Gay Marriage

[2000zx2chik]

http://wjz.com/local/gay.rights.marriage.2.726739.html

Just wondering what everyone's take on Gay Marriage is..

Personally, I think they should legalize Gay Marriage. I mean I understand certain points where they say if we legalize it then guys are gonna go out and marry each other just so they can get that persons insurance policy or whatever the case may be but truthfully whether or not it is legalized people are still going to do it only it is a man and a woman. I even know people who have married just to keep the other person in the country. My mom is gay and I think she shoul dhave the right to marry a woman if she thinks that woman is the person she believes that she should be iwth for the restof her life. I personally dont believe in marriage but I think if someone else does they should have the right to marry whoever.

[inis]

it did get legalized last week in cali.

[capitalcrew]

Oh god here we go.

[2000zx2chik]

it did get legalized last week in cali.

yea I heard about that..

Oh god here we go.

LOl whats taht supposed to mean??

[capitalcrew]

I see mass bannings in the future.

[2000zx2chik]

Just a friendly conversation..

[morningstar2101]

i think that gay people have just as much right to the successes and disappointments in life as straight people do

[2000zx2chik]

agreed

[Spyware]

Fags are gay!

[/idiot]

Anyways.. I'm kinda torn between the two sides. Personally, I couldn't give a damn if gay people wish to get married. If they love eachother -n- whatnot let it be! I have no problem with gay people and I don't see how people can judge a feeling between two people just due to gender. Love is love regardless of the conditions involved.

With that being said I'm also against it for those that wish to abuse the system. We already have enough abuse with people getting married for citizenship and so on, but you don't see people raising hell on the news over foreign marriages.

[scort2498]

I know a feemale gay couple. and they purposefully will Never get married because one of them get alimony for the rest of her life. I dont quite agree with it. but think of it.
Boyfriend/Girlfriend is just a title.
Marriage is just another title but now the govt. steps in and gives breaks here and there on taxes.
the lesbian couple i know arn't officially married but consider themselves married.(and no they are not young and dumb they are 60+ years old).
So i guess my point is if the state dosn't want to consider them married fine but if they are in a life long relationship at least give them the same benefits of a "married couple"

[CraZx2ing]

Gay Marriage - Against. Marriage to me is a religous thing and God and the Bible don't agree well with gays being married.

Gay Civil Unions - That's fine.

Benefits - Should go to both. That's only fair.

[2000zx2chik]

Gay Marriage - Against. Marriage to me is a religous thing and God and the Bible don't agree well with gays being married.

Gay Civil Unions - That's fine.

Benefits - Should go to both. That's only fair.

I dont have anything against your opinion because itis yours and you are entitled to it. But personally nowadays alot of people do not get married for the religious aspect of it anymore nor do they do it for love. Alot of time its strictly for show or for tax purposes. Not saying that isnt done for the right reason but if a straight couple who have know eachother for 35 hours can go to the "little chapel" and get married shouldnt a gay couple be able to do the same thing.

[CraZx2ing]

Ohhhh, so we are asking opinions and then calling people out when they don't see eye to eye with you. Okay.

Marriage should be for a man and a woman. Civil unions for gays. If a man and a woman are not religious then let them do a Civil Union.

Why would a gay want to go to a church to get married, especially under a God that doesn't like how they behave according to the Bible? I dunno, maybe they'd get married by a Buddhist monk that allows it?

Leave marriage to believers of whatever religion and civil unions to non believers. If the gay happens to be a believer, well, I guess they are just really confused.

I'd also like to see the total % of married people that just get married for taxes.

[2000zx2chik]

LOL i didnt call you out. was just asking. Plus not everyone gets married in a church "under gods eyes". Im not into the whole church thing and the only reason I was ever going to get married in a church was for the fact that it was my grandmothers church adn it was what she would have wanted. But not all people beileve in the god that you believe in also.

Again not trying to call you out lol. just sayin.

[CraZx2ing]

uh huh. That was a bonafide call out in my book. I personally got married in a Buddhist ceremony in Vietnam out of respect for my wife's family and their beliefs. We also got married at my house by my uncle the pastor. I wasn't in a house of worship for either. Whether you are married in a church or not you are "under God's eyes" :).

Either way, what difference is it to a person if they are not religious if they get married or have a civil union.

Give the gays civil unions so they can have equal rights and leave it at that.

Is the argument whether or not gays should be allowed to "marry" or is it just looking for equal rights that a married couple get?

[2000zx2chik]

I think its more about marriage. I believe if someone wants to get married they should be allowed to. Regardless of sex, religion or lack of thereof. etc.

[JonsZX2SR]

I think the government should get out of the marriage business entirely, and only sanction civil unions, regardless if they are straight or gay.

If people also want to be married, then they can also have a religious ceremony as well at the church of their choice.

If one religion bans gay marriage (fundamentalist Baptist for example) that is their business and they should be allowed to hold their beliefs but not impose their beliefs on civil unions that others may favor.

If two religions, one supporting and another opposing gay marriage, get into a dispute, they should settle it themselves at a religious level. However, they should NOT involve the courts or legislatures in their dispute and avoid wasting gov't money that can be spent on other more valuable efforts.

[ZetecInside]

The government needs to get out of the marriage business.

Marriage (in the legal sense) is merely a contract between two parties that incurs certain financial and legal liabilities on both. That being the case, there should not be one pre-set contract defined by the government. The arrangement should be determined solely by the couple and their lawyers, which would include gay people if they so choose.

Unfortunately, due to our complex tax code and insurance regulations, the sheer potential variety and complexity of these contracts would make interpretation, application, and enforcement very difficult. So a more practical solution is, simply, let gays get married.

The commonly popular American notion of "marriage" is really two distinct and separate concepts: The spiritual ceremony of marriage is important for religious and cultural reasons, but without a notorized, signed, government approved contract, it carries no legal weight. Conversely, the marriage license is important for tax and legal reasons, but without a ceremony it carries no religious or moral weight (depending on your beliefs).

Making a legal distinction between "marriage" and "civil unions" is nothing but childish semantics. ALL marriages are "civil unions" in legal terms. Just call all of them the same thing, whether gay or straight.

[Buster]

http://images.cafepress.com/product/10018257_240x240_Front.jpg


/discussion

[ZetecInside]

A typically complex, well-researched, and convincing argument from Buster. :eyes:

[2000zx2chik]

A typically complex, well-researched, and convincing argument from Buster. :eyes:

As always.

[inis]

I know a feemale gay couple. and they purposefully will Never get married because one of them get alimony for the rest of her life. I dont quite agree with it. but think of it.
Boyfriend/Girlfriend is just a title.
Marriage is just another title but now the govt. steps in and gives breaks here and there on taxes.
the lesbian couple i know arn't officially married but consider themselves married.(and no they are not young and dumb they are 60+ years old).
So i guess my point is if the state dosn't want to consider them married fine but if they are in a life long relationship at least give them the same benefits of a "married couple"


most states only give it for a few years, if any at all.

[joshalabama]

http://images.cafepress.com/product/10018257_240x240_Front.jpg


/discussion

x2

[2000zx2chik]

most states only give it for a few years, if any at all.

I see where he is coming from though. I know of a couple who had a staged wedding with no marriage license so that the woman could continue to get social security from her late husband.

[00zx2s/r]

x2

x3

I personally believe that marriaged is defined by one man and one woman. I personally don't agree with gays, but to each his own. But I think that gays shouldn't be allowed the title of married, but just civil union like others have said. I think that by calling 2 gays married, it dillutes the meaning of marriage...

[SoCalZX2]

I like how you guys rip on buster for his simplified opinion... yet you were asking for it in the first place? If you guys are going to ask for an opinion, DON'T rip on anyone for it. No matter how it's portrayed.

I happen to be on the Christian side of things, so I do not believe that two men or two women should be getting married as it goes against the sanctity of that union in the bible. I do understand that a lot of people don't believe in God or don't care either way, so they aren't opposed to it.

You asked for opinions and there's really only 3 to give. "Go for it"; "Don't care" or "Man + Woman only".

Gov't should keep out of this arena, but the gays believe the Gov't should step in so they can get what they want...

[inis]

They stepped in on a marriage between a man and a woman, by legalizing it. Why wouldn't someone that is gay, want the same?

[2000zx2chik]

No one ripped into Buster or else the post's would have been much longer. I asked for people opinions, and im not downing anyone for having a different opinion then myself or trying to change anyone else's mind about the topic at hand.

[joshalabama]

Not as religious as the rest but I am traditional. I mean a man can love a man, and a woman can love a woman. I feel there is nothing wrong with civil unions. But actually empowering them with a sanctity from the church is wrong. They are going to get married on something that disagrees with them to begin with. I'm not against their rights to be together or have a partnership, but I personally do not want to see my future children thinking that two men, or two women together is something that is normal. It is in there own right normal between them, but the fundamental fact is they will not be able to naturally reproduce between themselves. Unless they are like bull frogs who can change their gender on a whim in order to survive. It just wasn't mean to be. I'm not saying it is wrong for them to do what they want, I'm not saying that I despise any gay person in fact I know several and am very good friends with them; however, that does not mean that I agree that they should be able to marry. I however 100% support a civil union between the two.

[SoCalZX2]

No one ripped into Buster or else the post's would have been much longer. I asked for people opinions, and im not downing anyone for having a different opinion then myself or trying to change anyone else's mind about the topic at hand.

You're right... but I didn't say ripped into. I said ripped on. Which did happen... Unless you consider

A typically complex, well-researched, and convincing argument from Buster.

and you saying "as always" not ripping ON.

[2000ZxT]

I think people worry too much about stuff like this.

My question is, 2 guys get married. How does it affect you?

The church started marriage, not the government. Theoretically it is wrong no matter what because of the church.

I see absolutely NO downside of 2 guys/girls being married. The only thing I see being different is the fact they would be happier, and married.

There are MUCH worse things in the world happening than this. My thoughts.

*edit*
Also, these people adopt a kid. What do they tell the kid(s)...Oh we are only in a union, we couldn't get married because other people thing it's wrong. I think that is wrong.

Does that send the message of equal rights for all people, I think not.

[SoCalZX2]

They stepped in on a marriage between a man and a woman, by legalizing it. Why wouldn't someone that is gay, want the same?

Well I guess you'd look at it that way from a secular view.

Thats the issue with these type of discussions. Not that they're bad, but you have the Christian beliefs vs Secular beliefs... so it's always going to butt heads.

[ZX2guy19]

Honestly, if a homo gets married, are you going to lose sleep at night? I know I won't, so who cares?

[ZX2guy19]

One more thing, hehe. God says Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve or w/e...but how many things do we as humans do EVERY SINGLE DAY that God would not approve of. I believe God and 'follow his ways' as much as I can, but I am not perfect by any means.

[2000ZxT]

I agree 100% with the 2 previous posts.

[2000zx2chik]

Honestly, if a homo gets married, are you going to lose sleep at night? I know I won't, so who cares?

Right!

[capitalcrew]

I personally do not think gays should be allowed to get married. They should be able to get the benefits of marriage in a civil union, or whatever, but marriage is for a man and woman.

Would I lose sleep over it? No. I just don't think it is right.

[raider]

I can't believe this is a website.
http://www.godhatesfags.com/

[2000zx2chik]

i cant look at it at work >:/ stupid gov't blocks

[Buster]

A typically complex, well-researched, and convincing argument from Buster. :eyes:

A typically insulting, immature response from ZetecInside. :winkyface:

It's a moral issue of right and wrong. No research required as it's not some kind of experiement like some people want to turn it into.

Religious view aside, nature has already determined that men and women belong together sexually. We were designed to fit together like a puzzle and only men and women being together can sustain human life.

It's that simple. Many here seem to agree with me.

There are a lot of strange and perverse sexual preferences out there. We do not need to or want to go down the road of modifying laws and granting benefits to those that are unnatural and/or immoral. If the definition of marriage is modified for one group of people who views sex differently, it will set a legal precident that will require us to continually change marriage laws for other groups who organize and pressure lawmakers and judges. You may think it is farfetched and reeks of conspiracy, but how can you be sure that pedofelia, bestiality, multiple spouses, marriage to children, inscest or other perverse groups won't demand the same treatment we undid the tradition and law of marriage for to please the homosexuals and medically-modified people?

Many gays cry about not receiving benefits such as spouse medical insurance, adoption rights, tax breaks for married couples...well, it's because THEY DO NOT QUALIFY. It's not discrimination or hate for them, they simply do not qualify because they are not married. A gay person CAN get married if they want to, it just has to be to the opposite gender. Marriage requires a license, just as driving or hunting. To qualify for it, they need to meet requirements of legal age, gender and other things such as not being related and getting a blood test. Their argument fails just as if a 6-year old wanted to drive and didn't obviously qualify for the license or a felon who wanted a hunting license and failed the background check. If they don't meet the legal (and biological) requirements for marriage, we should not change laws and nature just to prevent their feelings from being hurt.

In addition, this will require enormous costs to all taxpayers to change the law for them. Forms, pensions, insurances, filekeeping systems and many other items will need to be changed and updated. It's not a simple "OK, you can do it now". It will affect everyone to an extent.

This is not a road we want to turn onto as a society, molding laws around social concepts rather than morality. If we did that, many harmful activities would be legal and would affect children and citizens negatively just to keep up with what is popular.

[raider]

site block ftl

[JonsZX2SR]

You asked for opinions and there's really only 3 to give. "Go for it"; "Don't care" or "Man + Woman only".

Gov't should keep out of this arena, but the gays believe the Gov't should step in so they can get what they want...

However, the gov't has already stepped in on the side of the one man/one woman argument. What the gays want is for the gov't to end the preference for this one combination.

If you want to expand the argument, some groups living in Utah, Arizona, Texas, etc. believe the following...

http://www.teamzx2.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=657&stc=1&d=1211225153

What compelling argument is there to limit marriage to between one man and one woman, why not multiples of both ?? If you want to take the argument to the extreme of absurdity, why limit it to one species ??

Should a cowboy be able to marry his horse ?? Religious fundamentalists might agree as long as the cowboy is male and the horse female, after all we wouldn't want any gay cowboys ??

Seriously, the reasons for protecting the offspring of a union between a man and a woman would be equally protected by a civil union.

A separate argument, providing certain legal rights to those who wish to live together as a family unit, regardless of they are one man/one woman or other combinations needs to be discussed separately.

There is no inherent reason to disallow these unions. Whether or not you call them marriages is not important, but if you allow them you may as well call them marriages and stop with useless semantics. In no way to they devalue traditional one man/one woman unions.

If someone is bothered by this, that is thier personal feeling and they should stop trying to force their beliefs on others.

[Buster]

Yes, it's the 95-98% heterosexual majority that's forcing their view on others.

Of course.



Just realized I didn't even mention the insanely high STD and AIDs outbreak in the gay community. :D

[JonsZX2SR]

...Just realized I didn't even mention the insanely high STD and AIDs outbreak in the gay community. :D

If you want to be factually correct you should also include the insanely high STD infection rates of youth, whether gay or staright.

Carelessness has to do with ignorance and promiscuity, regardless of whether one is gay or straight...

[2000zx2chik]

Lets not get into the STD and AIDS outbreaks because that is not necesarily just in the Gay community. There is a very large outbreak in young african americans so that is a little off topic. (not saying that plenty of people get it, just percentage wise is what im reffering to)

[MellowedZX2]

A typically insulting, immature response from ZetecInside. :winkyface:

It's a moral issue of right and wrong. No research required as it's not some kind of experiement like some people want to turn it into.

Religious view aside, nature has already determined that men and women belong together sexually. We were designed to fit together like a puzzle and only men and women being together can sustain human life.

It's that simple. Many here seem to agree with me.

There are a lot of strange and perverse sexual preferences out there. We do not need to or want to go down the road of modifying laws and granting benefits to those that are unnatural and/or immoral. If the definition of marriage is modified for one group of people who views sex differently, it will set a legal precident that will require us to continually change marriage laws for other groups who organize and pressure lawmakers and judges. You may think it is farfetched and reeks of conspiracy, but how can you be sure that pedofelia, bestiality, multiple spouses, marriage to children, inscest or other perverse groups won't demand the same treatment we undid the tradition and law of marriage for to please the homosexuals and medically-modified people?

Many gays cry about not receiving benefits such as spouse medical insurance, adoption rights, tax breaks for married couples...well, it's because THEY DO NOT QUALIFY. It's not discrimination or hate for them, they simply do not qualify because they are not married. A gay person CAN get married if they want to, it just has to be to the opposite gender. Marriage requires a license, just as driving or hunting. To qualify for it, they need to meet requirements of legal age, gender and other things such as not being related and getting a blood test. Their argument fails just as if a 6-year old wanted to drive and didn't obviously qualify for the license or a felon who wanted a hunting license and failed the background check. If they don't meet the legal (and biological) requirements for marriage, we should not change laws and nature just to prevent their feelings from being hurt.

In addition, this will require enormous costs to all taxpayers to change the law for them. Forms, pensions, insurances, filekeeping systems and many other items will need to be changed and updated. It's not a simple "OK, you can do it now". It will affect everyone to an extent.

This is not a road we want to turn onto as a society, molding laws around social concepts rather than morality. If we did that, many harmful activities would be legal and would affect children and citizens negatively just to keep up with what is popular.

Well said Sir, it is very true, regardless of popular belief we need to have a line. We cannot keep moving the line so we don't hurt some ones feelings. I think it is funny how we talk about equal rights and the gays should have the same rights as everyone else, fine and good but why does it seem that we Christians are being more and more censored because we don't morally agree with what people do, then call them on it. Just because some one does some thing, then a large group follow, doesn't make it acceptable.

Joel

[Buster]

Well said Sir, it is very true, regardless of popular belief we need to have a line. We cannot keep moving the line so we don't hurt some ones feelings. I think it is funny how we talk about equal rights and the gays should have the same rights as everyone else, fine and good but why does it seem that we Christians are being more and more censored because we don't morally agree with what people do, then call them on it. Just because some one does some thing, then a large group follow, doesn't make it acceptable.

Joel



Also well said and 100% correct.

So why can't we discuss the high AIDS rates among gays? Because it hurts their argument? Ok...

Homosexuality is another form of immoral sexual devience, so while you're right they are not people who are contributing to the disease outbreaks, they DO have a VERY high infection rate because of how they live. The Roman Empire had a very similar moral look at sex as today's society of homosexuality, bisexuality and sharing of partners and their downfall can be partially attributed to their erosion of morals in many aspects of life. This is not something we should encourrage as it would likely send America towards the same collapse as a free and strong nation.

[JonsZX2SR]

Should a monogamous gay couple in a committed relationship be condemned while a heterosexual couple where one or both partners is unfaithful ?? Should people who divorce and remarry multiple times because they fear commitment be held in higher regard than the monogamous gay couple described above.

If you want to talk about morals and ethics, there is much hypocrisy among "christians" who wish to force their personal beliefs on others while engaging in immoral behaviors in secret.

Q. If a recognized religion, for example Unitarians, recognize gay marriage, does a fundamentalist sect inherently have the right to overrule those beliefs ??

Q. If the one man/one woman agrument that some Christians argue is so compelling, why does it have to be protected by civil law ?? Perhaps the reason certain Christians argue against legalizing gay civil marriages is because they recognize the weakness of their arguemnet and need civil law to back up thier viewpoint.

Remember we do not live in a solely Judeo-Christian society. We do have growing numbers of Hindus and Buddhists and other religions among us. Trying to force arguments based solely on a Judeo-Christian bible takes a narrow viewpoint.

If anyone who opposes gay marriage on a strictly ethical or moral basis, without quoting the bible, wants to present a compelling argument I'd be willing to listen. If any of you thinks this is simply a matter of morals or ethics, you should be able to build such an argument.

[capitalcrew]

I will build no argument Jon. I don't care enough about it to even consider it. I have no religious motivation for my views. I just believe marriage is reserved for a man and woman. As I said, civil unions should have all of the legal benefits of marriage, and be completely open to gay couples.

[Buster]

Should a monogamous gay couple in a committed relationship be condemned while a heterosexual couple where one or both partners is unfaithful ?? Should people who divorce and remarry multiple times because they fear commitment be held in higher regard than the monogamous gay couple described above.

If you want to talk about morals and ethics, there is much hypocrisy among "christians" who wish to force their personal beliefs on others while engaging in immoral behaviors in secret.

Q. If a recognized religion, for example Unitarians, recognize gay marriage, does a fundamentalist sect inherently have the right to overrule those beliefs ??

Q. If the one man/one woman agrument that some Christians argue is so compelling, why does it have to be protected by civil law ?? Perhaps the reason certain Christians argue against legalizing gay civil marriages is because they recognize the weakness of their arguemnet and need civil law to back up thier viewpoint.

Remember we do not live in a solely Judeo-Christian society. We do have growing numbers of Hindus and Buddhists and other religions among us. Trying to force arguments based solely on a Judeo-Christian bible takes a narrow viewpoint.

If anyone who opposes gay marriage on a strictly ethical or moral basis, without quoting the bible, wants to present a compelling argument I'd be willing to listen. If any of you thinks this is simply a matter of morals or ethics, you should be able to build such an argument.



Most of your arguments are nothing more than simply trying to deflect fault back on those who oppose you. If someone engages in something else, it doesn't change the fact that marriage is intended for a man and a woman. Other unrelated behaviors are unrelated to this debate and are nothing more than a distraction from the real issue.

As I said, putting religion and morals aside STILL leaves the physiological reasons why it is stiill wrong.

Many studies have also determined that children benefit the most growing up in a home with both a mother and a father.

There's not much more to debate for me. This is an easy stand to take and is not a complicated issue.

Also, like it or not, our nation with its laws and Constitution WERE created and founded by Christians. You can say we're not solely a Christian nation because we do accept and allow freedom of any religion, however, we were founded as a Christian nation by Christians.

[JonsZX2SR]

Then why should the gov't be in the marriage business at all ? Provide equal legal protections to all unions, gay or straight, call all of them civil unions and stop callin civil unions between a man and woman by a separate term, marriage.

Marriage would then be a 2nd commitment, without legal backing, but with moral and spiritual meaning.

Religions could then decide whether gay marriage is acceptable, limiting their beliefs to the members of their religions, while not imposing their beliefs on others.

[MellowedZX2]

Should people who divorce and remarry multiple times because they fear commitment

Come on, again this isn't some thing that marriage is about, if you fear commitment STAY SINGLE, you will always fail if you don't get over the fear. Why ruin some else emotionally because you can't confront your personal problem (no fingers pointed). This is why dating is a problem, it just makes relationships games, if you get to a point over some little thing you call off the relationship, that is dating. Agree with it or not. Dating is practice for divorce.

In relation to religion, any orginazation the doesn't follow the Bible should be stayed clear of. Regardless of how you feel about it as Christians we are to beleive in everything the Bible says.
Quoting scritpture does no good to those who feel it has no bearing. Fine.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say the if you were to take religion out of the bible it is STILL A GOOD EXAMPLE of how to live a good life.

Putting religion back in the Bible, knowing it in your mind IS NOT the same as know it in your heart.

You speak of Christians pushing our belief's on others but what about pushing the homosexual propaganda on everyone too. Its the same thing, however because gay people get butt hurt (no pun intended) we Christians get classified as homophobes (because we don't agree with it) and get call hate mongers (spelling).

I have homosexuals in my family, and workplace. I don't agree with their lifestyle but I DON'T hate them.

Just for the record God doesn't hate fags (this hurts me as a Christian) God loves gay people, He doesn't like their sin (to God it is sin, clearly stated in the Bible) and it is the same with every breathing person. That is some thing that Christians have Ill portrayed, you affect people by loving them, you don't have to agree with them to love them, just love them.

Joel

[ZetecInside]

50 years from now, the most strident opponents of gay marriage will be viewed as a historical embarrasment, much like the authors of anti-miscegenation laws during the late 1800's and early 1900's. History will treat them with a similar, although less intense sense of shame.

The arguments against allowing gay marriage in the U.S. are laughable.

Pro-creation? Please. The world is already WAY overpopulated as it is, and there are thousands of orphans in need of adoption. Also, are we going to start revoking the marriage licenses of straight couples who actively decide never to have children?

Christian tradition? Funny, I believe the Bible has some pretty negative things to say about adultery and divorce, both of which are legal in this country.

Against nature? Tell that to the hundreds of biologists who have documented widespread homosexual behavior among numerous animal species.


The simple fact is, gay marriage will not harm society and will not negatively impact straight couples. The opposition to it is merely one of the remaining relics of a cultural homophobia that is rapidly dying in America.

[j0hnZ]

Wouldn't a gay marriage as in any marriage between 2 people have certain limitation as to who they get to sleep with for the rest of the marriage? Wouldn't that completely negate the whole STD concept?

The STD problem is with the single homosexuals that just sleep around...being with one person ala not sleeping around would prevent said STD outbreaks...

I say legalize it already so the government can focus on something actually important.

[younglink309]

I'm personally against same sex marriage, but i'm not really sure the gov't has any room to deny it.

It's a slippery slope, methinks. My bro is gay, and he is against gay marriage because (and this is a near-exact quote) "Well, God wouldn't recognize it anyway, so what's the point?"

That being said, I think People who get married for 2 years and get a divorce are making more of a mockery of marriage than homosexual couples would...

[scortched]

I also am a Christian, and even a youth minister. The issue of gay marriage is huge in the church. So often we point the finger and give Christians as a whole a bad name e.g. signs that say "God hates Fags". But in all seriousness, the divorce rate in this country is near 50% and that number is the same between Christians and non-christians alike. I think that we as Christians need to step out of the equation and let God do his job. Yes the Bible is clear about homosexual behavior, but what it doesn't say is "My children shall persecute all homos till death. Thus sayeth the Lord." I mean people are going to do whatever they want to whether it is sanctioned by the government or not. If people were so passionate about their own spiritual maturity as they are about making sure that other people are doing things the "Christian Way" they would be some pretty good Christians, and that's how we change the world for the better. Sorry if I get a little preachy, but Christians everywhere should really read Romans 12 and think about what that means in their life.

[MellowedZX2]

In all honesty, we as Christians ARE the vessels that God uses to do His job.

Joel

[scortched]

but how can you expect people to conform to Christian morals without them being Christian. I am not saying that I am an advocate for gay marriage, what I'm saying is there are other things that our focus should be on, like evangelism. We can argue whether it's right or not all day long, but all you are going to do is turn people of to Christianity, and those are souls lost. We are supposed to be planting seeds and helping water them, not making the soil turn to rock to where you can't make any kind of difference in someones life and afterlife. I don't mean to sound bad but conservative Christians just aren't doing a good job with evangelism, just the word brings images of John Hagee and Tina Fey. Even if we put a constitutional amendment and prevent the marriage of people of the same sex for the next 1000yrs. That is not being a vessel through which God's job is done (which is not what I meant at all I was merely talking about judging). Our "job" can be summed up in the great commision. Think about it, how do we fufill that? With debating and arguing about whether two dudes can get married or befriending those two dudes with love and talking to them about their lifestyle? I hope you do not missunderstand what I say. I am not condoning homosexual behavior in the least, but spreading the good news about Christ is the way that we can actually make a difference in this country.

[ZX2guy19]

I don't agree with half the stuff being said. Somehow, a man will fit into another man. I'm sure you get the idea.

Marriage is about LOVE. I have rarely heard of gay couples getting a divorce, when all I hear about it hetero couples getting a divorce. If they are in love, who the fuck cares.

As I said before, and it was backed by ZetecInside; if we all followed the ways of God down to the tea of the bible, no one would cheat or get a divorce, because that is looked down upon in the bible as well.

[SoCalZX2]

My only issue is that the Gov't (at least in Cali) over ruled the will of the people. THe people as a GROUP voted and chose to uphold the belief of marriage defined as between a man and a woman.

Even after the Supreme court overrulled that, the people still have about 60% slant towards man+woman marriage.

We can't complain about the morality (or lack there of) of this country... Political correctness has killed this country and it's morals.

So the arguement of Christian belief looks lame to most. But lets put it into a discussion of why the gov't overstepped the will of the people... Lets not make it a moral argument since everyone's morals are completely different.

Do you believe the gov't was right to overrule the will of the people? Or was that wrong and abuse of power?

I for one am of the belief that was wrong and shouldn't have happened.

[scortched]

Well this country is supposed to be about the people and for the people. So in that respect I do think that it is wrong for the government to do that, but on the other hand we can't leave every single issue to popular vote which is why we have elected officials who are supposed to do that job so in that respect the court did it's job the way they thought it should be done. it's just something to remember around election time.

[Larka]

I'm in this thread, let the bannings begin! :rocknana: I'm kidding... But I am impressed that this got to 5 pages without a knock-down, drag-out fight. But then again, I think the one on the old board got to like 40 some pages and died a quiet death...


On the religious debate- I LOVE how this always boils down to what Christians believe. What the Bible says thou should and shouldn't do. I love that. Why do I love it so much? Because being a homosexual is classified as an "alternative" lifestyle. And going with the flow- many homosexuals follow "alternative" religions- Paganism, Wicca, Buddhism, Hinduism and the like. Many homosexuals could care less wither the Christian God thinks that what they're doing is right or not. And where in the Bible does it say that you should go out and force people who believe in other things to live the way the Bible says?
But if we want to stick to Judeo-Christian religions- There ARE churches out there that have openly homosexual preachers/reverends/fathers/pastors. How many of you knew that? If there are churches out there that allow their leaders to be homosexual- why should they be banned from joining together to loving and committed individuals?

Am I for gay marriage? No. Why not? Because marriage is a religious institution. Each religion, and each group within that religion should be free to decide wither or not to allow homosexuals to marry without the government stepping in and forcing them to do something that they thing is against everything they believe in. I'm a firm believer in the separation of church and state- and the government stepping in and ramming gay marriage down the throats of churches and/or entire religions who think that it is wrong is throwing that out the window. I'm 100% for a Christian church telling me that my girlfriend and I can't get married. I'm 100% against the government telling my Unitarian/Pagan church that they can't marry my girlfriend and I when they're happy to do it.

Am I for civil unions? Yes. In many ways. I see civil unions as "courthouse marriages"- where people simply fill out the paper work but don't have a ceremony for whatever reason. You still get the rights of a spouse to both people, but it's not held together/overseen by any religion.

I think that homosexual couples at the very least should be allowed the same rights as a committed/married heterosexual couple. Heck, I'm even willing for them to set down a "time limit" where you have to live together and share bills and all that stuff for a certain amount of time before you can even file for a civil union. I think that it's wrong that how it currently stands- a homosexual couple who has been together for YEARS and is completely loving and committed do not have the same rights as a heterosexual couple would have. Right now, a homosexual couple could be together for 60 years, and still be separated on their death bed because only family (including the spouse) are allowed to see them. Or they can have plans for what do if one of them gets injured or dies- and the family can come in and throw those plans out the window because they're not "married."

[JonsZX2SR]

In all honesty, we as Christians ARE the vessels that God uses to do His job.

Joel

How do you know that 'Christians' are the vessels that god uses to do her job ?? For all you know, 'Christians' are misguided souls, deceived by Lucifer, and 'Hindus' (or another religious group) are the vessels that the creator uses to do his/her job.

Before you try to tell me that you know you are right because of faith and deep religious belief, I can introduce you to a Hindu who is equally devout, inspired by the creator and who holds an equally deep belief in a creator.

...now if you're truly inspired with the holy spirit, you should be able to convince me better than someone who lives an ethical life but drws inspiration from the same creator but in a different form.

I haven't heard one compelling argument yet from a 'christian'. It's all, you're going to burn in hell if you don't believe (the same as misguided me) I don't need proof, faith tells me I am right (and everyone else is wrong.)

Before you get the idea I'm an atheist or pagan, I believe in the same creator as you, was baptized into an eastern Christian religion that predates western protestantism and all the man-made fundamentalist sects that followed.

I just don't have to go around telling everyone they need to be like me to be saved, understand non-Christian religions may have been given enlightenment to help them seek and find the creator and recognized that each of us will be judged solely by the creator and no man will sit by the side of the creator and assist in the judging.

Let those of you who withou sin throw the first stone, the rest of us 9including myself) need to shut up and stop juding people.

[scortched]

well this thread is about the discussion of gay marriage if you are looking for arguments read this:
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/orthodoxy/orthodoxy.html
it's a book by G.K. Chesterton, tough read but very good. that's the online version so it doesn't cost you anything to read it just some time.

[2000zx2chik]

Come on, again this isn't some thing that marriage is about, if you fear commitment STAY SINGLE, you will always fail if you don't get over the fear. Why ruin some else emotionally because you can't confront your personal problem (no fingers pointed). This is why dating is a problem, it just makes relationships games, if you get to a point over some little thing you call off the relationship, that is dating. Agree with it or not. Dating is practice for divorce.

In relation to religion, any orginazation the doesn't follow the Bible should be stayed clear of. Regardless of how you feel about it as Christians we are to beleive in everything the Bible says.
Quoting scritpture does no good to those who feel it has no bearing. Fine.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say the if you were to take religion out of the bible it is STILL A GOOD EXAMPLE of how to live a good life.

Putting religion back in the Bible, knowing it in your mind IS NOT the same as know it in your heart.

You speak of Christians pushing our belief's on others but what about pushing the homosexual propaganda on everyone too. Its the same thing, however because gay people get butt hurt (no pun intended) we Christians get classified as homophobes (because we don't agree with it) and get call hate mongers (spelling).

I have homosexuals in my family, and workplace. I don't agree with their lifestyle but I DON'T hate them.

Just for the record God doesn't hate fags (this hurts me as a Christian) God loves gay people, He doesn't like their sin (to God it is sin, clearly stated in the Bible) and it is the same with every breathing person. That is some thing that Christians have Ill portrayed, you affect people by loving them, you don't have to agree with them to love them, just love them.

Joel

Thats just like saying all christians ahve never had or do not like having anal sex. You don't have to be gay to like to give/receive anal sex. I myself am not into it (nt a christian though, no that that has anything to do with it) but religion doesnt have anything to do with what you like to do in the bedroom or your sexual preference, If anythig i think it hinders you from trying things sexually.

[2000zx2chik]

In all honesty, we as Christians ARE the vessels that God uses to do His job.

Joel

FYI this thread was not created to push your belief's on other people. Just because you believe you or your religion is gods vessel does not mean that other people believe so. This is just for your opinion on gay marriage not your opnion on which religion is the right religion in gods or anyones eyes.

[Larka]

FYI this thread was not created to push your belief's on other people. Just because you believe you or your religion is gods vessel does not mean that other people believe so. This is just for your opinion on gay marriage not your opnion on which religion is the right religion in gods or anyones eyes.

The problem with what you're saying is this- 9 times out of 10, the debate about gay marriage is centered around religion. How many times do you hear someone say that they don't like gay people or are hugely opposed to gay marriage and they don't base what they believe on their religion? That's the whole problem with the gay marriage debate- marriage is a religious institution and every time you talk about something remotely dealing with religion you get into a screaming match of which religion is the right one and lose sight of what you were arguing about in the first place...

[scortched]

and that is why i was trying to bring it back to the original point and the comment that mellowed was bringing up was just directed at me, i believe, because I brought up what Christians should be doing and where their focus should be. I don't think that getting into a screaming match over religion is appropriate, you could say it's against my religion (sorry couldn't help myself). Do I think same sex marriage should be allowed? Honestly that's not up for me to say. Do I approve of homosexual behavior? No, but I have dear friends who are homosexual and yes some of them go to churches and yes I understand that some religious leaders are homosexual. There are also people who call themselves Christian Pastor who deny the Diety of Christ, it's just something that doesn't make sense.

[mechtech]

We have been indoctrinated, poisoned, and brainwashed over the years by the super liberal media, movie makers, schools, music industry, etc.
We no longer know what is basic right and wrong.
Nature itself teaches that homo marriage is wrong.
The Old and New Testament clearly state that this is one of the worst things, and is total depravity.
Mankind usually has laws against this as well, but in the last stages of a nation, things change.
The euphemism of 'gay' instead of homosexual attenuates the actual meaning.
Now, we are told that normal people are 'homophobic', to somehow place guilt on us.
A phobia is a clinical term - fear beyond normal or irrational fear. That is not the case for 99% of normal people. Girls often don't quite get how a normal guy just balks at the whole homo ideology. It is inherently distasteful and disgusting.
I had dinner with 2 homo guys last week, and everything was pleasant and we got along , laughed and left in peace.
But so what, it is still a very wrong thing.

[JonsZX2SR]

You make a good point that from a moral or ethical viewpoint homosexuality is considered wrong by many people.

At the same time, studies of animals under crowded conditions where females are absent or missing indicates that homosexuality may be occurring. Is in normal or preferred ? Probably not, but it is happening.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

And there is the likelihood that some, but not all people are wired differently. It is in their nature. If the creator wired some people differently, do any of you think the creator might show some mercy on them, rather than judge them harshly ?? Can any of you say you have the wisdom of the creator or know the creator's master plan ??

Those who hold homosexuality is wrong or immoral are certainly entitled to hold those views. However, they should tolerate differing viewpoints, although they shouldn't have to engage in those acts themselves. Note that allowing gay marriage, doesn't make those who tolerate it gay themselves. Whether they have the right to enforce their views on others is debatable.

Better to leave the judging to the creator in the afterlife. Those who try to do the judging for the creator in this world are likely to face a harsh judgment in the afterlife themselves.

* * * * *
No one has answered an earlier question I posed. How do you know that a devout, moral Hindu (or follower of another non-Judeo-Christian) religion is a true follower of the Creator and we Christians (myself included) have it all wrong and follow the wrong faith. Saying that you know Christianity and the bible is the one true faith isn't an answer, because many of my Hindu friends can say the same. From a moral and ethical perspective, they are as enlightened and inspired by the creator as any Christians I know.

Consider that there is evidence Christ may have traveled to India in the years between his teens and re-appearing around age 28 to preach to the Jews and later non-believers. Hindus believe in one Creator of the universe, their many 'gods' are seen as different personifications of the one creator. (Consider that Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva form a Trinity, similar to the Blessed trinity many Christian faiths) they wash away their sins in the River Ganges in an act similar to baptism, and they hold Jesus Christ and deities sacred as personifications of one creator.

Look at the way Christ lived and taught among criminals and sinners. Rather than condemn them, he lived among them to set an example so that he might find the way. He saved condemnation for the money lenders and the high priests who had lead the Jewish faith astray. Perhaps if we want to live life as Christ did, we should set a good moral example so those we consider sinners might find the light and save condemnation for the fundamentalist leaders and televangelists who have turned 'christianity' into a big business and led millions of followers astray.

Mechtech's example of how he sets an example for his gay friends rather than condemn them is more Christ-like than what I hear from many others here or from conservative religious leaders. Just something to think about...

[Hypnose Zx2]

One word.....
"Freedom"
No more need to be said! We can believe in any God or anything, but if you want to be gay its wrong, Why? This is the year 2008 everyone has right but them. I didn't read what you all been saying but come on now! How could you be against that? It dose not hurts you in no way at all. Grow up and stopping caring. In couple of year they will pass the laws and we will have to tell our kids about how 2008 was a f'ed up time.
Blacks, women, NOW GAYS!!!!!!!!! OOOO YAH!~

Ps: not gay!

Pss: if they get married they can leave us alone!

[scortched]

QUOTE=JonsZX2SR;30904]

And there is the likelihood that some, but not all people are wired differently. It is in their nature. If the creator wired some people differently, do any of you think the creator might show some mercy on them, rather than judge them harshly ?? Can any of you say you have the wisdom of the creator or know the creator's master plan ??

What about those who are wired to have a tendency to rape and kill people? Is that then an excuse? Or maybe those who have the disease of Alcoholism when does it become their responsibility that they put the bottle to their mouth?


Better to leave the judging to the creator in the afterlife. Those who try to do the judging for the creator in this world are likely to face a harsh judgment in the afterlife themselves.

I agree and disagree here. If you are going by the whole Matthew 7:1 argument you have to then read more of the text. If you read the next verse it talks about with the ruler that you use to judge then you will also be judged. And if you continue to read then you see the whole speck in your brothers eye argument, which is why I say that Christians have their focus off and there is alot more that we, as Christians, could work on ourselves rather than getting into other peoples business.

* * * * *
No one has answered an earlier question I posed. How do you know that a devout, moral Hindu (or follower of another non-Judeo-Christian) religion is a true follower of the Creator and we Christians (myself included) have it all wrong and follow the wrong faith. Saying that you know Christianity and the bible is the one true faith isn't an answer, because many of my Hindu friends can say the same. From a moral and ethical perspective, they are as enlightened and inspired by the creator as any Christians I know.

That's the whole thing. God doesn't want people to know, He wants people to believe and have faith. The only certainty is in death. Your argument is valid and invalid. The bottom line is I cannot give you forensic evidence that shows everything in the Bible is true. As soon as someone did that (if they could) there would be someone saying "Okay but the rest isn't true." I mean sure we have evidence, but people don't accept it. We have testimony, but no one believes it. Christ says that he is God, which is different from other religions, and He also says that the only way to the Father is through Him. I can also see how you would say that other religions are so similar. I absolutely believe that Jews, Muslims, and Christians all worship Yahweh, Allah, and God the Father and I believe that those are all the same being. The difference is in Jesus which may also prove the necessary difference.


Look at the way Christ lived and taught among criminals and sinners. Rather than condemn them, he lived among them to set an example so that he might find the way. He saved condemnation for the money lenders and the high priests who had lead the Jewish faith astray. there was no condemnation there he just got madPerhaps if we want to live life as Christ did, we should set a good moral example so those we consider sinners might find the light and save condemnation for the fundamentalist leaders and televangelists who have turned 'christianity' into a big business and led millions of followers astray.this is exactly my point!

Mechtech's example of how he sets an example for his gay friends rather than condemn them is more Christ-like than what I hear from many others here or from conservative religious leaders. Just something to think about...[/QUOTE]

[JonsZX2SR]

Comparing consensual sex, straight or gay, with rape or murder is a poorly thought out argument. If you want to say that homosexual rape is as offensive as heterosexual rape i would agree. However, we are debating consensual realationships here.

[MellowedZX2]

Man alot to catch up on... standby.

Joel

[MellowedZX2]

How do you know that 'Christians' are the vessels that god uses to do her job ??
I just don't have to go around telling everyone they need to be like me to be saved, understand non-Christian religions may have been given enlightenment to help them seek and find the creator and recognized that each of us will be judged solely by the creator and no man will sit by the side of the creator and assist in the judging.

Let those of you who withou sin throw the first stone, the rest of us 9including myself) need to shut up and stop juding people.

The Bible that Christians are supposed to live their life by is where you find that we can be used as vessels.
You are using the word judge too loose, by calling a tree a tree it is not judging, (yes I know that this is based on Christian belief)
The truth is not relative, fire is hot and burns you, that is a truth even if you don't believe it, so therefore you will suffer the consequences of getting burned if you play with fire.

Thats just like saying all christians ahve never had or do not like having anal sex. You don't have to be gay to like to give/receive anal sex. I myself am not into it (nt a christian though, no that that has anything to do with it) but religion doesnt have anything to do with what you like to do in the bedroom or your sexual preference, If anythig i think it hinders you from trying things sexually.

I think you are confused on what I was saying, I was not referring to anal sex, I was trying to guide away by saying "no pun intended"
If you are not a Christian how can you think that it hinders me sexually with my wife? (not trying to punk you just asking what you can base that upon)

FYI this thread was not created to push your belief's on other people. Just because you believe you or your religion is gods vessel does not mean that other people believe so. This is just for your opinion on gay marriage not your opnion on which religion is the right religion in gods or anyones eyes.

I am not here to push anything on anyone, I will however tell you how I feel, and why I feel that way. In my earlier post I mention we affect the world by loving people, as I may not agree with some views I still love and care about the state of your soul (please remember that this is how I beleive according to the Bible)

You make a good point that from a moral or ethical viewpoint homosexuality is considered wrong by many people.

At the same time, studies of animals under crowded conditions where females are absent or missing indicates that homosexuality may be occurring. Is in normal or preferred ? Probably not, but it is happening.

Please try not to compare us to animals, I can understand how Science has miscontrued (spellinng) this but ultimatly animals don't know the difference between right and wrong.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

And there is the likelihood that some, but not all people are wired differently. It is in their nature. If the creator wired some people differently, do any of you think the creator might show some mercy on them, rather than judge them harshly ?? Can any of you say you have the wisdom of the creator or know the creator's master plan ??

Those who hold homosexuality is wrong or immoral are certainly entitled to hold those views. However, they should tolerate differing viewpoints, although they shouldn't have to engage in those acts themselves. Note that allowing gay marriage, doesn't make those who tolerate it gay themselves. Whether they have the right to enforce their views on others is debatable.

Better to leave the judging to the creator in the afterlife. Those who try to do the judging for the creator in this world are likely to face a harsh judgment in the afterlife themselves.

You are correct in leaving the judging to the Creator, but again another analogy would be to call and orange and orange, it is just stating what it is. Judging in the sense you are reffering has to do with Christianity, and according to the Bible homosexuality is wrong. Calling a sin a sin is not judging.


* * * * *
No one has answered an earlier question I posed. How do you know that a devout, moral Hindu (or follower of another non-Judeo-Christian) religion is a true follower of the Creator and we Christians (myself included) have it all wrong and follow the wrong faith. Saying that you know Christianity and the bible is the one true faith isn't an answer, because many of my Hindu friends can say the same. From a moral and ethical perspective, they are as enlightened and inspired by the creator as any Christians I know.

Are you calling yourself a Christian because you don't believe on what all the other religions teach, because based off what you have said you don't believe the Bible either. I am not trying to be a jerk or punk you, but to me it sounds more like Christianity by association. I am not saying I have it all together either. But as a Christian you have to uderstand that we have to look out for our brother. Some time, alot of times, we don't want to hear the truth because it cuts across the grain of how we live (I am guilty of this too). I am NOT saying I am better the you either.


Consider that there is evidence Christ may have traveled to India in the years between his teens and re-appearing around age 28 to preach to the Jews and later non-believers. Hindus believe in one Creator of the universe, their many 'gods' are seen as different personifications of the one creator. (Consider that Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva form a Trinity, similar to the Blessed trinity many Christian faiths) they wash away their sins in the River Ganges in an act similar to baptism, and they hold Jesus Christ and deities sacred as personifications of one creator.

Look at the way Christ lived and taught among criminals and sinners. Rather than condemn them, he lived among them to set an example so that he might find the way. He saved condemnation for the money lenders and the high priests who had lead the Jewish faith astray. Perhaps if we want to live life as Christ did, we should set a good moral example so those we consider sinners might find the light and save condemnation for the fundamentalist leaders and televangelists who have turned 'christianity' into a big business and led millions of followers astray.

You are right He did live and teach among sinners, He WANTED sinners to be His disciples, but He didn't want the to continue the same path they were on before. Again it goes along with what I mentioned before about loving people, you can love them and not agree with the way they live.


Mechtech's example of how he sets an example for his gay friends rather than condemn them is more Christ-like than what I hear from many others here or from conservative religious leaders. Just something to think about...

Just a side note, yes thecomment about being a vessel was to Scortched.

Joel

[2000zx2chik]

I dont believe that religion hinders everyone sexually. I think that at times that it can. The reason for that is because some people use it as an excuse not to explore there sexuality or whatnot due to the fact that in some relgions sex is frowned upon other then for reproduction purposes.

[SoCalZX2]

The problem with what you're saying is this- 9 times out of 10, the debate about gay marriage is centered around religion. How many times do you hear someone say that they don't like gay people or are hugely opposed to gay marriage and they don't base what they believe on their religion? That's the whole problem with the gay marriage debate- marriage is a religious institution and every time you talk about something remotely dealing with religion you get into a screaming match of which religion is the right one and lose sight of what you were arguing about in the first place...

I wasn't going to say anything more in this thread... They always turn into arguements. But I have to agree with Larka. The debates always turn into a religious debate because Christians feel strongly about it... and then you have those that feel strongly about it the other way and bring up other religions.

No one here will change anyones opinion, and mine is based on my Christian faith and background.

[decay]

I want my freedom.
You leave me alone, I'll leave you alone.
You don't judge me, I won't judge you.
You give me freedom, you can have yours.

-my 2 cents

[decay]

PS - Next topic --> "Is sex for procreation only?"
That should stir up the religious minded...

[2000zx2chik]

PS - Next topic --> "Is sex for procreation only?"
That should stir up the religious minded...

No its also for fun :)

[decay]

No its also for fun :)

Sure it is :winkyface:
I don't have time for all this fun!

[powder]

If we let them get married, tv would be even gayer. I just want them to stop rubbing it in our faces. I don't want to see homo's making out on tv. I don't want to see them walking through a park holding hands, i don't want to hear them talking dirty to each other. Keep your fudgepacking/gay lovemaking behind closed doors and almost everyone on earth would let you just do your thing.

That's all i care about... i don't want to see it. Leave the rest up to the people who think they need to make a political decision about a business they should not be in... cuz that's what marriage has become, a business.

[ZetecInside]

If we let them get married, tv would be even gayer. I just want them to stop rubbing it in our faces. I don't want to see homo's making out on tv. I don't want to see them walking through a park holding hands, i don't want to hear them talking dirty to each other. Keep your fudgepacking/gay lovemaking behind closed doors and almost everyone on earth would let you just do your thing.

That's all i care about... i don't want to see it. Leave the rest up to the people who think they need to make a political decision about a business they should not be in... cuz that's what marriage has become, a business.


Get over yourself, dude - gay marriage isn't about "rubbing it in your face". There are serious, logistical reasons why people want it legalized (tax benefits, power of attorney, hospital visits, insurance, etc). These are basic legal priviledges that gay people in committed relationships need for practical reasons but are currently unable to get.


I don't want to see homo's making out on tv. I don't want to see them walking through a park holding hands, i don't want to hear them talking dirty to each other.

The sight of a 400lb woman and a 95 year old man making out in a park is pretty disgusting to me too. Doesn't mean we should have a constitutional amendment outlawing it.

[decay]

Get over yourself, dude - gay marriage isn't about "rubbing it in your face". There are serious, logistical reasons why people want it legalized (tax benefits, power of attorney, hospital visits, insurance, etc). These are basic legal priviledges that gay people in committed relationships need for practical reasons but are currently unable to get.




The sight of a 400lb woman and a 95 year old man making out in a park is pretty disgusting to me too. Doesn't mean we should have a constitutional amendment outlawing it.

+1
Geesh!

[powder]

Get over yourself, dude - gay marriage isn't about "rubbing it in your face". There are serious, logistical reasons why people want it legalized (tax benefits, power of attorney, hospital visits, insurance, etc). These are basic legal priviledges that gay people in committed relationships need for practical reasons but are currently unable to get.

Myself? Sorry, i look out for #1. You can't change a channel on tv anymore w/o seeing something like that.

I didn't even mention anything about a yay or nay on gay marriage. I said, leave it to the lawmakers, i have no opinion.

You just want to argue, but you're making an ass of yourself.

[decay]

Myself? Sorry, i look out for #1. You can't change a channel on tv anymore w/o seeing something like that.

I didn't even mention anything about a yay or nay on gay marriage. I said, leave it to the lawmakers, i have no opinion.

You just want to argue, but you're making an ass of yourself.

Uuummm....
Then why comment at all?
That makes who an ass?

[powder]

Uuummm....
Then why comment at all?
That makes who an ass?

Now you want to make a law against freedom of speech? lol

[2000zx2chik]

He was posting his opinion somewhat on the subject. even though he has no opinion about legalizing it he still has an opinion about homosexuality which is part of the topic. If others are postiong about religion (which in my opinion doenst have anything to do with it) then he can post about that.

[SoCalZX2]

He was posting his opinion somewhat on the subject. even though he has no opinion about legalizing it he still has an opinion about homosexuality which is part of the topic. If others are postiong about religion (which in my opinion doenst have anything to do with it) then he can post about that.

LOL Why doesn't Religion have anything to do with it? It's where many peoples opinions are formed on the subject... Is my opinion somehow less valid because I base it on my religion?

If you wanted a topic free of religious discussion on this topic, you should have just added "Christians, we don't want to hear what you have to say".

[2000zx2chik]

I did say in my opinion. I didnt want a religion free topic. It does say what is your opinion.

and if i wanted religion free i wouldnt target just 1 religious group.

[JonsZX2SR]

If we let them get married, tv would be even gayer. I just want them to stop rubbing it in our faces. I don't want to see homo's making out on tv. I don't want to see them walking through a park holding hands, i don't want to hear them talking dirty to each other. Keep your fudgepacking/gay lovemaking behind closed doors and almost everyone on earth would let you just do your thing.

Then stop watching, it's as simple as that... Excessive public displays of attention, gay or straight, are offensive, but no one says you have to watch.

I think one of the reasons some people are opposed to gay unions or accepting gays is they have homophobic fears. Anyone who is secure in their own sexuality should have nothing to fear about other people's gay relationships.

However, those who are not completely sure or secure in their own sexuality are afraid they might start looking out of curiosity, might have feelings, might feel guilty, etc. etc. So they seek to ban certain behaviors so they don't have to deal with temptation or curiosity.

Seriously, if you are straight and confident, why would you care about a bunch of gays ?? From a guys perspective, it mans there are just fewer guys looking for women.

At the same time from a guy’s perspective, if some women want to avoid men and be with women, that is their choice. You wouldn't want to be with someone if you have to force your will on them.

[powder]

Then stop watching, it's as simple as that... Excessive public displays of attention, gay or straight, are offensive, but no one says you have to watch.

Seriously, what is so hard to understand about this? It's on EVERY CHANNEL. I just want to watch some tv, and i see that crap every time.

I think one of the reasons some people are opposed to gay unions or accepting gays is they have homophobic fears. Anyone who is secure in their own sexuality should have nothing to fear about other people's gay relationships.

However, those who are not completely sure or secure in their own sexuality are afraid they might start looking out of curiosity, might have feelings, might feel guilty, etc. etc. So they seek to ban certain behaviors so they don't have to deal with temptation or curiosity.

Seriously, if you are straight and confident, why would you care about a bunch of gays ?? From a guys perspective, it mans there are just fewer guys looking for women.

At the same time from a guy’s perspective, if some women want to avoid men and be with women, that is their choice. You wouldn't want to be with someone if you have to force your will on them.

I'm straight, married and confident. I am not a homophobe... i just don't want to see it. Do you like it when things are thrown in your face? I'd seriously doubt it. So we probably have that in common.

[ZetecInside]

Seriously, what is so hard to understand about this? It's on EVERY CHANNEL. I just want to watch some tv, and i see that crap every time.

I'm straight, married and confident. I am not a homophobe... i just don't want to see it. Do you like it when things are thrown in your face? I'd seriously doubt it. So we probably have that in common.

Don't be ridiculous - it's not on every channel, and you know it. Are you so thin-skinned you can't take a (very small) amount of gay activity on TV because it makes you uncomfortable? Does the rest of society have to censor itself for every activity just because it makes some people squirm?
Do we have to keep westerns off the air because it offends vegans? Should "Top Gear" be cancelled because hippies don't like gas-guzzlers? Should the FCC ban "700 Club" because it offends non-Christians?

Nobody's forcing them to watch this stuff, and no ones forcing you to watch gay shows. It's not like you're sitting at home watching football and all of a sudden Fox decides to flash-cut to a gay orgy scene to trick you. It's pretty well understood where you're going to find gay themes on TV. If you decide to watch "Will and Grace", you don't get to act all surprised and offended when you see two guys kiss. Chill out, man.

[powder]

You don't care. It's easy for you to not see it.

[powder]

LOL, why the hell do i even join these conversations.

Yes i'm a close minded individual. We live in a country that allows that. I'm done.

[JonsZX2SR]

If you care to the point where you have trouble ignoring it, that still does not give you the right to impose your will on others.

Yes i'm a close minded individual. We live in a country that allows that. I'm done.

...but it also doesn't allow you to impose your closed minded will on others. You are correct, you are done.

Some people are uncomfortable with relationships between people of different races (My 1st g/f HS and a few others in college were black and people did get upset.) At one time laws were passed to outlaw mixed marriages and people were lynched. Should we return to this kind of thinking become 'some' people get upset seeing mixed couples.

I do agree, that excessive public displays of affection are offensive, whether they are gay or straight. However, if the sight of two gay men holding hands or hugging offends you, you are being unreasonable. I can understand some people getting upset over two men kissing, but in the name of tolerance, people are going to have to get over it.

Those who are most hypocritical are men who get excited over women having a lesbian sex scene and think it's great, but complain about two men getting together. An guys who watch straight porn are still watching both a naked woman and a naked guy.

Nothing remotely this extreme is on public TV. Don't watch and get over it...

[MellowedZX2]

Come on guys, we have been pretty good, I know we all get heated up about issues but lets keep it cool.

One of my biggest arguements is the allowance of anything that Christians find morally wrong, and the sensorship of most anything to do with Christianity.

Joel

[powder]

Where did i impose my will on others?

[ImCrazy]

Homosexuality is a Sin, bottom line the church/ bible doesn't condone it so its not marriage. It can be a legal union and I'm fine with same sex couples and homosexuality is cool with me, i don't mind gay people as long as they don't try 2 be gay with me.

[ImCrazy]

Where did i impose my will on others?

u didn't. I think its fine 2 be closed minded I am about some things you have the right to be also !

[Larka]

I don't want to see homo's making out on tv. I don't want to see them walking through a park holding hands, i don't want to hear them talking dirty to each other.

Okay. You're heterosexual and that's your point of view.

I'm homosexual- I don't mind seeing people straight or gay holding hands in public. I don't mind a little hello/goodbye/I love you kiss. I HATE people straight or gay making out in public. Seriously, if you want to shove your tongue in the other person's throat- I do believe you have a bedroom... I don't want to hear ANYONE talking dirty in public. I really don't need to hear someone tell their significant other what they want to do to each other in bed.

So from what you said- can we conclude that you wouldn't care if a straight couple was making out in public?

And where do you see it on TV? Being homosexual- I'd love to know, maybe I can tune in... I only see it on Will and Grace or Queer as Folk (both of which are no longer being made, so only found in reruns and usually at night) or The L Word (which is only on during it's season, and it's not on right now.) Oh, and I think there's now a gay TV network. Which doesn't bother me cause we have a couple women's networks, networks that are mostly for guys, networks exclusively in Spanish and BET. Seriously though, where do you see it? Just curious.

[powder]

Okay. You're heterosexual and that's your point of view.

I'm homosexual- I don't mind seeing people straight or gay holding hands in public. I don't mind a little hello/goodbye/I love you kiss. I HATE people straight or gay making out in public. Seriously, if you want to shove your tongue in the other person's throat- I do believe you have a bedroom... I don't want to hear ANYONE talking dirty in public. I really don't need to hear someone tell their significant other what they want to do to each other in bed.

I agree w/ that.

So from what you said- can we conclude that you wouldn't care if a straight couple was making out in public?

Actually no. But i thought we were talking about gays here.

And where do you see it on TV? Being homosexual- I'd love to know, maybe I can tune in... I only see it on Will and Grace or Queer as Folk (both of which are no longer being made, so only found in reruns and usually at night) or The L Word (which is only on during it's season, and it's not on right now.) Oh, and I think there's now a gay TV network. Which doesn't bother me cause we have a couple women's networks, networks that are mostly for guys, networks exclusively in Spanish and BET. Seriously though, where do you see it? Just curious.

The Real World or any other reality show on MTV. HGTV, there's all kinds of shows that have gay couples who have described their lifestyle. That's just a couple off the top of my head.

I know i'm over exaggerating, cuz it's not every channel.

[Larka]

Actually no. But i thought we were talking about gays here.
We were. But my question I guess is this- if you have issues with anyone making out in public, even a straight couple, then why does it matter if they're gay or straight???



The Real World or any other reality show on MTV. HGTV, there's all kinds of shows that have gay couples who have described their lifestyle. That's just a couple off the top of my head.

The Real World has gay people on it for the publicity. Another show on MTV that I think you're referring to would be "Real Life" or something like that... Yes, there was a gay episode of that. But there's also been episodes with people with eating disorders and street racers and people who are violent and a whole load of other issues that teenagers and young adults face. That was just one episode in the whole series. And it tells you what it is when it starts, so you can avoid it. Like I said about The Real World- they're just trying to make money. I think it's crappy TV to begin with and they're just trying to rope more people into it.

[2000zx2chik]

Okay. You're heterosexual and that's your point of view.

I'm homosexual- I don't mind seeing people straight or gay holding hands in public. I don't mind a little hello/goodbye/I love you kiss. I HATE people straight or gay making out in public. Seriously, if you want to shove your tongue in the other person's throat- I do believe you have a bedroom... I don't want to hear ANYONE talking dirty in public. I really don't need to hear someone tell their significant other what they want to do to each other in bed.
So from what you said- can we conclude that you wouldn't care if a straight couple was making out in public?

And where do you see it on TV? Being homosexual- I'd love to know, maybe I can tune in... I only see it on Will and Grace or Queer as Folk (both of which are no longer being made, so only found in reruns and usually at night) or The L Word (which is only on during it's season, and it's not on right now.) Oh, and I think there's now a gay TV network. Which doesn't bother me cause we have a couple women's networks, networks that are mostly for guys, networks exclusively in Spanish and BET. Seriously though, where do you see it? Just curious.

Definently agreed.

[TheGhostInTheMachine]

Christian tradition? Funny, I believe the Bible has some pretty negative things to say about adultery and divorce, both of which are legal in this country.

God did not approve of adultery or divorce. Last time I checked adultery had some consequences in this country. Moses allowed divorce because of the people's hard hearts. God doesn't change, people do and many are changing for the worse.

Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

How do you know that 'Christians' are the vessels that god uses to do her job ?? For all you know, 'Christians' are misguided souls, deceived by Lucifer, and 'Hindus' (or another religious group) are the vessels that the creator uses to do his/her job.

I love how non-religious people try to push their views on religious people by turning things around to suit themselves. You and everyone moving into immorality are the only ones misguided.

[younglink309]

...but it also doesn't allow you to impose your closed minded will on others. You are correct, you are done.


you are only allowed to impose beliefs if they are "open minded" or go against traditional values.

I confirm and understand

[Larka]

Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.



Adam and Eve got together because they were the only people in existence... They had kids only to create the Human race. Adam and Eve were never given the option to be with each other or to be with someone else. So we can't use people who were forced into a relationship as the basis for all relationships the world over.

Also- we shouldn't base who people can and cannot marry on a couple from ONE religion. Someone do a Google search and find out how many religions are on this planet. Now tell me why Christians think that it's okay to go "The Bible says it's wrong, so it's wrong and you're going to hell" to people from other religions. To quote a favorite quote of mine "He's YOUR God, they're YOUR rules, so YOU go to Hell." The US is made up of dozens of religions, so why should we have to be forced to follow the beliefs of a religion that we might not follow??? This is why "marriage" needs to remain a religious institution and let the religions deal with how they want to handle it. And the government should have jurisdiction over civil unions.

[Buster]

Actually, I believe pretty much EVERY religion condemns gay sin.

Even Islam. I'm not saying every CHURCH does, but there are always single chuches that go against their denomination's teachings.

[TheGhostInTheMachine]

^ Thanks Buster.

[Larka]

Actually, I believe pretty much EVERY religion condemns gay sin.

Even Islam. I'm not saying every CHURCH does, but there are always single chuches that go against their denomination's teachings.

There are Pagan religions that are perfectly fine with homosexuals.

My argument- is why can't we just leave it up to the religions to decide if they should marry homosexuals or not? And allow the states to approve civil unions without it becoming a religious debate.

[scortched]

Adam and Eve got together because they were the only people in existence... They had kids only to create the Human race. Adam and Eve were never given the option to be with each other or to be with someone else. So we can't use people who were forced into a relationship as the basis for all relationships the world over.

Also- we shouldn't base who people can and cannot marry on a couple from ONE religion. Someone do a Google search and find out how many religions are on this planet. Now tell me why Christians think that it's okay to go "The Bible says it's wrong, so it's wrong and you're going to hell" to people from other religions. It doesn't matter what people says it's what God says. God says someone goes to Hell they go to Hell. We all deserve Hell, Christians just submit to God and ask for forgiveness then work on repentance.
To quote a favorite quote of mine "He's YOUR God, they're YOUR rules, so YOU go to Hell." I'll just make up a quote to retort that, "He is THE God. I obey HIS rules. If I screw up I go to HIM and ask for forgiveness, so I'LL go to Heaven.
The US is made up of dozens of religions, so why should we have to be forced to follow the beliefs of a religion that we might not follow??? This is why "marriage" needs to remain a religious institution and let the religions deal with how they want to handle it. And the government should have jurisdiction over civil unions. I don't think that I am opposed to that; I'll have to think on it more. But then you would have to keep government completely out of herterosexual weddings so no blood tests, no government licenses, it could get screwed up.
It's a crazy world that we live in, and it's been that way since the "Fall of Man."

[Larka]

I'm for taking the government out of heterosexual marriages to a point- the whole "no government license" thing... If you got married, you'd have to have some license somewhere along the line so that they could prove that they were married so they'd be able to get spousal benefits and stuff.

[greenbigdaddy]

I just think we should consider the origin of marriage and what it was based upon when the concept was still young and unaltered by a governments need to regulate and control one more aspect of its citizens life, as well as find some way to profit no surprise there I guess. I believe the altering of marriage should never have been a descision for judges to rule upon because the government did not create marriage in the first place its a hollow ruling that may make some feel better for a short time but we already accept a gays rights to be together and benefit from eachother. I myself do, but that doesn't mean because everyone should or will because
their being told by 3or4 judges they have too because their understanding of a ancient tradition is wrong.but that doesn't mean we should not be polite and kind to our fellow brother's or sisters'
by the way ZX2CHICK is smoking hot and if I was a babe I'd probably be gay

[ImCrazy]

There are Pagan religions that are perfectly fine with homosexuals.

My argument- is why can't we just leave it up to the religions to decide if they should marry homosexuals or not? And allow the states to approve civil unions without it becoming a religious debate.

exactly the state should marry NOONE it is in violation of the separation ofchurch and state IMO.

[JonsZX2SR]

Actually, I believe pretty much EVERY religion condemns gay sin.

Even Islam. I'm not saying every CHURCH does, but there are always single chuches that go against their denomination's teachings.

Actually you are not quite correct. The Unitarians and the churches in the US Anglican Council tolerate committed gay relationships and do not condemn sex within these relationships as sinful. Their position is somewhat vague, but not condemning.

One of the reason a split in the Anglican church in the US is they consecrated an openly gay Bishop in a committed relationship. Some parishes have split from the American Council and joined a more conservative African Council.

Split in North American Anglican Churches (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4298253.stm)

The position of the American Council of Churches avoids naming sex between two partners in a gay relationship as sinful. Sex (gay or straight) outside of a committed relationship is still considered sinful, but where commitment means marriage is aslo somewhat vague.

Unitarians allow gays to marry in commitment ceremonies, which may also be marriages depending on the laws of the states

[TheGhostInTheMachine]

God hasn't changed. Homosexuality is immoral and a sin. That has not changed in God's eyes. People have changed and are twisting religion to suite them just for the sake of calling themselves religious or Christians or whatever they chose to call themselves. They might as well revert to worshiping idols.

[sunshine198905]

^^ i will second what vit said.

[JonsZX2SR]

For civil and legal reasons states should continue to license civil unions between persons, whether gay or straight. From a legal viewpoint government recognition of all unions should provide the same benefits, rights and responsibilities. All should be called civil unions.

For a couple to marry, they would still have to establish a legal civil union according to civil law, then the church of their choice would also sanction the union as a marriage.

If any church refused to marry gays, that would certainly be acceptable, since the church or the opinion of it's members would not interfere with the civil law.

If another church decided to marry gay couples they would follow the same process as straight couples and receive the same benefits, rights and responsibilities.

If two different churches wanted to enter into a dispute of the marrying of gays, they should be allowed to have that dispute. However, the matter should stay entirely out of the legal systems, since marriage would solely be a religious matter.

Similarly, if a religious group opposed civil unions, they could voice their religious opinion. However, these religious opinions shouldn't be applied or forced on anyone in civil law, upholding the right of anyone to practice what religion they choose, including no religion.

[SoCalZX2]

God hasn't changed. Homosexuality is immoral and a sin. That has not changed in God's eyes. People have changed and are twisting religion to suite them just for the sake of calling themselves religious or Christians or whatever they chose to call themselves. They might as well revert to worshiping idols.

I would have never taken you for a Christian... lol But I whole heartedly agree with your statement.

[TheGhostInTheMachine]

I would have never taken you for a Christian... lol But I whole heartedly agree with your statement.
I'm full of surprises.

[capitalcrew]

Posting to get rid of vit's asshole-ish long name. Ignore me.

[wifeszx2]

Gay marriage makes about as much sense as titts on a boar, but we as a country and the world as a whole is going to hell in a hand basket anyways. We can't have in GOD we trust, we can't say under GOD, military members have the option to say they "affirm" and not "swear" during enlistment, and so on and son forth. Might as well legalize gay marriage too. Add it to the list of abortion, sex change, etc. Yet we can't legalize marijuana and polygamy? Dec 21, 2012 can't come soon enough.

[powder]

What's december 21st 2012?

[wifeszx2]

Supposeably the end of the world, according to ancient Mayan beliefs.

[powder]

Oh yeah... that 13 crystal skulls crap.

[wifeszx2]

yeah, screw Harrison Ford