11 States ban gay marriage

[Guest SP-1]

Man, your pastor was an idiot. I hate that crap. I can't picture the two lesbians that I am friends with every molesting or hurting a kid. Ever. It's an illogical correlation that's just kind of dumb.

 

Homosexuality is touched on in the New Testament as well. The application of the Mosaic Law is an interesting thing. Alot of the cultural things were bound to the notion of sacrifice and whatknot so they were fulfilled in Christ and not such a big deal now, and alot of it was examples of sin but the Levitical passages touching on homosexuality are still clear teaching on human relationships.

 

At the end of the day though, condemnation and judgement isn't for us. Disagreement, with love, yes. Confrontation and discipline within the confines of the church body, yes, because that's a restorative maneuver and not a judgement maneuver. Sin must still be called sin and repented of, but you've got to love people in that process and beyond. Nothing else works without that.

 

And Slayer: come again? I'm not sure what you mean. The people that do that are clearly Isegeting the text (interpreting it with a dogmatic or other bias and not looking at what it actually says within the hermeneutical process) and trying to force it to back up what they're doing. That's wrong. Very wrong.

[brokentusk16 0]

Sorry to break it to you Loss, but within ten years you're going to facing concentration camps. Hope you learned how to pray back in Sunday School.

[Guest SP-1]

Sorry to break it to you Loss, but within ten years you're going to facing concentration camps. Hope you learned how to pray back in Sunday School.

Ladies and gentlement, Sir Ignorance has spoken.

[Special K 0]

I think there's a real threat that Bush's amendment would pass if he chooses to reintroduce it. Hopefully he meant it when he said it was time to unite, since I thought the whole purpose of the amendment was to make Democrats look bad, seeing as how unpopular gay marriage is with the general populace.

[brokentusk16 0]

Sorry to break it to you Loss, but within ten years you're going to facing concentration camps. Hope you learned how to pray back in Sunday School.

Ladies and gentlement, Sir Ignorance has spoken.

Hey, I'm just telling it like it is. You can't handle that? That's your problem.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

I think there's a real threat that Bush's amendment would pass if he chooses to reintroduce it. Hopefully he meant it when he said it was time to unite, since I thought the whole purpose of the amendment was to make Democrats look bad, seeing as how unpopular gay marriage is with the general populace.

He still won't get 2/3rds of the Senate. Most of the spots that the Dems lost tot he Reps were held by "Dixiecrat" senators like Miller who are just as likely to vote in favour of such an ammendment as the Republicans replacing them. If this ended up in the Senate I'd expect most of the Dems to vote against it and probably some of the Reps too.

[Guest SP-1]

Sorry to break it to you Loss, but within ten years you're going to facing concentration camps. Hope you learned how to pray back in Sunday School.

Ladies and gentlement, Sir Ignorance has spoken.

Hey, I'm just telling it like it is. You can't handle that? That's your problem.

Yet that isn't "like it is". It's at best, a dark imagining on your part with wording that doesn't have a grip on its own implications.

 

Twit.

[Slayer 0]

And Slayer: come again? I'm not sure what you mean.

I was just reading the usual back-and-forthism in this thread and then I came across that post with the fifty dollar presumably-biblical-college-level word which I found equal parts funny and offputting to the conversation

 

So, essentially, chalk it up to another smartass Slayer post

[Guest SP-1]

Yeah. It's just the language I'm used to because I use it so much for classes here.

[EricMM 0]

Gay marriage would be as good for America as strait Marriage is.

 

Obviously there are benefits for strait marriage, because marriage is a strengthening and uniting force for budding families.

 

When you're married, you're more likely to help someone through school, or share investments. Build yourselves up together. This is economically good, since the more education people get, and the more investing they do, the better we all are.

 

So there are government benifits for marriage. Thus, it follows that if two gay people marry, they are more likely to help each other prosper, and develop educationally and financially. They are more likely to invest, and are more likely to live long lives.

 

All these things are good for America. Thus, gay marriage is good for America.

 

Is this wrong?

[Guest SP-1]

Marriage isn't about economics.

[EricMM 0]

What is it about?

[Guest SP-1]

For one, its an analogy for God and His people. In the present age, specifically, for Christ and His church. It was clearly defined as the most intimate of human bonds in the opening chapters of Genesis, and there defined as a God-ordained joining between a male and a female.

 

It always has been and always will be a spiritual/physical matter that speaks of a deep and vibrant relationship with God both as an example and also in practicality as man and wife grow with God together.

Edited November 4, 2004 by SP-1

[teke184 0]

I think there's a real threat that Bush's amendment would pass if he chooses to reintroduce it. Hopefully he meant it when he said it was time to unite, since I thought the whole purpose of the amendment was to make Democrats look bad, seeing as how unpopular gay marriage is with the general populace.

Passing a Constitutional Amendment takes 2/3 of the House, 2/3 of the Senate, the President's approval, and the ratification of the amendment by 2/3 of the states.

 

 

There are NOT enough Democrats in the House or Senate that would cross over to even get the Amendment to Bush's desk.

[Guest Loss]

Then, logically, all marriages should be declared unconstitutional, because a marriage is the product of a theocracy. Give everyone civil unions, and let that relationship mean whatever it will. We do have a separation of church and state after all, and marriage is a religious issue.

[EricMM 0]

You cannot argue this on theological grounds SP.

 

This isn't a theological issue.

 

It's a state issue.

[Guest Cerebus]

You asked him what mairrage is about. He told you. Since mairrage is, and has been, a religious institution that means you can't talk about what mairrage IS without theology.

[Guest Loss]

You asked him what mairrage is about. He told you. Since mairrage is, and has been, a religious institution that means you can't talk about what mairrage IS without theology.

If that's true, then all marriage, by definition, is unconstitutional.

[EricMM 0]

Saying that it's against God's teachings should have NOTHING to do with American law.

 

Nothing.

 

If you can't find a better argument than that, then you're arguing on opinion.

[Guest Cerebus]

You asked him what mairrage is about. He told you. Since mairrage is, and has been, a religious institution that means you can't talk about what mairrage IS without theology.

If that's true, then all marriage, by definition, is unconstitutional.

You're a moron. If its unconsitutional than so is having a circumcision for religious reasons. Anything that is done for religious reasons is not unconstiutional.

[Guest Cerebus]

Saying that it's against God's teachings should have NOTHING to do with American law.

 

Nothing.

 

If you can't find a better argument than that, then you're arguing on opinion.

To be fair, Eric, your argument is based on economics which has nothing to do with law either.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

You asked him what mairrage is about. He told you. Since mairrage is, and has been, a religious institution that means you can't talk about what mairrage IS without theology.

If that's true, then all marriage, by definition, is unconstitutional.

You're a moron. If its unconsitutional than so is having a circumcision for religious reasons. Anything that is done for religious reasons is not unconstiutional.

He obviously means the government sanctioning of marriage.

 

Thanfully, at least no one on this board has broken out the "gays will start to sue churches to demand weddings" argument I've had to endure elsewhere.

[Guest MikeSC]

No, it's weird because it's fucking weird. The entire thing is a disgrace.

 

Also throw in that NAMBLA is a none-too-quiet partner in your side's arguments and you have a problem.

        -=Mike

You have a giant stick up your ass. For me to say that to someone else, considering how much of a prude I am, is a strong statement.

 

 

I know nothing of NAMBLA, actually.

Note that I have no need to insult you. Nor will I make the obvious "(insert object here) stuck up your ass" line.

-=Mike

[UZI Suicide 0]

What's the difference between seeing two guys at a shopping mall making out while being "partners" and seeing two guys at a shopping mall making out while being married? Is it really going to affect you if they are married? I don't see how that could personally affect your life. That's what I find funny about this whole issue. So many people seem to think because gays are married they're all of the sudden going to be all over the place in society.. well newsflash, they already are.

 

It's funny because the majority of these people in the bible belt so against this are probably cheating on their spouses anyway.

[EricMM 0]

But economics is a secular reason why gays should be allowed to marry.

 

I have yet to hear a secular reason why they oughtn't be allowed to marry.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Saying that it's against God's teachings should have NOTHING to do with American law.

 

Nothing.

 

If you can't find a better argument than that, then you're arguing on opinion.

Yeah, its a real dumb argument. The problem is that they outnumber those of us that disagree, and it is up to us to convince enough of them. Not all of them are dead set in their ways.

 

And I am not gay, so I'm not about to go out of my way campaigning for this, although I will state my opinion when the topic comes up.

[Special K 0]

All you're going to get is 'it's icky' and 'it's in the Bible'. Or some hyperbole about how it will REND the very fabric of heterosexual marriages ASUNDER. Ask them to explain how, and they can't say.

[brokentusk16 0]

Yet that isn't "like it is". It's at best, a dark imagining on your part with wording that doesn't have a grip on its own implications.

 

Twit.

I know what my implications are. The US will, at some point in the future have a clash between hetero and homosexuals. And considering the mindset of the country, it's not at all impossible that the gays will lose. Perhaps it won't be within ten years, but it will happen in my lifetime, I have no doubt. If you don't want to think about this, that's fine. That's your choice. But it is inevitable.

 

Bitch.

[Guest MikeSC]

Yet that isn't "like it is".  It's at best, a dark imagining on your part with wording that doesn't have a grip on its own implications.

 

Twit.

I know what my implications are. The US will, at some point in the future have a clash between hetero and homosexuals. And considering the mindset of the country, it's not at all impossible that the gays will lose. Perhaps it won't be within ten years, but it will happen in my lifetime, I have no doubt. If you don't want to think about this, that's fine. That's your choice. But it is inevitable.

 

Bitch.

I love seeing whackjob conspiracy theorists call people bitches.

-=Mike

[brokentusk16 0]

I love seeing whackjob conspiracy theorists call people bitches.

-=Mike

"A paranoid is simply someone in possession of all the facts."

 

Deny all you want, it only shows how little you know about the human race.