Difference?

[l3rok3n]

I figured this had more to do with religion then sexuality.



I was just wondering since some homosexuals I have been talking to say that Christians have no right to say that homosexuals aren't allowed to get married just because of their religion but then I look at some middle east areas where woman are covered head to toe and treated less than men for religion. Also, a lot of other severe things are done in the name of religion.



So, I was just wondering how everyone else thinks about religion and gay marriage.



This has nothing to do with suicide bombing and stuff because most of the people in the religion suicide bombers claim don't support what they did at all.

[xJuliex]

You know, at first, I was against gay marriage, because in the bible, there are things that indicate that it's wrong. Then, there's just the plain out fact that the body parts don't fit, and you can't have kids...I mean, if that doesn't give you a clue that something's wrong, than nothing will...



But then, I just gave up on the issue. I myself wouldn't be gay, but for the people that are, it's their life, their choice...I mean, if God doesn't like it, then I guess they're going to hell. I find it hard to believe that God would send people, dedicated Christians, to hell because they're gay, but that's his call, not mine.



I'm just kinda neutral on them. Don't really approve, but don't disapprove.

[l3rok3n]

Originally posted by thedepressed1@Feb 9 2005, 06:53 AM

You know, at first, I was against gay marriage, because in the bible, there are things that indicate that it's wrong. Then, there's just the plain out fact that the body parts don't fit, and you can't have kids...I mean, if that doesn't give you a clue that something's wrong, than nothing will...



But then, I just gave up on the issue. I myself wouldn't be gay, but for the people that are, it's their life, their choice...I mean, if God doesn't like it, then I guess they're going to hell. I find it hard to believe that God would send people, dedicated Christians, to hell because they're gay, but that's his call, not mine.



I'm just kinda neutral on them. Don't really approve, but don't disapprove.

[right][/right]

I think God will send anyone to hell who doesn't ask for forgiveness of their sins. I mean I am sure there are people who have killed other people who are Christians and may have not committed another sins. I just don't think being Christian is a pass out of hell.

[yoaliens3000]

As i christian who has the right to an opinion given to me by my RELIGION and FREEDOMS. I do not support gay marriage. Gay unions are fine, just dont call it marriage.

[FranklinF]

eh i think God wil do with them as he pleases i personally think that if they asked for forgivenss and truely believe in Jesus they are saved from hell i dont support gay marriage but i wont keep someone from marrying the person they love as long as they know for sure they love eachother (devorce is a much bigger problem in my eyes because its soo common these days and it says clearly inthe bible about that)-MARY

[Dark]

Personally, I'm sick and tired of seeing these topics repeated over and over. So, I'll be rather blunt here: What does marriage have to do with Christianity? YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE CHRISTIAN TO BE MARRIED! My GOODNESS, people, look up the definitions of words here! "The ceremony containing certain LEGAL formalities by which a marriage relationship is created" It all has to with LAW and the fact that this country is predominately CHRISTIAN, thus giving the American people the assumption that something must be present, i.e. the Christian religion, in order for a "true" marriage to occur.



I'd like if someone could give me a valid reason as to why it SHOULDN'T be allowed. It's an infringment on a person's right not to marry whom they so desire in the first place. Because it's not the "Christian" thing to do is no excuse. Our country has the "freedom of religion" policy, and thus also has the seperation of church and state aspect in action. To say that one cannot marry whom they so desire on the base of the fact that Chrisitanity says no would be against the law, which is thus making those who know the law a hypocrite. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's wrong. And for those who think civil unions are enough, check the differences and benefits first before you go complaining that a civil union is all that is needed.



Personally, I'd never get married. I'm not a relationship person, I'm a free spirit. But, deny someone the formal expression of true love for an IGNORANT reason such as YOUR personal belief over their own is just plain and flat STUPID. Thank you.

[junglemonkey]

Wasn't marriage ORIGINALLY about being married in the eyes of God? And that's how it became connected to Christianity? I know that belief has faded out now...



Don't shout at me, I just thought thats the way it went lol.

[Doug]

No, it wasn't created for God. I forget how it was created, but I was speaking with a history major who has studied this, and he said it didn't have much, if anything, to do with the christian God.

[l3rok3n]

[Dark]

Originally posted by l3rok3n+Feb 19 2005, 01:43 AM--

[/right]

[/b]

<span style=\'font-family:Times\'I don't think you can say something someone believes is stupid and I find that offensive. Ignorance is not knowing the facts not having a different opinion then someone else.



People in this country have a right to decided what happens in their country. If they base their opinions on religion or not they should all get a say. If you are 18 or older you can flip a coin and have it decided who you vote for in the presidential race. So why can't you vote based on religion? I say let each state, or the whole USA vote at one time to legalize it or not.



I personally do not think that marriage is a right. I am not Christian and I believe it is wrong. At first I believed "marry who you want" then I started talking to people and have since changed my mind.



"It's an infringment on a person's right not to marry whom they so desire in the first place."



So then what if a man desired to marry his daughter? Is that also infringing on his rights? What if a woman desired to marry her 12 year old student? People desire to do a lot of things and that is no biases for anything.

[right][/right]

[/b][/quote]



First off darling, read what I read. I called no one's personal beliefs "stupid"..I called the fact that valuing one's belief and thus finding one's belief to be "superior" to another and agreeing to pass a law over such a belief of superiority is stupid. That's why we're democratic, so that EVERYONE has EQUAL rights.



As for your argument of choosing one's religious beliefs over that of an unbiased, equal point of view, that's ultimately your decision. The point I'm trying to get across is that because of the fact that people that do such are unwilling to compromise so that their fellow peers can benefit from something that they obviously deserve to have in the first place.



Well, could you explain to me as to *why* you don't believe that homosexuals should be granted marriage rights? I'm quite curious as to why exactly.



And yes, if a man desired to marry his daughter, and if his daughter, for whatever odd reason it may be, desired to marry her father in mutual bonding, then by all means. Same goes for the teacher and student. Love knows no bounds, sweetie. Perhaps, until everyone can understand that, nothing will change...

[l3rok3n]

Originally posted by Dark+Feb 19 2005, 03:02 AM--

[/right]

[/b]

<span style=\'font-family:Times\'"As for your argument of choosing one's religious beliefs over that of an unbiased, equal point of view, that's ultimately your decision."



There is no unbiased equal point of view. In a homosexuals opinion they should be allowed to get married, they are biased because they are homosexual. In a straight person's case if they have friends who are homosexual they are biased. I don't think anyone is right and I don't think anyone is wrong. It is merely an opinion. People can argue all they want that being homosexual is right because they were made that way but you cannot base the law off a feeling. That goes for Christens wanting gay marriage illegal as well. America should vote on what they want because if gay marriage is allowed it will effect straight couples.



I believe that homosexuals should not be allowed to get married because I believe that marriage benefits are designed to help couples who want to have children. Yes, not all couples have children but a lot of them do. Marriage financial benefits were designed a long time ago when a lot more couples had children, and a lot of them. Since gay couples cannot physically have children they really have no need for the financial benefits. As for right of kin and such, you can adopt the children and for legal matters such as medical concerns you can assign who you wish to control that.



A father should not be allowed to marry his daughter ever. That is against the law and it should stay that way. I never thought I would hear someone say that.



I am really tired and really sick, so if what I just wrote doesn't make sense I can explain later.

[Dark]

Originally posted by l3rok3n+Feb 19 2005, 02:24 AM--

[/right]

[/b]

<span style=\'font-family:Times\'"As for your argument of choosing one's religious beliefs over that of an unbiased, equal point of view, that's ultimately your decision."



There is no unbiased equal point of view. In a homosexuals opinion they should be allowed to get married, they are biased because they are homosexual. In a straight person's case if they have friends who are homosexual they are biased. I don't think anyone is right and I don't think anyone is wrong. It is merely an opinion. People can argue all they want that being homosexual is right because they were made that way but you cannot base the law off a feeling. That goes for Christens wanting gay marriage illegal as well. America should vote on what they want because if gay marriage is allowed it will effect straight couples.



I believe that homosexuals should not be allowed to get married because I believe that marriage benefits are designed to help couples who want to have children. Yes, not all couples have children but a lot of them do. Marriage financial benefits were designed a long time ago when a lot more couples had children, and a lot of them. Since gay couples cannot physically have children they really have no need for the financial benefits. As for right of kin and such, you can adopt the children and for legal matters such as medical concerns you can assign who you wish to control that.



A father should not be allowed to marry his daughter ever. That is against the law and it should stay that way. I never thought I would hear someone say that.



I am really tired and really sick, so if what I just wrote doesn't make sense I can explain later.

[right][/right]

[/b][/quote]



Actually, there *can* be an unbiased and equal point of view. Look at everything from every different kind of person's perspective. As I stated earlier, I seriously doubt I'd ever get married. How would this law benefit me in anyway? In all honesty, I'm looking at this with no sexual nor religious affiliations. Quite bluntly, men and women are allowed to be married. Why can't a women and a women or a man and a man? Whenever one puts their personal belief in the mix, it becomes biased. Thus meaning, as I just presented, in an unbiased manner, that gay marriage *should* be allowed.



Now, I find this rather hilarious to be honest. You say that it will affect straight couples? In other reasons that financially, I see none, in which there are a lot of straight couples feeding off of the system with their children, or feeding off of welfare, which can be easily proven to be a much larger issue here than the "effects it would have on straight couples."



As for the whole, "you can't base a law on a feeling", tell me the point of one of your last statements then.."That is against the law and it should stay that way." Is that not a "feeling" that you have? Why has this law been instilled? Because people FELT is was wrong and/or sick. Apparently, I didn't make it clear enough when I said LOVE KNOWS NO BOUNDS, which I believe still haunts a greater part of society today in this matter.



Marriage benefits are marriage benefits. Just because people have children doesn't mean that they should benefit more over those that don't. Their lives, their choices. Even so, what if a lesbian couple decided one of them wanted artificial insemination? That one would birth a child, thus having it as their own. Is that not the same as having a children born from a straight woman? It happened the same way. By stating that marriage benefits are for those who want children, you'd be practically stating that those who don't end up having children shouldn't receive financial benefits, which would include straight couples. And what if the couple wants their own child from some form of our technological advances? Are they to be denied your form of financial benefits just because of their sexuality? And regarding medical concerns, if that was never an issue to begin with, why did you bring it up? Unless, of course, you're trying to say that it was one in the past, but isn't now...I wouldn't know, I've not looked into that bit recently.



Once again darling, may I stress that love knows no bounds. I'm open-minded to most everything, and that last bit from your post shows just what I mean.



EDIT: I'm sick and tired as well...Perhaps this debate will go better when we're both at optimum health? Also, please know that I respect your opinion, I just don't agree with it...I don't mean to come off as an asshole, though I'm sure I do several times throughout these replies...

[l3rok3n]

We have to put boundaries on how far people are allowed to do everything. Like drinking alcohol, what times you can buy alcohol and so many other things. Just because someone wants to do something doesn't mean we should allow it.



Straight people would be effected since they might be asked to attend a gay marriage, they might be asked to marry a gay couple, and so many more things. Anything that happens in the USA effects more then just one group of people.



The law should be based on what the majority of people think. Like the judge or whoever that said gay marriage should be allowed in NY. That person was totally out of line. One person should not be allowed to decided the outcome of a whole state. 11 states already had the vote come up and they were able to vote on it perfectly fine so I don't see why the rest of the USA can't vote on it.



Homosexuals can love whoever they want. They can kiss, hug, have sex with whoever they want I just don't think that is reason to allow them to get married because they believe they are in love. If it is love why can't they just be happy being with that person for the rest of their lives? Do they really need a piece of paper to know they are in love?



I am open to all opinions. If someone gives me a good point that I can't argue then I think about it and sometimes I even change my standings on the subject.



Off subject: I have a version of strep throat that doesn't act to antibiotics so I will be sick for a while lol.

[Dark]

....Erm...The example there with the alcohol is an entirely different case of things than what we're debating about...That's a whole different point of view than what is presented in the original subject...There are other erasons behind the alcohol thing, and I'm not exactly sure as to what point you're refuting with this either, so...



And there is a problem with people going to gay marriages? It's their choice whether or not to go, and should the law ever come to pass, I'm sure that the state or whatever wouldn't force someone to marry the couple should the person not be comfortable with it...I honestly can't think of any way that it would "hurt" a straight person, but then again, this medicine has me practically half-dead and I may be missing something...Tell me if I am, please, I'm curious as to what it may be...



In all honesty, this should have been guaranteed a *long* time ago...I don't think anyone, anywhere, has ever presented a viable reason as to why it shouldn't be allowed. People just think it's "disgusting" and "sinful", when they aren't even viewing it themselves, so I don't see what they're complaining about, as it's OUR lives not live....Why should someone tell us what we can and can't do in that aspect, because of *their* beliefs...



Why do heterosexuals need a piece of paper to know that *they're* in love? It's the same reason that straight couples want to get married that homosexuals want to get married. Why can't heterosexuals just be happy living with that person for the rest of their lives? Then we can just do away with marriage all together then, and these problems wouldn't exist! Huzzah!



Sorry to hear about that strep throat...That sounds like a rather annoying infection. _ I just have a really bad cold and my parents are keeping me on medicine that makes it so that I can't think very well and I'm sleepy all of the time..

[Jimmy_Page]

I've got a question.



Doesn't Christianity teach that we shouldn't judge people?



Look at it like this: The bible says (albeit not in the new testament) that gay sex is a sin, not that being gay is a sin. Even were that true, marriage has extended beyond just a christian thing. An athiest man and woman can get married right now, and you're not fighting to restore sanctity of marriage there. There are drive-thru wedding chapels in vegas, but you aren't fighting to shut them down. You're using your religion as a tool for bias and homophobia, and it's people like you that sicken me.



And before you begin flaming, keep in mind that I'm not some evil anti-christian - I'm christian myself.



/first post

//welcomewhoring

[l3rok3n]

<span style='font-family:Times'Jimmy_Page if you were talking to me I never "flame". Wow this post is going to be long.



I didn't say it would hurt a straight person I said it would effect them. What if a straight person runs a business and doesn't believe in gay marriage, does he have to give benefits to gay couples?



I don't think you need a "good" reason to not allow something. I mean if as many people as there are don't think homosexuals should be allowed to get married isn't that reason enough?



Heterosexuals don't need a piece of paper to say they are in love but a lot of people don't think that being heterosexual is a sin. Also, a lot of heterosexual couples get married to have children and marriage financial helps them.



Homosexuals can live their lives how they want but when it comes to marriage it is stepping into having validation for homosexuality. That it is okay by the law, when many people believe it is wrong.



My throat is killing me and good thing we aren't in person because I wouldn't be able to talk lol. This discussion would have ended after the first word.



Saying that homosexuality is a sin isn't judging. I think Christens are simply telling homosexuals that so that they can ask for forgiveness for being homosexual. Christens don't want people to go to hell. They want them to live a sinful life and end up in heaven.



If you are homosexual the chances of you having sex are very high. After marriage is when sex is all right but if it says in the bible that gay sex is a sin then in a run around allowing gay marriage would be allowing sins to take place since I don't think many married couples do not have sex. According to what you have red in the bible.



It isn't about what religion you are. To my understanding Christens don't believe being atheist is a sin. I could be wrong though.



I am not Christen and I don't think you can say that Christens use their religion as biased and homophobia. I am not homophobic and yet I still am not for gay marriage. Also, a lot of homosexuals use their sexuality as biased. Do they also sicken you or is it just the people with a different opinion?

[Jaegermeister]

I won't lock this because every different discussion takes us different places, but for some light background reading see here, here, here,here, here, here, here, here, here, and here for further information. This is a fairly popular topic.



tJ

[Jimmy_Page]

Jimmy_Page if you were talking to me I never "flame". Wow this post is going to be long.

No, not talking to you in particular. Just that usually when someone expresses a reasonable opinion they get flamed. At least here in texas, anyway.

I didn't say it would hurt a straight person I said it would effect(sic) them. What if a straight person runs a business and doesn't believe in gay marriage, does he have to give benefits to gay couples?

It should be assumed that he would, were the govt to greenlight gay marriage.



Even had they not, I still find that treating people equally regardless of age/race/gender/religion/sexual preference is something that every human being should do, regardless of how they feel.

I don't think you need a "good" reason to not allow something. I mean if as many people as there are don't think homosexuals should be allowed to get married isn't that reason enough?

Right. And this is how slavery became widely accepted.

Heterosexuals don't need a piece of paper to say they are in love but a lot of people don't think that being heterosexual is a sin. Also, a lot of heterosexual couples get married to have children and marriage financial helps them.

And you're saying that gays *do* need a piece of paper? You're saying that gays *don't* want benefits for being married? I know a man who's been with his partner for around 25 years - and he's been denied the right to see him in the hospital, denied many of the rights that married heteros have. He doesn't need a piece of paper to say that he's in love with his partner - both of them know it, that's good enough - but the benefits would be a damned nice thing to have.

Homosexuals can live their lives how they want but when it comes to marriage it is stepping into having validation for homosexuality. That it is okay by the law, when many people believe it is wrong.

And validating homosexuality is a bad thing? You can be a christian and not be a bigot, you know. Just because many people believe something DOES NOT mean it's right - again, look at how slavery started. You can hardly say that was a good thing.

My throat is killing me and good thing we aren't in person because I wouldn't be able to talk lol. This discussion would have ended after the first word.

I know what you mean - my allergies are horrible right now; my throat is swollen and I've got horrible drainage. Not a very good combination

Saying that homosexuality is a sin isn't judging. I think Christens are simply telling homosexuals that so that they can ask for forgiveness for being homosexual. Christens don't want people to go to hell. They want them to live a sinful life and end up in heaven.

I realise this - but saying that homosexuals are sinners is. I can understand your logic here - though you obviously meant to put sin-free instead of sinful - but homosexuality is NOT a choice. Ask any gay person and they'll tell you. Hell, you can figure it out logically - who would WANT to go through that kind of discrimination?



As a christian, I believe that saving sinners is an important part of my faith. But denying benefits to people we don't neccessarily (sp?) like isn't saving souls - it's using religion as a tool for bigotry. Telling a gay couple they can't get married because they're sinners* is hardly going to convert them.



*I'm a nondenominational christian - I have my own interpretation of the bible, and I personally don't believe that homosexuality is a sin - it's not a conscious choice, and it's not, as far as I know, mentioned at all in the new testament. I do believe that homosexual intercourse is just as much a sin as premarital sex and using birth control (imo also not sins) - the reason the ancient hebrews were against these things is because it was seen as murder - they believed that semen contained all the essence of life and that the woman merely provided space for incubation.



This, however, has been disproven in the centuries since.

If you are homosexual the chances of you having sex are very high. After marriage is when sex is all right but if it says in the bible that gay sex is a sin then in a run around allowing gay marriage would be allowing sins to take place since I don't think many married couples do not have sex. According to what you have red in the bible.

It would seem I've already responded to this - I'm taking this post paragraph by paragraph.



But to reinforce that: So? It's not as though being unmarried is going to prevent a gay couple from doing what they want. It doesn't stop most heterosexuals.



Besides that, you cannot enforce your beliefs on the rest of the world. Just because you believe something doesn't mean someone else has to. The 1st amendment not only seperates church and state but allows for freedom of religion - by banning gay marriage you're defying a constitution the likes of which we're fighting so hard to set up overseas.

It isn't about what religion you are. To my understanding Christens don't believe being atheist is a sin. I could be wrong though.

I think that this is the main issue of the topic - the main groups fighting to ban gay marriage are, surprise, christian activist groups.



I'm not sure on the athiesm thing - though as a christian I personally would at least attempt to convert the person if I thought it could be done.

I am not Christen and I don't think you can say that Christens use their religion as biased and homophobia. I am not homophobic and yet I still am not for gay marriage. Also, a lot of homosexuals use their sexuality as biased. Do they also sicken you or is it just the people with a different opinion?

You aren't Christian? Why are you against it, then?



Christians _are_ using their religion as a tool for bias and homophobia. There are much more important issues out there that they could be fighting the good fight on - instead they choose a small and irrelevant one to enforce their personal biases and gain political capital.



I'm not sure what you're saying.. A lot of gays use their sexuality as a bias?



I'm going to assume that you're talking about gays that are biased against heteros - which I personally don't approve. It's just like all the blacks during the civil rights movement that became racist against the whites - notedly the black panther party. When you do something like that, you're no better than who you oppose, and of course I am against that.

[Jimmy_Page]

And because I can't find the edit button:



I'm a christian, and one of the major parts of my faith is accepting people for who they are and loving your neighbor.



Take, for example, the bible passage in which the people were stoning an adultress; Jesus stopped it by saying, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."



Nobody's perfect, of course, so who are we to blame others for their sins?



A couple of weeks ago I was in church preparing to do the readings and the deacon (sub-priest, for ye laymen) asked one of the altar boys why we went to church. The boy couldn't come up with an answer, so he told him - "Because we're sinners."



He used this in his sermon. We go to church because we're sinners, and we admit that. Jesus surrounded himself with sinners - look at who the apostles were before they became Jesus' disciples. You're hardly going to save any souls if you're discriminating against gays - and it certainly doesn't fit well with Jesus' last commandment to his apostles at the Last Supper - Love your neighbor as you love yourself.