DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads - Forums: The General Forum: why gay marriage shouldn't be

Forums > The General Forum

why gay marriage shouldn't be

Acumen	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:37 AM I saw this on another board and thought it was quite humorous. ------------ 1.Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control. 2. Heterosexual marriages are valid becasue they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can't legally get married because the world needs more children. 3. Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children. 4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if Gay marriage is allowed, since Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful. 5. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal. 6. Gay marriage should be decided by people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of the minorities. 7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire counrty. That's why we have only one religion in America. 8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall. 9. 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. 10. Children can never suceed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children. 11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to things like cars or longer lifespans. 12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "seperate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Seperate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as seperate marriages for gays and lesbians will.
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:45 AM huh... Well I just don't agree... Who are you to say what is natural and what is not? Are you some sort of Devine presence???? -Jess
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:48 AM Gay marriage is not supported by religion. What religion? In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire counrty. That's why we have only one religion in America Oh really? Is that so???? Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "seperate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Seperate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as seperate marriages for gays and lesbians will. huh... This was just a really dumb post... -Jess Infertile couples and old people can't legally get married because the world needs more children. Huh, something else I didn't know...
Gatherer	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 1:06 AM Jess...this was a facetious post. You know, tongue-in-cheek, designed to show why banning gay marriage is wrong to so many...but let's not get into that again. Anyway, it's humorous...everything's cool.
Cryxan	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 4:12 AM lol... especially 3, 4, and 10.
johnnygnote	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 4:39 AM I don't care who anyone wants to marry, I think it's just not necessary to bombard me with the information. TOOO Munch Infor mation. I could care less. Just do it and shutup about it
TameasDust	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 6:44 AM Good post ... the attitudes are what control society ... if people had there way most of us would still be in caves ... cause that is what our parents did
Jesuszilla	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:35 AM Gay people are gay.
dkeifer	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:56 AM Acumen--cool post! (I've been hanging around tall people for years, and haven't grown an inch.)
Dexter	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 9:52 AM And they missed out "God gave Adam Eve - NOT Steve!".
JIGGAMAN42076	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 10:06 AM First of all, I don't want to start a war here, as the following is just my OPINION. Marriage has always been a sacred union between a man and a woman. I am not the most well-versed in Bible studies, but I have heard that it is even stated in the Bible that marriage is a union between MAN and WOMAN (Maybe this is not fact, I am not sure). But, TRADITIONALLY, marriage has always been between a MAN and WOMAN, not same sexes. This is alot more than just 'Gays wanting the right to marry'. Gays are a MINORITY group. There are so many MINORITY groups in the spotlight now, these people just want attention. Everything has to be so goddamn politically correct nowadays, these groups feel that this country owes them everything, and it doesn't. Think about it, why all of a sudden do gays want the right to marry? Was homosexuality just invented or something? No, gays have been around since the beginning of mankind. Why haven't they fussed about this before? They want attention. They want to change traditions because they are 'special' and a minority. Gays can live a perfectly happy life together without disrupting the system, by demanding the right to get married. They want a joint checking account, go get one, marriage is not required. They want to purchase a home together, fine, marriage is not required. Want to travel the world together, okay, once again, marriage is not required. If they love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together, fine. I'm all for that. But by getting married, they are bastardizing the lifelong and traditional views of marriage between a man and a woman. In conclusion, I don't have a problem with homosexuals (as long as they don't try to hit on me), and I believe their happiness is AS important as anyone else's. But if they are so 'in love', why can't they just be happy with that. Why do they feel they have to change the laws, and change tradition, therefore irritating SO MANY other people, just for their own happiness? That's horeshit. The people causing this commotion don't care about other people's feelings, so why should anyone else care about their feelings. There are SO MANY more important things the general population should be concerned with. I get so sick of seeing "Gay Marriage blah,blah,blah" on the front page of the goddamn newspaper.
Arthen	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 10:19 AM i disagree with the statement "straight parents only bring up straight children". in the first place then; where did the gays from?? 2 men?? 3 chimpanzees? how the family orients and how children are brought up affects every single moment of who they are.
kredd	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 10:27 AM "Think about it, why all of a sudden do gays want the right to marry? Was homosexuality just invented or something?" gooood question!
flamingpyro	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:04 PM they've wanted to marry for a long time.. but they've never had enough people for their voice to be heard as much as it is now...
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:04 PM Jigga... If you haven't noticed most of the more important issues are also being dealt with... And why are you trying to make this a religious thing? huh? "it is even stated in the Bible that marriage is a union between MAN and WOMAN" I can tell you the is NOT just made up of Christians... So why must people quote from the Christian's book!?! There are many a minority in the U.S., I know this... And everyone of them wants their time. Women, for instance, have been around for a long time, but they did not get all their rights until recent times. Years ago women were practically sold into marriage... For their property, their postion in society. Now women have equal rights, and although that is what this country was built on, women we still inferior at that point. So why is it so wrong for Homosexuals to want to have something so insignifagant to the country, yet so important to many? Our country is full of diversity, when will everyone just accept that as fact?!? ... -Jess
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:05 PM Agrees with flamingpyro -Jess
JIGGAMAN42076	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:31 PM ~Quote Because this country was founded upon Christian beliefs and principles, that's why. Now a SMALL group of people (gay's) feel that this should change and everyone else BETTER like it, just so they can be happy. I am merely wondering what they have to GAIN by being married? Tax writeoffs, maybe?? Lower insurance rates?? Those are excellent reaasons for marriage... "And why are you trying to make this a religious thing? huh?" ~Quote Please re-read the first line of my previous post. - "....the following is just my OPINION." I am not trying to make it ANYTHING, I just think the whole situation is trivial... Respect to you all.. ~Jigga" id="88841">"I can tell you the [US] is NOT just made up of Christians... So why must people quote from the Christian's book!?!" ~Quote Because this country was founded upon Christian beliefs and principles, that's why. Now a SMALL group of people (gay's) feel that this should change and everyone else BETTER like it, just so they can be happy. I am merely wondering what they have to GAIN by being married? Tax writeoffs, maybe?? Lower insurance rates?? Those are excellent reaasons for marriage... "And why are you trying to make this a religious thing? huh?" ~Quote Please re-read the first line of my previous post. - "....the following is just my OPINION." I am not trying to make it ANYTHING, I just think the whole situation is trivial... Respect to you all.. ~Jigga
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 12:41 PM Is this country really set up on Christian beliefs??????? As I remember it was esbablished for FREEDOM of religion and other such things... humph... Maybe citizens (sp?) should pay more attention in history class... Seriously! I mean for pete sake! there are people out there that don't know that West Virginia does NOT refer to the western part of Virginia, but an ENTIRE state!!! Yeah, happened way back in the CIVIL WAR!!!! humph... -Jess Grrr
JIGGAMAN42076	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 1:44 PM Yes, it was. Although some groups feel they have the right to change that...FREEDOM of religion was established to allow citizens to worship in the manner they deem necessary (ie: (in layman's terms) you don't have to be a Christian to live here). That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the fact that this country was founded on Christian beliefs, because it Most Certainly was.. "These are the days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed except his own" ~Quote G.K. Chesterton A Christian has to be tolerant of every other religion out there, but is not returned the same respect. And when a Christian rightly becomes indignant at the display of contempt for their faith, these Minority groups call them (the Christians) intolerant. Tolerance is a two-way street, but some people just can't understand that. "Maybe citizens (sp?) should pay more attention in history class... Seriously! I mean for pete sake! ~Quote Was this directed at me? " id="88850">"Is this country really set up on Christian beliefs??????? " Yes, it was. Although some groups feel they have the right to change that...FREEDOM of religion was established to allow citizens to worship in the manner they deem necessary (ie: (in layman's terms) you don't have to be a Christian to live here). That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the fact that this country was founded on Christian beliefs, because it Most Certainly was.. "These are the days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed except his own" ~Quote G.K. Chesterton A Christian has to be tolerant of every other religion out there, but is not returned the same respect. And when a Christian rightly becomes indignant at the display of contempt for their faith, these Minority groups call them (the Christians) intolerant. Tolerance is a two-way street, but some people just can't understand that. "Maybe citizens (sp?) should pay more attention in history class... Seriously! I mean for pete sake! ~Quote Was this directed at me?
Acumen	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 2:01 PM guess what? a good while back Rosa Parks refused to move in the back of the bus. eventually it got bigger and bigger, over what? moving to the back of the bus? sounds like something insignificant, but it was actually a big step in the civil rights movement. so why should you dismiss something like marriage because you think it's insignificant? sure, marriage doesn't mean a whole lot to me but it means a hell of alot to others. I seen that post on the board at deepelm.com and I got it's use of Satire. I LOLed. but this same exact discussion was sparked after the post. several users missing out on it's starical meaning and not taking their daily grains of salt.
johnnygnote	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 2:28 PM I have lots of Gay friends who's parents are straight. I think freedom of choice is important, and the right to do as you please without hurting anyone else is tantamount. No one has the right to judge, it's the Creator and that person and that's it.. If being Gay is wrong then when the time comes people will find that out. In the mean time I just don't care to be hearing about Gay marriage in the news all the time, marriage is marriage the sacredness of that union was lost a long time ago when the State involved itself with licenses and such. Religion is not innocenet of it's own wrong doings "people who live in glass houses". None the less my objection to the whole thing is it seems to be back firing and the law is coming down on one more freedom. "one day this bird decided to not fly south for the winter, when it got cold and there was no food the bird started to die. A cow came along and took a big shit on the bird, the shit was so warm the bird began to revive, and there was some undigested grain in the shit and the bird ate it, he began to feel so much better the bird began to sing. Along came a cat and heard the bird and dug him out of the shit and ate him right on the spot. Moral: All who shit on your are not your enemy All who get you out of shit are not necessarily your friend and If you find yourself in a better position than before keep your mouth shut or you just may find yourself in a worse one
JIGGAMAN42076	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 2:58 PM Acumen- I did find the original post to be humorous. It was the replies that followed that I have been replying to. The Civil Rights movement(forthwright referred to as CRM) is not necessarily the same issue at hand here. The CRM had a purpose of leading to equal rights for persons of all races. What I am trying to find out is 'What benefits would a gay couple have by getting married?' Where will this phenomenon lead? Will the gays eventually try to form their own unions like the 'NAAGP' for example? If people want to be homosexual, more power to 'em. But homosexuality should NOT be glorified in every way. For example, I don't care to see couples 'making out' in public places, that is totally disrespectful. But the gays that are pushing for this are the ones that don't give a rats ass about other peoples feelings. The first time I see two guys making out in public, I will throw up. But if this does happen (and you know it does) and a police officer asks them kindly to refrain from doing that, it will automatically become discrimination. That is bullshit. The last thing we need is another little group to holler "DISCRIMINATION!" everytime they don't get what they want.
Acumen	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 5:49 PM i'm not necessarily calling the lobby for gay marriage another civil rights movement or anything, i was just making a comparison. as for this little issue with gays using discrimination to "get away" with what they are doing... it kinda works with other groups as well... actually with most minority groups. believe it or not but gays are just as honest and hardworking as straights or anyone else, and yes... you do get the occasional few that uses the issue of discrimination as an excuse for anything. for example, i know a guy that got fired from a corner store. he thought he was fired because he was gay and he made this huge lobby happening... when actually he got fired for being a dumbass. what does that mean? does that mean gay discrimination is a joke? i don't think so... actually I think it is something serious, but I am aware that a few out there will misuse this serious issue to get what they want... remember when Michael Jackson was accusing Tommy Matola of being a racist and had this lobby against sony music because he thought his latest shitfest Invincible didn't get enough advertisment because of his race (yeah... I don't know either). that album got more than enough publicity and advertising, way more than enough. but instead of blaming the "poor" sales of Invincible (2 million... which really isn't all that poor) on lack of music substance and well... what else he has been doing lately... he has used the serious issue of racism as his reason. (this is just a comparison to the dumbass) mmmm... i should have expected this thread to go this way... oh well... my bad.
sinai	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 6:49 PM fuck christians and fuck their fucking bible
geetarman	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:14 PM
geetarman	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:18 PM I saw a picture of the Earth today. It was the last picture taken by the Challenger. The Earth looks so peaceful from a distance...we are all we got.
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:40 PM "If people want to be homosexual, more power to 'em. But homosexuality should NOT be glorified in every way. For example, I don't care to see couples 'making out' in public places, that is totally disrespectful." Any couple gay or straight doing this in public is disrespectful... -Jess
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:41 PM "fuck christians and fuck their fucking bible" It's not Christianity I hate, it's the Fundie's I can't stand!!!... -Jess
tomkerswill	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:42 PM Interesting... has anyone actually pointed out to Jess1561 that the original post was "ironic"?
sinai	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:43 PM yeah, i think they know by now...
Gatherer	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:49 PM well, I did try.
RON-JEREMY	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 7:49 PM "fuck christians and fuck their fucking bible" Wow...A complete sentence!! Now, maybe you can work on your capitalization and punctuation. Keep up the good work, gangsta!
woodhead	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 8:39 PM But if they are so 'in love', why can't they just be happy with that well if this is so, then no one needs to get married so what is the use of marrige if being so on love is enough to make them happy. Why go through the process of getting married at all. No w the scary thing about this is Bush wants to have a const amendment to ban Gay marrige, if this happens it will be the first time the const is used for discrimination. And as for "Christianity" this is a man made religion that has tried over the years to CONTROL the actions of the masses, and to say that it is in the Bible makes it wrong, you cant say that who is to say that line was added in after 100 of years. Lets face it the bible as we know it today is not the same bible that was written and this is a fact. Whole chapters have been taken out and edited. I.E. The War in heaven after revelations for instance.
jess1561	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 9:04 PM Ironic? It was absolutly uncalled for... -Jess
milladrive	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 9:42 PM Welp, it seems some people "get it," and some people don't. Anyhoo, I think my favorite is probably #8.
jmweirick	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 9:54 PM "It's not Christianity I hate" Jess, if you hate the idea of banning gay marriage then you hate Christianity. The Bible gives an account of the destruction of two whole cities because of homosexuality, in the Bible homosexuals are refered to as sodomites (spelling approximate), in case you were wandering. I am a Christian, and I do not approve of gay marriages, but I also do not believe that the government should ban them. I think that marriage is a religious institution, not a secular one, therefore the government should have no say in marriage. I don't even approve of marriage certificates issued by the government. I would also like to point out that if a ban is put in place, this will not be the first time that the government has banned certain types of marriage. Take, for instance, the fact that you cannot marry your sister/brother. I know that nobody wants to, but if you are going to attack a ban on gay marriage, on the grounds of discrimitnation, then you must also attack this one. My point here, people, is that this is not a big issue. What I find to be the debatable issue is whether or not marriage is secular. Marriage has, historically, been a religious foundation, when did it become a secular one? I personally don't see any reason for people who are not Christians, or members of some other religion that calls for marriage, to get married. It really only causes more problems. With the fact that living with somebody, before marriage, is socially acceptable, it astounds me that homosexuals want to get married! I want marriage because the Bible requires that you be married before you have sex. I see no reason for any person who does not believe the Bible to be married. Also, LIGHTEN UP! We took something meant to be thought of as a joke and made it into a political discussion. We Americans are so freakn' annoying.
Thaspian	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 9:55 PM #7 is my favorite. America is Catholic, and if you're not, you're evil.
Svensta	Date: February 26, 2004 @ 10:14 PM Here's a quick question for jmweirick, Acumen and others of this opinion: Just what does religion have to do with a legally recognized marriage, precisely?
Woof	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 1:19 AM Well, I'm Christian, too... although I have a real problem with organized religion... however, gay marriage, in this case, is a legal issue... not a religious one, as Svensta pointed out. If marriage in general was a religious issue only, then civil unions would be illegal. Also, whose church would be recognized as "the" church of authority, to perform the ceremony? Would it be only Catholics who have "legal" marriages? Or only Pentecostals? What about people of other faiths? So, in America, we have civil unions. We also have separation of church and state. AND... we're supposedly fighting for equal rights, and to abolish sexual discrimination. Well... as I see it, if you do not allow marriage between two willing partners, because of their gender, it amounts to sexual discrimination (not gay discrimination). And churches don't need to perform ceremonies, if they don't want to. And if churches have a moral problem with civil ceremonies, then they can lobby and vote on whether or not such ceremonies should remain legal. Right now, though, they ARE legal and binding, and to deny such a thing to somebody, simply because of their gender, or the gender of their partner, sets a double standard for sexual discrimination issues all across the boards... this can be used in the courts for dealing with other legal issues in the future, that have nothing to do with "gay" or "straight". Remember... abortion's only legal in the US now, because insurance companies didn't recognize a foetus as a human life. They didn't want to pay for miscarriages. Roe vs. Wade never would have turned out like it did, if that little technicality wouldn't have been there to use as an argument.
nvoise	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 1:45 AM i think that it's a little late to get worried about trivializing marriage... i also think the church should spend less time hating fags and more time keeping it's filthy hands off the alter boys.
johnnygnote	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 3:31 AM Homosexuals go the name soddomites in the bible because of the city Sodom that was destroyed. I wonder what Gamoraites are?
jess1561	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 4:18 AM Marriage Now tell me why do Christians have to bring their beliefs upon others? Is it witnessing, or is it Harassing? -Jess " id="88983">I am not ignorant about Christianity nor am I ignorant about the bible... I personally don't see any reason for people who are not Christians, or members of some other religion that calls for marriage, to get married. It really only causes more problems. With the fact that living with somebody, before marriage, is socially acceptable, it astounds me that homosexuals want to get married! I want marriage because the Bible requires that you be married before you have sex. Marriage Now tell me why do Christians have to bring their beliefs upon others? Is it witnessing, or is it Harassing? -Jess
robbydadrummer	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 5:19 AM Christians aren't the only ones that bring their "beliefs" upon others.. but they sure seem to make the biggest stink about it.
TameasDust	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 10:51 AM well in the 20th century women got a whole bunch of rights so maybe in the 21st century it will be gays ... but sadly most people act with 19th century attitudes ...
jess1561	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 12:24 PM True, true Robby... Also true Tame!!!
BernJ	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 12:38 PM Everyone has been drawing lines in this debate. Some draw the line to perserve the status quo. Others draw the line after gay marriage, or polygamous marriage (see for example http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/27/national/main596268.shtml , about a month old), or marrying ones cousin, or.... Draw a line somewhere (please, before child marriage!). You have to have your own reasons to back it up. Many Christians back their reasoning up with the Bible; Jews, the Tanakh; Muslims, the Koran; etc. Quite an initial post and following flame-age...
jess1561	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 12:58 PM But why must they push things off on people like me who don't believe in their sacred writing? hmmm?
BernJ	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 1:08 PM jess, maybe their sacred writing say so, "Thou shalt denounce, curse, destroy, and force your opinions upon those of other religions and those without a religion." Hamburger 8:17 §3a Maybe it's because people are people and sometimes they stink... (and don't even follow all of their own religion's teachings)
ryanwilliams	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 4:32 PM What i wanna know is why people like Jiggaman can't just come out and say "I don't like gays." Because, I'm sorry, but if you can't tolerate queer PDA the same as straight PDA, that's discrimintory. That'd be like me saying "I have no problem with white people, but i'd disown my child if he or she married a white person." That "some of my best friends.." bullshit is a little old. Like, no disrepect or anything, but call it like it is. I also don't get what will be so different if two women or two men marry. The answer is: nothing. There aren't any negatives here. The US isn't going to suddenly become this country full of freaks, nothing's going to really change--other than the fact that, as Jiggaman did mention, gays will have full marriage benefits. I don't know who may or may not be aware, but as things are now, gays who form civil unions in VT aren't considered united if they go to Oklahoma. Imagine you and your spouse getting in an accident outside of your home state. You don't have the right to go visit your spouse in the hospital, you don't have the right to claim his or her body or possesions if he or she dies if there's no will. The answer, then, might seem like "Let's make civil unions!" But the reality is that, as the Mass court said, "Separate But Equal" is rarely equal. There will be things that married couples have that civil unions won't. Right now it's on a state-by-state basis, but there are a lot of Federal benefits that gay couples can't have without marriage rights. I also think that if two consenting adults make a decision that isn't hurting anyone, why does anybody else care? Gay Marriage doesn't make your stomach turn because two people are getting married. It turns you stomach because of what YOU think.. What YOU think (you being general here) determines what YOU feel. People also wanna use that whole snowball theory...fuck that. Brothers and Sisters will never be able to marry--their decision will hurt people, especially if they procreate. Animals cannot give consent to anything, so that wouldn't happen either.
dkeifer	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 4:44 PM Well said.
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:03 PM Liviticus 20:13 'If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed, they ahve forfeited their lives.' that is were in the bible it says homosexuality is wrong.
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:25 PM also in: Liviticus 18:22 'you shall not not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is abomination'
Dexter	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:31 PM Can't find my Bible mtekk so I would like to know in what context that was said. To take one sentence out of a whole passage can entirely change it's meaning. TTFN.
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:31 PM and this link is interesting http://home.att.net/~eucharistic/Homosexuality.html
Thaspian	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:34 PM Yay for your freakin' bible.
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:34 PM rhthesinner: In the section it was listing... You shal not.... line started with You shal not.... it is in one of thoes these are the rules obey them sections and not taken out of context or modified, my bible is over five years old.
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:36 PM and in Romans 1:24-32 it talks of the 'corrupt' society, that jmweirick mentioned I'm just stating the facts Thaspain..
Dexter	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:39 PM Well thank you mtekk. That was about as clear as mud.
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:40 PM http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/2/172004a.asp a story that is also interesting
milladrive	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:40 PM "I'm just stating the facts Thaspain.." ...Yeah, but unfortunately, The Bible isn't very well known to state them.
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:42 PM You'll just have to read it yourself i guess
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:43 PM this is also intersting: http://www.americandaily.com/item/3093
Thaspian	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:44 PM Facts? Yeah, maybe I should make up a bunch'a bullshit and call it a religion... If Christians are taught to accept people for who they are, and their sexuality is _not_ their choice(as far as I know, homosexuals are born that way, it's not a choice), then why would they wanna put them to death because of it? It's a book of contradicting garbage. I mean, its own facts contradict its other facts. Why should I read it? B
milladrive	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 6:48 PM What makes you think I haven't read it, mtekk?
Dexter	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 7:13 PM When was homophobia invented mtekk? In the 16th century? The year 2000? No. It has, along with prejudice in all its guises been around since mankind. I'm not doubting it says in the Bible what you say it does. But how many times has the law been proven to be unjust? I don't think these rules you are talking about are one of the Ten Commandments which came from God and appear earlier in the Bible - so whose rules are we talking about here? They could have been made up by anyone! Somebody who had nothing better to do than to take his prejudices out on others. So just because something was reported as being said in the Bible it doesn't necessarily mean that it is the word of God. What you appear to be forgetting through all of this mtekk that the word of God is LOVE
sinai	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:04 PM Fuck christians and fuck their fucking bible.
Dexter	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:07 PM Amen!
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:17 PM religous institution, can I make myself more clear? It is obviously not a secular one, the idea is only popular in America because of our Christian background. Since we all seem to advocate the idea of separation of church and state, then isn't it obvious that marriage shouldn't be regualted by the state? We would have a cow if the government would say that you can't worship your god, whether or not you are a religious person, so why do we just sit back and let the government regulate our religious institutes? Why do we argue about homosexual marriage when the real issue is marriage its self? Look at the real issue! We are not debating the right of homosexuals to get married, but the right of the government to regulate marriage! This issue is a landmark one and should be carefully considered before acting rashly, as many of you seem so ready to. mtekk, thank you for giving those reffernces. The passagein Romans was not the one that I was thinking of, but it is still a good one none the less. I can't find the exact verses that tell the story. I will try to find them." id="89081">milla: you obviously haven't read the Bible because you made the statement "The Bible isn't very well known to state them." refering to facts. I know many could debate the truth of the Bible and that statement, but that isn't the topic. If one chooses to argue for or against the Bible, however, I would simply request that you actually read the Bible before sharing your oppinions. "Just what does religion have to do with a legally recognized marriage, precisely?" everything. marriage is a religous institution, can I make myself more clear? It is obviously not a secular one, the idea is only popular in America because of our Christian background. Since we all seem to advocate the idea of separation of church and state, then isn't it obvious that marriage shouldn't be regualted by the state? We would have a cow if the government would say that you can't worship your god, whether or not you are a religious person, so why do we just sit back and let the government regulate our religious institutes? Why do we argue about homosexual marriage when the real issue is marriage its self? Look at the real issue! We are not debating the right of homosexuals to get married, but the right of the government to regulate marriage! This issue is a landmark one and should be carefully considered before acting rashly, as many of you seem so ready to. mtekk, thank you for giving those reffernces. The passagein Romans was not the one that I was thinking of, but it is still a good one none the less. I can't find the exact verses that tell the story. I will try to find them.
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:24 PM Jess1561, I just read your dictionary definition of marriage, but it still didn't answer the question.
milladrive	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:36 PM I fail to see where that statement of mine makes it "obvious" that I haven't read it. You offer nothing of evidence to your assertion. However, whether I've read it word for word or scanned it like a magazine is neither here nor there. Too many events in The Bible go against the laws of physics for me to not believe that it is primarily a book (books) of fiction. As for your "religious" marriage, I hate to tell ya this, but marriage has been around for much longer than any one religion. It is an institution that goes back to when humans were first able to reason. You may think the world is only 7,004 years old, but it's not.
Svensta	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:41 PM You are quite clear, jmweirick. You are just completely incorrect. Christians get married. Jews get married. Muslims get married. Hindus get married. "the idea is only popular in America because of our Christian background" :buzzer: wrong again. Marriage is a legally binding contract in fully 90% OF THE COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD. Most of which managed this without the benefit of Christendom. Marriage is NOT regulated by the state. There should be no regulation of a marriage. The state FORMALLY and LEGALLY acknowledges the marriage through the marriage license. The state provides bylaws for the severing and the dispension of a severed LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT. The idea of marriages being the exclusive domain of religion is just humorous. Priests must receive a license from the state they preside in in order to act as an officiant. It IS a secular event. The state allows you to celebrate and bind it religiously because it will not interfere with a citizen's religion, but make no mistake, it is secular. "This issue is a landmark one and should be carefully considered before acting rashly" I think acting whie swollen full with your righteous Christian knowledge and faith is acting more rashly than anyone else could. How DARE you condemn anyone or anything based on your meaningless doctrine. Never mistake that what is real and true for you in a spiritual sense is real for ANYONE else. The moment one man speaks about God to another is when religion gets screwed up. MY god says its okay. YOURS does not. Why do you get to say what is legal?
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:52 PM milla, the statemeant about your reading the Bible was meant as a joke, kinda. the reason why I say that marriage is religious is because man does not naturally want to be with just one woman, and likewise a woman doesn't want to be with just on man. It can't be considered as something that would naturally occur. Also if you want to be technical, where can you give me a proof that marriage is as old as you say, or that the earth is as old as you say? If we're going to serious with ourselves, neither side will ever win the religion debate. Though as for the marriage debate, I have had no one offer me a good reason why the government should intervene in marriage. Banning homosexual marriage isn't the first step towards removing your right to marry somebody without approval, the government issuing marriage certificats was. In fact it already has reached the end goal of not being able to marry without state approval. So if you are going to use the debate that this will just lead to worse regulation of even heterosexual marriage, then you must attack marriage certificates also. As I said before, we are dealing with an issue of marriage as a state institution, not marriage as a union between man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman.
sinai	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 8:58 PM our christian background in america? ya know, several hundred different tribes of indians lived here long before any christians came along (...and claimed it was god's will to slaughter an eradicate them). and some of them even had marriage!!! and this was hundreds of years before any of them had the pleasure of being forcibly removed from their lands in the name of manifest destiny! no jesus, no wine and crackers, just two people wanting to be together and helpin each other to kill them some damn buffalo for the kiddies.
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:04 PM "Priests must receive a license from the state they preside in in order to act as an officiant." "Marriage is NOT regulated by the state." And you say the Bible is contradictory? Who gives the license? The second statement is one of the most ridiculous I have seen. If marriage is not regulated by the state then why can't I legally marry my sister? "MY god says its okay. YOURS does not. Why do you get to say what is legal?" When did I say that I wanted regulation on moral grounds? And more importanly, when did I say that I thought gay marriage should be regulated? NEVER! I have only corrected those who made incorrect statements about Christianity, and told why many of the statements supporting gay marriage are unusable in this aurgument. If yo had read any of my posts you wold have seen that I believe that gay marriage should not be regulated.
Svensta	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:04 PM I will bow out now. I cannot debate in the face of arbitrary rejection in the science of fossils and carbon dating. When the fundies bring that out, its time to head for the hills. You _can_ marry without approval, just that the state doesn't acknowledge same-sex common law marriages. If they legally acknowledged homosexual marriages, then they would do the same for the cmmon law variety. This is not about God, it's about granting people the right to health care, tax penalties, and power of attorney. All cough secular rights. Who cares if the Catholic or Jewish churches won't recognize the legal contract?
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:06 PM thank you sinai for making a logical statement against what I have said, and you are right, marriage was here before Christianity. Sorry.
sinai	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:11 PM no problem Jm, and dun't take anything i say to be derogatory to you, i dun't dislike christians, juss christianity. every religion has its assholes and it's good, honest practicioners, but at the end of the day, this is about people wanting rights guarenteed to them by our country's constitution, and it's purely religious fervor that's blocking it, and come on now, that's wrong and you know it.
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:14 PM First, when did fosill dating come into this? I meant my above statements about the age of the earth as side notes not to be debated. Thank you for giving me some kind of reference to what I have actually been arguing, sven. Removing religion from the debate, as I have been trying to do since the begining, I wish simply to address this issue as it relates to our freedoms as Americans. Before I can debate wether the state should allow gay marriages, I must first know why the state has any say in marriage to begin with. Could somebody please give me a clear, logical answer to this question, without going back to the religious debate?
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:16 PM yes, sinai, you are right. though there are the other people who have no religion, but want to rule the world who are stopping us also
sinai	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:19 PM the state has say over the BENEFITS that come with marriage jm, and that's what this is about. equal rights to all people for access to marriage benefits, that is what the whole fight is about. tax deductions, insurance benefits, inheritance rights, you know what i mean, domestic things that everyone is supposed to be entitled too. THAT is what the state has to do with it
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:19 PM scratch us there, replace with them. I am not saying I am gay I meant Americans, but that may be taken the wrong way.
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:23 PM thank you! Finally a good answer. That I can work with. Ok, in that case than fine, let the gays get married. I see no reason why the state should prevent them from doing so. The states job is not to regulate morals, it follow that gays should be able to get married.
sinai	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:28 PM thank you!!! now, close this forum and let's all get on with our goddamn lives
jmweirick	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 9:30 PM and back on topic those are hilarious!
mtekk	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 10:25 PM jmweirick, the bible says you can't marry your sister. Millia, my remark about the 'you'll have to read it yourself' wasn't directed towards you, it was directed towards rhthesinner the only reason why a state wouldn't want marriage of homosexuals is because then if one dies the other can collect social sevurity, and naturaly inherat the possessions of their 'spouse', along with qualifing for health benifits that thier 'partner' gets from work, though both mostlikely work. Yeah, the beging post was funny, incorrect but funny :lamo:
Maffmatix	Date: February 27, 2004 @ 10:40 PM The Dislocated Boner Bible (DBB)- Maffmatix 10:11-3 ~ "He who takes life too serious is a loser." Sleazy 12:1-36 ~ "Shut up, all of you. Shut your stupid faces before I kill you all with a spork."
TameasDust	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 12:44 AM awwwwwwwwwwwww
johnnygnote	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 4:37 AM Actually the founding fathers were all masons or rosicrucians look here: http://www.soul.org/Famous%20Rosicrucians.html and here http://www.trunkerton.fsnet.co.uk/founding_fathers_that_were_mason.htm and most of the foundation for this country (U.S.) are based on mason beliefs and structures. look here http://watch.pair.com/mason.html and here http://www.crystalinks.com/freemasons.html Masonry is not Christianity, the only reason the former was incorporated in the foundation was to appease the populace and, to win over the average person. The quote "One Nation Under God" does not connote Chritianity it is very ambiguous and could mean any number of religions since thay all belive in some form of God. Then agian there is the debate over this fact about masonry and founding fathers look here http://www.saintsalive.com/freemasonry/founders_fm.htm and here http://www.freemasonry.org/psoc/masonicmyths.htm
redrasta	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 9:25 AM If people want to be homosexual, more power to 'em. WANT TO??????????? WANT TO???? Like I wanted to be white, short, female or British? May I take this oportunity to say fuck you, and your ethics, and please, dont tell me about being allowed your opinion... I am very aware of this.... as much as I am aware that your opinion is wrong. That being said.. Things are only 'wrong' in accordance with what we individually hold true. Laws are made by many individuals with the same beliefs in right and wrong. Gay marriage shouldnt be disallowed especially if they want a CIVIL ceremony. I didnt get hitched in a church, but that didnt make me any less legally married, did it?
ryanwilliams	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 11:27 AM Don't you love how the US only throws the Bible around when it deems neccessary? 90% of the time, the US has no concerns about the Bible. As soon as 9/11 happened, everybody was all "God Bless America! Pray for us!" and not three seconds later they were talking about taking "Under God" out of the pledge, because how dare we force our religion on the non-believers in a free country. Yet, aren't we doing just that with this very argument? Like I and others have said above, there are benefits that same-sex unions WILL NOT GET without full federal marriage rights.
milladrive	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 12:53 PM Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn't give us freedom from religion.
Acumen	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 6:59 PM well, seeing has the whole thing is legal up here in the north, how has it changed my life as a canadian citizen... mmm... err... nothign really, only i can go down aisle with another guy... and I'm not ready for commitment yet
CrescentShadow	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 7:34 PM i absolutely hate people who pull the "being gay is a sin".. card. thats so full of shit on so many levels. the first and foremost, fucking SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE. there should be NO religious arguments against gay marriage. absolutely none. theres no question about that. so without the religion arguments, what arguments against gay marriage are left? none? masturbating is a sin too, they dont make constitutional amendments banning that. religion just pisses me off. it is the opiate of the masses. im pretty sure it is. something about having vain thoughts about someone other than your spouse. if im totally wrong, then ignore that part.
jmweirick	Date: February 28, 2004 @ 7:52 PM mtekk, I know the Bible says I can't marry my sister, and I don't want to marry my sister. I was only using that as an example. redrasta, you can technically be black, tall, male, and of any nationality you want with enough money, but that is besides the point. I'm not going to argue this, please don't try to.
Izekial	Date: February 29, 2004 @ 6:31 AM I think the Bible is basically a text book on principles, morality, and life lessons. It uses metaphors and analogies to get its point across from time to time (some stories appear somewhat ridiculous according to interpretation), and of course one cannot take it at face value wholly... times change, for instance. And if you want to use it as a tool to judge others, you should remember, if you are a believer... there is only one judge, and it's not man. Man can make laws and the majority churns, social norms constantly evolving ever so slight. Sometimes it’s for the better, sometimes it’s not, and sometimes it’s just a minute blip in our diverse, chaotic world. This country has laws and morals and Bibles of all kinds, and it was founded by an oppressed people who sought to rid themselves of the tyranny that shackled them in their own homes, but it was also founded through murder, rape, lies, and war. We speak of freedom, did both unimaginable evil and unforgettable good to attain it, to preach it, yet find ourselves at another crossroads, the people divided again over… what. There’s still a war going on, still a KKK, drug trafficking, sexists, poverty, inhumane acts being carried out all over the world… seems like all we’re really caring about is this now, since it’s on the TV, in the papers, and on the tip of every pastor’s tongue. I don’t know the exact stipulations with all this, but if gay people want to get married under the state and not in the church, what’s wrong with that? I will at once defend the church as well, if they do not wish to have a same sex couple wed on their grounds. It’s very simple. Haven’t gay people been getting married before all this bickering anyway? They want to make it official now, want the same benefits… why not give it to them? Less money in your pockets? I can’t think of any other excuse. Someone please give me another reason without mentioning God or tradition. Especially tradition. What the fuck is tradition, anyway… just a certain way people liked to do things in the past, something that was either respectable, desirable, or essential in some sentimental or revered practice. Shut up. There are people that clap at funerals, burp to compliment the chef, and read Tom Clancy novels. We’re all people, for the love of everything the end. Even in fucking Satanism, it’s said that you cannot harm another person or oppress them, and if you are successful in this, you are free to do what you will. God bless Satan (though Satanism is completely different from Devil worship… I just like ending posts with shit like that).
TameasDust	Date: February 29, 2004 @ 6:50 AM ooooooooooo I a good
Pagan	Date: March 1, 2004 @ 12:27 AM I read this forum and after every post and I say out loud "Gets it" or "Doesnt get it". Anybody else say that out loud while reading this?
Pagan	Date: March 1, 2004 @ 12:39 AM I second anything sanai posted, is posting, or will ever post in the future.
jess1561	Date: March 1, 2004 @ 7:52 PM No, I didn't Pagan... but I thought something of the sort... humph...
ryanwilliams	Date: March 1, 2004 @ 8:21 PM I thought about myself smacking people over the head. I dunno if that counts.
sinai	Date: March 1, 2004 @ 11:07 PM why thank you pagan, i'm honored ... hundreth post mo fo's!
jess1561	Date: March 2, 2004 @ 2:21 AM ... lol...
JIGGAMAN42076	Date: March 2, 2004 @ 3:25 PM ryanwilliams looks like Theodore Huxtable...

~~Previous 100~~

Page: [ 1 2 ]

Next 100

Post A Reply
From:	Guest	(Icons - Linking)
Post: