It used to be that gays were in the closet. Now it seems that people who voted yes on California Proposition 8 are the ones in the closet. If you admit that you voted yes on 8 to define marriage as heterosexual only, then you are labeled a bigot and a hater. So you can’t tell your friends you voted yes on 8 because they won’t talk to you anymore. And there’s no having a civil conversation with gay marriage supporters to address legitimate reasons why someone might vote yes on 8.
“legitimate reason why someone might vote yes on 8″
such as what?
Is there a legitimate reason why someone would vote yes on prop 8?
Being against all marriage. Ignoring the fact the marriage comes from evolution – reproducing couples. Ignoring reproduction on marriage is like ignoring that eating has anything to do with nutrition. Imposing a set of laws geared towards 17th century heterosexual families on the 21st century gay community. That equality can be had by removing marriage from non-reproducing str8 people.
If someone believes marriage (government marriage) sucks then why would someone want to vote for something that sucks to be expanded to gays?
There are a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with hate an bigotry. But the gay community seems to be oblivious to the legitimate concerns the the reality based difference that there is a gender component to marriage and that gender does make a reality based difference.
There is also an argument that a “one size fits all” marriage is a really bad idea because there are structural differences and that these relationships are not the same. But you can not have a reasonable conversation about this with the No on 8 supporters. All they can do is yell bigot at you without considering the fact that there are differences between males and females.
You also have to consider that the California divorce rate is 60% and that the #1 cause of divorce is marriage.
Voters voting for Prop 8 are guilty of not wanting to redefine marrige as those on the left would like. The redefinition issue is an uphill fight with the energy being expended better coming up witha suitable legal frame work for domestic partners. It is unfortunate that those who have supported Prop 8 are now being verbally abused as the opponents having little more than name calling in left their playbook.
Although not a citizen of California I would have voted for Prop 8 and will not hide from that position.
the most intolerant hate filled types are those who are for gay marriages and against prop 8. All you have to do is see how they act towards those who voted for it.
I found the best reason to give those mean spirited hate filled gay marriage bigots as to why I voted for prop 8 is to, “protect gays from the horrors of divorce. I am sparing gays from the disappointment that marriage brings.” Many on the left always rip marriage because of the high divorce rates thus it’s my duty to make sure they are protected.
I accept that someone who is very anti-marriage may vote for any proposition restricting people’s right to be married without caring who those people are. So that is indeed a non-bias based reason.
The rest of the reasons you cite – “the gender component to marriage” – is no different than people claiming biological differences between black and white people as the basis for segregation. There may be no hate involved – a lot of people honestly believed African Americans are better off segregated – but there sure is prejudice.
I accept that a lot of people who voted for proposition 8 now feel uncomfortable, because they do not hate homosexuals and do not feel they should be labelled as bigots. But the truth is, whether or not someone is a bigot doesn’t depend on whether they themselves would agree to that label. If a lot of people are pointing at someone and saying “bigot”, maybe they need to come to terms with the fact that that is what they are, hate or not.
So which of these “legitimate” arguments has fuck-all to do with a non-intrusive intent? I mean, I’m pretty sure I could make better decisions for everyone else’s life than they do, so why don’t I get to legislate what they do…I mean…they are wrong, right? I get to decide.
Ooops, I mean, yeah, it isn’t bigotry, THEY were mean. That is pretty much the best argument I’ve ever heard. In fact, let’s put that standard up for ANY bigotry. If there are those who are “reverse” hateful, then all arguments for keeping government out of legislating people’s personal business are off…
“spare them from divorce”…nice. I think we should make jobs illegal to spare people from unemployment….or getting fired/laid off if you prefer your parallel structures…
Why is everyone so wound up that we want do define marriage as between man and wife. civil unions still have the rights afforded them, were not pushing to take those away. We just want the word “marriage” and the institution it has stood for all these centuries to stay defined as man and woman. Get off your bigot-calling horses and have some respect for those that want marriage to stay the way it has been. Christians like myself are not called to hate gays but rather the actions that is homosexuality. We dont hate gays just like I would hope you dont hate christians. We dont call you bigots whne you take away our holidays of Easter and Christmas, so show the same respect please.
[Comment deleted - Violation of Posting Guidelines. - ed.]
#8 “We dont call you bigots whne you take away our holidays of Easter and Christmas…”
Huh?
#8 Because they want to be like straights even though they are not & want not to be like that.
#3 – M Perkel
>>If someone believes marriage (government
>>marriage) sucks then why would someone want to
>>vote for something that sucks to be expanded
>>to gays?
Uh, because many of them want it? And it’s the right thing to do?
#8 – ray
>>civil unions still have the rights afforded
>>them, were not pushing to take those away.
Yeah, civil unions have the rights afforded to civil unions, but not the rights afforded to marriages.
Get it?
#8 – ray
>>Christians like myself are not called to hate
>>gays but rather the actions that is
>>homosexuality.
Well, this being a free country and all, you are free not to engage in those hateful actions known as homosexuality. Never! Not even once!
Not everyone (not even all Christians) feel that way.
Why not just adopt the “live and let live” position on things that have absolutely no impact on how you live your life?
#9 – Warden
>>I found the best reason to give those mean
>>spirited hate filled gay marriage bigots as to
>>why I voted for prop 8 is to, “protect gays
>>from the horrors of divorce. I am sparing gays
>>from the disappointment that marriage brings.”
Gee, that’s mighty white of you, Warden.
[Comment deleted - Violation of Posting Guidelines. - ed.]
#8 – Ray
>>We dont call you bigots whne you take away our
>>holidays of Easter and Christmas
Sure you do.
And the holidays aren’t even being “taken away”. As a card-carrying Christian myself, I can say I have not trouble at all celebrating Christmas or Easter.
If your “celebration” involves using taxpayer money (from Jews, Muslims, Atheists, etc.) to underwrite some kind of public gala, or including Christmas/ Easter indoctrination in public school classrooms, well, that’s a whole different kettle of fish. Christian kids and taxpayers aren’t forced to support Ramadan or Chanukah, and nobody’s crying “bigot” about that.
Defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Sounds like common sense. Next they should amend the Constitution to define north.
#17 MikeN
Nicely put
[Comment deleted - Violation of Posting Guidelines. - ed.]
#17 – Lyin’ Mike
>>Defining marriage as the union of a man and a
>>woman. Sounds like common sense. Next they
>>should amend the Constitution to define north.
Ah, you homophobes. So easily confused. You are congenitally unable to distinguish between a physical law of nature and a made-up societal construct that has been in flux ever since it was “defined”.
Tsk.
When you’re on the same side as people who are openly bigoted, you gotta wonder if you’re on the right side.
#6:
“The rest of the reasons you cite – “the gender component to marriage” – is no different than people claiming biological differences between black and white people as the basis for segregation.”
Not really, since there really are biological differences between men and women. There is the idea that marriage is allowable when there is an intent to produce children. I don’t necessarily agree with this, but it’s not illogical.
I voted to allow gay marriage. Just call it a ‘civil union’ for everyone, straight and gay, and get it done with.
Conrack
Keep in in your home and place of worship. That stuff has no place at the ballot box. You’ve heard of “separation of church and state”, I assume?
“Ignoring the fact the marriage comes from evolution – reproducing couples. Ignoring reproduction on marriage is like ignoring that eating has anything to do with nutrition”
Another example. Which one of these things is different from the others:
reproduction, marriage, eating, nutrition.
There is No separation of church and state, the state is merely prohibited from establishing a national religion. There is no such restriction on the people, or enforcing their collective will, everything available to the people expressing their collective will is free game.
Mustard for brains
Homophobes. What a pussy label. I have no fear of the homos. Homophobe doesn’t even come close to describing what I feel for the homos. It’s more like homo disgust, homo contempt, homo revulsion, homo abhorrence. You live in a christian nation, if you don’t like it then move to Lesbos, or France.
#15
Gods kingdom sounds like one boring dull place. Yet it’s called it heaven?
#19: That’s Paul’s opinions, not that of some deity. Paul is such a bigot (remember he was persecuting Samaritans when you first hear of him), that he’s a lousy interpreter of what Jesus was trying to get into people’s minds.
If God was against gays, why did he make them gay? It’s apparently genetic, you know.
By the way, I’m straight but have a sister that’s a lesbian.
#26 Conrack
I just have to ask. Would you make sodomy illegal?
Conrack fails a a Christian. “As I have loved you love one another” Hating gays, or anyone is not Christian!
He’s a troll, either that or a closet case.
Sounds like a state issue to me. Personally if California wants to ban gay marriage, then the only people who should have a say in the matter are those residing in the state of California.
That being said, I frankly do not care one way or the other when it comes to Gay marraige. What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is their own business. What I would like to see is government getting out of the business of certifying marriage to begin with. Marriage tends to be a religious ceremony to begin with, and should have been left to the church.
The prop-8 supporters seem to be delusional with the notion that if Prop-8 didn’t pass that churches would be forced to perform gay marriages, or perform no marriages what so ever.
Which makes little sense since this is a state constitutional amendment, which would force a change. If this did not pass, then everything would be status-quo; how would that “force” churches to have gay marriages? Technically nothing would be different if it didn’t pass.
Besides do you really need to amend the state constitution to change what some judges had ruled? Bit overkill isn’t it?
Also didn’t we have similar propositions in years past (about 10+ years ago) in CA that tried to do the exact same thing but failed?
Marc Perkel said:
“Ignoring the fact the marriage comes from evolution – reproducing couples. Ignoring reproduction on marriage is like ignoring that eating has anything to do with nutrition.”
So now I’m confused. Is it technically possible to have a baby outside of a marriage?
#20 It’s so funny that you use the word congenital. Wonder if you know what it means.
#34 pedro
*snort* You said con-genital *snicker*
Oops, I meant 36. It must congenital. 
[Comment deleted - Violation of Posting Guidelines. - ed.]
[Comment deleted - Violation of Posting Guidelines. - ed.]
#22:
“Ah, you homophobes. So easily confused. You are congenitally unable to distinguish between a physical law of nature and a made-up societal construct that has been in flux ever since it was “defined”.”
As long as we’re being precise, the physical law of nature known as “north” not only drifts geographically over time but has flipped numerous times throughout the Earth’s history. So, in a way, your comparison of “north” to marriage as something that has been “in flux” is rather ironic.
[Comment deleted - Violation of Posting Guidelines. - ed.]
While I may hold US (and all politicians) in very low esteem. I must admit this is just the kind of thing that society should decide by voting. Marriage is a term defined and defended by society and should be so. It’s definitely not a question of right or wrong, good or bad, thinking otherwise is UNdemocratic.
#41 Conrack, so should non-Christians (at least by your definition) be deported? If they are allowed to stay so they have less civil rights?
Conrack, to be more precise. Should people who sin (e.g. adultery) have less civil rights or lose their citizenship?
“The prop-8 supporters seem to be delusional with the notion that if Prop-8 didn’t pass that churches would be forced to perform gay marriages, or perform no marriages what so ever.”
I don’t think this is the case at all. This was about recognizing same-sex marriage, which a lot of people aren’t ready to do. People can accept providing health coverage, etc. to domestic partners but they aren’t quite willing to go that far. And it didn’t help having SF mayor Gary Newsom doing an end-run around California voters, telling them (in a manner of speaking) “Nya nya nya, suck it up! You can’t do anything about it!”…
Gary did things the wrong way, and he set the movement back by doing so. He is right in that it’s inevitable. I think same-sex partners will be allowed to marry. But this has been a fiasco from the beginning when he started handing out licenses a few years ago.
#42 I’d hate to come off as snarky but I must.
Two things seem foreign to you:
1) Marriage is not only a word. It’s a contract in which each party must meet certain conditions.
2) The tyranny of the majority is a deadly force.
The USA is a representative republic. This mean this thing of the people is governed by elected representatives, not directly by the people. In addition to the elected representatives, we have parties responsible for the just execution of legislation and others instituted for the sake of justice, according to founding principles and precedent.
In other words, you would take the same mob which hated universal sufferage and miscagenation over a legislature and judiciary which is held accountable to something and by something.
“Are Prop 8 supporters the ones who are now in the closet?”
Not that I know of. I have different friends that voted different ways on it.
#17… so what?!? Your point only speaks to saving one’s soul. It has nothing to do with marriage.
This is a civil rights thing and those who voted for 8 ARE on the same level as those who voted against the rights of blacks. Someday, maybe you will have a right taken away and you will see how it feels.
I am a heterosexual Christian who believes that everyone has basic civil rights and no one has the right to take them away. Majority does not mean right.
Conrack,
God stated that the Two Great Commands are to Love God and to Love Your Neighbour As Yourself.
On these two hang the Law and The Prophets.
If you do not follow the first command, you cannot follow the second. Likewise, if you cannot follow the second, you cannot follow the first.
To follow the commands you must allow the same rights to your neighbours as you would yourself.
If you wish to fight against sin, then fight against homosexual sex. But again observe the second command and fight against adultery of heterosexuals as well. For if you do not fight for your heterosexual neighbours you are not following the Command.
Cursor_
I have lost friends over their view on Prop 8.
I don’t want to be friends with people that voted yes on Prop 8. My time is my own, and I would rather spend it with people that do not have bigotry and hate.
Especially if your support of it is “because it is wrong”.
Every argument sounds exactly like one from the 50’s against mixed race marriage:
– bible quotes
– “it’s wrong”
– people aren’t ready
– sanctity of marriage
– scientific, biological
#3, Marc,
Ignoring the fact the marriage comes from evolution – reproducing couples.
Wrong. Marriage comes from a tendency for humans to prefer one mate over their life. Through history there have been many instances of some men having hundreds of wives at one time. Even today, certain cultures still allow multiple wives.
Then there are the infertile heterosexual couples that marry. They can’t bare children either. Why not extend Prop 8 to them?
If someone believes marriage (government marriage) sucks then why would someone want to vote for something that sucks to be expanded to gays?
Separate question. Prop 8 is to deny equal civil rights to a specific minority. Marriage sucking applies across the board. Besides, marriage can’t be all that bad. Every divorced couple had to try it at least once.
There are a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with hate an bigotry. But the gay community seems to be oblivious to the legitimate concerns the the reality based difference that there is a gender component to marriage and that gender does make a reality based difference.
Sorry, but basing your reason on gender is bigotry. The exact same argument was used to enslave blacks, discriminate against native Indians, deny women the vote, and allowing anyone but whites to sit at the front of the bus.
There is also an argument that a “one size fits all” marriage is a really bad idea because there are structural differences and that these relationships are not the same.
So what are those structural differences? Both partners work outside the home? The stay at home partner can also fix the plumbing? That neither partner uses the “Mrs.” (for gays) or “Mr.” (for lesbians) prefix which will confuse the hell out of the postman?
Whatever reason I hear in favor of Prop. 8, it is based on bigotry. So many narrow minded people in favor of denying others the same rights they have. Marriage is a contract between two people who love each other to bond together for life. Besides, if marriage was good enough for my parents, it is good enough for the rest of the world.
Being an evil atheist I do not believe in sin. I do not believe that we should live a good life so as to not anger an imaginary eye in the sky. I do believe that we all should love one another and afford each other the basic rights of leaving each other alone and doing what is ethically right. i.e. Do whatever you want as long as I don’t have to pay for it.
Marriage is a contract between two people for protection of common property and benefits. It is not for the creation of children. I myself am in a childless marriage and I have no need or want for a baby. Neither does my wife. If marriage were defined for the production of offspring then is that forced by law?
The other importance of marriage to have a legal process that can be arbitrated by the state to handle a dissolution of a relationship. Do you think that gay couples do not have common property? Do you think that gay couples do not have children? Is it not reasonable for all American citizens to be afforded the protections of the state?
The state has no business using religious definitions for marriage. Therefore as far as the state is concerned all marriage should be considered a civil union. Marriage is religious, Civil unions are legal.
Sadly this mess will probably be resolved by the Supreme Court and sadly for all the anti gay marriage supporters it will not go the way that you want. The issue that will most likely be raised will be parity between the states. A couple legally married in Connecticut will have to recognized as married in California. You cannot revoke rights by crossing state lines. Thus this decision will make gay marriage a long lasting non issue for Conservatives to be trotted out for election years.
#51 Jimmy James
Cool name by the way. Don’t let the insecure idiots get you down. Realize most of this comes from fears about themselves. Inability to accept differences in others means they haven’t accepted themselves yet.
For every Conrack there usually is a Brian to balance them out.
[Comment deleted - Violation of Posting Guidelines. - ed.]
The REASON the Yes on 8 voters need to be vilified is that we were given the proper right to marry by the courts.
THESE ASSHOLES TOOK AWAY RIGHTS OF A GROUP OF PEOPLE.
THEY ALL deserve to be vilified and eggs thrown at their houses for eternity.
Shameful, mean spirited, and just fucking WRONG.
There is no excuse, no reason other than to be PISSY AND MEAN to those who have done NOTHING to you.
Guess what, that’s WHY the courts ruled the way they did — they are telling you fucks that you are WRONG.
Ah, but you’d rather quote ancient texts that were transliterated to whatever people wanted them to say for several thousand years and used to cause heartache to millions, if not billions of people.
FUCK YOU ALL.
Sort of comes down to this.
A person is entitled to marry one person [at a time] of the opposite sex.
Partake of it if you wish.
Sorry if you want to marry two or more concurrently, or one of each or…
I think bisexuals would have a good argument against the “arbitrary” limitation of one person. And polygamists also would have somewhat simialr concerns with the arbitrary limitation.
So, we are all limited to one of the opposite sex, take it or leave it.
The tradition of opposite sex is similar to the tradition of one, hell if we do away with tradition perhaps we could legislate communal marriages 3 men 3 women or whatever.
#51 said: “My time is my own, and I would rather spend it with people that do not have bigotry and hate.”
Yet, you hate those that voted yes.
And scientific & biological reasons are not good, huh? so fresh.
#52 Mr. conFusion, you’re so funny, in a distorted kinda way.
>if Prop-8 didn’t pass that churches would be forced to perform gay marriages, or perform no marriages what so ever.
Why shouldn’t people think that? Liberals love forcing their views on churches, particularly various Catholic hospitals and pharmacists.
Conrack and Honestly:
This section is for comments and discussion, not bible quotes. If you want to try to convert people, go to a religious site. Don’t post bible quotes here.
This discussion should make us all very sad.
It’s similar to the discussions had by those who would deny women and blacks their rights. Psuedo scientists even developed “rational” or “objective” theories about why each of those groups were inferior or not deserving. Fortunately, we’ve (for the most part) moved beyond that.
The gays are just then next minority group that some feel the need to rationalize their feelings about. We will get past it. It’s just a matter of how many lives are made harder or ruined in the process.
The biology question is crap. I notice no one has taken up the banner to argue that people who are infertile should be denied marriage licenses. That those who are too old to reproduce be denied the right. No, only gays. No one thinks of themselves as the villain in their own story, and no one thinks of themselves as a ‘bigot’. Instead they rationalize their fear or hatred or whatever part of themselves seeks to reach into someone else’s life and control their behavior and reduce their happiness, in order to satisfy some part of themselves or their religion. You frankly should be ashamed of such an impulse. As for people making you feel guilty about it, or not talking to you. Too bad. You wanted the government to control the freedom of expression of the commitment of a group of people by passing prop 8 and your friends are exercising their right to express their opinion when you tell them how you voted.
The religious position is also weak. We don’t condone slavery anymore although the bible does. No one is walking into places of business on Saturday and stoning the sinner’s who violate the sabbath as the bible says we should. So using it as an excuse to bar somone else’s behavior is very weak.
I want to be disgusted, but instead I’m saddened that this was even posed as a serious question, as if the government denying a right is the same as your friends exercising their right to be upset with you.
#57 clio
By what reasoning do you come to the conclusion that it is limited to a man and a woman? Are two men not capable of having a healthy, loving, and long lasting relationship with each other? And by the nature of being human they share common property and shouldn’t their rights to that common property be protected by the state in case of death or dissolution of the relationship?
I do not understand in this day and age the reasoning that marriage is limited to a man and a woman. And please do not make an argument from absurdity by including “if we have to give them the right then why can’t Farmer John marry his horse?” No one who is reasonable thinks that.
Covenant said: “The biology question is crap.”
The faith based arguments are silly. The “scientific” arguments are absurd. Thanks for pointing that out.
However, I did attend an all moose wedding not so long ago…
They call gays gay because they’re gay. Gay is gay period. Gay is bad and straight is good mm’kay!! I think all you fags need to stuff your junk back in the closet. I don’t want to hear about it!!
#9
If a civil union actually mandated all the rights and privileges of marriage, which it does not, then what’s the point in defining them differently? You are basically saying that CA baked into its Constitution a clarification of semantics in terms of what to name the concept of two people in a contractual union. That is the height of ignorance.
However, if as is actually the case, corporations or governments are permitted to confer benefits based on whether it is a homosexual or heterosexual union, then you are allowing the government to discriminate based on sexual preference.
#24
If that were the case, then many, many marriages should not be legal because they do not have nor plan to have children. Further, isn’t it a bit macabre to say that the government in the business of social planning with respect to population control?
#27
Fortunately, that is not true. The Supreme Court has upheld the notion on many occassions that the First Amendment does indeed mean there is a wall of separation between Church and State as mentioned by the Founding fathers.
#30
God did not make them gay. Gay is a choice. He made a man and a women and told them to be fruitful and multiply. There are many references in the Bible were God warns against homosexuality. Remember that He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for the things they were doing…homosexuality. So any argument that biology has any part in it is crazy.
As Christians we are called to love everyone and we should. The issue comes with the lifestyle that is wrong.
#66 DBo
You seem to have a sort of knowledge that the rest of us lack. That being gay is a choice. Given the social outcast status that comes with outing oneself we must conclude that the choice is very easy. Given that people are kicked out of their homes and shunned by their families in some instances for making the choice to be gay must make it better for them somehow.
Please make an argument against Homosexuality that is not from the Bible. If you remember the text about Sodom and Gomorrah, when the angels came to Lot and the crowd wanted to “know” the men, Lot offered up his own daughters to be raped by the crowd. If that is showing God your devotion to him then he can sod off.
And knowing many gay people, the whole “hate the sin, love the sinner” thing is really not appreciated. Actually most Gay people could care less what you think. They just want what we all want. To live our lives in privacy and to be left alone.
Who is the last guy beaten, sodomized, and left for dead for coming out in favor of Prop 8?
Your insensitivity is shocking.
As a schizophrenic, I should be have the same rights to marriage between my personalities as “solos”. I don’t see gay activists supporting the rights of my personalities to marry each other, so I must conclude they are bigoted haters.
Me, myself and I will be picketing in front of GLAAD headquarters tomorrow afternoon, and I hope that everyone who supports equality and basic human rights for schizophrenics will join me.
‘dro
>>Oops, I meant 36. It must congenital.
Have you been hitting the tequila again? It was #22, not #20 or #36.
Sheesh.
After reading these last few comments I’m suddenly happy that I’m a Canadian so we can focus on real problems that confront our nation instead of focusing on crap like this.
Maybe we should sort our banks. Wait, we had time to deal with that already so they’re in good shape.
OK, we can tackle our trade deficit. Oh damn, we have a surplus.
Let’s see, maybe dealing with millions of uninsured. Crap.
How about find a Prime Minister who knows something about the economy. Oops, he an economist.
OK lobbyists. Shit we have oversight and an independent auditor.
Well see what happens when you don’t spend countless hours focusing on “value issues”. Your country goes to hell in a handbasket.
Conrack
“It’s more like homo disgust, homo contempt, homo revulsion, homo abhorrence.?.”
Jesus, boy!! WTF is wrong with you? If you hate homos as much as you say (which I kind of doubt, based on the volume of your denial, heh heh heh), just don’t take it up the ass. What’s the problem?
“You live in a christian nation, if you don’t like it then move to Lesbos, or France.”
I do? Did I miss that part of the Constitution? Or do you consider that “just a goddamned piece of paper”, and you and your Aryan nation buds just make up the rules as you go along?
And if you’re a “Christian”, I’m siding with the Atheists on this one. That shit should be illegal.
#67 – Jezco
>>They just want what we all want. To live our >>lives in privacy and to be left alone.
Sorry, but that’s not possible for the pro-8 set. They enjoy living THEIR lives in privacy and being left alone, but if they see somebody doing something that isn’t part of their lifestyle, **KA-BOOOM!!!** Need to have a law to make that illegal.
Yes Mr. Mustard. I was trying to express that rational people basically want the same thing out of this world. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Not to be infringed upon by those who somehow believe that what happens in someone else’s bedroom affects their lives.
The best part of all this is that Newsom won’t be Governor. He decided to define his career with this controversy. Not everyone is as liberal as most of the people of San Francisco. Thank God.
#74 – Jezco
Yes, there’s something almost perverse and voyeuristic about the way people like Conrack insist on poking their noses into other people’s bedrooms. Kind of creepy, actually.
There’s WAAAYYY too much interest on their part in matters that, except for the prurient thrills they derive, don’t have a blessed thing to do with them.
QB #71.
I appreciate your point, but I beg to differ. This is a real issue. A major civil right has been taken away from an entire class of people because they are different than the majority. This is a violation of basic law. The right to marry for gays should be championed by anyone who wishes to see equality for all. Anything less is simple denial.
I just think that gov-t should keep its hands off the definition or redefinition of marriage and should instead focus on equality of rights. Defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman or between “one man” and “one woman” or between two adults, or between “one adult female species” and “one adult male species” is the realm of culture, religion, tradition and personal beliefs. This subject should never be on an official ballot, it should not be a legal matter.
#77 Brian, I appreciate your thoughtfulness. Personally I’m glad you see things the way you do. This issue has divided the US electorate and has been used as a weapon to win elections far too often recently.
Buchanan and Nixon saw an opportunity for the right in the US and win elections starting with ‘68 by dividing the left over race. The same thing is happening again over sexual orientation and you’ve identified the victims in all this.
Keep up the good, and sane, fight.
So I guess the Supreme Court’s decision of about ten people is the preferred choice of how the issue should be settled? And if they next declared that the Constitution declares taxes should be raised, well that’s ok too.
#67 So now you have to make a case against Homosexuality instead of against homosexual marriage. Boy, are you a little bit confused or what!
#70 I think it’s you the one hitting the tequila. I didn’t write that line you’re quoting me.
#74 Yet you’re ancase in this stupid marriage thing and making people miserable because you didn’t get what you wanted. It didn’t pass, move on.
#76 What? You don’t like the way he hangs onto religion? Imagine that! talk about irony
#77 You submitted the issue to a vote and you lost. Accept it. It seems as if you cannot deal with reality…oh, wait.
this “gays is genetic” thing is so retarded. there is x and there is y, no “g” gene. male is x woman is y class. now i will agree that some men have more y in them than x and vice versa for woman, but this does not make them gay, being gay is a choice, and in this day and age when everyone is pushing their agenda of “no God” Christians also have the right to oppose the stances that the Bible tells us is against God, and without being called bigots. You dont like our position, fine, we can still get along, we can agree to disagree. However when you want to go as far as changing institutions of marriage to fit with your agenda, dont expect us to sit back and be cool with it. Yall are the haters with all the bigot talk.
#81 – ‘dro
>>What? You don’t like the way he hangs onto
>>religion? Imagine that! talk about irony
Who said anything about “religion”, ‘dro? I don’t like his creepy obsession with the homosexual lifestyle.
Like it, don’t like it, makes no nevermind to me. But when someone is fixated on homos, what they do, what they call what they’re doing, how they’re doing it…we’ll that’s just downright perverted.
The guy should get a life, and stop trying to codify into law how others live theirs. creepy….
>>You submitted the issue to a vote and
>>you lost.
Nope. Voyeuristic deviants like Contrack “submitted the issue to a vote”. They’re not satisfied living their own lives the way they want; the need to control how other people live theirs. How about if we “submitted to a vote” whether or not people with Beaner-like names such as “Pedro” should have equal rights? And it was decided “no”. Would you just “accept it” and “deal with reality”? Hmm?
#83 Am I supposed to get offended with the word beaner?
Ok, here comes…nope, I’m not. Who knew!
But I think God will strike you down by using that kind of language. I’d be worried the rest of the day. Oh, that’s right! You only side with God when it suits you, not when others use his words on issues you agree with.
And don’t be using us pagan jokes to get away from this.
The gay community agreed to the vote, votes were casted and they lost. I didn’t see any antivote demonstrations nor pronunciations before Nov 4th. So that sanctimonious position of yours that the “right” for gay marriage should not have been decided by vote is a little late, it should have been addresses before the vote, not after. And I didn’t see no gays bopicoting the vote, they actually rallied for it. And a lot of money was collected to that effect.
I love it when people like democracy only when it suits them.
#84 = ‘dro
>>The gay community agreed to the vote
They did? I guess the Drive-by Media forgot to cover that story. The way I read it, the vote was forced by self-proclaimed anti-homosexual (heh heh heh) fanatics and holy rolling extremists. Only 5% of the voters must sign a petition to get a proposition on the ballot. How many gays do you suppose signed that? Probably about as many as blacks would have signed a “keep slavery legal” proposition before the Civil War.
Come on people. 30 states have rejected this. More will follow. Live with it for now.
As usual, when this issue is raised, I ask people to provide one, just one example of how a specific heterosexual marriage has been damaged by letting a couple of homosexuals somewhere in the country get married.
And I have never gotten any examples. Just bullsh*t about protecting “Marriage” as if it was a separate entity.
So once again… Pedro, ray, MikeN, others… are you married? Has your heterosexual marriage been harmed by gays getting married somewhere in the US? Would gay marriage being made legal tempt you or your spouse to divorce and become homosexual? No? Then how, exactly, is “marriage” harmed?
#87 Phydeau – Whatever. 30 states (and climbing) have placed laws against redefining the word marriage. Live with it.
Paddy-O, you actually have a patchwork of laws now. For example, NY recognizes Canadian same sex marriages. Connecticut has same sex marriages. Arkansas bans same sex couples adopting. Etc.
What you really have is a patchwork mess and it will continue to consume your politics for a long time. Courts are acting because your legislatures are afraid to act.
That’s really what you have to live with.
#88 Paddy-O’Giveup
Your concession has been acknowledged and accepted. You don’t know why the f*ck you’re against gay marriage, you’re just against it. Your mind is made up — I won’t try to confuse you with any facts.
That’s very refreshing. pedro, ray, MikeN… how about you guys?
#85 What proof do you have that it was antihomosexuals the ones driving the vote? None! Only your assumption. Not enough votes, period !
# 90 Phydeau said, “You don’t know why the f*ck you’re against gay marriage, you’re just against it.”
Typical psycho hate mentality. Probably due to genetic defect. I didn’t vote yes on Prop 8.
#84
Huh? Prop 8 was put on the ballot by the anti-gay, “god fearing” people, not the gay community. Why would the gay community submit a proposition that would take rights away from them?
> But I think God will
> strike you down by
> using that kind of language.
I’ve been asking for him/her/it to strike me down with a bolt of lightening for years. Still waiting. He/she/it must be busy.
I’m still waiting for a reasonable argument against gay marriage. Clearly, it cannot be procreation as many marriages do not seek such ends. The only answer I have heard is religious ignorance.
No one addressed the fact that Prop 8 is a California thing. Many people who are not from California are very vocal about this.
Other states that also had similar ballot initiatives. Yet even people in those states seem to be more vocal about California’s Prop 8 than their own state’s initiatives.
Can someone explain to me what happened to state’s rights?
#92 Paddy-O’Troll
> I didn’t vote yes on Prop 8.
D’oh! My bad, sorry. You’re just a troll, I forgot. Hard to keep the wackos straight. (Heh heh. So to speak.)
# 95 Phydeau said, “D’oh! My bad, sorry.”
Don’t worry. I’m sympathetic to those who are mentally impaired, whether through drug use or due to genetic defects…
#96 Wow, you must be fun on dates.
#87, overturning a Supreme Court case when they are out of bounds is OK regardless of the issue.
As for your question, compare it to French fries at McDonald’s. They cost $1.79. Can you name one customer who would stop buying those fries if the price is raised to $1.80? Yet we know that sales wold drop if the price is raised.
Change happens on the margin, and the devaluation of marriage does have an effect. Not just from so-called ‘gay marriage’, but even more so from divorce and adultery.
# 97 QB said, “#96 Wow, you must be fun on dates”
For those with an IQ above that of a turnip it’s a blast.
#98 MikeN
Change happens on the margin, and the devaluation of marriage does have an effect. Not just from so-called ‘gay marriage’, but even more so from divorce and adultery.
I’m not the first to say this, but I’d believe the “Save Marriage” folks really wanted to save marriage and not just make a statement against icky gays, if they spent millions trying to ban divorce. Which is a far greater threat to “marriage”. You know, trying to stop people from leaving the institution would help more than stopping people who want to get into it.
At least the Catholics are ideologically consistent — they’re against gay marriage and divorce. But the protestant fundies who froth at the mouth so much about gay marriage are perfectly fine with divorce. (So much for biblical accuracy, oh well.)
So this all makes me think it’s not about saving marriage per se, it’s just that these “marriage saving” people don’t like those icky gay people. But don’t want to admit it.
So if you aren’t willing to do everything, you should do nothing?
I don’t think it’s a good idea to devalue marriage even more with a redefinition like this.
And of course, any such redefiniton is the business of the legislature, not the courts.
#93 Then why did gays went on and vote?
#100 Banning divorce a bigger threat to marriage? No wonder you don’t have your ideas straight.
#94 – Ben
>>Can someone explain to me what happened to
>>state’s rights?
The same thing that happened to states “rights” when it came to slavery, anti-miscegenation laws, women’s suffrage, child labor, handicap access, etc.
One role of the federal government is to ensure equal and fair rights for all its citizens. Just because some podunk state thinks it’s OK to work second-graders double shifts in a coal mine, or it’s OK to keep dem dar bluegums on a chain out back except when dey cleanin’ massa’s house, that’s no reason to give states the “right” to run roughshod over people’s civil liberties.
#101 MikeN
So if you aren’t willing to do everything, you should do nothing?
Mike, Mike, Mike… how many millions of people get divorced every year? Versus how many thousands of gay people would get married if it was legalized?
Don’t strain out gnats while swallowing camels, buddy. (Matt. 23:23-24) If you really want to save “marriage”, put your efforts where they will do the most good. Gay marriage is the least of your worries. Work on banning divorce and adultery. Or people will suspect that it’s really not about saving marriage, but bashing gay people.
Hmmm… which makes me wonder… how many of these pious “marriage defenders” have been divorced themselves…
#102 pedro
#100 Banning divorce a bigger threat to marriage? No wonder you don’t have your ideas straight.
Gee, then why don’t you explain it to me, smart guy. Explain why a couple thousand gay people getting married is more of a threat to “marriage” than millions of straight people getting divorced.
Explain to me why gay marriage is more of a threat to “marriage” than divorce. Explain why right-wing wackos are willing to spend millions to stop a few thousand gay marriage but nothing to stop millions of divorces. I’m all ears.
Or are you a troll just like Paddy-O?
#104 – Phydeau
>>Or people will suspect that it’s really not
>>about saving marriage, but bashing gay
>>people.
Gee, ya think?
I’ve never met a single person with a good reason for banning gay marriage (and I’ve looked). What they would REALLY like to do is ban gays, but that ship has already sailed. So their second-best way to stick it to the man (or the woman) is to relegate them to second-class citizenship.
For the life of me, I can’t imagine why the Saviors of Marriage aren’t agitating for jail time for adulterers, and a ban on divorce.
Unless they’re all full of shit.
#102
> Then why did gays went on and vote?
They did. In droves. They voted against it. However, they were overwhelmed by the fearful religious folks. If there was ever a vindication for the vilification that the Founding Fathers gave Democracies and thus devised a Republic, Prop 8 is it.
#3 – Marc Perkel,
That equality can be had by removing marriage from non-reproducing str8 people.
Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds? Do you have a clue? Will you only allow marriage when the bride is pregnant? Will you annul any marriage that fails to produce children within some specified time?
#99, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath,
# 97 QB said, “#96 Wow, you must be fun on dates”
For those with an IQ above that of a turnip it’s a blast.
No wonder you remain single. No one will have you.
# 109 Mr. Fusion said, “No wonder you remain single.”
Single? Really?
I admit, I would have never dated a guy as I’m not genetically defective like some others on this blog.
# 99 Paddy-O said
“For those with an IQ above that of a turnip it’s a blast.”
OK, I draw the line rutabaga sex, and tubers in general.
# 111 QB said, “OK, I draw the line rutabaga sex, and tubers in general.”
I thought rutabaga’s had a higher IQ than turnips…
#6 “the most intolerant hate filled types are those who are for gay marriages and against prop 8.”
I whole heartily agree with you on these statement. These stems more from couples than singles however. Thank God my single gay friends can appreciate that I, myself, like women and I shouldn’t be hated or bashed for it.
#112, QB,
Cow-Paddy prefers to fornicate with vegetables. If you get them fresh you can almost be assured you’re the first. AND, vegies don’t talk.
In six months, when there are no jobs to be found, and the only meat to be found is Spam, and your children are malnourished, you’ll wonder why you wasted so much time protecting the sanctity of your marriage when you should have been protecting your wallet from the rapacious pirates in charge of our financial system.
Aww, shucks, who am I kidding? They’ll probably blame the fags for that too.
DBO
God did make them gay. Just as he made me straight.
I never chose to be straight. I liked girls starting at 4. I had no choice they were cool and even today I will take 100 women over any one man. Even for conversation and companionship, men are shit, especially the beer guzzling, sports obsessed, truck salivating smegheads.
I never had a choice in what I liked. So too gays have NO CHOICE.
The sin of homosexuality, in context with the scripture, is sex akin to adultery. Sex for sex’s sake. A personal defilement due to people being on four legs and not two. There is no difference in vilification between the homosexuals acting out and heterosexuals acting out. But that is the natural state of humans scriptureally speaking. It is on the same level as being drunk, gossip and uncontrolled gambling. It hurts the person and others as well.
It is not about being gay or straight. It is taking eithet to an extreme that is harmful and dangerous. Just because some fools do not know how to translate hebrew well, does not mean that it is set in stone or vellum.
Hebrew is a contextual language and is often poorly translated. Take the Earth was covered with the flood. The Earth in hebrew has many meanings. One of which is REGION. Another classic is that the devil is called a light bringer, and so too is Jesus. So is Jesus the devil? All poor interpretation based on a word and not ist context.
What is worse is the context must be read not just by a passage or by a chapter or a book, but by the whole of scripture to get what is really being said. If you don’t go through it cover to cover you will always screw it up.
So please, stop trying teach faulty knowledge that you gleaned from someone else who was also gleaning it from some other slob who had no clue of what he was citing verbatim from yet another fool.
Tradition is not truth. Truth is truth. Stop listening to heretical levite wannabees in chrisendom.
Cursor_
#107 Ok. You acknowledged gay marriage lost. That’s a great step forward. Let me know then when you get out of the denial phase.
#114 It’s real fun whenever you run out of arguments.
#115 Or is the time being wasted by the ludicrous cry of gay marriage? Who’s wasting whose time?
#116 It is a choice. It is called sexual preference, not sexual karma
#117 – ‘dro
>>It is a choice. It is called sexual
>>preference, not sexual karma
Huh. Interesting. So what you’re saying, ‘dro, is that if you chose to do so, you could be whipped into a frenzy of wanton sexual desire by the sight of a naked man and his throbbing unit.
Who knew?
#117 pedro
#116 It is a choice. It is called sexual preference, not sexual karma
Have you ever spoken to a real, live, gay person, pedro? And the ones pretending not to be gay don’t count. Every single gay person I’ve talked to knew their “preference” as far back as they could remember, as very young children.
Educate yourself, pedro.
Hey Mister Mustard, I was going to say that exact same thing. 
The thought occurred to me… maybe the people who think sexuality is a “choice” are closeted or unknowing bisexuals. Maybe they could go both ways but choose to stay hetero because of their religion, and think everyone could make that choice!
hmmmmm….
That’s not a bad train of thought; bisexuals have a choice, and thus the people who think that gay people have a choice are most likely bisexual, as a person’s belief tends to follow their experience.
# 117 pedro said “It is a choice. It is called sexual preference, not sexual karma”
Try being gay for a while and see how that works out for you.
# 119 Phydeau said, ” Every single gay person I’ve talked to knew their “preference” as far back as they could remember, as very young children.”
That jibe with it being a genetic defect.
#122 Paddy-O’Troll
That jibe with it being a genetic defect.
(It is only with the most morbid of curiosity that I converse with the troll.)
So what if it’s a genetic defect? What does that have to do with anything? Some bit flipped the wrong way when the fetus was growing, and the sexual orientation got messed up. It happens all the time. See the book Biological Exuberance for many examples in other animals.
So explain how this matters — not that you’ve expressed a coherent viewpoint on this issue.
>That jibe with it being a genetic defect.
Of course.
How else would you explain a member of any species that is hardwired to not pass on its genes?
There will be a cure for this someday. Just like any other gene-therapy, a shot in the arm and all will be well.
But in the meantime, if they want to call themselves “married” and pack fudge behind closed doors, power to them. Just don’t force the rest of the population to agree to change their definition of it. Go down to the courthouse and get a civil union contract drawn up.
#123 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>That jibe with it being a genetic defect.
You mean like having red hair, or a body like Michael Phelps?
# 126 Mister Mustard said, “You mean like having red hair, …”
No, defect as in evolutionary dead end…
#127 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>No, defect as in evolutionary dead end…
Oh, for chrissakes, Paddy-RAMBO. What is it with you and your insistence that nobody hook up unless it’s to procreate? We have too many breeders working their mischief already.
You should be thankful for that evolutionary dead end in any case. Soon, there will be no homos.
And I’m still waiting to see you circulate the petition to annul the marriages of childless (hetero) couples. They’re dead ends too.
# 128 Mister Mustard said, “Oh, for chrissakes, Paddy-RAMBO. What is it with you and your insistence that nobody hook up unless it’s to procreate?”
And this has to do with homosexuality being a genetic defect how?
#119 I’m tired of seing “flip-floppers” that go from one to the other and mingle in between. Or are you going to belittle them because their not “real gays”
#120 What that meant is that you deserve each other. You’re kindred spirits.
#122 I take it then you’re against freedom of choice.
#128 I think you’re the one to come out of the closet. Not that there’s anything wrong about it.
If it’s a defect then it would tend to disappear over generations and be specific to a species. Last time I looked ungulates are not humans unless Paddy-O has been going out behind the paddock.
Or could Paddy-O be trolling? Let me get Occam’s Razor out…
#129 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>And this has to do with homosexuality being
>>a genetic defect how?
In the sense that (at least according to you), gays are hapless victims of cruel fate, unlike the evil perpetrators of childless marriages.
Since the only reason to call something a “marriage” is to crank out rug rats, anything else is, well, something else. And the gays have no say in the matter.
I would think your anger and discrimination would be directed first toward people who CAN have children but CHOOSE NOT TO. It’s one thing to be an evolutionary dead end when you have no choice, but to commit such a crime against nature VOLUNTARILY? I would think you’d demand jail time if those charlatans, those poseurs, tried to pawn off their unholy relationship as “marriage”!
#130 – ‘dro
>>Or are you going to belittle them because
>>their not “real gays”
Nope, but it’s nice to know that the “choicers” among the anti-gay-marriage contingent are really closet bisexuals.
Very enlightening.
#132 Mustard,
You’re babbling again.
Homosexuality is caused by a genetic defect. It has nothing to do with your repressed anger or views on marriage or views on whether you like the colour blue.
It is a defect. Someday, this defect will be detectable and repairable before birth.
Is fixing genetic defects a bad thing?
Well, I was trying to keep out of this discussion, but here goes…
I think the anger in the pro-gay marriage groups is a displacement of anger for their own failure to run a successful campaign. I live in Southern California, I saw plenty of TV adds and people on street corners in favor of Prop 8, but very little against it until the last couple of days.
As for “protecting the sanctity of marriage” , I think the divorce rate in the US kind-of kills the legitimacy of that argument.
My bottom line is that this issue is too important to be decided piecemeal, it needs to be done at a Federal level, with real legislation, not some court decision. To bad Congress (both parties) are to chicken-shit to deal with it.
Pres-Elect Obama said he was for civil unions but against gay marriage, I haven’t heard anyone on the pro-gay marriage side screaming about that.
I want to see gay activist scream “bigotry” against African Americans. A sight worth seeing.
#133 How’s that behaviour projection working for ya? Love yourself Mustard. Stop hating yourself.
#132 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>You’re babbling again.
Naw, your comprehension skills just leave something to be desired.
>>Is fixing genetic defects a bad thing?
Not if the fixee is on board, which would be difficult during gestation.
A lot of people enjoy the lifestyle. Just because they’re not overpopulating the earth at the rate you deep appropriate is no reason to go on a genetic cleansing rampage.
Do you suppose they could fix that extra bone the darkies have in their ankle, the one that allows them to move so blazingly fast?
You’re a douche bag, Paddy-RAMBO. Why don’t you just admit it. You don’t like gays, and anything that will stick it to them, you’re in favor of, be it right or wrong.
#136 – ‘dro
>>How’s that behaviour projection working
>>for ya?
Heh. Heh heh heh. {snicker}
# 137 Mister Mustard said, “Not if the fixee is on board, which would be difficult during gestation.”
So, that rules out abortion for you then.
Cool.
If civil rights in the USA were left to be decided to the majority the whole nation would have become the biggest FLDS compound in the world.
As individuals humans are smart but en masse they’re nothing but an angry, ignorant mob.
#139 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>So, that rules out abortion for you then.
I’ve never had one, and I never will. So yes, I guess that rules it out for me.
I let others make their own decision, as whether or not a clump of cells is really a “person” in utero is an undecided question.
However, if you go dicking around with that clump of cells in such a way that at full term it’s born with different genetic characteristics than nature intended, well that’s a whole different kettle of fish. Now you’re talking about something that everyone agrees is a full-fledged human (except for those of you who consider gays to be sub-human).
The problem you hatemongers have is that you have to come up with ad hoc arguments to defend the logical inconsistencies in your points of view, which generally have “hatred” and “control of others” as the common denominator.
Cursor_said, before you and every misinformed Bible quoters, lead every one astray, try this scripture on for size..Leviticus 18:22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” its not born in you, its abnormal and according to God its an abomination, period. Look at scripture before you misquote it please.
# 141 Mister Mustard said, “However, if you go dicking around with that clump of cells in such a way that at full term it’s born with different genetic characteristics than nature intended, well that’s a whole different kettle of fish. ”
Sorry to break it to ya, but legally, it’s settled law. Roe v. Wade decided this issue.
Now, with Obama getting stem cell research going again and Universal Healthcare, I can see that in the future, parents will have the tools & resources needed to correct genetic defects in the womb.
Thanks Obama!
>However, if you go dicking around with that clump of cells in such a way that at full term it’s born with different genetic characteristics than nature intended,
Why do you hate science so much?
This is all a big misunderstanding. There are two things called marriage. As it says on http://2tcm.org/ — One is a legally recognized agreement about property rights, child custody, taxes, and health benefits. The other is an agreement recognized by the church showing the union of a man and a woman before God. Would it be so terrible to just re-name one of them?
Again I will restate.
I had NO CHOICE. It was girls all the way.
Men make me sick. They have NOTHING, zero, zip, nada to offer. I don’t associate with them as much as possible. I have little in common with them. When they start talking sports I walk away. They talk autos or guns I would rather gas them. And when they start their “cocktales” about who they would like to screw or whom they have screwed I would rather stick skewers in both ears than listen to their hogwash.
The choice was made for me by nature. Straight as an arrow. I was offered twice in my life and turned it down both times. Men leave me cold as ice. Pure trogs.
Gays are nature made that way as no one would choose to suck the last chicken in the shop!
Cursor_
#145 Imagine, if it is impossible to accept the results of an election…
#143 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>Sorry to break it to ya, but legally, it’s settled law. Roe v. Wade decided this issue.
Am guessing MM was born pre-RvWade – pity.
#145,
Do you really think the church would want to call theirs a Holy Fuck Up or something like that?
Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath and Mall Rent-A-Cop,
I notice you not only screwed up with your Obama’s Civilian Armed Force on the Laid Off Engineer post, you went and did the same here. Get a life and quit the trolling.
#143 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>Sorry to break it to ya, but legally, it’s
>>settled law. Roe v. Wade decided this issue.
Paddy-RAMBO, when you complete Junior High civics class, you will know that Roe v Wade only pertains to abortion of a fertilized ovum, not to genetic dicking around with embryos that are going to become people. And you will recognize the difference between reproductive rights and the creation of Frankenhumans.
>>I can see that in the future, parents will
>>have the tools & resources needed to correct
>>genetic defects in the womb
I guess they will, provided they consider it a “defect”, AND they’re into eugenics. That worked out pretty well during the Holocaust, don’t you think? It will be a great technological advance for “parents” who e.g. want a boy, find out they’re getting a girl, then have an abortion.
>>Thanks Obama!
I imagine all of America will be saying that quite a bit for the next 8 years. And beyond.
#107
Actually, I only stated that the Proposition to ban gay marriage passed allowing the government to freely discriminate based on sexual preference. The causes for that passage are numerous however, the primary reason it passed is that intolerant, almost exclusively religious people voted in larger numbers than tolerant, non-religious types.
Gay people will commit to one another something akin to marriage regardless of this Proposition. The government can do nothing to stop that. However, what has happened is that the government is now allowed to confer benefits on a subset of unions based on sexual preference with no societal benefit.
If the government is not allowed to confer benefits on a subset of society based on gender or race, why would you think it is acceptable to do so based on sexual proclivities?
As someone aptly put it, CA voted in rights for chickens and vote out rights for humans.
#129
The current scientific thinking is that homosexual tendencies are not genetic or at least not predominately genetic. It is postulated that they are due to conditions during gestation.
#145
From the standpoint of the State, what’s the point? The State should simply recognize “civil unions” and nothing else. Individuals can call it marriage if they like and can even use the term in reference to religious ceremonies taken at the time of the union. However, from the State’s perspective, there is no point in having two terms for the same thing. Doing so would lead to the propensity, like now, of confer benefits and privileges to one type of union and not the other.
I’m an atheist, my wife is a wiccan. When we got married, we did so at the courthouse, not a church, for obvious reasons. Even so, we had to sign a piece of paper that said we were married “before God” or some such tripe before we were actually considered contractually linked. I went for a civil union, but ended up married, because that’s the only way we could have all the rights and privileges that married people get.
Somebody really oughta fix that, it’s not fair for us non-god-fearers to have to lie on record just to have the same rights as everyone else. Call it anything you want, just give people an option to become an American family regardless of their religion, or sexual preference for that matter.
Gay hate us for voting to ban gay marriage. Gay hate us for not accepting their life style. Gay hate us for not agree with them. And so on.
#155 – Bookie
All your base are belong to us…
#155, Booky,
And I suppose you hate them even more because of who they are.
#153, Thomas,
RE #129,
WOW. Thank you for setting me (us) straight. I confess I too held those beliefs. In fact, because I didn’t your statement so I have spent some time searching for something to bolster the gene argument or refute the behavior argument.
Plainly put, I was wrong.
Are you people still beating this dead horse?
Although is funny to see conFusion playing the good cop.
#158,
I, too, have heard that argument.
Supposedly, the mother releases an overabundance of a certain hormone that affects the fetus’ brain in such a way as to determine sexual orientation. Heterosexuality is determined by the mother’s ability to keep that hormone balanced. Failure results in homosexuality.
From what I’ve read, they haven’t determined “what” that hormone is, but have found certain genetic markers in the mothers of homosexual offspring that are responsible for regulating certain hormones during pregnancy.
Research is ongoing.
The question then becomes, if they do find that hormone imbalance causes it, how many parents would opt for the pills and how many would not? How many of you straight “live and let live” individuals would opt for the pills if your doctor told you and your wife that your child would be homosexual but you could alter that outcome with a pill?
# 160 LibertyLover said, “How many of you straight “live and let live” individuals would opt for the pills if your doctor told you and your wife that your child would be homosexual but you could alter that outcome with a pill?”
Considering CA is the most lib state & over 50% there would probably choose that option, it would be much higher in the US as a whole.
#153 Thomas said “As someone aptly put it, CA voted in rights for chickens and vote out rights for humans.”
You right there, I just went back and checked the results:
Prop 2 Chicken Rights: Yes=7.3mil No=4.2mil
Prop 8 No Gay Marriage: Yes=6.2mil No=5.7mil
Amazing ain’t it…
#160, Liberty,
Yes, although we are straying from the topic to something I am far from an expert in and I think you too. What you ask might be getting into the realm of Science Fiction.
Too many years ago, I remember reading a short story which ended with the finding of a cure for homosexuality. I confess I was much less understanding then but I didn’t quite understand the ending where the homosexual community rebelled. Today I see them as being happy being who they are. Today, I respect their life, choice or fault.
#163, Agreed. No expert am I either.
I just wanted to throw that question out there and see what the response was.
#67 & #116
The bottom line is the whether or not you believe in the Bible or not, homosexuality and gay marriage is wrong.
#67 If you look at the King James version of the Bible in Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain…, to know or knew in both the Sodom and Gomorrah and this one mean “to have intercourse”. So daughters or not they wanted to engage in homosexual activity with men b/c you notice they didn’t take the women.
#116 I have read the Bible for myself and listened to many different people teaching and preaching from it. As far as interpretation, it seems very clear in and out of context that homosexuality is sin/wrong. You never had to choose b/c God made you the way you are. It is a lie to think that homosexuality is OK that is why people struggle with it. They know in their heart of hearts it is wrong but choose to believe that that is the answer. There are several meaning to Hebrew and Greek words in the Bible but the message is clear. My hope and prayer is that God will bring someone into your life that will be a better example of what a true Christian is.
No amount of arguing or stating of opinions will make a difference until you get a glimpse of who He is for yourself. My challenge to you is ask Him to do that for you…what can it hurt.
#165 DBo
Make a non biblical argument why being gay is wrong. You have only stated it as a fact without any support that is based in the real world only on your faith.
I understand what “knew” meant. My point was that Lot offered up his own daughters to be gang raped to protect God’s angels. Clearly a simple sign of devotion to God since angels, being supernatural, would not need protection. My point being if that is what God needs to feel good about himself then he can sod off.
I was trying to illustrate that using biblical reference to support your moral position as a position of fact is a slippery slope, especially in the Old Testament.
#166 Jezcoe
Since everything was created by the words of God and he is the expert on all things, it only seems right to use the Bible. That being said here is a non-biblical argument…nature. You don’t see things in nature demonstrating homosexual behaviors. Except to assert dominance which in the humans is not the issue. There is male and female with some exceptions I will grant. The vast majority of nature has male and female and they are drawn to each other for one reason b/c they were made to be that way.
The real dispute here is marriage and whether or not gays should be able participate in it. I think with so many states passing laws to prohibit gay marriage there is no question what is right. I have a difficult time thinking that so many are wrong about this issue. Many people who may not believe in God see that gay marriage is wrong. They understand the importance of family, mother, father & children. If that is distorted then the whole balance is gone and we begin to see things happening that were never intended (i.e gender confusion & AIDS).
#167 Dbo
Making your argument of how nature intends things to be following your statement of faith greatly weakens your position. There are many cases of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. It is quite common. But to use your case that everything is created by the grace of God then that creation should be perfect. Especially in the animal kingdom where there is no free will. Non humans would not be subject to tests of faith and accordingly would not be given the temptation of a same sex partner.
So many are wrong on the issue of gay marriage just as so many have been wrong about so many things in the past. The majority rule does not always equal an ethical right. I know of no atheist who see gay marriage as wrong. Yes the family is important, I mean who in there right mind would say it is not, but marriage is not just about the nuclear family. What would you say about my own marriage? I am an atheist and we have no children and we do not plan to have any.
I don’t understand the balance issue that you raise. Without gay people we would still have gender confusion and AIDS. The bottom line is that a certain group of people want, like yourself, want to force their ideas on a minority that is based only upon faith. It is not about facts, ethics or equal rights among all.
#168
God did create us perfect but man sinned and fell from grace along with the whole world. Hence the reason that so many things have been messed up in the past and will continue to be until Jesus comes back.
As far as your marriage, there is nothing wrong with it. Lots of people don’t have children, an awesome gift BTW, for various reasons. Hopefully you are giving to others the love that you would share with them.
The one thing that always interests me is that people seem to be able to dispute the Bible, which you have some knowledge of, by bringing out scriptures and don’t really get the message. Basically, God set up certain principles and if followed thing will go a certain way(i.e. blessing) if not curses. The balance issue is that as we allow people to think that being gay, gay marriage, and sex outside of marriage are ok then we get the curses on us. Where does it stop as far as what is ok and what is not. There are no gray areas just black and white. If it is ok to be gay then it is ok to steal or kill. Truth is truth. And believing any differently only leads to more bad things. I guess being an atheist means believing in something would be impossible. Otherwise, your whole system is worthless.
This is not a death and destruction rant, just reality.
#165
> The bottom line is the whether or
> not you believe in the Bible or
> not, homosexuality and gay
> marriage is wrong.
No sir. You might as well claiming that a marriage between a white woman and a black man is wrong. *Any* two (or more) people can commit their lives to each other. That has been happening for millennia. What is recent is the notion that the State is permitted to give benefits to certain types of unions that it deems “right”.
I suggest that you need to broaden your knowledge beyond the Bible and its mythology. You should start researching the dozens of other creation myths from other cultures. You will find monogamy to be missing from most of them.
> You never had to choose b/c
> God made you the way you are.
Is it not true in your beliefs that God made everything? That means he/she/it intentionally made people with an innate desire to copulate with people of their own gender. Given that, we can postulate a handful of possible motivations:
1. Incompetence. He was hitting the bottle that day and just screwed up when he made homosexuals.
2. Sadistic. He enjoys watching the suffering of people he intentionally created in a way that he knew they could not abide by the rules he set down.
3. Bad editors. God’s word was misinterpreted and he never meant that homosexuality is bad.
4. Fiction/Societal planning. It was all made up by elders to gain position and encourage procreation in a struggling new religion.
> No amount of arguing or
> stating of opinions will
> make a difference until
? you get a glimpse of who
> He is for yourself
Sure. You setup an non-biased, repeatable, non-anecdotal experiment whereby we can even verify “he” exists and we’ll go from there.
#168
> God did create us perfect
> but man sinned and fell
> from grace along…
Nonsense. Beyond the fact that this does not explain birth defects or genetic disorders, humans have plenty of flaws that are purely physiological and thus have nothing to do with choice. Homosexuals fall into this group. The vast majority of homosexuals have had those desires from a young age.
> The one thing that always
> interests me is that people
> seem to be able to dispute the Bible,
> which you have some knowledge of,
> by bringing out scriptures and
> don’t really get the message.
A classic, but flawed argument. The core problem with your argument is that there is no authoritative source to determine what that message “really” is. Many churchmen have presented different interpretations over the years. Furthermore, in the case of the New Testament, the text was written decades after the person on whom it is based died making its reliability very suspect.
Many people have read the same text and derived different meaning from the same words. Atheists tend to take the words on face value and when done that way, the deity in the Old Testament is a monster and in the New Testament is at best a politician or at worst a monster.
Dbo
Being an atheist means that I simply believe in one less God than you do. I believe that I and I alone am accountable for my actions, good or bad, and it is not attributed to any sort of spirit. I have just one chance and one chance alone to do good in this world for my own reasons. There is no later rewards, a great candy store in the sky, there is only the here and the now. So it is not nothing that I believe. It is very real.
My problem with using faith to justify civil rights is that the bible is inconsistent in laying out what God wants or needs or whatever it is that is laid down as his law. Passages in Leviticus forbid the eating of crustaceans, yet you see very few Christians willing to ban the lobster industry. Followers if the bible generally do not live by God’s laws that are an inconvenience.
I have no idea what curses you talk of. The problems that people create are no acts of God but are ones that we put upon ourselves. It is because we are imperfect, flawed, stupid, and greedy at times. In a word we are simply human.
Equating pleasurable acts between consensual adults as to leading to theft and murder is just plain stupid. One is a private act hurting no one (barring some of the very real negative effect of adultery, unwanted pregnancy, etc, but it is not like religion has been very good at stopping those things) the others are denials of property and life. As in your rights end at the tip of my nose.
Black and white thinking is very hard to justify in the real world. The world is nothing if not various shades of grey. That is what makes it such a cool place to be.
#171
The Bible says that we were created in the image of God. As God is perfect so were we until Adam and Eve disobeyed and lost the relationship they had with Him. That is when the imperfections came. We were never perfect in ourselves but with God and our renewing of our relationship with Him do we work through all that this world has become. The Bible says that when we become born again our former self is gone to God and we are a new creation. We are not perfect b/c we are human but we were created perfect.
#170
This is not a race issue. Not sure why you brought up black/white marriage. Homosexuality is the issue here and whether or not to permit any kind of lawful union between gays. We have become so tolerant of these gray areas [#172] that our country has forgotten what we were established on…God’s Word, the Bible. I will admit the there are areas in the Bible that we no longer practice (i.e eating or not eating certain foods) and there are legitimate reasons to continue those things. The deal is that we now live under a different covenant as Christians than they did back then. Jesus bridged the gap for us and created a way for us to have direct relationship with Him. The laws and rules are still good but the relationship is important. The rules are easy if you remember two things. Love God, Love people.
#170
To think that God is schizophrenic is absurd. He is motivated by Love. He did not create gays that is a lie from the devil as with the rest of your list. If people think God is crazy then it is easier for them not to believe in Him or justify things. Here is the truth.
Satan = Steal, Kill & Destroy
God = Life More Abundantly
Gay marriage is an effort to destroy the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. Pretty clear whose agenda that is.
#172
Curses was a strong word for consequences. That is what happens when we deal too long in gray areas or disregard the black and white. God said do not have sex outside of marriage so when you do there are consequences, STDs, unwanted pregnancy, etc. As far as equating murder and theft to homosexuality and other sexual sins, in God’s eyes they are equal. They are sin. We return to consequences again. One thing has different consequences than another. Stealing = Imprisonment
Sex outside of marriage = too many to innumerate.
#172
If you believe in 1 less God than me then you believe in zero. There is only one God and He will hold us accountable for what we do. You do have one chance on this Earth and doing good is not enough. You must receive Jesus as your Savior and live for Him to the best of your ability. That is the way to make a difference. As far as a candy store in the sky, Heaven is way better than that. Better than you or I can imagine. Hell, on the other hand, is real and worse than we can imagine. There is a here and now and after that there is Heaven or Hell. Choose Jesus and Heaven awaits.
This conversation has built my faith and my family and I will be praying for each of you to come to a better understanding of who God is and how he thinks.
Again not a doom and gloom comment, just trying to shed some light on things.
Thanks.
Dbo
Ok where to begin. First I want to say that I would never dream of taking away what your beliefs are. It is your right to have control over your own thoughts. I object to setting public policy based on faith. Faith where no critical thinking has been applied.
I guess we start with Genesis. So you mean to tell me that evil is in the world because of what two people did countless generations ago? I have no say in it? That hardly seems fair. Also one of the great problems I have with the creation myth is where did Cain meet his wife? There is also the problem that a single breeding pair of humans (Adam and Eve) would be able to fill the earth with their offspring so rapidly. Just apply a little critical thinking to the creation myth and it falls apart as a truth and takes it rightful place as fiction.
Maybe the reason we are not perfect is that mankind was never perfect in the first place. We were never created but evolved to fill a niche in nature and inherited all the imperfections that nature could possibly give us.
Lev (11:10-12)
“And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.”
So no shrimp for you.
That is just one of the many of God’s laws in Leviticus (the one that talks about being gay) that modern Christians do not follow. How about the part about not shaving your beard.(Lev 19:27)
Or not wearing poly cotton blends (Lev 19:19) So of that is God’s law and you are breaking it then you are visiting curses upon yourself.
I do not have to receive what I do not believe in. I do not have to fear a hell that does not exist and I do not have to gain a heaven that is not there. Thankfully we do not live in a theocracy. We can only make the laws of our land to be a fair to all as we can. Anything less is a sin towards humanity. You cannot use faith alone to make laws. You have to use reason, logic and fairness. Something that religion often lacks.
#173 (Part 1)
> The Bible says that we were created
> in the image of God…
So, people with birth defects or those that die at birth can blame Adam and Eve? You cannot seriously believe that. It is creation story, not the literal truth. Taken as the literal truth, the story is comically flawed as #174 pointed out. We are talking about imperfections that have nothing to do with choice. Is your deity so callous as to intentionally create flaws in humans that specifically precludes them from obey his/her/its supposed laws?
RE: Race
I bring up race because the comparison is apt. There is no more difference between the argument against a black man and a white woman marrying than there is for two gays marrying. Homosexuality is not really a choice. It is called “sexual preference” but that is really so the ignorant can get their head around the idea. It is an innate desire created at birth.
> Jesus bridged the gap for us
> and created a way for us to
> have direct relationship
> with Him
I have heard such nonsense from other Christians. What they conveniently omit is EXACTLY, PRECISELY which requirements no longer need be followed. Jesus is conveniently hazy on that point. That of course is up to interpretation. Who is to say that animal sacrifice should no longer be required? Who is to say that allowing gays to love is not a logical extension of your messiah’s message? Banning gays from marriage IS impeding people’s ability to love.
> To think that God is schizophrenic
> is absurd. He is motivated by Love
Really. So, how do you explain the Tsunami that killed thousands a year or two ago? How do you explain Katrina? How do you explain premature death by natural causes? How do you explain schizophrenia? How do you explain people born with innate desires contrary to that of your religion’s law? Is not your deity omnipotent? Is not your deity omniscient? How do you explain your Satan figure? Did he/she/it not create Satan? Is not evil bad? Did not your deity know well in advance of creating Satan that he would turn to evil? If not, then how is it that he/she/it is omniscient?
The vast majority of homosexuals are created from BIRTH. They had no control over those feelings. Did not your deity create everything? How can you claim that it is omnipotent and yet either powerless or unwilling to stop defects from your own vision of perfection over which no choice was ever made. Either your deity does not have the power to stop such evil or he/she/it is unwilling. If the later, then reiterate that said being, if it existed, is monstrous.
> Gay marriage is an effort to
> destroy the sanctity of marriage
Of what sanctity do you speak? From what religion? The world is made up of many religions and many deities. Furthermore, why care? Gays are committing to themselves in relationships akin to marriage everyday for hundreds of years. Has your “sanctity” changed at all? No sir. Fundamentally, Prop 8 is about whether the State can discriminate the benefits it provides based on the type of union.
#173 (Part II)
> God said do not have sex
> outside of marriage so
> when you do there
> are consequences
“He” supposedly said this in the Old Testament did “he” not? I thought you just said that all laws in the OT no longer needed to be heeded. Where does *Jesus* specifically said that gays may not marry or that restrictions on gay marriage are still in place?
RE: Consequences and “Stealing = Imprisonment”
Not exactly. In the OT, the price for stealing was losing your hand. Apparently, it is acceptable to ignore that one too.
> Sex outside of marriage
Actually, sex outside marriage was common in Biblical times. However, having a relationship with someone outside marriage was a not allowed.
> If you believe in 1 less God
> than me then you believe
> in zero.
Nothing getting past you. Indeed that is exactly what my friend meant however, the point you missed is that you are ok with dismissing Thor, Zeus, Ra, Sheba and a host of other deities based on logical and scientific reasoning but to dismiss the last one it too much for you. Fine. However, by the same token understand that you are dismissing other ideas based on your religion and that by far the best approach for everyone to live in civil fashion is to not let the State in any way get mixed up in religion. Banning gay marriage is just that. Is is PURELY based on one group of religious notions about what marriage should be. It is akin to banned communion because it is the serving of alcohol.
Forgetting that you are unable to provide any unbiased, repeatable evidence that your deity or that Jesus existed, you’re thinking is wholly clouded by your religion. You appear to be incapable of understanding that Prop 8 was a prime example of the majority trampling on the rights of the minority.
As I said before, hundreds if not thousands of years have gone by with homosexuals having relationships with one another albeit in the closet. Has your marriage sanctity changed? What do think it would change now simply because people want to stop the State from discriminating based on the tackle of their partner.
#169 Dbo
>>This is not a death and destruction rant,
>>just reality.
More like a horrible fantasy; a nightmare.
#174 & #175
Yes, God did create us perfect but with free will. He created us to walk in perfect relationship with Him. The problem came with the temptation that Adam and Eve gave into. By disobeying God they fell out of the relationship that they had. This is when all of the evil, Satan, was given reign over the earth. As I stated earlier God does not make the bad things of this world happen. He does not make people sick, make Tsunamis that kill thousands or make people gay. Remember I said God is Love and Love doesn’t do those things. There is a god of this world, Satan, and it is his job to do those things. God did create Satan but not to rule this earth. Satan thought he was better than God and decided to try to be God. So God cast him out of Heaven with 1/3 of the angels. Now he has made it his mission to do whatever he can to destroy God’s creation. This is the explanation for the bad in the world. Satan is evil, God cannot be evil b/c God is Love.
#175
Equating race to “sexual preference” is not an comparison at all. You are born whatever race you are born, the way God made you. Sexual preference is a choice. You use Scripture as a rebuttal to what I say which in and of itself ironic.(#174) If you don’t believe the Bible than you cannot possibly use it in a disagreement as support for you opinion. God says numerous times both in the OT and the NT that homosexuality is a sin. (Lev 20:13,1 Corinthians 6:9) If it were something that God created you with then it could not be a sin.
Animal sacrifice was for atonement of sins. We no longer have to practice that b/c Jesus was crucified for our sins. He paid the final price. Because He died on the cross and rose from the dead, we are living in a dispensation of grace. This means that if we do sin he is faith and just to forgive us of the sin and cleanse us of all unrighteousness. This doesn’t mean we can go on sinning. He has called us out of the darkness of the fall into light so that we can live in righteousness not b/c of what we do but b/c of what He did. This explains why we no long practice certain things. The deal is we need to do things in love. God gave us laws and rule to show us that we cannot do it of ourselves but only through him. [If you study carefully though you will see that our laws now are based on the 10 Commandments from God.] Love does not steal or kill or have affairs. God doesn’t care how you wear your hair or what you eat unless it interferes with your relationship with Him or it is harmful to you. He does say that our body is a temple and it should be treated as such. Sexual sin whether gay or straight is sin and harmful to you and your relationship with God. A relationship is ok outside marriage but when relationship equals sex outside marriage then it is wrong.
#176
Having gods of logic means that man made them. Worshiping logic and reason gets you nowhere. With that thinking mathematics could be a god. Great 1+1=2, this does not help you live your life. This does not help you with relationships. Logic and reason cannot explain people getting healed from terminal diseases, the blind seeing, cancer being cured and countless other miracles. Go to the graves of other heads of religion, see if they are still there. They are. Only Jesus was raised from the dead. He is the One,True,Living God. Any other thinking is a lie straight from hell. If Satan can get you to believe that there are all these ways to get to Heaven or all these other ways of believing he has neutralized the power that you have to change the world and your life through Christ. That is why preserving marriage as a man and a woman being joined together is so important. It was his first lie that put Adam and Eve out of the garden and out of relationship with God and he is still pursuing it to this day. Divorce and gay marriage are but avenues for him to break that important establishment. God will forgive these things. When that forgiveness comes it is then time to turn to Him and live right with the help of Jesus.
#177
Not sure what you mean by nightmare. Life through and in Christ is very far from a fantasy or nightmare. It is a wonderful thing.
What would it change to not allow gay marriage among other things? It would keep us from the consequences of sin which is death. The USA is a nation established on God’s Word. If we neglect the fact that our founding fathers knew how important it was to have God as part of our everyday life then we missed the reason this nation was established, a Christian nation. God is God not matter what and he has called us, Christians, to a higher standard. It is our, Christians, responsibility to make sure that you do everything in our power to let everyone know about Jesus and His saving grace. As part of that we have to defend His Word b/c we understand what is at stake, eternal life. That’s what the difference will be if we stand by and let marriage be distorted and let babies be killed.
#178
1. Is your deity omniscient? If he is, then free will is an illusion because he already knows what decisions you will make. If he is not, then that implies your deity has limitations. I direct you to the Riddle of Epicurus:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
2. You again brought up the creation myth. You do realize it is a myth right? Using that as evidence of your position is like using Harry Potter to prove that witches exist.
3. Did not your deity create everyone including birth defects, gay people, people with Downs Syndrome, MS and a host of other at birth maladies? These people had no choice in the way they came out. Homosexuality, in most cases, is NOT A CHOICE. Thinking that it is is why you fail to understand.
RE: You religious rant
First, nothing is better at showing Christian hypocrisy than the Bible itself. In fact, I find that most religious types have never actually read the Bible critically. For example, you quote from Corinthians:
1 Corinthians 6:9
“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind”
Where does it say anything about homosexuality there? He merely says the “effeminate”. There are many gay people that are not effeminate. How does that explain butch lesbians?
Since we’re speaking of Corinthians, Paul also says that if you associate with Gentiles you associate with Devils:
“But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.”
Since you happen to like Leviticus, it also says:
“And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.”
So where does Jesus say that it is no longer necessary to punish adultery with death?
From what I can tell your deity of love is nothing of the sort (assuming it even exists). He punished those he didn’t like and hung his son up like a side of veal.
> Worshiping logic and reason
> gets you nowhere.
How can you possibly argue your position without logic? How can you possibly hope to convince anyone about anything relating to your deity without logic and reason? You might as well stomp your feet and hold your breath. Logic gave us a few things like the Internet, computers, microprocessors, television, modern medicine and pretty much every invention since the plow. What you are discussing is blind allegiance and ignorance.
At the very least, you have proven without question that people voted for Prop 8 solely because of religion and nothing else. In other words, people filled with ignorance and adherence to nonsensical religions are what killed Prop 8. As you have already admitted, it has nothing to do with logic or reason and thus nothing to do with the public benefit. You are welcome to believe what you wish but I would prefer if you didn’t vote. After all, if you don’t vote, “God’s will” will be done either way right? Isn’t voting a logical process? Why inject logic into your fantasy world of religion?
Btw, those two quotes are respectively:
1 Corinthians 10:20
Leviticus 20:10
Dbo
My point all along in this is that if you hold the bible up as inerrant and the direct word of God for all to live by then you run into to some severe problems. You do so especially when you reference Leviticus that has all sorts of rules and laws that no one that I know of but the Hassidic Jews live by. If you do not live by those same rules then aren’t you living in offense to God? Put down your bacon! That trip to Red Lobster is the direct ticket to hell! No more blended fabrics or shaving! How does Gad want you farm the land? Well it is right here in Leviticus. I mean really? If you hold up the rules against Homosexuals by quoting Leviticus then you have painted yourself into a corner by not following all the other parts of the book. I have no idea if you do or not, but I think I can make a pretty good guess.
The absolute word of God in Genesis also falls apart when you think about it terms of modern knowledge and science. If you choose to look at Adam and Eve as anything more than a myth then you have to throw away all the provable information on biology, geology, astrophysics, and well basically all modern scientific understanding. Everything that you enjoy is become some human came up with it, by understanding nature, and created it. Not God.
So I will pose to you my original challenge. Because we do not live in a theocracy, make a rational non-religious argument on why Homosexuals should not be allowed to marry. I make my pro gay marriage point by looking at the protection of property, children (if you do not think that gay couples have children you are deluding yourself) and liberty by two people who enter a contract and should have that contract arbitrated under the laws of the State should anything happen. Just like the State looks at a marriage between Straight people. Why should they be treated any different when religion is not part of the State?
Remember keep it non religious. I don’t think you can.
Dbo
It is also a complete myth that this is a Christian nation. Most of the Founding Fathers were Deists. I think that Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, Madison, Monroe, Ethan Allen and Thomas Paine would disagree with you. So like some biblical Scholarship (Jesus wasn’t the only one brought back from death, three guesses on who else was. I know and I am an atheist.) you need a good remedial course in U.S history.
#179
1. He is omniscient. He knows what you are going to do and the beauty is He lets you, free will. You are free to worship Him or not. In all of us there is an empty spot that we try to fill in all sorts of ways. In the end He is the only one that can make you whole.
2. Creation is no myth. It is reality. If you can honestly look at a baby and not be in awe of the complexity of forming a human being and realize that it is not by accident but God’s perfect design than I’m not sure what might convince you, other than an intervention by God Himself. Which He has been known to do on occasion.
3. If you look at earlier comments and read them I have explained that God does not create “birth defects, gay people, people with Downs Syndrome, MS and a host of other at birth maladies”. The first portion of #178 discusses where those things come from. The awesome thing is that God will heal people of those issues and is able.
4. Your quote from Corinthians still applies to all homosexual activity. Look at all the translations “effeminate” equals homosexuality. “Butch lesbians” are in the same category they are behaving contrary to how they were created.
4a. Leviticus 20:10, death for adultery was called for in OT times. Remember that I also stated that we live under grace and we can be forgiven of our sins. Read John 8:1-11 that will give you insight into Jesus’ heart. I am not saying to go and sin or break laws b/c you will be forgiven. We still have laws that we have to obey and if you don’t expect consequences but know that God will forgive. People are usually the ones who are unforgiving.
God doesn’t punish those He doesn’t like. We bring things one ourselves generally b/c of choices we make and also we live in a fallen world. As far as Jesus being hung on the cross, He chose to do that so that we could be saved (John 3:16-17). He bore all our sins so that we could have a personal relationship with Him. The awesome thing about it is that He did it for us even though we were sinners that we might be saved and have everlasting life in Heaven.
Here’s the deal, God defies logic. He takes the foolish things and uses them to confound the wise. I am not saying that logic is not important. God being based on logic and reason gives no place for faith. If I based my relationship with God on logic and reason then I am putting Go in a tidy box and saying God you can only do the things that I can think of with my brain. Fortunately God is bigger than that. The universe is expanding at light speed science tells us. God holds the universe in His hand. Logic and reason cannot explain that. I believe that God gave people the ideas for new innovations not for us to think how great we are but how great the creation is that He made.
Finally, I do believe people voted for Prop 8 based on their beliefs/religion. They see the bigger picture, the benefit to the public. Thankfully my state already has banned gay marriage so I did vote and it counted. As for God’s will, it will be done. The great thing is He works through people and I get to participate in making it happen as do countless others. We need only to be obedient to His Word and listen to what He says.
I will not be checking these comments any longer since I am having to restate things to the same people. If you want to know Jesus better read these books in the Bible (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). 1 Corinthians 13 is also a good place to find out what God thinks about love. It give insight into how we should live our lives. God Bless.
#183
1. If he is omniscient, then he already knows what choices you will make before you make them. In that scenario, free will is an illusion. You are simply making the choices he knew you would make well in advance of you making them.
2. The creation story in the Bible is a myth and it isn’t even original to the Jews nor is it the only creation story in the Bible. Your mind is truly clouded by religion if you believe it to be a factual representation of how creation occurred.
3. Did or did not your deity create everything? The Adam and Eve MYTH in no way explains maladies over which there is no choice unless you are suggesting that your deity included these sorts of non-choice maladies in his punishment for Adam and Eve’s mistake in which case your deity is truly monstrous.
4. Where exactly does effeminate equate with homosexuality or even not normal? I see nothing in your Bible which clarifies that. As far as I can tell. you are injecting that interpretation into the discussion with absolutely no foundation. Some straight men are effeminate. Some gay men are not. Sorry, but you do not get to reinterpret the meaning as you wish. If you are going to use the Bible as the only source of information, then you do not get expand on the meaning of words whenever you wish.
4a. Where exactly does Jesus say that death for adultery is no longer necessary? The simple answer is that he does not along with a host of other items in Leviticus which according to your interpretation means they are supposedly still in effect and yet generally ignored.
> God doesn’t punish those He doesn’t like.
Really.
Looking past the Egyptians for a moment, after Moses came down off the mountain and saw the people worshiping the golden calf, your deity then plagued the people (Exodus 32:35). Then there is:
Leviticus 14:34
Leviticus 20:2
Leviticus 21:16-18
Leviticus 25:44-46
Leviticus 26:15-39
Numbers 1:51
Numbers 11:1 – Burn people that complain. Nice!
I could go on. The stories about your deity’s punishments are legion.
Again, if you deity is omniscient, he already knows what choices you will make before you make them. In fact, he knows every choice you will make throughout your entire life before you are born. That is what is meant by omniscient. Thus, when he punishes you, he is punishing a being he created and that he knows will defy his will and yet he lets it continue. That is sadism.
> Here’s the deal, God defies logic
That is a cop out. Since you cannot reconcile the massive inconsistencies in the Bible nor the inconsistent nature of your deity, you are throwing your hands up and simply claiming “Well, he defies logic.” Nonsense. Past Christians used logic to try to explain the inconsistencies (Moore, Augustine etc). Logic is the cornerstone of communication and understanding. The problem is that your religion defies logic by design to keep the masses in the dark.
> Finally, I do believe
> people voted for Prop 8
> based on their beliefs/religion
On this we agree. No question that the religious swayed the vote out of fear and ignorance.
> They see the bigger picture
No. They saw the picture they wanted to see while trampling on the rights of the minority.
> We need only to be obedient
> to His Word and listen to
> what He says.
You are not seriously suggesting that your deity “told” you to vote against gay marriage? Where in the Bible does it command people to vote against measures contrary to your deity’s will? As far as I know, there is nothing about voting in the Bible.
Beyond refraining from voting, I suggest you take the time to actually read the Bible critically and not through rose colored glasses if you are able. Look for contradictions. Look for mistakes. Look for inconsistencies and vagueness. I think you find it far more error filled than you first imagined.
Dbo
i am sorry to see that you are throwing up your hands, taking your toys and going home. I am sad to see that you could not answer any of the questions posed to you in a critical fashion that involves just a little bit of thought put into instead of parroting the same things over and over. Maybe that is why you are frustrated, you do not have any answers that require thought. You choose instead to live on a world of black and white where you do not question the authority that has been taught to you. That is fine. That is your right to live your life as you will without restrictions. I only take umbrage when people like you try to impose their will based solely on what is their faith, without a critical eye on what that means for society at large. I wish you luck and hope that you can gather the strength to begin to question things. if you do start to question and still believe than that is great. Some of the greatest thinkers went through the same process (my favorite being C.S. Lewis) but do not surrender your brain to what others tell you. That is truly a sin against God.
Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
- Monday’s PC Magazine Column Online and print columns posted for online viewing
- Spam! End it! Here’s How.
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
