Do you approve? [Archive]

Twisterdog

02-28-2004, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by G.P.girl
i am way for it! what people don't get is that this is the EXACT same thing that happend with blacks marrying whites...peole thought it was terrible, and wrong and it goes aganst this-that-and theother but now look, nobody really thinks muchof it anymore...why can't we learn from our mistakes?

You have hit the nail on the head, G.P.girl. That is EXACTLY what this is like. Apparently, we are slow learners. Fifty or a hundred years ago people thought their little worlds would crumble if they had to live in the same county with an inter-racial couple. Marriage was forbidden, people were lynched, babies were rushed off to orphanages in the middle night ... or worse.

In the 1960's, people said, "Seperate but Equal" ... put blacks in their own schools, their own swimming pools, their own restaurants. As long as it's seperate from what we have, it's ok. So wrong. So very, very wrong. The very fact that it IS seperate MAKES it unequal.

Now, here in the 21st century we have people saying "Seperate but Equal" .... let homosexuals live together is they must, but don't let them get married or have joint custody of children, or sit with their dying partner in the hospital. Again ... the very fact that it IS seperate MAKES it unequal. A civil union is NOT the same as a marriage.

Homosexuality is the last bastion of the bigot. It's not politically correct anymore, or socially acceptable, to be outwardly prejudiced against people of a different race, or against women, or the handicapped. But it's still acceptable to say that homosexuals do not deserve the same rights as everyone else. Slow learners we are.

Karen

02-28-2004, 04:27 PM

"Outsource Bush" - this is a reference in opposition to his policies, which has allowed more and more businesses to "outsource" jobs - for example, paying much lower wages for tech-support phone help by using people in India, which is good for India, but not good for the Americans who formerly held those jobs.

So it would mean sending him overseas, like all those jobs.

The topic of this post is a complex issue. I believe heterosexual people should hold marriage as sacred as they are screaming anout it being. If so, our divorce rate would not be so sky-high.

Fox-Gal

02-28-2004, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by Karen

The topic of this post is a complex issue. I believe heterosexual people should hold marriage as sacred as they are screaming anout it being. If so, our divorce rate would not be so sky-high.

Ditto.

Divorce is to easy now days. When you hear people saying "If it doesn't work out, I'll just get a divorce" then the meaning of marriage have been lost some where. You should never start a marriage planing for your way out. :eek:

As for the topic at hand, I'm all for it. No human has the right to deny anyone the same rights we enjoy, just because they are so called "different". What kind of people would that make us, to say "We are better then you and intill you conform to our way of thinking, you will not have the same rights as us." And that is more our less what we are saying to them when we take away their right to marry.

PUPGIRL

02-29-2004, 09:38 AM

Personally, at first I thought it was okay, but then I thought about it more deeply. When I think of marriage, I think of kids, and gay and lezbians cannot have kids. Well they can adopt right? Yes, they can adopt, but that child will be made fun of severly all through it's childhood and maybe adulthood. I do not support homosexual marriages at all.

Kfamr

02-29-2004, 10:09 AM

I support them 100%.

I don't understand why some people think so badly or are against it. It's not hurting them personally, it's not stopping them from living, and it's certainly NOT hurting anyone. They just have some mental issues, IMO, if they want to stop two people of the same sex from owning a piece of paper saying they love each other.

I've heard some religious people say it's because 'God' doesn't approve of it, well let 'God' decide what's going to happen in the end, and let people live their own lives.

Personally, if I fall in love with another female, NOTHING is ever going to stop me from loving that individual.

mugsy

02-29-2004, 10:14 AM

The legislating of morality IS what this is about and a lot of conservatives feel that marriage should be traditional..between a man and a woman...well, like Karen said, how sacred is it really when 50% of marriages end in divorce? Most committed gay couples I know are a lot happier than some heterosexual couples. Now, I realize that is a severe overgeneralization, but, I think you get what I'm saying. I would rather see a kid raised by a gay couple that was committed and loving than in a home with heterosexual parents who scream at each other or worse...obviously, in our society, it would be preferable to have kids raised by a committed heterosexual couple because of the harrassment the kids face, but....

wolf_Q

02-29-2004, 10:28 AM

I agree with others in that the sanctity of marriage is pretty much already lost with such a high divorce rate.

The whole idea of homosexuality kind of weirds me out, and it's something I would never do. However, I don't see how we have the right to tell a person who they can and cannot fall in love with. As Twisterdog said, it's like the Jim Crow laws saying that a black person could not marry a white person. It's just stupid for the society as a whole to decide how love works. How is a homosexual marriage going to harm a heterosexual marriage?

ILoveReptiles

02-29-2004, 12:18 PM

clara4457

02-29-2004, 12:18 PM

Whether you agree with homosexuality or not within your own moral code - having the government dictate that moral code to individuals is abhorent to me.

CathyBogart

02-29-2004, 12:45 PM

Foam

02-29-2004, 12:52 PM

Bush is a....well yeah. :mad:
I think you should have the right to marry whom you love. Who cares about sex, color, race, whatever? It's your buisness, not the world's. :mad:

wolf_Q

02-29-2004, 12:54 PM

I don't think having kids is necessary to have a marriage at all.

I also don't think just because the kids parents are married and heterosexual they will necessarily be happier and better taken care of. There's bad situations that happen in every kind of family.

wolfsoul

02-29-2004, 01:47 PM

I'm 100% for gay marraiges. They are going to be together anyways. I don't think a contract of marraige will really make a difference.

People say that God doesn't like it. Well, if there really is a God, and He made the earth, and He made the people...then He shouldn't complain that He made some of his people gay. That is my honest opinion. Some peope will say that people are not born homosexual. Well, scientific evidence is starting to say otherwise. I watched a video where they took several different types of animals and put them all under severe stress while they were pregnant. When the babies were born, the males' testosterone levels were significantly lowered, and the same with the females' estrogen levels. It's actually really interesting stuff.

My brother's friend has two parents who are lesbians. My mom was talking to me about it, and my brother goes "Austin has TWO mommies?! Boy, is he lucky!" :D

Fox-Gal

02-29-2004, 01:49 PM

wolfsoul

02-29-2004, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by Fox-Gal
Don't deny a child a loving home just because their parents might be gay, single etc.
I agree. The parents' sexual status is not important -- the child's loving home and family is what's really important. If we support same-sex marraiges, soon society will become accustomed to homosexuals, and children who have gay or lesbian parents will not be made fun of.

Twisterdog

02-29-2004, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by PUPGIRL
Personally, at first I thought it was okay, but then I thought about it more deeply. When I think of marriage, I think of kids, and gay and lezbians cannot have kids. Well they can adopt right? Yes, they can adopt, but that child will be made fun of severly all through it's childhood and maybe adulthood. I do not support homosexual marriages at all.

Soooo ... if a heterosexual couple choose not to have children, then you would say their marriage is not valid? What about a heterosexual couple that try to have children, but one partner is sterile? What about a homosexual couple, where one or both partners were married before, in a heterosexual marriage, and have biological children? Linking children to marriage is outdated, hurtful and ridiculous.

I personally think it would far, far better for a child to grow up with two loving, kind, educated parents, even if they are of the same sex ... than to grow up with some of the pathetically trashy, inadequate and abusive heterosexual parents I've seen.

Children are teased for all sorts of things ... their weight, their height, their intelligence, how much money their parents have, what their names are, the brand of shoes they wear, if they wear glasses, the street they live on, etc., etc., etc. Teasing, sadly, is a very real part of childhood. What if two overweight heterosexual people decide to have a child? Should they not have children, because someday some other kid might tease them about having fat parents?

Every generation is more tolerant than their parents generation. Small children today do not seem to be nearly as bothered or affected by homosexuality as their parents and grandparents. As it should be. People of my generation never blinked an eye or thought twice about inter-racial relationships or bi-racial children ... but to our parents and grandparents it was practically, or literally, a crime.

moosmom

03-01-2004, 01:02 AM

Quoted by Mugsy:
Most committed gay couples I know are a lot happier than some heterosexual couples.
I would rather see a kid raised by a gay couple that was committed and loving than in a home with heterosexual parents who scream at each other or worse

I agree with Mugsy. Personally, I think everyone has the right to live their lives the way they want to, as long as they don't hurt anyone else. Homosexuality is NOT going away. And the government has no business dictating how people should live their lives.

Speaking of which, Rosie O'Donnell married her partner last Thursday.

aly

03-01-2004, 01:27 AM

Originally posted by RubyMutt
I'm all for it.

I believe you should have the right to marry the person whom you love. It's no one's business to tell you who you have or do not have the right to marry. That's just absurd. Gays should have just the amount of privileges that people who are in opposite sex marriages have.

Bush made me want to hurl when he suggested that amendment.

100% AGREED !!!!

It makes me very angry when people think gay marriage is "wrong" :mad:

CathyBogart

03-01-2004, 01:43 AM

Here's a question for those who don't approve.... Why?

I've yet to hear an argument against that really satisfies me.

"It's traditional" doesn't fly, because humans are great at making new traditions when old ones become outdated. What about the tradition of wifebeating? The traditional marriage is no longer taken seriously even between heterosexual couples, which we need only look at the divorce rate to confirm.

"It's religion" doesn't work because not everyone here shares the same beliefs. That's what makes the USA such a wonderful place....that we have so much variety in our people!

"It's Unnatural" is a blatant lie. HUNDREDS of animal species exhibit homosexual behavior, including lifelong pair-bonds and rearing youngsters. :) Flamingos are one of the greatest examples of this: two male flamingos will mate for life, and build a nest. One of the females in the flock will lay eggs in the males' nest, and the males will rear the subsequent chicks.

"It's just wrong" isn't even a real argument!

I'm trying to think of others that I've heard, but I can't right off the top of my head.

ramanth

03-01-2004, 12:37 PM

100 % for it. :)

2kitties

03-01-2004, 12:57 PM

go for it!

pitbullmommy

03-01-2004, 01:51 PM

i think people should be able to marry who ever they love not matter if is the same sex or not.i also think that they should be allowed to adopt. I am not gay but i know a few ppl that are and i see the love they have for each other.

Rottieluver45

03-01-2004, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by WolfChan
Here's a question for those who don't approve.... Why?

I've yet to hear an argument against that really satisfies me.

"It's traditional" doesn't fly, because humans are great at making new traditions when old ones become outdated. What about the tradition of wifebeating? The traditional marriage is no longer taken seriously even between heterosexual couples, which we need only look at the divorce rate to confirm.

"It's religion" doesn't work because not everyone here shares the same beliefs. That's what makes the USA such a wonderful place....that we have so much variety in our people!

"It's Unnatural" is a blatant lie. HUNDREDS of animal species exhibit homosexual behavior, including lifelong pair-bonds and rearing youngsters. :) Flamingos are one of the greatest examples of this: two male flamingos will mate for life, and build a nest. One of the females in the flock will lay eggs in the males' nest, and the males will rear the subsequent chicks.

"It's just wrong" isn't even a real argument!

I'm trying to think of others that I've heard, but I can't right off the top of my head.

WOW!! You`re good! Great point! :D

PJ's Mom

03-02-2004, 10:31 PM

I'll go with the majority on this. It's nobody's business who you marry.

Why can't we all keep out of other people's business, live our own lives and let others do the same?

G.P.girl

03-02-2004, 10:41 PM

tikeyas_mom

03-02-2004, 10:49 PM

Honestly i dont care either way.. It isnt my prob...

catland

03-03-2004, 10:24 AM

Starting today, gay couples here in Portland Oregon can get married.

What I think?

I'm worried that the gay/lesbian couples aren't seeing the bigger picture here. This issue could end up giving the presidency back to GW, which is probably the last thing that a lot of them would want.

Why?

Because this issue divides people. This issue is disturbing to a lot of people and could be the issue that creates fear and causes them to back away from the more liberal democrats.

PCB - I appreciate your honesty and respect your beliefs. One thing we can remember here is that most of these marriges are being performed by judges and not by priests or rabbis or the muslim equivilant (my appologies, I don't know the correct word for the muslim equivilant).

btw - my opinion - I think that the normalizing of single-parents and out of wedlock children are far more damaging to our moral fabric.

Logan

03-03-2004, 11:32 AM

I thought this was an insiteful and interesting approach to this whole issue. It was written by a local talk show host (talk radio) in his daily "dispatch" which I get by email every day. He certainly brings up some valid points! :)

Not all marriage is equal

While the rest of the nation mires itself in what is likely going to be an endless debate over same-sex marriage, I'm going to change the subject, and begin a new, equally unpopular campaign on a related issue. I expect no success whatsoever, and very little moral support from people of any political ilk, whether they are liberal, conservative or anything in between.

I don't care because my goal is just and right and fair.

I start with the premise stated simply and succinctly last week in an opinion column published by the Wall Street Journal. The author is Mary Ann Glendon, a professor of law at Harvard University. She stated, "Society gives married couples special benefits because most of them are raising or have raised children -- and research shows that intact families are the most desirable for raising children."

You will find very little disagreement with that statement, either in whole or in part.

1. Society does give special benefits to married couples. That's why other couples want the same benefits. No one likes to be left out.

2. Most married couples either are raising, or have raised children. Not all, but most.

3. Nearly all pertinent research does in fact show that intact families are the most desirable for raising children. The key word there is "intact."

Each of the parts of Ms. Glendon's statement is true and the whole statement is likewise true. Society gives married couples special benefits because most of them are raising or have raised children -- and research shows that intact families are the most desirable for raising children.

Therefore, if society insists on adopting laws for the purpose of benefiting children, it should narrow, not expand, the body of people upon whom it chooses to confer those benefits. In other words, we need to start taking benefits away from many married people, because they don't fit the mold.

The most obvious people who would lose the benefits are those who divorce - people like me. The same research that sings the praises of intact families warns of the destructive nature of divorce. Therefore, divorced parents should lose the child tax credits in the tax code and should not be able to claim their children as exemptions. People should get one shot at the benefits that accompany childrearing. If you stay married to your first spouse, you get lifetime benefits. If you don't, you lose them forever. You can't remarry and recapture your benefits.

What other benefits would you lose? How about inheritance advantages? Why should a man who marries one woman, raises children with her, and then dumps that woman for his young secretary be able to leave his new wife all of his worldly possessions without having to pay inheritance taxes. What did she do for society to deserve that special treatment?

I don't have a complete list of all of the special benefits that society gives to married couples, but it wouldn't take long for a good researcher to find all of them in our laws and for Congress or the states to reserve them for those married couples who meet some objective criteria. Politically, this is next to impossible. It would be like trying to take meat away from a pack of mad dogs. But, it's the only policy that actually fits the consensus reason that society gives benefits to married couples.

A better approach would be for society to mind its own business and quit using laws as leverage for social engineering. But that's even less likely to happen, so we should at least strive for the reward system to make sense. Giving all couples the same benefits based on their marital status makes about as much sense as giving all teachers the same pay based on their degrees.

CathyBogart

03-03-2004, 05:32 PM

I have to respectfully disagree. With 6.4 billion people on this earth I think we really should be rewarding those married couples who do not reproduce.

Interesting line of thought though, that's an angle I hadn't looked at before. Thank you for sharing!

-Cathy

aly

03-03-2004, 05:34 PM

Very interestubg, Logan. Thanks for sharing that. There are some good points there to ponder!

wolfsoul

03-03-2004, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by WolfChan
I have to respectfully disagree. With 6.4 billion people on this earth I think we really should be rewarding those married couples who do not reproduce.

I agree. Scientists say that we are now at our level point. Level, meaning, our population has inclined greatly, and it's only time before we start dieing off, just like with all other animal populations. Just think of lemmings lol. That may be us soon. There are way too many people on the earth.

BitsyNaceyDog

03-03-2004, 10:39 PM

posted by wolfsoul
People say that God doesn't like it. Well, if there really is a God, and He made the earth, and He made the people...then He shouldn't complain that He made some of his people gay.

God did not make people gay. It was a way of life they chose. I don't support gay marriages because God created marriages to join a man and his wife as one. Regardless of who preformes the ceremony it is wrong. A man sleeping with another man is immoral, it is a sin, it is no different than a man performing sexual acts on an animal. We all sin, the difference is I ask for forgiveness and it's forgotten, I also try not to sin.

Twisterdog

03-03-2004, 10:55 PM

God did not make people gay. It was a way of life they chose.

Please site your source for this. Do you have a scientific study showing this?

CathyBogart

03-03-2004, 11:09 PM

In my opinion, it is a decision that the person can take to their deity when they die, and it affects us....not at all!

ITA Twisterdog...I would be very interested to see if anyone can prove that Deity didn't make some people gay. Once again I turn to ancient Greece and their religion....

Shelteez2

03-03-2004, 11:14 PM

popcornbird

03-03-2004, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by KBlaix
God did not make people gay. It was a way of life they chose. I don't support gay marriages because God created marriages to join a man and his wife as one. Regardless of who preformes the ceremony it is wrong. A man sleeping with another man is immoral, it is a sin, it is no different than a man performing sexual acts on an animal. We all sin, the difference is I ask for forgiveness and it's forgotten, I also try not to sin.

I agree. I don't believe God made people gay. I don't need scientific proof for that. The words of God state how much God is against such actions themselves. Science is the research of mankind. While I do believe in most of it, I take God's words before man's words. The research of man can possibly have errors in it. How many times do they do research on certain issues, make a scientific discovery, and later say they were wrong, after further research? It happens all the time. I don't take the words of scientists over the words of God, Who created us and gave us guidelines in life to follow, which I personally, firmly believe in. If the words of scientists contradict the words of God, I don't take them. Whether certain people believe in that or not, that is another issue, but personally, when God Himself has told us how He destroyed the nation of Prophet Lot because of their gay acts, it is very obvious from the Bible/Quran/and other religious books that God is very much against this action. If God *made* people like that, He wouldn't have condemned this as such a huge sin. I'm sorry.......I don't believe God created people gay, and I never will. This is my opinion and no one has the right to condemn me for it. I am not condemning anyone for their opinions either. :)

Twisterdog

03-03-2004, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
I agree. I don't believe God made people gay ... This is my opinion and no one has the right to condemn me for it. I am not condemning anyone for their opinions either. :)

But see, PCB, that difference in your post and the previous one is that you are saying what you believe and what your opinion is. And you are absolutely correct, no one has the right to call another's beliefs or opinions wrong. It IS wrong, however, to state a belief or an opinion as a matter of fact, as was done in the other post. If you are going to state something as a literal fact ... i.e., "God did not make people gay. It was a way of life they chose.", then you'd better have something concrete to back that up. If you are saying, "My belief is ... My opinion is ...", then that is fine and well, and entirely up to you to belief whatever you choose. You are just stating how you feel, not stating a universal fact.

Who in their right mind would choose to be gay knowing the ridicule and suffering they go through at the hands of people like you? That alone is enough to make me believe that being gay is not something you choose.

I agree. Anyone who has ever personally known someone who is gay knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that they did not choose to be gay, in any way, shape or form. Most homosexuals are tormented by their "abnormal" thoughts, feelings, emotions and attractions, and try to "change" and stay "in the closet" for years, decades, or sometimes their whole lives.

I have a friend who grew up a devout Catholic, and said he "spent twenty-five years praying every day for God to make me heterosexual, to let me find women attractive" Now, tell me, then, KBlaix ... here is a man who wanted more than anything to be heterosexul, to be "normal", to do what was right in his God's eyes. He prayed about it for twenty-five years, daily. He is still homosexual, of course. How can that be a "choice" he made?

Could you "choose" to become homosexual tomorrow?

God also said, "Judge not, lest ye shall be judged." And, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

wolfsoul

03-04-2004, 10:02 AM

Originally posted by KBlaix
It was a way of life they chose.
Actually if you read the rest of my statement, people do not choose to be gay. Scientific evidence has proved that levels of stress during pregnancy can cause a baby's testosterone or estrogen levels to decrease. The resulting baby might be homosexual.

wolfsoul

03-04-2004, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by popcornbird
If God *made* people like that, He wouldn't have condemned this as such a huge sin.
There are alot of things that are sins that we go through in our daily lives. And God maybe didn't "make" you do them, but He certainly gave you the ability to. I say that it shouldn't hurt to add another big "sin". We all hate sometimes, we get angry, we get selfish, we get envious. Being a seamstress, musician, or craftsmen is a sin for cyring out loud. They always say that even if we sin, as long as we believe in God we are forgiven. I know plenty of gay people who believe in God, and in their right minds they are going to Heaven.

2kitties

03-04-2004, 10:16 AM

Aside from all the scientific evidence that shows homosexuality is genetic, I know in my heart from my close friends who have dealt with this that it is NOT a choice. I've seen up close the pain they have gone through, along with their families. They would give anything to be "normal". The God that I know and love made all of us the way we are and never hates any of the children he made. I simply refuse to believe otherwise and I look forward to knowing my gay friends in Heaven as I know them on earth- only without the horrible influence of rediculous bigotry and persecution. And, let all be clear that God is not too keen on judgementalness and bigotry either.

BitsyNaceyDog

03-04-2004, 01:18 PM

They always say that even if we sin, as long as we believe in God we are forgiven.

That's not fully true. I know poeple who "believe in God" but are not saved. To be saved you need to pray from your heart and ask Jesus to come into your heart, you need to know that Jesus died to save you from your sins. When you know in your heart that Jesus died for you and you accept then you are saved. That's when and only when your sins are forgiven.

Being gay is a choice. Some part of them likes being gay, other wise they wouldn't be. I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.- Philippians 4:13 . If they chose God as their way rather than the world then they would have the power to overcome their homosexual desires.

KBlaix ... here is a man who wanted more than anything to be heterosexul, to be "normal", to do what was right in his God's eyes. He prayed about it for twenty-five years, daily. He is still homosexual, of course. How can that be a "choice" he made?

He wasn't saved. If you're not saved God can't answer you. Going to church for 25 years doesn't get you into heaven. The only way into heaven is through Jesus.

RICHARD

03-04-2004, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by KBlaix

He wasn't saved. If you're not saved God can't answer you. Going to church for 25 years doesn't get you into heaven. The only way into heaven is through Jesus.

But doesn't God love everyone??

If God, in all his greatness, chooses who he will
save, accept, love and forgive, wouldn't that make him just as jaded as we are?

We really should leave God to worry about who is going to be saved and answered. Altho, when I learn to really see into a person's heart I may
not depend on God so much....;)

We are all here on the planet by some funny miracle, we should take more time to see how much we are alike, rather than judging each other on invisible beliefs.

wolf_Q

03-04-2004, 02:04 PM

I was in an argumentative mood this morning. They were talking about Gay marriage protests in Utah on the news. I tried to make a nice argument with my mother. It didn't get anywhere, all it ended in was "Are you GAY?" :rolleyes: Can't somebody be ok with gay marriages and not be gay? Ugghhh

popcornbird

03-04-2004, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by wolfsoul
There are alot of things that are sins that we go through in our daily lives. And God maybe didn't "make" you do them, but He certainly gave you the ability to. I say that it shouldn't hurt to add another big "sin". We all hate sometimes, we get angry, we get selfish, we get envious. Being a seamstress, musician, or craftsmen is a sin for cyring out loud. They always say that even if we sin, as long as we believe in God we are forgiven. I know plenty of gay people who believe in God, and in their right minds they are going to Heaven.

That is just ridiculous saying that if you believe in God, you can do whatever you want and are going to be saved anyway. Why on earth did God make hell then? Of course God gave us the choice. God gave human beings free choice to test them, to see who is a true believer, and who isn't. God also made Satan. Its part of the test..........to see who is strong enough to keep away from Satan, and who isn't. God gave us free choice, the freedom to judge for ourselves, and make our own decisions. God also made heaven and hell, and trust me, hell is not going to be no empty place. God made it for a reason. Just believing in God doesn't give you a free ticket to heaven. I guarantee you, there will be MANY so-called believers in hell. It isn't enough to say *I believe in God*, and go around disobeying Him in EVERY aspect in life, and then expect Him to forgive you. Why should God forgive you when you never left the sin, and never asked for forgiveness? He has no reason to. God is merciful to those who seek His mercy, not to those who commit sins after sins, and instead of feeling bad about it and seeking His forgiveness, they justify their actions and continue to commit their sins. Such people deserve no forgiveness. To God, sins are crimes, and just as criminals deserve punishment, so do sinners. Homosexuality is no minor sin. It is one of the GREATEST sins a person can commit in God's eyes, in all major religions. It is up to God to judge every person, but who are we to say there are good gays that in their right mind will go to heaven? God has punished gay communities in the past, in this world, and certainly has a more severe punishment waiting for them in the hereafter. Who are we to say the gays today are not going to have to face the same punishment that those before them had to face because of their sins and rejection of God's message brought to them?

That being said, God's doors to forgiveness are always open, and if a person sincerely repents and leaves a sin, even after years of committing it, God WILL forgive that person. The person just has to do it before death knocks at his/her door. ;)

Again, this is my opinion, and I'm not imposing my beliefs on anyone. This is something I feel strongly about, and my feelings will never change on this issue. I don't care if you choose to call me closed-minded because of that. I would rather be closed-minded on such issues than open my mind to what I see as wrong, and get myself a ticket to hell. And, I would like to add, everyone is closed-minded on different issues, just as those of you in favor of gays are closed-minded to why so many others are against it. We're all closed-minded on certain issues. If you don't have a little closed-mindedness in you, you aren't human. :p

kitten645

03-04-2004, 02:14 PM

That's not fully true. I know poeple who "believe in God" but are not saved. To be saved you need to pray from your heart and ask Jesus to come into your heart, you need to know that Jesus died to save you from your sins. When you know in your heart that Jesus died for you and you accept then you are saved. That's when and only when your sins are forgiven.

It boggles and frightens me each time I am reminded that "people" actually still think like this in this day and age. I usually find the least "Christ like" people on earth are those proclaiming to be Christian. :rolleyes: Last I checked judgements on morality were to be left to God. Who are you to pass judgement on anything?

RICHARD

03-04-2004, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
I would rather be closed-minded on such issues than open my mind to what I see as wrong, and get myself a ticket to hell.

If we get our tickets together, one of us travels for free!!!!
:D

2kitties

03-04-2004, 02:31 PM

Alright group. What say we all agree to disagree. These kinds of things never get settled. You have your beliefs. I'll have mine, and we'll agree to sit back and think the other is crazy but not try to change that.
Really, this is bordering on going way out of hand and having people start saying things they can't take back.

*shakes any hand thats out there*

Kfamr

03-04-2004, 03:22 PM

Some of these responses really made me disgusted. :mad: :( :(

popcornbird

03-04-2004, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by Kfamr
Some of these responses really made me disgusted. :mad: :( :(

Good for you.

I agree with you 2kitties. Let's all agree to disagree and march out of this thread. There's no use arguing about it. This is a VERY hot topic, and everyone has strong opinions on it, that as far as I can see, isn't going to change on either side of the argument.

*Shakes 2kitties' hand, agrees to disagree, smiles, and waves goodbye to everyone else on the thread* ;)

Kfamr

03-04-2004, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
Good for you.

:confused: :confused:

RICHARD

03-04-2004, 04:11 PM

oh well,

I am going to forgo the discount and use my frequent flier miles for my trip.

The HUGE question that I have is WHY IS RELIGION
flaunted as such a great,loving and forgiving vehicle for peace and getting along when all the while it's the followers of ANY religion that turn it into a devisive tool?

Hokay...... __________ is against MY religion but does that make that person any less?
Should I turn my back on an accident because I suspect the person may be a Baptist? Muslim?
Jehovah's Witness?

Should I not hold the door for a woman who has dark hair because I like blondes?

Should I only go to the tellers at the bank because they are women, I don't deal with men tellers?

You religion tells you to that ____________ is against it's basic tenets, but it also tells you
treat everyone the same.

While it may not be on the up and up in God's eyes , He didn't give anyone the go ahead to smite and judge people because they are different.

Leave it to your God, He's far more qualified to sort out the bad seeds...

Again, Let he without sin cast the first stone....
Straight up in the air and pray that the rock don't land on your head.

Kfamr

03-04-2004, 04:17 PM

Richard, I'd be glad to get a ticket with you, you can travel for free. That post was great. "Bravo."

PepperRSM

03-04-2004, 04:22 PM

I'm not religious or anything so I want to know why it's such a big "sin" to be gay? (Please don't just say "because god wants it that way"...I don't find that to be a valid argument, i want to know WHY he wants it that way...and I know that it says somewhere that he wants marriage to be between a man and a woman but WHY?) Why keep people who love each other apart? I thought god was about love forgiveness.

I'm 100% for gay marriages. If people love each other then let them get married. It saddens me that this even has to be an issue, I mean why can't we just let them be happy together?

RICHARD

03-04-2004, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by PepperRSM
Please don't just say "because god wants it that way"

Let's take 'god' out of the equation.

Now,
What happens to the arguement? There is none.
It become a purely personal opinion..

Now, should you bring the 'natural' arguement up......

What is natural??? Well, pretty much anything..

Since,
Love knows no bounds, colors, size, distance or genders......

There goes THAT arguement!!

That means 50% of the discussion is wrong......

I'll let you guess which 50...;)

-----------------

Speaking of 50%...

K,

Let's split the freebie, o.k.?:D

Logan

03-04-2004, 04:38 PM

Those of you who don't agree with us "religious" types need to at least respect our opinions. I don't see anyone trying to overcome your opinions, just stating their own.

If anyone is bold enough in this group to state that they are "against" gay marriages, allow them to do so!!! I've actually remained quiet because all of my arguments are religiously based, and I don't want to get into the fray.

But, I do accept and appreciate what any of you have to say, regardless of your stance. And so many of you are very well spoken! Allow some leniency here for those of differing opinons to state their too!!!

PepperRSM

03-04-2004, 04:45 PM

I do respect your opinions, sorry if it doesn't really seem that way, discussions make me a little....harsh I guess you could say. So, sorry and sorry in advance if I say anything else mean/hurtful.

I'm just wondering why god wants it that way. I'm actually interested in those of you who are into religion, because I don't really know anything about it. I want to know what you've been taught about why god wants it this way.

I'm just curious, that's all. I just want to understand it from your side.

Kfamr

03-04-2004, 04:49 PM

I respect your opinions and I understand that you follow as 'God says', but I don't understand how some are able to support the law, and basically say that their beliefs, opinions, and such are meant for everyone. As if everyone has to follow by them. And that's exactly what banning Gay marriages, and what most religious people's "arguments" are doing or saying.

BitsyNaceyDog

03-04-2004, 05:16 PM

I'm not judging gays, or hating them. I know gay people, and don't hate them. They are simply miss-led and lost, like most of you. God does want all of us in heaven with him, however gave us that choice.

Being Gay is not a "big sin" there are no big or small sins in Gods eye, they are all just sins. However it's our sins that condemn people to an eturnity in hell. People put the lable "Big" on it.

primabella

03-04-2004, 05:17 PM

Not even to get into the argument but..I totally agree with it. :) I have a strong belief in God but I just don't see the problem here. God allowed me to have free will which means I am able to have my own opinions on certain things. That's how I feel, anyhow.

That's all I'm going to say.

PepperRSM

03-04-2004, 05:18 PM

I don't understand why it's a sin, though. Why is it wrong to be gay? Why does god want it that way?

popcornbird

03-04-2004, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by PepperRSM
I don't understand why it's a sin, though. Why is it wrong to be gay? Why does god want it that way?

God wants it that way because God created two different genders.......male and female, and wants both genders to be who they are. Being gay is against manhood/womanhood. Males aren't supposed to attract males, or vice versal, just like the same poles on a magnet don't attract each other...they repel, but the opposite poles attract. From a religious point of view, God did not make anyone gay. Just like God did not make anyone a thief, or a murderer, etc. They choose their own lifestyle. When one gets so involved in sin, they get addicted, and begin to think it is a part of them. Satan is around all the time and will always continue to push people into committing sins. When they become so addicted to what they are doing, they begin to think its a part of them, and close their minds to changing, or repenting. You know how you all say its hard to leave smoking once you start? Same thing. Its hard to leave sinning once you start. It certainly isn't who they are, but who they made themselves to be.

So, in answer to your question, God wants us to be who He made us. He doesn't want us to change His creation, and being gay is changing the manhood or womanhood that God created in us.

I hope this answers your question, though there are other reasons too. I just don't want to get into an argument, but I don't want to leave your question unanswered either. I respect all of you for having your opinions and wish that you would all have the same respect for others too.

*waves goodbye again* (I only returned so your question doesn't remain unanswered) :o

Uabassoon

03-04-2004, 05:51 PM

While I do try hard to understand those who are against homosexulaity due to religious reasons, I don't understand how or why the law has to follow these religious reasonings. There is "supposed" to be a seperation of church and state. Growing up I was told that America's values were based and equal rights for all citizens. It wasn't until I got older that I learned things don't work that way. Not allowing gay marriages isn't going to stop gay couples from living together and raising children. Personally I would rather see a married gay couple raising a child than an unmarried gay couple raising a child. But sadly that may never happen because people don't know how to keep their own religious beliefs out of our laws. I personally don't see this issue as Bush allowing or not allowing gay marriages. But it's an issue of Bush wanting to take away/not give equal rights to all citizens.

aly

03-04-2004, 06:27 PM

Very good points, Laura. I was hoping you'd chime in :)

Originally posted by KBlaix
They are simply miss-led and lost, like most of you.

I support gay marriage and am not misled, nor lost.

Uabassoon

03-04-2004, 06:30 PM

Very good points, Laura. I was hoping you'd chime in
I usually try to stay away from these thread as much as possible.

RICHARD

03-04-2004, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by aly

I support gay marriage and am not misled, nor lost.

Aren't those GPS things the best?;)

Kfamr

03-04-2004, 06:39 PM

Originally posted by aly
Very good points, Laura. I was hoping you'd chime in :)

I support gay marriage and am not misled, nor lost.

Ditto on both comments!

LMAO, Richard! :D

Rottieluver45

03-04-2004, 08:19 PM

Wow! I`ve never had such a popular thread!!

Richard. Richard, Richard, Richard! You made me look at this in a completely different way! Thanks!! :D You`re right with out god there would be absolutley NO argument, at all! People say it`s a sin.

Is it a sin when you marry the one you love. That`s all it is. Just with the same sex. It`s not a sin!!! What`s so sinful? That`s the only part I`m not understanding now.

I respect the opinions of others but I just don`t understand them.

popcornbird

03-04-2004, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by Rottieluver45
Wow! I`ve never had such a popular thread!!

Richard. Richard, Richard, Richard! You made me look at this in a completely different way! Thanks!! :D You`re right with out god there would be absolutley NO argument, at all! People say it`s a sin.

Is it a sin when you marry the one you love. That`s all it is. Just with the same sex. It`s not a sin!!! What`s so sinful? That`s the only part I`m not understanding now.

I respect the opinions of others but I just don`t understand them.

But my friend, if there were no God, there would be no humans either, because there would have been no creator, so no humans, no animals, no world, no nothing. Now wouldn't that be a peaceful world? ;) It wouldn't be a world at all. :p He he he

Rottieluver45

03-04-2004, 08:48 PM

oops I 0think I was missunderstood.

I meant if there was no -god- issue. The issue with god being "disappointed"

Ya know what I`m talking about? :D

Twisterdog

03-04-2004, 11:34 PM

He wasn't saved. If you're not saved God can't answer you. Going to church for 25 years doesn't get you into heaven. The only way into heaven is through Jesus.

Oh my, you're a piece of work, aren't you?

You have never met this person, never had a conversation with him ... how do you propose to know if he was "saved" or not? Did God tell you this? No one knows this information but God and this person ... I highly doubt you are privy to God's private ledger.

I did not say he "went to church" for 25 years. I am well aware of the fact that "going to church for 25 years doesn't get you into heaven" ... that's quite a no-brainer. I said he was a devout Christian and that he prayed every day for 25 years. BIG difference in that, and just showing up for church once a week.

You have just exhibited the infamous, right-wing, fundamental Christian fallacy ... "I know it all about everyone all the time, and I have the right to tell everyone what they think and how they feel and why they do things. Hallelujah. Amen."

And this ... "If you're not saved God can't answer you." Really? Interesting. Says who? Again ... if you are going to state "facts", you'd better be ready to back them up. Or maybe we read from two different Bibles? My God is a forgiving, kind, loving God. I'm not sure we are worshipping the same one.

Fox-Gal

03-05-2004, 12:44 AM

Doesn't it all come down to just a few simple things.

It was Bush that said no gay's shall marry, right? Now does Bush have the right to judge peoples belifes or should that be left to God? I say leave it in Gods hands, when the time comes. If you belive different, so be it.

Maybe being gay in a sin, I can't say that for sure but what I can say is that everyone has the right to love another and no one should tell them they are wrong for loving another.

How much different is it then when I married a man 18 years younger then me, I was told that it was sick and wrong. Why, because they said so? Who where they to judge my love? So I ask who are we to judge the love that gay's have? Not me or you or even Bush. Give everyone the same rights, isn't that what the United States, foundation was based on?

We each have our own views on a lot of things in life, we should be big enough to accept that in each other. Just as some here said, their mind won't be changed then respect that others wont be changed also. Encluding the Gays.

Let God sort it out and let us just accept EVERY human being for what and who they are. Just picture what a better place this would be if we did.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 01:14 AM

what a great thread.

My 'god' is a god of understanding and love....

he is a god of trees, air, sunrises, smiles on a baby's face.............
my god is laughter, problems, results and clouds, rain and breathing..

My god is taxes, bills, a problem, heartache and sorrow.
He is a god of tears and my pets......
My god is stars, galaxies and things I do not understand.

My god is hope, despair and my voice.

I am my god and you are gods to me.

My god is belief and my accepting your god.

In the past 'gods' were used as a crusade, an inquisition and the trials of people thought to be evil.

My god is looking at you, seeing you are the same, but different, and my god tells me that you are right for your beliefs.

My god tells me that you are right.........

My god is everything yours is, except..................

My god loves you no matter what.

I don't know who my god is, he doesn't have a name or a book written about him............

He is a god of tolerance and a god of acceptance.

And sometimes I wonder why he has taken me under his hand.

My god is my breathe, my heart beat and my god is the ability to see good in everything around me.

Who is your god?

micki76

03-05-2004, 08:44 AM

My god is the God of the Bible, God of Abraham, Joseph, Moses & Jesus. He is understanding and loving. He made me imperfect. He doesn’t hate me if I sin, because he created me a sinner. If I wasn’t a sinner, I’d be perfect and only God can be perfect. Therefore, I am a sinner. I need to repent these sins & try not to commit them again, but it will happen because I’m a sinner. Confusing, but very simple. He doesn’t hate me for who I am. This is my God. Yours may be different.

But, my God doesn’t love me any less for my sins that it commit. He loves me simply because I’m his child. It’s an unconditional love and though I may disappoint him a lot with my sins, he’s still my Father. He doesn’t hate anyone.

Now, I personally don’t care if someone sins, I still love them just like God loves me. I don’t always agree with them, but I still don’t hate them. There are some sins IMO that are greater than others. To me lying is to me a much lesser sin than child molestation and murder. I can only believe that God feels the same way.

I don’t know (or for that matter, really care) if homosexuality is a sin. I know many, many gay people and quite a few of them are better people than a lot of ‘Christians’ that I know. I also know many good Christians and some bad gays. There are good and bad people in any walk of life. Your job is as a fellow human being is to love them and try to respect them. Leave the rest to God if you believe in Him.

I think if there’s going to be a separation of church and state, then it must be totally separate. You can’t pick and choose to use the church at your whim.

Our Fathers created this country for freedom. One reason was that their religion had been persecuted by the Queen of England. They came here to create a place where everyone could practice their religion freely. That obviously doesn’t mean that Christian beliefs belong anywhere in the Government anymore than Pagan beliefs or Jewish beliefs. Yes, the country was originally based on a certain religious groups’ set of beliefs, but that group wanted religious freedom for all. I think they would be rolling over if they realized that we were using their Constitution in the way we’re trying to use it these days.

Religious freedom means that our country is not based on the laws of one religion’s beliefs and that we can believe anything we choose to believe. We must uphold our freedoms or we will become the country our forefathers left behind. :(

2kitties

03-05-2004, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by micki76
Religious freedom means that our country is not based on the laws of one religion’s beliefs and that we can believe anything we choose to believe. We must uphold our freedoms or we will become the country our forefathers left behind. :(

^^^what she said^^^

primabella

03-05-2004, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by micki76
My god is the God of the Bible, God of Abraham, Joseph, Moses & Jesus. He is understanding and loving. He made me imperfect. He doesn’t hate me if I sin, because he created me a sinner. If I wasn’t a sinner, I’d be perfect and only God can be perfect. Therefore, I am a sinner. I need to repent these sins & try not to commit them again, but it will happen because I’m a sinner. Confusing, but very simple. He doesn’t hate me for who I am. This is my God. Yours may be different.

But, my God doesn’t love me any less for my sins that it commit. He loves me simply because I’m his child. It’s an unconditional love and though I may disappoint him a lot with my sins, he’s still my Father. He doesn’t hate anyone.

Now, I personally don’t care if someone sins, I still love them just like God loves me. I don’t always agree with them, but I still don’t hate them. There are some sins IMO that are greater than others. To me lying is to me a much lesser sin than child molestation and murder. I can only believe that God feels the same way.

I don’t know (or for that matter, really care) if homosexuality is a sin. I know many, many gay people and quite a few of them are better people than a lot of ‘Christians’ that I know. I also know many good Christians and some bad gays. There are good and bad people in any walk of life. Your job is as a fellow human being is to love them and try to respect them. Leave the rest to God if you believe in Him.

I think if there’s going to be a separation of church and state, then it must be totally separate. You can’t pick and choose to use the church at your whim.

Our Fathers created this country for freedom. One reason was that their religion had been persecuted by the Queen of England. They came here to create a place where everyone could practice their religion freely. That obviously doesn’t mean that Christian beliefs belong anywhere in the Government anymore than Pagan beliefs or Jewish beliefs. Yes, the country was originally based on a certain religious groups’ set of beliefs, but that group wanted religious freedom for all. I think they would be rolling over if they realized that we were using their Constitution in the way we’re trying to use it these days.

Religious freedom means that our country is not based on the laws of one religion’s beliefs and that we can believe anything we choose to believe. We must uphold our freedoms or we will become the country our forefathers left behind. :(

Agreed. Very well said Micki.

CathyBogart

03-05-2004, 11:58 AM

"An' ye harm none, do what ye will"

...Thought I'd throw out a quote from MY religion because I'm starting to get a bit uncomfortable with this thread.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 12:22 PM

Going on, right above my head, my god is having a grand old time.

http://hubblesite.org/gallery/showcase/text.shtml

So why are we, down here, worried about who is married to who?

micki76

03-05-2004, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by WolfChan
"An' ye harm none, do what ye will"

...Thought I'd throw out a quote from MY religion because I'm starting to get a bit uncomfortable with this thread.

Feel free to. :) That's what the USA is about after all.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by WolfChan

...Thought I'd throw out a quote from MY religion because I'm starting to get a bit uncomfortable with this thread.

A question???

why are you uncomfortable?

BitsyNaceyDog

03-05-2004, 01:21 PM

Or maybe we read from two different Bibles?

My Bible says in Leviticus that it is abomination for a man to lie with another man. It is abomination for a man to lie with his sister. It is abomination for a man to lie with an animal, etc.

Romans 1:25-27:
25 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.
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 recompense of their error which was meet.

You have never met this person, never had a conversation with him ... how do you propose to know if he was "saved" or not? Did God tell you this? No one knows this information but God and this person ... I highly doubt you are privy to God's private ledger.

No, God didn't tell me that. Only God knows if he is saved, and your friend should know. I don't know and neither do you. What I do know is that if he were saved then God would give him the streingth to over come his desires towards men.

You have just exhibited the infamous, right-wing, fundamental Christian fallacy ... "I know it all about everyone all the time, and I have the right to tell everyone what they think and how they feel and why they do things. Hallelujah. Amen."

I never calmed to know it all. I don't know it all. If there is something I need to know then I go to God and my Bible, and I get the answer.

micki76

03-05-2004, 01:29 PM

When did one of my inlaws join the forum? :confused: :confused: :p

The bible also says a lot of things that society doesn't "obey" anymore. I for one do not submit to my husband. I am allowed to due many things that according to the bible, women shouldn't do. Women are church leaders now. We can speak in church now.

Welcome to the 21st century.

2kitties

03-05-2004, 01:32 PM

I'm pasting one of my posts in another thread.

Alright, if we want to get all biblical and bible thumping, then let's take of the gloves.

If we are going to go so far as to take what the bible says as literal, as you seem to want to do kblix, then let's go ahead and amend the Constitution based on it.

The US Constitutional Marriage Amendment.....
A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)

B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines, in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe, and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

G. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even ifhe had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

2kitties

03-05-2004, 01:39 PM

This is clearly inscribed on the Jefferson Memorial.

"I am certainly not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

kevinrats

03-05-2004, 01:51 PM

WolfChan, a couple questions-
I have yet to hear from you a good argument for gay marriage. Because they love each other? That's like saying you should marry your pet if you love them, or maybe a car or something. Huh?

You keep talking about how overpopulated the world is. Do you have any evidence to back this up? The world's population can fit into Texas. Is there enough food in the world? There IS enough food in the world, but it's obviously not distributed well enough.

And then anyone who doesn't have kids should be rewarded? Why? Just because you hate kids? Most people love the joy of having kids! Obviously you don't. You've stated it with your many proabortion anti population posts.

And why do people always have to have an opinion that is the same as yours and that makes sense to you? You're right, not everyone has the same religion and I agree that it isn't a strong argument for everyone. But for a lot of people it is, because it says in almost every religion that gay marriage is wrong.

I think gay people are among the nicest on the planet, and they are wonderful people. I just don't think gay marriage should be legalized!

kevinrats

03-05-2004, 01:52 PM

2kitties, you're not using a lot of those verses in the correct context, and you are leaving out a lot of the verse. You've done it several times.

2kitties

03-05-2004, 01:58 PM

You're welcome to correct me Kevin, if you'd like, by being specific.

But I think you are missing the point entirely. My point is sattire to illustrate that the bible has been translated hundreds of times and is used intirely in interpretation. No two Christian denominations read the Bible identically. If they did, then there would be no need for different denominations. So to base laws of our "Free" nation upon a Book which nobody can agree on in the first place is a ludacris idea.

2kitties

03-05-2004, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by kevinrats
Because they love each other? That's like saying you should marry your pet if you love them, or maybe a car or something. Huh?

Well, Kevin, I'll tell you this. If any person can find a dog or a car which a court of law finds legally capable of making decisions, and when that dog or car can make it through a civil marriage ceremony and sign the marriage license... then sure. marry them.

kevinrats

03-05-2004, 02:08 PM

Okay 2kitties here you go: (out of NIV) I'll do these one at a time cuz their big.

Genesis 29:17-28
Genesis 29
17 Leah had weak [1] eyes, but Rachel was lovely in form, and beautiful. 18 Jacob was in love with Rachel and said, "I'll work for you seven years in return for your younger daughter Rachel."
19 Laban said, "It's better that I give her to you than to some other man. Stay here with me." 20 So Jacob served seven years to get Rachel, but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her.
21 Then Jacob said to Laban, "Give me my wife. My time is completed, and I want to lie with her."
22 So Laban brought together all the people of the place and gave a feast. 23 But when evening came, he took his daughter Leah and gave her to Jacob, and Jacob lay with her. 24 And Laban gave his servant girl Zilpah to his daughter as her maidservant.
25 When morning came, there was Leah! So Jacob said to Laban, "What is this you have done to me? I served you for Rachel, didn't I? Why have you deceived me?"
26 Laban replied, "It is not our custom here to give the younger daughter in marriage before the older one. 27 Finish this daughter's bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work."
28 And Jacob did so. He finished the week with Leah, and then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel to be his wife.

I see where you are trying to come from, but Rachel's Dad tricked Jacob, because Jacob worked 7 years to marry Rachel, but Dad gave him Leah instead, so he had to work for awhile longer to marry Rachel. It was Dad that had an uh-oh. It doesn't permit polygamy.

2 Samuel 3:2-5
2 Samuel 3
2 Sons were born to David in Hebron:
His firstborn was Amnon the son of Ahinoam of Jezreel;
3 his second, Kileab the son of Abigail the widow of Nabal of Carmel;
the third, Absalom the son of Maacah daughter of Talmai king of Geshur;
4 the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith;
the fifth, Shephatiah the son of Abital;
5 and the sixth, Ithream the son of David's wife Eglah.
These were born to David in Hebron.

The next couple I'll post in a few seconds...

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by 2kitties
Well, Kevin, I'll tell you this. If any person can find a dog or a car which a court of law finds legally capable of making decisions, and when that dog or car can make it through a civil marriage ceremony and sign the marriage license... then sure. marry them.

Exactly.

A dog or a car cannot say "I do." Although i'm sure a dog knows love i'm pretty sure a dog, or a car, do not know the true mean of a marriage. A dog can't speak for itself, therefore we'd never be able to know if the dog actually wanted to be in such a relationship. Besides that, a car has no emotional feelings.

There's far more things Bush should worry about, other than two people of the same sex in love, LIKE making sure food is availible for people don't starve like they do.

Now... what does Wolfchan's opinion on children have ANYTHING to do with this subject? :confused:

Maresche

03-05-2004, 02:16 PM

All I will say is that it is a pity that closed minds don't come with closed mouths.

2kitties

03-05-2004, 02:16 PM

Again, Kevin, in your arrogance, you completely miss the point.
You and I just interpreted teh same scripture in two completely different ways. THAT ITSELF is the point. In my mind, you're interpretation is entirely wrong.

You see, you can't base the laws of a FREE nation upon a book so open to interpretation. But keep posting until you are blue in the face--- please--- it just makes you look more arrogant.

kevinrats

03-05-2004, 02:19 PM

2 Samuel 5
13 After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him.

This is where David slipped up. But then later, because of this, disaster struck his family, people were raped and murdered. So yes, he took concubines but there were serious consequences.

1 Kings 11
3 He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.

Ahh, yes. But in 1 Kings 11:4, his wives all went away and his heart was not right with the Lord because of it.

So far, you have been quoting overall themes in the Bible. But the Bible is really a story of many people, and many of who slipped up and sinned a lot. A few more in a sec...

kevinrats

03-05-2004, 02:21 PM

Let me interject for a sec.

WolfChan's opinion comes in because she said that there is no good argument against gay marriage. Maybe so. But she or anybody else isn't giving a good argument for it either.

kevinrats

03-05-2004, 02:23 PM

It makes me look arrogant? You kept quoting them too. You started it too. If it offends you to unbelievable ends, I will stop posting.

Once again, conflicting opinions piss everyone off. This is ridiculous.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by kevinrats

3 He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.

hold on a second.......This came out of the bible?
Seems kind of odd that this guy can run around with 1000 different women........

I am led astray one woman at a time.....

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by kevinrats
Let me interject for a sec.

WolfChan's opinion comes in because she said that there is no good argument against gay marriage. Maybe so. But she or anybody else isn't giving a good argument for it either.

That seems pretty heartless to me that you say that.
It's love we're talking about. Two people's emotions and feelings for eachother, yet they're looked upon badly. These two people can't own a piece of paper, can't have that word 'married' in their lives, just because some people frown upon it.

If that's not a 'good argument', please, please tell me what is.

ILoveReptiles

03-05-2004, 02:28 PM

Well I don't know about anyone else, but as soon as I start seeing quoted passages from the bible in relation to allowing or not allowing personal freedoms, I just lose interest in what the person has to say and dismiss it as irrelevant.

Then again, I am not a religious person at all, so for anyone who might be offended by my lack of interest in scripture; oh well - sorry to disappoint.

I fail to see what relevance the bible has to anyone's personal liberty and civil rights. Just my $0.02.

dukedogsmom

03-05-2004, 02:54 PM

Hey, let's not forget that guy from a Jerry Springer episode that wanted to marry his horse. I don't think it ever aired.

aly

03-05-2004, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by Maresche
All I will say is that it is a pity that closed minds don't come with closed mouths.

Hehe, I'm going to have to remember that one!

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by kevinrats

Once again, conflicting opinions piss everyone off. This is ridiculous.

Temper, temper.......

It seems like we sail along with a pretty decent discussion for a while then we hit a pot hole.

Micki answered me with her version of who her god is. She did it eloquently and gave me the chance to see what her beliefs are.

I 'used' to be a catholic until I began to question some of the biblical accounts.....multiplying fish and loaves, Lazarus and the three wise men in a Honda (ACCORD) left me looking at the bible with a very inquisitive eye....

A few tips on arguing a sensitive issue like gay marriage...

1) Remember that religion is a personal thing, that and the fact that a Muslim, JW, Baptist may not have read or even know what is in a Bible.

2) Argue common sense first. Leave out your personal bent.
You'll get farther than the 'I throw my hands up' stage.

3) Listen to the other side and digest the words and thought.
ILR hit the nail on the head. Quoted bible verses have a detrimental effect on lucidity. Look around during a church sermon......If glazed eyes were donuts, Krispy Kreme would be out of business.

4) You do not have to accept a point of view. But you can listen to
it and know that the person that stands behind it, believes it.
It doesn't make them wrong, it doesn't make them right...

It makes them, just like you, a person with an opinion....

and you know....the world will keep spinning.;)

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by Kfamr
That seems pretty heartless to me that you say that.
It's love we're talking about. Two people's emotions and feelings for eachother, yet they're looked upon badly. These two people can't own a piece of paper, can't have that word 'married' in their lives, just because some people frown upon it.

If that's not a 'good argument', please, please tell me what is.

There's nothing wrong with *loving* a person of the same sex. I *love* many women myself. What we are talking about is when it is sexual. Being gay is not loving a person of the same sex. That is something we *all* do. Being gay, is committing sexual acts with a person of the same sex, and THAT is what we are against.

There is a difference between love, and love with sexual intentions. Big difference.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
There's nothing wrong with *loving* a person of the same sex. I *love* many women myself. What we are talking about is when it is sexual. Being gay is not loving a person of the same sex. That is something we *all* do. Being gay, is committing sexual acts with a person of the same sex, and THAT is what we are against.

There is a difference between love, and love with sexual intentions. Big difference.

Out of curiosity.....

What or how would you deal with a brother or sister who confided in you, that they were gay?

How would your view of them change?

aly

03-05-2004, 03:07 PM

You cannot pick the person who you would like to fall in love with. No one can force love.

In high school, there was a smart, nice, sweet guy who asked me out. He really would have been the perfect boyfriend. But I turned him down for a 'bad boy'. On paper, it was a black and white decision - I should have gone for the nice guy. But my heart would not listen to my head and I dated the other one.

It is no different for a gay person. In their head, they know that it would be easier to love someone of the opposite sex. They wouldn't have to face being an outcast because of who they love. But their heart tells them differently, and they can't help that.

No one can choose who they love. It doesn't work that way. And asking someone to supress their feelings is just wrong.

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
There's nothing wrong with *loving* a person of the same sex. I *love* many women myself. What we are talking about is when it is sexual. Being gay is not loving a person of the same sex. That is something we *all* do. Being gay, is committing sexual acts with a person of the same sex, and THAT is what we are against.

There is a difference between love, and love with sexual intentions. Big difference.

It's NOT JUST sexual. Someone doesn't fall in love with another just for sexual reasons. LOVE is not just sexual.

Ok, so many hetersexual couples get married, and have love with sexual intentions. It's a natural feeling, whether it's for the opposite sex or same sex.

And since when is someone's sexual acts anyone else's business, anyways?

ILoveReptiles

03-05-2004, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by Kfamr
And since when is someone's sexual acts anyone else's business, anyways?

Kfamr - I couldn't have said it better myself. It shouldn't be anyone else's business but the couple themselves. Why people insist on making other people's sex lives their personal business is beyond me...

I've never understood it and I never will.

CathyBogart

03-05-2004, 03:15 PM

Arguments for gay marriage...

Marriage (even if it was called something else) has been around LONG before Christianity or any of its subsets.

A dying person deserves to have their best beloved by their bedside.

Someone who devotes their life to loving and caring for another person should have more say than some distant relative.

There is supposed to be a SEPARATION of church and state, which in theory would keep people from imposing their beliefs on others.

If one partner is arrested, the other can be compelled to testify against them or provide evidence against them, which legally married couples are not forced to do.

In many cases, even carefully drawn wills and durable powers of attorney have proven to not be enough if a family wishes to challenge a will, overturn a custody decision, or exclude them from a funeral or deny them the right to visit a partner's grave. As survivors, the family can even sieze a real estate property that they may have been buying together for years, quickly sell it at a huge loss and stick them with the remaining debt on a property they no longer own.

http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm <~very informative

Oh, and Kevin...the question what what my opinion ON CHILDREN has to do with this subject. The answer is.... *drumroll*....Absolutely nothing! Once again, the discussion was doing well until you showed up.

Oh, and I noted that you still didn't come up with any functional arguments against. :P

"None of us can choose where we will love"

Uabassoon

03-05-2004, 03:16 PM

There is a difference between love, and love with sexual intentions. Big difference.

I guess I see it differently. I think there is a difference between love and being "in love". Being "in love" doesn't necessarily mean lust or sex. When people get married it's not just about having sex with that person, it's about being in love with the person.

CathyBogart

03-05-2004, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by Uabassoon
I guess I see it differently. I think there is a difference between love and being "in love". Being "in love" doesn't necessarily mean lust or sex. When people get married it's not just about having sex with that person, it's about being in love with the person.

Exactly.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by Kfamr

And since when is someone's sexual acts anyone else's business, anyways?

*COUGH COUGH*......paris hilton's boy friend turned those tapes into a business.....at 50 dollars a copy.. Sorry had to clear my throat.

And not only do gay partnerships suffer..
I dated a gal for thirteen years- she got cancer and before she passed I was not allowed any contact with her during her last days....As a matter of fact I found out that she passed away three days afterwards...from a co-worker...

If a family has a problem with ANY relationship they can practically forbid you to make any contact with a loved one when they fall ill....

All because of the color of your skin, your religion, your orientation, race or ??????

Fair? hardly.....

Life sucks when people decide how, when and who you should love...

ILoveReptiles

03-05-2004, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by WolfChan

http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm <~very informative

[/i]

Wow, WolfChan. That link is great! Thank you for sharing it!

ILoveReptiles

03-05-2004, 03:45 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
*COUGH COUGH*......paris hilton's boy friend turned those tapes into a business.....at 50 dollars a copy.. Sorry had to clear my throat.

And not only do gay partnerships suffer..
I dated a gal for thirteen years- she got cancer and before she passed I was not allowed any contact with her during her last days....As a matter of fact I found out that she passed away three days afterwards...from a co-worker...

If a family has a problem with ANY relationship they can practically forbid you to make any contact with a loved one when they fall ill....

All because of the color of your skin, your religion, your orientation, race or ??????

Fair? hardly.....

Life sucks when people decide how, when and who you should love...
:eek: :mad:
That really blows, Richard!

PepperRSM

03-05-2004, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
Being gay, is committing sexual acts with a person of the same sex, and THAT is what we are against.

If them having sex is what you're against, why can't they get married? They're going to have sex married or not, so what does it matter? Stopping gay marriages is not going to stop them from having sex.

CathyBogart

03-05-2004, 04:02 PM

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by PepperRSM
If them having sex is what you're against, why can't they get married? They're going to have sex married or not, so what does it matter? Stopping gay marriages is not going to stop them from having sex.

It doesn't make a difference to me whether they are married or not. I'm against what they are doing whether it is in terms of marriage, or out of marriage. Why I don't like them getting married is because I don't see this as marriage at all. I find it against the basis of marriage, and the significance of marriage.

Putting that point aside, I have a question, or say, an argument to make, to those of you who justify gay marriages with letting them marry whoever they're in love with. Since someone said previously that you can't marry a pet or a car because they have no say in the decision, I would like to ask you this. Say a girl loves her brother, and wants to marry him. Why is it against the law to marry someone so close in kin? After all, it shouldn't be anyone's problem who someone else wants to marry (according to many of you). Is the government discriminating by making it against the law to marry a sibling? What if someone doesn't believe its wrong, and wants to do that? Why is THAT against the law? Now if any one of you says they should be allowed to do that too, if they wish, seriously, I would faint.

Please tell me, if that is allowed to be banned by law, why not gay marriages? They are both *immoral actions*, as defined by religion.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
Out of curiosity.....

What or how would you deal with a brother or sister who confided in you, that they were gay?

How would your view of them change?

There is a reason that sibs are not allowed to be married......birth defects.....look back at the inter marriages in royal 'families' in order to keep blood lines 'clean'.....

So what happens to your sibs when they tell you they are gay???

How would you treat them?

BitsyNaceyDog

03-05-2004, 05:00 PM

What or how would you deal with a brother or sister who confided in you, that they were gay?

I would still love them regardless, but I would not support their decision in any way.

G.P.girl

03-05-2004, 05:05 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
Look around during a church sermon......If glazed eyes were donuts, Krispy Kreme would be out of business.

LMAO!!

ok...i have a question, several peple said that gay marriage is wrong becasue then they are going to go to hell...ok that's fine and all, but don't you think it should be thier choice if they want to go to hell or not? just like they can't tell you what to door try to force you to want to go to hell. how is it going to hurt you if they go to hell? besides if you don't believe in hell, then there's really no where to go.

they've probly been saving up frequent flier miles too;)

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
There is a reason that sibs are not allowed to be married......birth defects.....look back at the inter marriages in royal 'families' in order to keep blood lines 'clean'.....

What about AIDS that comes with unprotected homosexual activity? If you can justify that with birth defects...........

Previously, others said that having children is not what validates a marriage, and I agree with that. A marriage can be perfectly valid without children. What if a brother and a sister want to get married, and do things in a *protected* way, and not get any children. Why stop them? Isn't it against their rights? If its against a gay's rights to ban them from marrying a person of the same gender, then I suppose, its against a person's rights to ban him/her from marrying a sibling. After all, who is the government to force their beliefs on individuals, as you all say??? Answer this question with an answer that makes sense, and we'll move on. Why is it against the law to marry a close relative? Its against religion, but what if someone else doesn't choose to believe in that??? I say, the government is discriminating! :p They're imposing their beliefs against the marriage of close relatives on others. How very discriminatory. *shakes head* ;)

As far as having a gay relative, I have no one in my family that would EVER do something like that, BUT, if I did, I would try my best to talk them out of it, to explain issues to them nicely, etc. If they leave it, they would be forgiven. If not, quite frankly, I would leave it up to God to judge them, and honestly would feel terrible about their actions. Of course the natural feeling of love that comes with kinship would still be there, but I would be frowning big time, upon their actions, and praying that God guides them to the right path.

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 05:16 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
What about AIDS that comes with unprotected homosexual activity? If you can justify that with birth defects...........

As far as having a gay relative, I have no one in my family that would EVER do something like that, BUT, if I did, I would try my best to talk them out of it, to explain issues to them nicely, etc. If they leave it, they would be forgiven. If not, quite frankly, I would leave it up to God to judge them, and honestly would feel terrible about their actions. Of course the natural feeling of love that comes with kinship would still be there, but I would be frowning big time, upon their actions, and praying that God guides them to the right path.

Aids is not 'just' a homosexually transmitted disease....
There are several methods of transmission...Men are the most
'effecient' at moving the disease from person to person.

Any unprotected activities have some 'side effects'.

I guess since we are ALL from the family of man, WE can forgive all the homosexuals out there, that makes the religious arguements a moot point!

Why does a relative rate higher on the forgiveness scale?

G.P.girl

03-05-2004, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
What about AIDS that comes with unprotected homosexual activity?

what about AIDS from heterosexual sex???? there is way more people with AIDS becasue of that!

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
Aids is not 'just' a homosexually transmitted disease....
There are several methods of transmission...Men are the most
'effecient' at moving the disease from person to person.

Why does a relative rate higher on the forgiveness scale?

I am well aware of that, but you can get birth defects in other ways TOO, so my point in saying that was, that isn't a valid argument.

A relative doesn't rate higher on the forgiveness scale. I never said I would forgive them. I would forgive them if they LEFT the action. I would forgive ANY gay if they left their sin and repented. Honestly, if I had a gay relative who was insisting on his/her sins, I wouldn't feel the same about them. The love that exists amongst relatives would still be there, but quite frankly, I wouldn't feel the same about them. I wouldn't. To be honest, I would probably distance myself from them.......perhaps cut off the relationship completely.

AND you never answered my question. Why is it not discriminatory on the government's behalf to ban marrying between close blood relatives if THEY wish to marry the one they love, yet it is discriminitory on the government's behlaf if they want to ban gays from marrying the ones they love? Why why why. Both are condemned by religion. Why is it ok to force that opinion on the non-religious, while it isn't ok to enforce the gay law. I want to see an answer to this. An answer that makes sense.

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 05:24 PM

If anyone is willing to answer my questions with an answer that makes sense, i'll be willing to answer any of yours the best I can.

PCB.. How can you say that no one in your family would ever do that? Have you ever stopped to think, maybe, just maybe they're scared to? Having a relative with such a strong disbelief against something surely would not make me want to come open with them. I doubt you'd be able to guide anyone away from homosexuality. It's a natural feeling.

Why can't everyone just "leave it up to 'God'" to judge Homosexuals? Afterall, according to some, he's the one who thinks it's a 'sin', people are just his followers.

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by Kfamr
If anyone is willing to answer my questions with an answer that makes sense, i'll be willing to answer any of yours the best I can.

PCB.. How can you say that no one in your family would ever do that? Have you ever stopped to think, maybe, just maybe they're scared to? Having a relative with such a strong disbelief against something surely would not make me want to come open with them. I doubt you'd be able to guide anyone away from homosexuality. It's a natural feeling.

Why can't everyone just "leave it up to 'God'" to judge Homosexuals? Afterall, according to some, he's the one who thinks it's a 'sin', people are just his followers.

I know that for a fact because they ALL talk against homosexuality themselves. And trust me, not everyone in my family is religious. Some of my cousins don't know a single thing in their religion, yet they speak against homosexuality. I know my family, and I know how they feel about things. They are very open in what they disagree with me in and very open in what they agree with me in. They know how I feel about things, and I know how they feel about things. AND.........I was talking about my direct family in this, all of whom I know very well, inside/out. They are more against such issues than I am.

No one has an answer to my question?

2kitties

03-05-2004, 05:31 PM

But People! NONE OF THIS MATTERS!!! The United States is a Constitution free OF and free FROM Religion. Religious arguments do NOT apply to this.

What if, for instance, the government of the US decided to follow Christian rules. Well a big ole see ya to Jewish Americans, Muslim Americans, Pagan Americans, Athiest Americans, etc. And all the way around. Our country can't and should not be lawed by a religion. These arguments are all religious. A church or synagog or whatever can refuse to marry a gay if they want (but you'll find if you look around that many churches are finding it in their faiths to embrace homosexuals). But the government can't.

All the religious arguments in this thread are beautiful and of deep conviction. Poppy, I know in my heart that you believe completly in everything you say and to you it is truth- same for Kevin and the rest. But the fact is, they are YOUR truths. You can't impose them on everyone. You can't speak to me as if they are certanity because MY truths are different than YOUR truths. Why can't we all learn to accept this?

Look around you at non-secular governments. They fall. Their countries are in tourmoil and they will never be peaceful. Why? Because Religion is too volatile. It is personal and should be between a person and their God- not in the laws of a nation. There are too many faiths in the US for that kind of ruling. I do not want to live under a religious government. EVER. They always fail and they always oppress members of their society.

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
I know that for a fact because they ALL talk against homosexuality themselves. And trust me, not everyone in my family is religious. Some of my cousins don't know a single thing in their religion, yet they speak against homosexuality. I know my family, and I know how they feel about things. They are very open in what they disagree with me in and very open in what they agree with me in. They know how I feel about things, and I know how they feel about things. AND.........I was talking about my direct family in this, all of whom I know very well, inside/out. They are more against such issues than I am.

No one has an answer to my question?

I've known Homosexuals who've spoken against Homosexuality yet later came out and regretted everything they did. They did it as a cover up, because they were around such close-minded people and were afraid to come out.

I think, if I remember correctly, a special on MTV aired with one man who was in that exact situation.

Tonya

03-05-2004, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
I am well aware of that, but you can get birth defects in other ways TOO, so my point in saying that was, that isn't a valid argument.

A relative doesn't rate higher on the forgiveness scale. I never said I would forgive them. I would forgive them if they LEFT the action. I would forgive ANY gay if they left their sin and repented. Honestly, if I had a gay relative who was insisting on his/her sins, I wouldn't feel the same about them. The love that exists amongst relatives would still be there, but quite frankly, I wouldn't feel the same about them. I wouldn't.

AND you never answered my question. Why is it not discriminatory on the government's behalf to ban marrying between close blood relatives if THEY wish to marry the one they love, yet it is discriminitory on the government's behlaf if they want to ban gays from marrying the ones they love? Why why why. Both are condemned by religion. Why is it ok to force that opinion on the non-religious, while it isn't ok to enforce the gay law. I want to see an answer to this. An answer that makes sense.

I don't have an answer that makes sense, but I totally hear what you are saying. I'm for gay marriage, yet I'm against polygamy and marriage within family members.

Whom I to say what's right and wrong? I am ok with homosexuality, so gay marriage is ok to me. Yet, I'm not ok with incest, so those marriages aren't ok. They are both moral issues.

My only defense is that it is scientifically proven that children resulted incest can have birth defects.

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by 2kitties
But People! NONE OF THIS MATTERS!!! The United States is a Constitution free OF and free FROM Religion. Religious arguments do NOT apply to this.

What if, for instance, the government of the US decided to follow Christian rules. Well a big ole see ya to Jewish Americans, Muslim Americans, Pagan Americans, Athiest Americans, etc. And all the way around. Our country can't and should not be lawed by a religion. These arguments are all religious. A church or synagog or whatever can refuse to marry a gay if they want (but you'll find if you look around that many churches are finding it in their faiths to embrace homosexuals). But the government can't.

All the religious arguments in this thread are beautiful and of deep conviction. Poppy, I know in my heart that you believe completly in everything you say and to you it is truth- same for Kevin and the rest. But the fact is, they are YOUR truths. You can't impose them on everyone. You can't speak to me as if they are certanity because MY truths are different than YOUR truths. Why can't we all learn to accept this?

Look around you at non-secular governments. They fall. Their countries are in tourmoil and they will never be peaceful. Why? Because Religion is too volatile. It is personal and should be between a person and their God- not in the laws of a nation. There are too many faiths in the US for that kind of ruling. I do not want to live under a religious government. EVER. They always fail and they always oppress members of their society.

I understand what you're saying, but when the government shouldn't be able to force the ban of gay marriages on people, why can they force the ban of marriages between relatives? Why is that ok? They are BOTH religiously immoral. Why is one ok and not the other? That is my question. They can both be said as wrong from a scientific point of view, but.....what happened to freedom of choice, when it comes to this issue?

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 05:36 PM

G.P.girl

03-05-2004, 05:39 PM

2kitties

03-05-2004, 05:40 PM

Honestly Pops, I don't think they should ban marriage between relatives. Lord knows I find it vile to imagine that kind of relationship with any of my family members, but it isn't my place to legislate my morality over someone else.
There's nothing we can do about plain old stupidity ya know!:p

But, that said, there would have to be some kind of regulation on their reproduction. It is cruel to their offspring to allow them to purposefully procreate. I think of it sort of like crime- bear with me I'll get to the point.. We have laws against crimes like murder because they hurt other people. Knowingly procreating in a way that will harm the child is harmful to another person and, therefore, a crime in my mind. Like women who drink alcohol or do drugs while pregnant. It is becoming illegal more and more because it is a crime. The purposeful procreation between close relatives is sort of like that.

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by Kfamr
Yes, but besides religious reasons, what's a reason for not allowing Gays to marry?

Its against the nature of man and woman. You can find scientific research approving of that and disapproving of that. Same with the marriage of kin, so I don't see that as a valid argument. I figure none of you have an answer to my question. Anyway, I have friends coming over, so I'll be gone for quite some time. I'm glad everyone can debate peacefully without hurting each other. Remember, while you all argue..............not to break the friendship. ^_^

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 05:42 PM

RICHARD

03-05-2004, 05:51 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
I understand what you're saying, but when the government shouldn't be able to force the ban of gay marriages on people, why can they force the ban of marriages between relatives? Why is that ok? They are BOTH religiously immoral. Why is one ok and not the other? That is my question. They can both be said as wrong from a scientific point of view, but.....what happened to freedom of choice, when it comes to this issue?

Congrats on you impending Quadrapillarhood.....

http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/?article=law&refid=009

Both are religiously immoral but marriages between
family members is prohibited more by natural laws than religious laws. "Royal" families were decimated by intermarriage..Those laws were put in place by the ruling families themselves..After a few generations the 'lineage' crumbled upon itself...practicality, and the desire for families to keep power were more important than religious convictions...

Science says that same sex relationships are against the basic rules of procreation...because we are not animals our desires and needs as people
come before the basic desire to rut.

Animals do 'it' instinctually, we look for a partners from the standpoint of what makes us comfortable and what we find attractive in another being....

Intermarriage had more of a consequntial effect on the products of such a union....e.g. Birth Defects.......a same sex marriage has no 'products', but the pair has to be socially and physically responsible to each other....when people get sloppy they run into problems.

micki76

03-05-2004, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
Its against the nature of man and woman. You can find scientific research approving of that and disapproving of that. Same with the marriage of kin, so I don't see that as a valid argument. I figure none of you have an answer to my question. Anyway, I have friends coming over, so I'll be gone for quite some time. I'm glad everyone can debate peacefully without hurting each other. Remember, while you all argue..............not to break the friendship. ^_^

I think if you ask any gay person, they will tell you it feels natural to them and that being with someone of the opposite sex feels unnatural to them. That goes angainst their nature.

I have to agree with 2K, it grosses me out to think of a brother and a sister marrying and having sex, but they should really have the right to do so if they wish. No children should be allowed from the relaltionship, but I also think that someone who knowingly spreads aids or hepatitis to anyone should be punished as well. Any two consenting adults should be with whomever they choose. I personally don't have a problem with multiple spouses as long as they're adults and aren't manipulated or forced. I would never do it, but they are welcome to if it floats their boat and harms no one.

popcornbird

03-05-2004, 08:28 PM

Well I was gone for hours and other than *that shouldn't be banned either*, I haven't gotten any other answer.

I hope you all understand my point now, my reasons for being against it. Just as marriage between siblings disgusts you (and it disgusts me too ewww), the same way, the act of homosexuality disgusts me. Its something I cannot accept, just as I cannot accept marriage between close blood relatives.

The reason I think its *ok* to make a law against this, is the same reason I'm ok with the law against marriage between blood relatives. Exactly the same reason, as I see them as very similar issues. AND, if its ok for gays to do whatever they want without government interference, than there should be protests against the law banning marriage between relatives too. After all, it isn't fair to allow one and ban the other. Either they should both be outlawed, or both allowed.

Micki, I think if you'd ask a child molestor why he molested a child, he would say those feelings came to him naturally. Regardless, it is wrong. Those are not feelings that come to us by our nature or instincts, but feelings that Satan puts in our minds and makes us think they are natural. This is my opinion, and I put this example of marriage between siblings to make it clear to you all WHY I feel this way. I do think it is clear enough now, because no one has had an answer.

I am over with this thread.........I don't want to waste my last posts to 4000 :D in arguing with people I consider my close friends (yes I consider many of you very close friends). I've gotten my point through, and you have all gotten your points through. I think we should end this subject now, because it is getting no where. I respect you all for who you are, and respect that you have your own beliefs and faiths. I hope you can understand now, why I feel the way I do. I see this act as unnatural and wrong (from a non-religious point of view) and if you ask me why, taking religion out of it, its for exactly the same reason that I can't accept marriage between kin as right. Its just something that I find vile and unacceptable. Again, this is my opinion, and I'm done with this thread. :)

CathyBogart

03-05-2004, 08:45 PM

You know...I do have a dear friend who has romantic/sexual relations with his sister...and as much as I wouldn't consider it...he really loves her, and I wouldn't deny him that. It's hard for me to fathom, but if he truly decided he wanted to marry her, I don't know that I could bring myself to tell him that it's wrong.

G.P.girl

03-05-2004, 08:48 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
Well I was gone for hours and other than *that shouldn't be banned either*, I haven't gotten any other answer.

I hope you all understand my point now, my reasons for being against it. Just as marriage between siblings disgusts you (and it disgusts me too ewww), the same way, the act of homosexuality disgusts me. Its something I cannot accept,

what exactly are you looking for an answer to?

just because you an't accept it and it discusts you doesn't mean you have the right to tell other people what they should accept or be discusted by. just becasue they get married and live happily together doesn't mean that you're suddenly going to turn gay or straight marriage is suddenly going to be less 'special' thanks to Britney Spears and other hollywood figures marriage is realy just a big joke to everybody

2kitties

03-05-2004, 08:50 PM

pops, i know you are through, but you know i can never keep my big mouth shut. i don't think i was clear about why i think it is different than sibling marriages. I get what you're saying. I really do. But i just think that we can't make something illegal simply because it disgusts some people. Imagine how many people are disgusted by interfaith or interracial marriages, by women in powerful positions, by women in the minstry, by blacks using the front door..... we can't go backwards, we just can't. And to AMMEND our supreme document in a way that takes away rights from a segment of the American population who've committed no crime... it's sad to me.

At the end of the day, I think people should be allow by law to do whatever the heck they want to do so long as they don't hurt anybody else. Getting married doesn't affect anybody other than the two consenting adults involved. So, I personally don't think it's anybody's business to regulate who they marry. The problem with sibling marriages is that they result in children who are born of a defective gene pool. They risk birth defects, etc. So, in effect, the marriage of relatives with the intent to procreate is directly harming an individual not consenting to the marriage (the unborn children).

Now, in terms of a child molester doing what comes naturally... well yes. But again, his natural thing harms others. So, therefore it can't be legal.

If it doesn't hurt anybody else- I'm all for it. Two gays getting married and making legal decisions for one another and becoming the beneficiary of their social security (for what that's gonna be worth) is fine by me.

If it hurts another individual- not fine by me.

And I'll add- Britney Spears did NOT make marriage a mockery. Maybe the alcoholic husband beating the crap out of his wife or his children, or the adulterers cheating on their husbands or wives... maybe they made a mockery of marriage. But to assume that just 55 hours in the life of Britney Spears can destroy the institution of matrimony is sort of a stretch.;)

aly

03-05-2004, 08:50 PM

PCB - It has only been a few hours and not many people visit the dog house so it takes longer for replies. Even less people want to visit the controversial threads about these topics. So I'm sure you'll get more replies if you're patient! :)

Even though they said incest disgusts them, they never said that marriage between relatives should be banned. Having children in that situation would definately be wrong because of birth defects.

I have to disagree that there is scientific evidence proving homosexuality to be wrong. How can you prove that scientifically? (I don't think you used the word 'wrong', but something similar)

*edit* Great post, 2kitties! You stated things very well.

Kfamr

03-05-2004, 08:52 PM

I still don't understand where you're coming from PCB.
I do understand that you follow by 'religious beleifs', but I don't get your point. That's where i'll leave it though, because i'll probably never understnad your way of life, or thinking.

You never answered my questions, either.

PepperRSM

03-05-2004, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by 2kitties
If it doesn't hurt anybody else- I'm all for it. Two gays getting married and making legal decisions for one another and becoming the beneficiary of their social security (for what that's gonna be worth) is fine by me.

I completely agree. Gays marrying is not hurting anyone, so why is it such a big deal? Why can't they get the legal rights of heterosexual couples who get married? It just seems so unfair. They're not doing anything to hurt anyone and they don't get the rights everyone else does.

Rottieluver45

03-05-2004, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by aly

*edit* Great post, 2kitties! You stated things very well.

Ditto!!! You`re great at stating your points!!

Twisterdog

03-05-2004, 10:07 PM

Once again, conflicting opinions piss everyone off. This is ridiculous.

What is ridiculous is that everyone seems perfectly capable of expressing mature, if conflicting opinions, in many controversial threads on this board. That is, until you arrive. This is the third thread within the last couple of weeks that you have managed to degrade to an argument with your immature, closed-minded arguments. Perhaps a different board would suit your needs better, kevinrats?

As an aside ... incestuous marriage was banned, in part, to prevent children born of too closely linked DNA, which can lead to many genetic diseases, birth defects and mental/physical handicaps. It is legal to marry your relatives, as long as they are not so closely related to you that your offspring could be damaged by it. I believe, for example, that you cannot marry your first cousin but you can marry your second cousin, or you first cousin once removed. Obviously, then, there is more to the incestuous marriage ban than there is to the homosexual marriage ban ... a homosexual couple is obviously not going to produce inbred children.

I never cease to be amazed by the fact that the most close-minded, paternalistic, controlling people in any room - the ones who are constantly stepping up on their high horse of righteousness or "family values" - are the people who profess to be so religious. This country was founded by people who were persecuted for their "abnormal" religous beliefs, and fled Europe seeking a free place where they could worship as they wish. America became that place for them, because they understood a very basic principal: Do under other as you would have them do unto you. All or nothing. Voltaire said, "I disaprove of what you say, but will defend unto death your right to say it."

What happened to this strong, wise pioneer stock, who knew for one group to be free, all must be free? They are a far cry from the Christian-right these days. The very people who should be proud and humble and overjoyed to be fortunate enough to live in a free country where they have the right to practice their religion as they see fit ... (a right the VAST majority of the world does not have!) .... these are the same people that so eagerly clamor to strip any group that is different than them of those same rights. Nothing infuriates me more than a hypocrite.

For example ... (not to be hurtful, just citing one example) ... Popcornbird, you are Muslim. You are free to worship your God in a country where the vast majority of citizens are Christian. You take for granted that your religious freedoms are protected in the USA, and that you are granted the right of religious freedom. There are millions of Christians worldwide that think Islam is an unnatural abomination, a "sin", etc. Yet, you are still granted the freedom to do what you want here. Is it anyone's business but yours who you worship? Where you go to pray? No.

And yet, even as you take full advantage of the rights this country gives you ... you would take away another minority groups' rights to freedom and happines because you feel their lifestyle is an unnatural abomination and a "sin." Is it anyone's business but theirs who they love? Who they want to marry? No.

Hmmmmm .......

I believe ... live and let live. If what someone does isn't hurting you, then why should you have ANY right to tell them they can't do it? Instead of screaming about the "sanctity of marriage" ... why not work on your own marriage instead? Isn't that ultimately the only marriage that will matter to you in the end? Instead of screaming about the "sins" that other people are commiting ... why not work on your own relationship with your own God. Isn't that ultimately the only relationship that will matter to you in the end?

"Judge not, lest ye shall be judged."

Shelteez2

03-05-2004, 10:13 PM

Originally posted by Twisterdog
What is ridiculous is that everyone seems perfectly capable of expressing mature, if conflicting opinions, in many controversial threads on this board. That is, until you arrive. This is the third thread within the last couple of weeks that you have managed to degrade to an argument with your immature, closed-minded arguments. Perhaps a different board would suit your needs better, kevinrats?

As an aside ... incestuous marriage was banned, in part, to prevent children born of too closely linked DNA, which can lead to many genetic diseases, birth defects and mental/physical handicaps. It is legal to marry your relatives, as long as they are not so closely related to you that your offspring could be damaged by it. I believe, for example, that you cannot marry your first cousin but you can marry your second cousin, or you first cousin once removed. Obviously, then, there is more to the incestuous marriage ban than there is to the homosexual marriage ban ... a homosexual couple is obviously not going to produce inbred children.

I never cease to be amazed by the fact that the most close-minded, paternalistic, controlling people in any room - the ones who are constantly stepping up on their high horse of righteousness or "family values" - are the people who profess to be so religious. This country was founded by people who were persecuted for their "abnormal" religous beliefs, and fled Europe seeking a free place where they could worship as they wish. America became that place for them, because they understood a very basic principal: Do under other as you would have them do unto you. All or nothing. Voltaire said, "I disaprove of what you say, but will defend unto death your right to say it."

What happened to this strong, wise pioneer stock, who knew for one group to be free, all must be free? They are a far cry from the Christian-right these days. The very people who should be proud and humble and overjoyed to be fortunate enough to live in a free country where they have the right to practice their religion as they see fit ... (a right the VAST majority of the world does not have!) .... these are the same people that so eagerly clamor to strip any group that is different than them of those same rights. Nothing infuriates me more than a hypocrite.

For example ... (not to be hurtful, just citing one example) ... Popcornbird, you are Muslim. You are free to worship your God in a country where the vast majority of citizens are Christian. You take for granted that your religious freedoms are protected in the USA, and that you are granted the right of religious freedom. There are millions of Christians worldwide that think Islam is an unnatural abomination, a "sin", etc. Yet, you are still granted the freedom to do what you want here. Is it anyone's business but yours who you worship? Where you go to pray? No.

And yet, even as you take full advantage of the rights this country gives you ... you would take away another minority groups' rights to freedom and happines because you feel their lifestyle is an unnatural abomination and a "sin." Is it anyone's business but theirs who they love? Who they want to marry? No.

Hmmmmm .......

I believe ... live and let live. If what someone does isn't hurting you, then why should you have ANY right to tell them they can't do it? Instead of screaming about the "sanctity of marriage" ... why not work on your own marriage instead? Isn't that ultimately the only marriage that will matter to you in the end? Instead of screaming about the "sins" that other people are commiting ... why not work on your own relationship with your own God. Isn't that ultimately the only relationship that will matter to you in the end?

"Judge not, lest ye shall be judged."

*applauds*

Well said.

Rottieluver45

03-05-2004, 10:15 PM

WOW!!! :eek:

Good job!!

*standing ovation(sp?)*

Fox-Gal

03-05-2004, 10:16 PM

Why it's wrong for blood relatives to marry, is it's harms others, the children of that marriage. Proven. The same as inbreeding your dog! Proven.

Just as murder is illegal, or assult, robbery theft etc etc it harms or hurts others. Not because any religious moral belifes.

Now who is harmed or hurt by gays marrying? I have yet to find anyone that can give a GOOD reason besides their religious belifes why they should not be allowed to marry. Someone said Aids was a reason, but honestly we know thats not a valid reason. You can get Aids from anyone. Children is also not a valid reason, childern can and have been raised happy, healthy and well adjusted with gay parents. I would like to hear a good reason, leaving God out of it.

SEPARATION of church and state, means that, SEPARATE the two.

Bfore we can tell these people that they are not intitled to the same rights as us because they are different, there needs to be a proven reason how others are harmed or hurt.

Without that reason, I can only see it as no different then years ago when woman could not vote or when blacks had to sit in the back of the bus or deniend their right to vote. Back then we where telling them that it's because they were different, they did not deserve the same rights as us. We learned from that mistake that no man, woman, are people of different colors should be denied their rights just because they are different. So why now is it ok to say to the gay's that because you are different from us, you can not share in the same HUMAN rights that all all of us enjoy. It' just another from of prejudice and hopefull we can all agree the prejudice is wrong, no exceptions.

Religious belifes need to stay out of this, you have every right to your belifes and if someone feels it's wrong they have that right. But you don't have the right to impose your religious belifes on others through laws. SEPARATION of church and state.

This debate could go on and on, and some might get hurt by it. Everyone has their own views and will stick by them. That will never change. Agree to disagree and walk away strong in your belifes but respecting that others feel strong in theirs.

If you feel that the debate needs to contuine then debate the legal side of it, does the goverment have the right to stop gays from marrying? But out of respect for others, leave religion out of it.

2kitties

03-05-2004, 10:18 PM

*claps for twisterdog*

IttyBittyKitty

03-05-2004, 11:53 PM

No, I do not find the idea of gay marriages "disgusting." I am friends with many homesexual young gentlement, and you'd never meet anyone more pleasant! Let me ask you this - how many gay gentlement commit sexual murder or acts of terrorism? As opposed to straight gentlement who consider themselves to be in some way religious?

So what am I "disgusted" by?

I am disgusted by the puritanical stance that religious people take when it comes to judging the choices and decisions that others make.

I totally agree with 2kitties, whose arguments are always lucid and sensitive, on the point that consenting adults may do what ever they like as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. And I am not refering to other people's "sensitivities" and prudish beliefs either. This, therefore, rules out paedophilia, siblings reproducing, murder, rape and anything else that would cause hurt to others.

But not gay marriage.

Last night, I went to see "Passion" which highlighted (in no uncertain terms!!) what Jesus went through. Jesus was tortured and crucified because the Jews had judged him to be a "heretic" and a dangerous lunatic, and decided that this was worthy of the highest punishment of them all. Jesus, himself, always said "cast not the first stone." If you are religious, then is it not God's place to judge others, not yours?

What really highlighted the hypocrosy of many Christians was the fact that I was in a theatre full of them (they'd booked out the whole theatre) and yet no one introduced themselves to us, no one exhibited any kindness to us. Later, in talking to some of them, I mentioned that Scott and I lived together and you should have seen the ripple of judgment that passed over their sweet, innocent faces. It was disgusting.

micki76

03-06-2004, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by IttyBittyKitty
What really highlighted the hypocrosy of many Christians was the fact that I was in a theatre full of them (they'd booked out the whole theatre) and yet no one introduced themselves to us, no one exhibited any kindness to us. Later, in talking to some of them, I mentioned that Scott and I lived together and you should have seen the ripple of judgment that passed over their sweet, innocent faces. It was disgusting.

Please don't think we're all like that. We're not. I'm not, though my inlaws are and I can't stand to be around them and hear thethings they say about others. :( I'm always so disappointed to hear a story like yours about Christians. I guess I'm an usual Christian in that I've sinned most of the sins that many others look down thier noses at. I'm sure there are even more that I will sin.

I know God loves me for me, not for who I pretend to be every Sunday. Nor does he love me more than you because I'm married. :rolleyes: It does get old.

For the longest time I stopped telling people I was a Christian because I got a lot of those ripples of judgement myself. :(

CathyBogart

03-06-2004, 02:15 AM

micki: I have to admit that for awhile I went through a "Christianity BAD" stage after a series of conflicts with one groups of people. Then I met the president of the Christian club at my school....

He was asking a man to leave our campus. The man had come in, stood on our fountain and started preaching about Christianity. We were all fine with this, until he started to speak badly about homosexuals and talking about "burning the fag flag". At that point, myself and one of my (gay) friends went to the campus police.

The campus police wouldn't do anything about it, but the president of our Christian club overheard, walked out, and asked him to leave. "The Christian club on this campus wants to be non-judgemental and non-obtrusive, and you are disrupting that, so please leave". The man didn't leave, but I immediately stopped generalizing. I even went to a Christian club meeting, just to see if what he had said was true, and I was very impressed by what I found.

Now that I've gone off on a long tangent that has nothing to do with the original topic, I'll be quiet. :)

RICHARD

03-06-2004, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by popcornbird
the act of homosexuality disgusts me. Its something I cannot accept, just as I cannot accept marriage between close blood relatives.

Here's a tip!

Look at people for who they are.
Don't look past their bedroom door and you'll see that they really aren't that much different than you and I.

I have always wondered why people obsess about what people do in the dark.

I have more of a problem with people standing outside a bedroom window, on tiptoes, trying to figure out what's going on inside....there's only one reason they are out there.....and that is to satisfy their curiosity.

From there, they can be totally shocked and gain ammo for their fight against what goes on, or get their jollies from the view....

But what it comes down to is why are people checking up on someone elses life, especially in the bedroom...

CamCamPup33

03-06-2004, 12:54 PM

I approve.. 100% of gay marriages! It's there buisness why should *anyone* be allowed to say if it's right or not.. It's who you love.. Opposition to opening up civil marriage has mostly come from the church and from Christian political parties. They claim on biblical and other moral grounds that the institution of marriage is only meant to be the union of a man and a woman. That of course is a matter of belief and you can't really argue with that, but it is incompatible with the notion of equal rights.. Many people continue to believe that homosexuality is about nothing but sex, considering it to be merely a sexual perversion. The reality is that homosexuality is multidimensional, and is much more about love and affection than it is about sex. And this is what gay relationships are based on -- mutual attraction, love and affection. Sex is a means of expressing that love, just the same as it is for heterosexuals. Being gay is much more profound than simply a sexual relationship; being gay is part of that person's core indentity, and goes right the very center of his being. It's like being black in a society of whites, or a blonde European in a nation of black-haired Asians. Yes, being gay is just that profound to the person who is.

If i was in love, with another woman, nothing and no one would stop me.. Those of you who are against it, what if this happened to you, where you were in love with someone of the same sex? Would you call your self a disgrace to god, would you really be sinning? I mean, i guess if you were in the postion yourself, the tables would surely be turned.

Could some of you who oppose of this give a few good reasons?