other organization/individual says.
There's no forcing yourself to love someone. Go actually make contact with some homosexuals (from what I'm seeing here, you haven't before). Ask them some questions, namely one of the silly assumption you just made. Ask them how much they "force" themselves to love someone. Love can't be forced. If it is forced, it's not love.
Homosexuality is possibly genetic and is most certainly determined by one's environment. As a male, you don't get fatigue from chasing women and then wake up one day and decide "hey, I'll be attracted to other guys!" Sexuality does not work that way, it's clearly much more deep seated than that and is determined at a somewhat young age. Perhaps you should do some research into the subject before giving us "the truth."
It's intellectually dishonest to say this is your opinion, then state things and follow them up with "that's the truth." No, it's not the truth. It is not founded on any facts what so ever, not a single study has been done on the idea that people get tired of the opposite sex and randomly switch sexuality like it's some point decision in life. Think. For the sake of mankind.
-
the real issues are two different things.....
first.... should two people, who want to be in a monogomous relationship, commiting the rest of their lives to each other, be allowed to have the same rights no matter what their sexual orientation.... the answer is yes
second... should the "label" be the same.... this is the one most people struggle with...
marriage by definition has been between a man and a woman to procreate....
the religious types believe it was sanctioned by God to be that way....
an alternative label was suggested (civil union) to allow the same rights that "married couples" get... the old "separate but equal argument"
and this idea wasn't well recieved....
my suggestion is simple.... NO STATE SANCTIONED "MARRIAGES".... make all of the state recognized unions.... "civil unions"..... make that the requirement for all the benefits, that should come with the choice to spend the rest of your life with someone...
then people who want to express themselves in a religious "marriage ceremony" could still call themselves "married" as an expession of their belief system and not as a requirement for benefits...
Correct. This would be one of the more simple, realistic solutions.
Although I disagree slightly on the definition of marriage. The definition of marriage has changed drastically over the ages and it has a lot more to it than just a man/woman union.
Also, the civil unions weren't equal. Not just because of the "separate but equal is inherently unequal" stuff, but because they simply didn't provide equal benefits to those under civil union.
Well, my opinion... I don't really care if someone is gay or not. I personally am NOT for it, meaning it's not my slice of pie. My son's godfather is gay. However, I don't understand why gays need a marriage instead of a civil union. Practically the same thing to the state. Marriage is strictly between man and a woman. Anyone reading this can hate me all they want, but this is still my opinion. On the flip side... some people just can't help loving someone who is the same gender. So, my opinion is obviously flawed. :(
Because giving someone what you deem equal treatment, but telling them they're to be separated from the rest of society and kept a minority is not equal treatment. Separate but equal is inherently unequal (I hate repeating this so much, but it sums up the point well).
The optimal idea would be to get rid of marriage as a state institution all together and have nothing but civil unions for all couples.
Nor do I agree that not wanting marriage, (a religious rite) conveyed on homosexuals is wrong.
But unfortunately the "secular institution of marriage as a religious rite" is an area of comingling of church and state. In its current state... partially.
I would divide the two if I could, into domestic partnerships and marriages, with marriage being a purely religious rite with no legal significance, and domestic partnerships being the licensing aspect of the legal ceremony. The difference being a clearer line of separation between church and state, where separation of church and state here would be a good thing. The church (and other religions) have non-legal significance in marriage, so separating the two would be ideal. Marriage would then be solely a religious rite. Its a fairly simple solution.
-
then they say that they were made that way, please,
Sexual attraction to the same sex isn't a choice. It is a natural tendency they are born with like any other natural urge.
Whether they act on those urges is a different matter.
-
God did create 1 man and 1 woman and told them to go out and multiply!
I come from a extremely strong Christian familing and I am a Christian. I do not believe in gay marriage. This (oo) and this (--) just don't fit. It doesn't work that way....I do not believe that they should be able to marry. Marriage comes from the bible and it is stated that it is to be between a man and a woman.
It looks like you're saying homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't procreate. That is your standard. Following that same standard, sterile people (who can't procreate) shouldn't be allowed to marry. Women who have gone through menopause (or had a historectomy) shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't procreate.
The way I see it, women and men are differnet for a reason. They fullfill the differences that women and men have and complete the circle to carry on life.
.... Unless the female has gone through menopause. So if a couple in their mid-60's get's married, is this sinful?
Can a couple of a man or woman who cannot have children marry? Or old couples where the woman has gone thru menopause?
Homosexuality ends that. It doesn't work....
Their ability to create life is not the central point to the morality of it. Otherwise, gay men who can create human life by synthesizing their DNA into a unique human being in a vat or a chamber or what have you (as may be done in the future) would make homosexuality perfectly acceptable. My intuition is that it would still be impermissible and immoral.
I think the procreation issue alone is a weak and unconvincing argument, frankly. Unless you want to argue that infertile couples can not marry.
-
I am open to a lot of things in this world, because I feel if it is not harmful to me or if it does not affect me personally, I have nothing negative or positive to say about it. If a gay couple wants to get married, by all means, let them try marriage. I honestly think by just allowing gay marriage, we can improve the economy - really, just think about the expense some gay couples would go through if they could get married legally anywhere.
Excellent point you made here! The population definitely decreases and...
This wouldn't be a valid argument for gay marriage if gay men who can make babies would increase the population.
...children in orphanages would get a home as well, which benefits the economy in many ways.
You could have a case if much statistical data has been shown decisively that it's good for society in practice, in the same or different way as traditional marriage.
-
I believe gay people have the right to be in love if they so choose. But Marriage is a religous thing and I dont know any religion that teaches or preaches in gay marriages. So maybe there needs to be gay "union" laws or something but marriage...I dont agree
And what about liars, thieves, cheaters, prostitutes and drunkards? The bible talks about these people in the same breath as homosexuality.
Should they be excluded from marriage too?
-
Please do some reading on the history of marriage as well before stating factually that marriage has any origin at all in the Bible.
Scripture clearly teaches marriage.
i honestly believe that God made man for a woman and a woman for a man. there should not be anything other than that. now without a biblical perspective, you cant say much either, because all you can say is that is changes the definition of marrige as we have thought about it for thousands of years...i dont think it is right.
The definition of marriage has changed even in the last few decades.
In American or Christian terms?
The subject of this country's foundation is not one of opinion.
And so is this: the people who founded this country upon virtuous principles were not bible-believing Christians at all but were deists who believed in the Enlightenment ideals and values of life, liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness (or property.)
-
Also small g in God refers to a false god, G should be always capitalized.
Firefly, I didn't end up with a red face after reading your post. However, it should be noted that certain faiths/religions require that god be lowercased or even written as G-d. Typing it out in full with capitalization makes whatever you've written it on to be sacred. As a sign of respect to those people, that is why you'll see me write it as such.
If some of you would read your Bible more you would know that this sort of relationship is an abomination against God.
For the record, my readings of Sodom and Gomorrah are that the city was burned down because of rape, gluttony, and inhospitality.
This doesn't change biblical exegesis on the abomination of homosexuality.
"Genesis 18:20-21, NIV"
Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."
People consenting to homosexual "relations" would not cry out to the lord against their partner. Somebody who has been raped (as the townsmen were attempting to do with the angels in Lot's home) would cry to the lord.
"Luke 10:10-12, NIV"
But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 'Even the dust of your town that sticks to our feet we wipe off against you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God is near.' I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.
Which, this reads to me that if a town is not hospitable towards you, they will suffer worse than Sodom.
I would disagree that the main nature of the sin they committed was simply in-hospitality. The main sin is general disobedience as in full rebellion being judged, not just one certain sin (i.e. rape and gluttony.)
This means that in the New Testament, when the apostles brought news that the town's overall rebellion (like Sodom's overall) would be forgiven, and if they rejected it --- then that would be judged much more harsher than the rebellion by itself.
-
I have worked with a lot of gay and lesbians throughout the years. A couple of them I could actually claim as a friend. They were wonderful , good people who just wanted to be happy and enjoy respect like the rest of us. Gay Marriage is a choice, the same as abortion, smoking, and drinking. :notworthy:
-
I do not have a problem with Gay marriage. My brother is gay. However, from talking with people that I know who are gay they just want the same tax breaks, insurance and such that married people recieve. Marriage is mostly that anyway. I got married for that reason. Not that I do not love my husband and plan to be with him, it was just that we were perfectly happy living as an unmarried couple, but I lost my job kids and myself needed insurance, as well as we checked on what a difference being married would make on our taxes and you would not believe the difference it will make for us.
-
I'm for gays and lesbians having the right to marry, I think it is positively ridiculous that they can't in most parts of the US. Whether it is against your religion or not, this is supposed to be a free country, with freedom of religion. We all aren't Christians. Buddhists celebrate gay marriages, so not allowing them to be married is infringing their freedom of religion. It is extremely obvious that they should be able to be married.
(Read: MARRIAGE IS NOT JUST A CHRISTIAN THING.)
Gays don't hurt anyone just being gay. Give one example where they have.
-
:angel12: I don't see why everyone, just can't be happy with you you are.
-
I don't care who you marry.
-
i think that ppl should have the right to get married to whoever they want to be with
u cant help it that they are gay
its who they are
its like for straight ppl
its like asking "why is a man and a woman kissing or holding hands?"
its the same thing with two men or two women
they should be married to whoever they love
and somehow i think that gays usually
have better relationships that
last longer than straight relationships
thats my opinion anyway
-
just let them get married. we can so why can't others be happy without us sticking our nose into their business?
-
:thumbsup: I'm straight, but I'm an artist, so I know a lot of gay men, and women in this industry. They are good people, and kind to everyone. I hope they CAN marry soon, and find love like the 'normal' people.
Gay marriage is not normal. It goes against God's law and even our Founding Fathers. It's just the nature of the beast.
-
:thumbsup: I'm straight, but I'm an artist, so I know a lot of gay men, and women in this industry. They are good people, and kind to everyone. I hope they CAN marry soon, and find love like the 'normal' people.
Gay marriage is not normal. It goes against God's law and even our Founding Fathers. It's just the nature of the beast.
Define normal.
Don't give a *bleep* about your invisible god's law.
Where did the Founding Fathers say anything about gay marriage?
If you're going to oppose something, at least put a little effort into thinking up logical reasons to do so.
-
:thumbsup: I'm straight, but I'm an artist, so I know a lot of gay men, and women in this industry. They are good people, and kind to everyone. I hope they CAN marry soon, and find love like the 'normal' people.
Gay marriage is not normal. It goes against God's law and even our Founding Fathers. It's just the nature of the beast.
Who are you to decide who is normal or not?
A lot of things that used to be abnormal are now legalized like interracial marriage and civil rights for women. If anything considering our currently rising population gay marriage should be allowed if only to lessen the number of new babies when so many others are in orphanages.
Maybe you should read this:
(Intended as sarcasm for those out there who take every-little-thing literally)
1) Being gay is not natural. Real people always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Brittany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
7) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in the world.
9) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans...
-
Gay marriage should NOT be an issue. If that is what people want to do then they should be allowed to as long as they are not putting anyone in danger and are following the law then it should be no one's concern.
-
I'll say one thing...I'm happy to live in Massachusetts!! :notworthy:
-
I believe in gay marriage....everyone should have the right to choice who they love!!
-
Let homosexuals live their lives. They need more justice. It's very sad to actually see fundamental Christians and homophobic people continuously bash them for their differences. Not everything in life is as "normal" as we think it should be. It is said that homosexuality and asexuals help control the population from being over-populated. Also, did anyone know that homosexuality and even bisexuality is present in several other species such as primates?
-
I wish there weren't ignorant people. Especially in government. Then, this wouldn't even be an 'issue'.
-
wow! this is quite a heavy topic for this forum! :-
makes me reconsider posting an opinion, not knowing who may or may not be offended or bothered by my post. :-X
what to do? what to do? :dontknow:
one thing's for sure, my older brother is gay and has been with his boyfriend for over 8 years. they both work, go to church twice a week, have bought a house and are raising his boyfriend's two children together. if my brother were a woman, people would think "she" was crazy for "playing house" with a man for that long without getting a ring on her finger.
-
Only folks that think it's "wrong" for gay people to marry are either old or small-town. Since they're both dying breeds, there's hope for this country yet.
-
i dont really care for marriage at all unless the to are truelly in love.
-
in reference to gay marriage I have always been taught that religiously it should be adam and eve not adam and steve! But to be politically correct nowadays as long as people don't hit on me I can tolerate them!!!
-
it should be adam and eve not adam and steve!
Way to be original, not so much.
But to be politically correct nowadays as long as people don't hit on me I can tolerate them!!!
Spoken like a true bigot. How nice that you "tolerate" peoples sexual preferences. You deserve a medal for that.
-
They should be able to get married !! :male: :male:
-
I believe we should follow the way GOD set it up. There was a reason for that! I believe there is a penalty that shows up in ones life when one does not follow the simple way he set it up. We were born with two packages. The first is the package of health wealth happines and love. The sec package is the penalty for not using the first. It is our choice. I found out the first is like heaven on earth in our spirit and we are blessed just following the way he set it up. Our creator knew there would be different paths that we could take and he left it up to us to choose. I take the way he set it up. Look at nature there are lessons to show us this over and over again. If you dont go against the grain you will find life fits together just like a huge puzzle. You love people and yourself and you find what you sow comes right back to you again. You are always building a boomarang that will always return to you. Be careful what materials you build it out of. You cn build it out of love, patience, helpfulness and all the materials you would want to return to you or you can build it of hate, malice and all the bad materials you dont want including going against his way he set it up. We can choose. We are much happier following his plan. He set it up in the natural reallm. There is a male and a female connection when fitting pipes together. That is one which comes to mind but there are many others. We can ignore them or we can learn from them. It is up to us. We have lessons right before our face if we would look life would run more smoother for us. God set up Adam and Eve not two of the same gender. I find it easier and happy beyond words to follow his plan. He had a reason but we can choose.
-
Aside from right or wrong..I don't see any benefit to being married. Honestly. I pay MORE taxes AND it costs more to live and we have no children so don't get any huge child credits....why do you want to get married?
-
i really honestly cant beleive this topic is still up on this forum :confused1:
-
Now as far as people being born with two genitals it was the result of different ones in the past mixing the wrong seed. God had nothing to do with it. He dont break his laws. Man does. He set it up the right way for man and woman to produce seed.
-
i don't see why they can't get married. teenage girls can get married with parental consent. if gays want to get married they should have that right. itwon't effect our economy any more or less. they pay taxes like everybody else. WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL!!!
-
this is such a never ending topic anywhere you go. i don't know what to comment about it, all i know is that man and woman's got to be married before living in together.
-
When it comes to the same sex marriages, sorry, I dont believe in that and the lord had not meant it that way either . we are all are in :female: or :male: so thats the way we are suppose to be. but thats not for me to judge. All of you have enough to deal with. We All have friends that are like that one way or the other. Lets try and get along.
-
I believe it is up to the person. Who are we to judge and it's none of anybody's business anyway. Don't really know why it is such an issue. Just don't shove it in any ones face. 8)
-
I feel that it is up to the person or people to decide what they want. I feel everyone should be able to get married to whomever they want.
-
I support Gay Marriage 150%. I will fight anyone on this topic, I am SO devoted to this cause. Its a personal choice, there is nothing wrong with two men, or two women. Theres no difference, really, love is love.
-
I support gay marriage in everything but it name. "Marriage" carries with it religious connotations, and it's totally within the rights of the church to not allow people they don't support to use that word. Basically, change the law so civil unions have the same rights (that's something that should have been fixed long ago), bam, gay marriage problem solved.
-
I support gay marriage in everything but it name. "Marriage" carries with it religious connotations, and it's totally within the rights of the church to not allow people they don't support to use that word. Basically, change the law so civil unions have the same rights (that's something that should have been fixed long ago), bam, gay marriage problem solved.
So then you're saying that Atheist should be denied the right to marry as well? If not, what's the difference? Your reasoning appears to be flawed.
-
I support gay marriage in everything but it name. "Marriage" carries with it religious connotations, and it's totally within the rights of the church to not allow people they don't support to use that word. Basically, change the law so civil unions have the same rights (that's something that should have been fixed long ago), bam, gay marriage problem solved.
So then you're saying that Atheist should be denied the right to marry as well? If not, what's the difference? Your reasoning appears to be flawed.
Call me crazy, but I don't think an atheist would want to get married in a church.
-
I support gay marriage in everything but it name. "Marriage" carries with it religious connotations, and it's totally within the rights of the church to not allow people they don't support to use that word. Basically, change the law so civil unions have the same rights (that's something that should have been fixed long ago), bam, gay marriage problem solved.
So then you're saying that Atheist should be denied the right to marry as well? If not, what's the difference? Your reasoning appears to be flawed.
The current issue of "marrying" gays is very different than marrying an atheist. Nothing in scripture goes against marrying a heterosexual atheist couple. The problem here is this. If gay marriage goes through with marriage as a convoluted blend of church and state, you get to where discrimination will occur or the first amendment will be violated. It is that simple.
-
(http://i45.tinypic.com/9gx2ra.jpg)
-
Let people be who they are. Who has the right to keep another person from love? If the people against gay marriage were gay themselves Im sure they wouldnt want to be controlled or stopped from being who they really are. Doing this is like treating gays like animals. There shouldnt be laws to keep some people from the right of mariage and love that everyone in the world deserves. Doing so is like depriving someone of an essential part of life. Its not really anyone elses business what people do and as long as it doesnt effect others directly then causing a fuss about gays is an unessecary reason to get people angry.
-
I support gay marriage in everything but it name. "Marriage" carries with it religious connotations, and it's totally within the rights of the church to not allow people they don't support to use that word. Basically, change the law so civil unions have the same rights (that's something that should have been fixed long ago), bam, gay marriage problem solved.
So then you're saying that Atheist should be denied the right to marry as well? If not, what's the difference? Your reasoning appears to be flawed.
Call me crazy, but I don't think an atheist would want to get married in a church.
Exactly my point. If Atheists can be married outside of the Christian faith, then why not homosexuals as well?
-
marriage is a contract for children - don't think you can get children out of this union - IMHO >> In My Humble Opinion - The MUSEUM, Zazzle, deviantART, ArtFire, FineArtAmerica
Health, Happiness, Peace and Positive Prospective
-
I beleive in God and in the Holy Bible.
Genesis 1:27-28 - So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; MALE and FEMALE he created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply;
God created Adam and Eve. (not Adam and John or Eve and Mary)
Gay marriage can NOT multilply, or can they? Gay multiply every day in this confused world, but gay people don't multiply children. I understand God meant to multiply by having children. :BangHead: :'(
Ohh and I am NOT judging. THIS IS THE WORD OF THE LORD :angel11: Male and Female Multiply !
-
So......if my GF is not able to become pregnant, someone should have the right to say we can't marry?
yeah right....go *bleep* up a tree.
-
So......if my GF is not able to become pregnant, someone should have the right to say we can't marry?
yeah right....go *bleep* up a tree.
:o You are so confused ! The topic is about GAY marriage unless your GF is a guy and I think you are a guy right? ;D
SOMEONE IS NOT BLESSED - MY GOD LOVES TO BLESS HIS PEOPLE. ONE WAY OR ANOTHER THERE IS A MIRACLE WAITING FOR A SPECIAL PERSON OUT THERE.
-
If we are to take every word of the Bible literally, then we cannot eat pork or shellfish, and a woman becomes her husband's property upon marriage. St. Paul says, "Women, obey your husbands; for the man is the head of the woman as Christ is the head of the church." How many people follow these rules, especially the last two? What kind of sick, messed up society would we be if we did? As time goes by, people use their God-given brains to understand human nature and biology. We now understand that people don't choose to be gay although many of them try and try to be heterosexual. I know a gay woman who married THREE TIMES before she finally acknowledged her true nature and is now happily married to a good woman. People can believe any nonsense they choose, but their belief does not make it true, or good.
-
So......if my GF is not able to become pregnant, someone should have the right to say we can't marry?
yeah right....go *bleep* up a tree.
:o You are so confused ! The topic is about GAY marriage unless your GF is a guy and I think you are a guy right? ;D
SOMEONE IS NOT BLESSED - MY GOD LOVES TO BLESS HIS PEOPLE. ONE WAY OR ANOTHER THERE IS A MIRACLE WAITING FOR A SPECIAL PERSON OUT THERE.
Really I don't think he is the one that is confused. If marriage is a union to multiply, and two people are not able to produce children, then in all means and purposes they should not be allowed to get married by the reasonings that your saying. A homosexual couple can have children by the same means as a couple who is not capable of carrying children, through surragency and adoption. I believe the idea of basing marriage strictly off the basis of being able to carry children is contradicting because essentially you are saying that those couples who cannot carry children cannot get married.
-
I support gay marriage in everything but it name. "Marriage" carries with it religious connotations, and it's totally within the rights of the church to not allow people they don't support to use that word. Basically, change the law so civil unions have the same rights (that's something that should have been fixed long ago), bam, gay marriage problem solved.
So then you're saying that Atheist should be denied the right to marry as well? If not, what's the difference? Your reasoning appears to be flawed.
Call me crazy, but I don't think an atheist would want to get married in a church.
I agree, I am Atheist and I would never get married in a church.
-
Using a different name would not work. Remember "separate but equal"?
Marriages are performed under every religion, and they are called marriages no matter what religion they are performed under. Some sects of Buddhism celebrate gay marriages. Not wanting to call it marriage because it has religious connotations is ridiculous, because marriages were being performed before Christianity existed.
-
I so dont believe in gay marriage ; if i was in charge of things i would prosecute them because first off God did not make Man on top of Man and he didnt make Woman on top of Woman so i think when you do that stuff its a sin. And i know that God would be ashamed to see the ppl that he set here on earth looking and being gay like that its sickening dude.
-
The way I see it, if a man and another man (or woman and woman) fall in love, what right does anyone have to say they shouldn't express their love to each other?
I don't know about you, but I don't think of God as someone who would break up love.
The way I see marriage, is that it's the joining of two souls in holy matrimony. And as far as I know, a SOUL doesn't have a gender.
-
i think people should have the right to their own preference. everyone should be happy to show their love and affection to whom ever they want.
-
sodom and gommorah were destroyed then and they will be again. soddomites are nasty and there is no room for them in this world i dont care who reads this and what you say god hates soddomites
-
Love is Love. Love is Universal. We have a new president, a new century, a new millennium. some of the most interesting people i know are gay, or associate with the LGBT community. I think that since Gay Marriage has no effect on Straight Marriage, that it should be allowed. I think Its more a matter of "why not?" than "why?"
-
Honestly i dont have a problem with it
-
I don't remember if I commented on this, and I'm too lazy to check. But some people wrote some things in here that make me want to throw up. Rights should not be denied to anyone based on who someone loves! I don't care if someone wrote it down in a book and said "god" said it. He and that book can suck it. Before you go judging anyone and denying them something so basic as committing themselves to the person they love remember that they are HUMANS first the same as YOU, all else comes after.
-
I don't believe the government should have anything to do with Marriage that is a religious concept. The Government is only involved for legal and tax purposes. I believe the State should offer everyone civil unions. If you want your civil union to be called a marriage find a religious institution that will preform the religious ceremony for you. But as far as the state is concerned They should not be marrying anyone, but only providing the legal documents necessary to register the legal civil union between two people. People are two caught up in labels. :BangHead:
-
to each person their own preferrence....
-
Because I lean toward Libertarian, I say they should be allowed to marry. Morality and Legality are separate.
-
gay guys are girls best friends.
-
my SISTER is gay and i am PROUD of it!!! AND she got married over a year ago!
she is HUMAN too!!! why can she deserve to be happy?!? just because ppl want to live the "normal" way??? wtf is NORMAL!?!?!? ugh whatever
im happy shes gay and im happy shes not hidding it and neither am i
-
I support gay marriage and people should be allowed to marry whomever they want to marry. There is nothing wrong with gay marriage. As long as they love each other, then nobody should stop gays from getting married. Gay marriage is legal in California and California is making gay marriage legal for Californians. I am a supporter of gay marriage and religion should not discriminate against gay marriage. People are just normal and people are just people. I don't think all religions should discriminate against someones sexual orientation. There are a lot of hypocrites out there. :)
-
Here in Iowa they recently passed a law stating that gay marriage was legal. I think it's a wonderful thing to be honest with you. I have a best friend who is gay, and him and his boyfriend have been together for almost 5 years. They recently got engaged, and will be getting married soon. I am very excited for them. I believe it should not matter what sex you are. They say people are supposed to be free and equal, but how free and equal are people when they can't get married due to a sexuality thing. Also, I think it's messed up who a gay person can't get married once in some places, but a person who is straight can get married and divorced as many times as they want. There are people who have been married 5 different times, and just because someone is gay they are unallowed to get married once. That's wrong!
-
Discusting!! Be straight or suffer the concequenses for all eternity.
-
:sad1:When you get older, you realize that it just dosen't matter.. Take love wherever you can get it, and with anyone who loves you.
-
I am 100% for gay marriage! Never EVER going to change my view. It's about love! :heart:
-
I totally support gay marriage. :heart: I think people have every god-given right to marry and love who they choose. Am I right? Plus, it's not very different being gay, in fact being gay is as normal as being straight. I know. Im a proud to like girls. :female:
-
To me I think anyone should be able to do what they want with their life, I can see people not agreeing with their lifestyle or choices but it is not your choice to make. I feel if they are not hurting anyone why not let them be who they want to be it is not your life !!!!!!!!!!!
-
Everyone should marry who they love
-
I don't believe the government should have anything to do with Marriage that is a religious concept. The Government is only involved for legal and tax purposes. I believe the State should offer everyone civil unions. If you want your civil union to be called a marriage find a religious institution that will preform the religious ceremony for you. But as far as the state is concerned They should not be marrying anyone, but only providing the legal documents necessary to register the legal civil union between two people. People are two caught up in labels. :BangHead:
couldn't agree more! marriage is a religious thing and state should have never got mixed in it...I'm for civil unions though. To each their own! :thumbsup:
-
its wrong and gross but they are people like everyone else and people fall in love and get married so um yea..
-
I think people should marry those they love (I don't mean one should marry one's pet or something because one loves them), but heterosexual or same sex marriages should get the go-ahead. As previous members commented: It's all about love!
-
I am straight and think that gay marriages are okay (not something I would do) and that the partner should be allowed to share in advantageous health insurance benefits. I am not sold on gay marriages fostering children. I think that children have a difficult enough time growing up and that same sex marriages create extra hardship for children and the children may become stigmatised and separated from peer groups. Today's society isn't as open-minded as we would like to believe we are.
-
Of course they should be allowed to marry. A church doesn't have to allow it, but city hall should have to. The fact that this is debated shows the stupidity of our country....
150 years ago we freed blacks but until 50/60 years they couldn't eat at the same counter as whites.
I hope my grandfather and his generation are embarrassed of this. I also hope my generation will look back and be embarrassed by the way we treat the homosexual community.
-
I think grape kool aid should taste like orange kool aid and orange like grape. Why don't we just distort or pervert everything so that every word means everything and you can make a sentence by saying "I I I I I I I I I."
-
This is an older post, but this answer is worth repeating. There is no future for families when we condone Gay Marriages.
-
This is an older post, but this answer is worth repeating. There is no future for families when we condone Gay Marriages.
Spoken out of fear and hate.
-
I think grape kool aid should taste like orange kool aid and orange like grape. Why don't we just distort or pervert everything so that every word means everything and you can make a sentence by saying "I I I I I I I I I."
What the hell are you talking about?
-
I'm a straight guy no offense, but gay marriage should be banned, we already have enough AIDS going around, I still can't believe they haven't found a cure.
-
I'm a straight guy no offense, but gay marriage should be banned, we already have enough AIDS going around, I still can't believe they haven't found a cure.
Spoken out of ignorance and possibly stupidity.
-
sigmapi1501 completely agree with your comment about ignorance. maybe we should see if we can worry more about ignorance and less about someones sexuality.
-
I THINK GAY MARRAGE IS RIGHT... I THINK PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE HAPPY IF THEY WANT TO GET MARRIED. ITS THERE LIFES NOT OURS AND IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A GOOD OR BAD MARRAGE LEAVE THEM ALONE ITNESS THERE HAPPY AND WE CANT JUGDE NOBODY BECAUSE EVERYBODY BETTER THN THE OTHER WE ALL THEY SAME. IM PRETTY SURE EVERYBODY HAVE A GAY FAMILY MEMBER :heart: :heart: :heart: *(I DO AND IM NOT AFRAID 2 SAY IT)*
-
I think it's a personal choice and not for some government to deside.
It is 2009 people..everyone is different.I think it should be the persons choice, if they wanna be with the same sex, why deny them or make them feel like they are different.
My uncle recently came out to my family, he got 4 kids, had a wife, but got divorced and also served in the military. very big shocker to the family, but we love him the same......
-
I don't believe in gay marriage but I do believe they should be able to have relationships openly and freely. To each his/her own.
Sounds kind of Hitlerish-superficial
-
I think it is a civil rights issue no matter what your religion is or what you believe about homosexuality.
-
I think it is a civil rights issue no matter what your religion is or what you believe about homosexuality.
Probably so however, there are many xtians who somewhow believe that modern religions "own" the concept of marriage, even though the institution of marriage pre-dates reliable recorded history, (which includes the on-set of xtianity and arises out of "pagan" notions).
-
It is there life it does not bother me as long as they leave me alone we can be friends but don't make a move on me.
-
To each his/her own. I have plenty of Gay friends and if they want to get married they should be allowed to get married. Most of my friends want to get married because they want, and should have, the health insurance benefits given to non-working spouses. My target is different. Straight or gay, I think that people want to consummate their union with marriage first off because they love each other in a deeper manner. I am straight and got married because, I love my wife, and I wanted to have children. Health insurance fell into my priority sequence at about reason number twenty.
-
Anyone who speaks out against gay marriage is a bigot, plain and simple. They don't believe that gays deserve the same rights as straights. They fear these people because they're different and God forbid that everyone else in the universe does not want the same exact things they do (I use this phrase a bit literally, since most people who discriminate against are from the uber religious right). The saddest part is that this hate isn't something we're born with, it's taught.
It's beautiful when two people love each other.. men, women, whatever. They're not hurting anyone else and breaking any laws by loving each other, so why not let them have the same rights as other married couples? There were similar bans on interracial marriage back in the day, again because people were SCARED, and now it sounds completely ludicrous! It'll be the same once we all just learn to be decent, tolerant human beings and accept gay marriage.
And don't give me any lines about the bible forbidding it. I respect religion, but if you discriminate against the rights of gays then eat shellfish, wear gold, get tattoos, cruse, shave, or so much as lay a hand on a football, then you're a massive hypocrite because the bible forbids those things too! Basically, you're using the bible as an excuse to validate your own intolerance and hate.
-
It does not bother me if gay people want to marry and it's none of my business what they do.
-
I love everyone I just want people to marry who God say's they should marry and I don't see that the Bible states that you should marry same gender.
-
I am not for gay marriage. I do not approve of that lifestyle. I do however believe that if you pay taxes you should not be denied the same rights as other citizens who pay taxes and as a matter of fact it's illegal. I also don't think that people who are gay should be disrespected or abused because they are homosexual. I think they should be treated with the same civility we expect from everyone else.
-
I'm a straight guy no offense, but gay marriage should be banned, we already have enough AIDS going around, I still can't believe they haven't found a cure.
Spoken out of ignorance and possibly stupidity.
[/I think it is strictly up to that person if they want to marry another of the same sex but i think yor commenwas sooooo wrong of you to say how dare you say that its enough aids going around first of all they do have a cure dont be fooled lol and 2 just becuse ppl are gey dont mean thats they got it from missing with the same sex have u thought abt they might have gotten it from the opposite sex think on thatquote]
-
DJBT......dont forget higher rates of syphillis and gonorrhea as well.Un-natural doesnt produce natural.
-
There's no valid evidence that supernatural entities produce "natural" physical ones, (or other/any effects). Blind religious faith does not constitute evidence and can be considered to be "unnatural".
Un-natural doesnt produce natural.
-
There are some xceptions.....sometimes natural produces un-natural when discerned.
-
That might account for some religious fundamentalists but, not all of them.
There are some xceptions.....sometimes natural produces un-natural when discerned.
-
Then sometimes natural produces <i dont have a clue what he meant>
But natural understood.
-
This is my unbiased opinion from my Christian stand point, no I don't think it it should be because it defies what God set us for, however, not one of us is free of blemish, and God gave us free choice of how to choose, no sin is bigger than another sin at any time..we are all sinners, I am not the judge, if I were to judge someone who wants to get married and was gay, would I not be creating another sin, God gave us free choice, so I don't think we should ban them from choosing to be married, it is their choice, we all have to stand before Him, what gives one the right to tell the other what to do.
-
A "xtian stand point" is inherently biased by blind faith.
This is my unbiased opinion from my Christian stand point ...
-
So Lynn...you say ur a xtian.....do you value the bible?
If you do the bible condemns homosexuality like it condemns drunkedness.Its pretty clear.
Those that are for it obviously dis-credit what bible says on it.
-
It remains irrelevant what some collection of religious superstitions condemns or supports. Using it as a premise for not thinking for oneself is both irresponsible and self-blinding.
... the bible condemns homosexuality like it condemns drunkedness.Its pretty clear.
-
Seriously people, if you do the proper research, you'll find the the bible isn't as condemning and 'black-and-white' about homosexuality as is popularly assumed. People who say the opposite are 100% biased.
I'm a Christian and I support gay marriage. Of all the people who support this, Christians should be at the top of the list. We should be accepting, non-hypocritical, and non-judgmental of all other people, including homosexuals. There are worse things in the world than a man having sex with another man. I think it also goes without saying that it should be a persons' right to choose how they live their life so long as they aren't harming others, and I don't see homosexuals murdering people or blowing up buildings.
-
Heres what the Bible says about sodomy (homosexuality):
"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."
Leviticus 20:13
"7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."
Jude 1:07
"26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
-Romans 2:26-28
I beleive its Genesis 19 that talks about sodomy in Lot's time.
I am sure there are plenty more. This was taken from the KJV Bible.
God loves everyone and hates sin. Thats why the Son of God Lord Jesus Christ came down to sacrifice Himself for our sins.
Some of my freinds are sodomites, but I love them and pray they get saved. Thank you all for your time. I hope this reaches your heart that it is an abomination to be homosexual.
-
Maybe Irb should read how God destroyed S&G.....Do you think He has changed his mind now!!Quite a ridiculous statement from 1 who says he is a xtian.
Where do you think the word sodom came from?
There is NO love in the act..its a desire of hurtfulness with no love or life intended!!!
-
Amen Tus...
And lets not forget the spread of disease.
-
why not if two people love each other what's wrong with it. it might be what some of us were raised to believe but it is our decision to make rather or not we accept it.
-
People with tattoos or people who wear blended fabric clothing are just as bad in God's eyes. Send them to hell to!
-
Wow, this one's been around for a long time. Hopefully tolerance has improved since 2009 when this post first came to the forum. I know I don't give a darn who sleeps with who as long as no one forces themselves on another...
-
Many are so tolerant of these taboos and say tsk tsk when bad comes from them...as long as it doesnt affect them or a loved one....BUT WHEN IT DOES THEY GO BOO HOO BOO HOO!!!
-
It is like this, God gives us free choice to choose right from wrong, it is not up to us to tell others how to choose, God gave us the right to choose, so we could come to Him with the desire to do so, if we stand back and tell others how to live, are we not essentially taking away what God so freely gave us to do, and that is the right to choose whether we will follow Him, or our own will. We are essentially breaking a worse commandment when we tell others how to choose, since this was not God's intentions. Gods job is judging us by what are hearts feel, what our heart decides to do, not because someone told us not to do it, God didn't make us love Him, God didn't say you have to follow my law, so who are we to change God and what He set in motion.
-
LYNN,What the hec are you talking about?
Did Jesus tell his apostles and teach others whats right,good etc?Should a parent discipline their child from doing wrong?
You gettin the point?I dont have a problem telling ANYONE WHAT THE GOOD BOOK SAYS!!
-
People with tattoos or people who wear blended fabric clothing are just as bad in God's eyes. Send them to hell to!
Tsk tsk,Sig!I explaned those verses to you before.Do you remember nothing?
I'm guessing it's not that you can't understand the difference,but simply don't want to.
-
I'm guessing it's not that you can't understand the difference,but simply don't want to.
I'm guessing you were 'accidentally' dropped on your head as a child. Repeatedly.
-
Well, they do have the right to be with whom they choose. I have a cousin who is a lesbian and I love her and her significant other who I consider to be part of the family.
I am not kicking and screaming either way on the marriage issue, but the bottom line is that they american people are not ready for it.