Your thoughts on Gay Marriage / Homosexuality?

Post Reply New Topic

Adam was gay.

Non-gays wouldn't just do everything a snake says.

I hope this is some sort of dry humour or satire of Christo-fascist bigotry. If not, let me just STRIDENTLY say that Adam and Eve are fictional characters.

There is no blurred line. Christians do not have the right to decide the rights of others. Period. Having a religious text which forbids its followers to do a thing does not grant you the right to enforce that same set of rules on non-followers. If Christians cannot accept this, that's just too bad.



The only moral responsibilities you have are those that you impose upon yourself. Likewise any other human being, be they straight, gay, Christian, Muslim, French, etc. That your morals might come into direct conflict with the law is for you to deal with. The Bible is not the defining text on moral correctness or moral responsibility.



Lifelong abstinence is simply a choice. There is nothing admirable about choosing to live your life a certain way. Those who make that choice do so because they believe it is the right choice for them. That's hardly an incredible achievement.



Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't the first commandment 'I am the Lord your God'?

Hysterectomies and vasectomies of non-Christians are not the business of the church. Once again, you are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to force that opinion on others. What you may do is attempt to change the laws of the land in which you live. You will, however, fail to achieve this. Stop trying to apply your personal morality to other people. To do so is wicked and wrong, and not at all in line with the true teachings of the Bible.

Master_Pedant wrote:

I guess you could call it dry humor but there's nothing satirical about it. A liberal co-worked once called me a jackbooted thug for my political beliefs and I guess that's about equivalent to what you call a "Christo-fascist bigot".
Coming from either of you I take it as a compliment.

It's great to see that you stand by your bronze age mythology and discredited political ideology no matter what.

I'm neutral on the issue. It's the Bible thumpers that need to get off their high horse about it.

First it was Adam and Lilith, but she wanted to be on top. It just didn't work out.

ruveyn

Sixty percent of straight marriages fail these days, leaving lots of problems with children of the union.

Gays are notorious for having multiple sexual partners in numbers that would make Hugh Hefner gasp.
So how long do gay marriages last? Does anyone know?

If two guys want to shack up together that is ok by me. If they say to each other "you will always be my best friend" that is their business.

So one of them changes his mind. Why do we have to bring the law into it?

In high school you don't get sued for dumping someone you were "going steady" with. That's life.

Well, to be honest, the data that suggests "most" marriage fail is skewed. The available data only takes into account every reported divorce. It doesn't distinguish between first-time marriages and people who have had multiple marriages. I personally know a guy who's been married and divorced so many times he isn't allowed to get married again--and that's the state of MISSISSIPPI. So that's one guy who has been married/divorced 8 times, and that also doesn't take into account the number of times his ex-wives have been divorced (I don't know that for a fact, but as old is this guy is, it's hardly likely he's been anybody's first). The general rule about divorce and re-marriage is "third time is a charm." That doesn't account for all of the new marriage that really do last throughout the lifetime of one partner.

FYI: My wife works for a divorce lawyer. I'm very, VERY nice to her!! !

Agreed, you shouldnt have to. Though I dont recall it costing much time or money for my brother. Some signed and notarized papers and a visit to the bank. Perhaps you mean some other process.

people who don't like gay marriage should simply abstain from such and stop bullying the rest of us around.

The facts can be inferred from the results of government census without needing specific marriage counts. For example you can pretty much assume that some 95+ per cent of people do attempt a first marriage, right? I mean its a pretty prime goal in the general population. So when a census happens and it returns that percentage of (adult) people unmarried, a quick subtract shows you the deviation from what is expected. Since the Census breaks down populations by age, it reads pretty cleanly if it says 50% of 40 year olds are unmarried.

So mister 8 marriages falls through the cracks, but then he did anyway being married 8 times. You could probably just ignore him entirely-it doesnt skew the numbers. He is probably one in a million people. are there 308 people alive in the US that are on their 8th marriage? Its a tiny group regardless. His marriages only count for one millionth each.

A good way to look at it is to imagine a field, square in shape, with a very round pond centered inside it. Lets specify that you are not permitted to measure it directly(similar to the census). You dont know the length of the sides of the field for instance.

So you shoot cannon balls at it(and with a really crappy grouping), and count the ones that fall outside the water(but not outside the field). After you a 1000 cannon shots have been fired, you have four numbers, water_hits, field_hits, outside_fence and total_shots. Using this you can approximate the area of the field and circle! In fact, the worse your cannons aim is, the better, as is an increasing number of shots. The error term, outside_fence, can be used to gauge the accuracy of the cannon. Not only that, but you can infer the value of PI. I can write you an application that demonstrates if you like.

Census designers arrange the questions carefully. For instance, they'll know the number of adults and kids living in the residence and the marital status of each adult as well as everyones ages.

So if its a 42 year old man, a 39 year old woman and three kids aged 13, 17 and 19 you can pretty much infer that its an average family. If its a 65 year old woman, a 43 year old woman and two kids, aged 16, its probably a grandmother, single mother and her two kids. Depending on the census questions you might be able to suss out more info than that. In fact, the more odd the living arrangements, the greater the detail they can infer.

I noticed you forgot to answer my question: are you amenable to other religions marrying gays? I know you probably consider other marriages religions as immoral, but I'm asking if you accept the legality of say, a Maori marriage.

If I may, just so I understand:

Divorce is kosher
Gay marriage is not

Wasn't there something to the whole "'til death do us part" thing?

The third choice is missing : "I don't care /mind".

The whole idea turns around the concept of alliance between groups of people.

The state here should be pretty much neutral regarding civil unions regardless of orientation.

The Church which polices itself can do whatever it chooses to do.

It was already pointed out that the figure doesn't discriminate between first and multiple marriages. I'll go ahead and add my +1 to that.



Insufficient data at time of asking. It's a relatively new thing, you know.
And incidentally, multiple sexual partners is hardly a gay phenomenon.



Indeed it is.



We don't need to bring anything into it. It's their business, remember.



How many high school relationships include legally binding vows and power of atorney?

I think some coffee went up my nose when I read that one!



I have never suggested that you can't speak out against gay marriage or against homosexuality. You are free to hold and express your beliefs until the end of time. My argument is with the substance of your beliefs.

Christians who oppose abortion are allowed to speak out against it. Christians who oppose the use of contraceptives are allowed to speak out against it. Christians who oppose divorce are allowed to speak out against it. Christians who oppose homosexual acts are allowed to speak out against them. Just because the law determines that an activity is legal does not mean that those who oppose that activity are silenced as a result.



Your logic fails, because individual beliefs conflict with legal determinism all the time. Christians are going to the mat on same-sex marriage in ways that they have not on many other issues of religious doctring. Are we to assume that you are less opposed to adultery? To pre-marital sex? Why are you not on the hustings looking for constitutional amendments to ban these practices?



And I thought you said this wasn't about power.

If your concern is with protecting homeschooling, then work to protect the rights of parents who homeschool. Banning same-sex marriage is not going to make the courts less concerned about homeschooling that is, "too religious." If that's your fight, then fight that one.



I am sensitive to your beliefs. I believe completely in your right to hold them and to express them. I believe in your right to raise your children in those beliefs. Furthermore, I don't expect to impose my beliefs upon you.

But you expect to impose your beliefs upon me.

So who's the hypocrite?