Guest LiveFastDieNever Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 God didn't want SP to remember his old account password It would appear so. It's ok. It was a lame screen name anyways. : )
Big Ol' Smitty Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 To Edwin: I don't see how you could disallow polygamy if someone wanted it, and I also think that it's a pretty clear case of being hypocritical. How can someone advocate gay marriage by criticizing anti-gay marriage folk for refusing to change the definition from marriage being between a man and a woman, and than saying they only want to change it to being between two people? By that token, they're discriminating against those that want to marry more than one person. It kind of is the same argument. I think the big difference is that, unlike monogamous gay marriage, there are actually legitimate concerns about polygamy such as: -long-term stability -level of abuse of wives, particularly in patriarchal families -level of child abuse. -girls as young as 12 years of age being forced to marry. -incest within polygamous families -high level of welfare fraud The only argument against gay marriage seems to be, "it will lead to polygamy!" So if we allowed gay marriage and then a group of people clamored for legal polygamy, we could just be like, "um, no...it's not good." There are actually lots of polyamorous relationships in the US & Canada already (estimated in the tens of thousands of participants), so it might be a moot point.
Special K Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 The laws of Western civilization have been taking cues from Judeo-Christian values for years, though Our system of law is based on at the MOST 4 commandments. (Murder, Adultery, Thievery, Bearing false witness) That's not a very strong correlation. Pretty much all the laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy have absolutely fuck all to do with our laws. So how is our laws based on Judeo-Christian values? That's just something we repeat so much it's accepted as truth. Plus the whole Judeo-Christian thing is a crock. No sect of Christianity that I know of follows Old Testament law. In fact, the New Testament pretty much directly contradicts it. The only part they pay attention to in the Old Testament is the 10 Commandments, and hating on the gays.
NoCalMike Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I think John Stewart laid out a pretty good case to disspell the "gay marriage means polygamy too" myth. Someone posted the clip in this thread already. Watch it.
Guest JustPassinBy Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I'm a Christian first. An American 2nd. Marriage is between a man-woman. The Bible spells this out perfectly clear. Therefore, if I were to vote for someone that would vote for gay marriage, it would in effect be going against my religious beliefs.
Murmuring Beast Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 The bible is a book. Marriage is just a piece of paper. Let everyone get the fuck on with things.
Dobbs 3K Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 The laws of Western civilization have been taking cues from Judeo-Christian values for years, though Our system of law is based on at the MOST 4 commandments. (Murder, Adultery, Thievery, Bearing false witness) That's not a very strong correlation. Pretty much all the laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy have absolutely fuck all to do with our laws. So how is our laws based on Judeo-Christian values? That's just something we repeat so much it's accepted as truth. Plus the whole Judeo-Christian thing is a crock. No sect of Christianity that I know of follows Old Testament law. In fact, the New Testament pretty much directly contradicts it. The only part they pay attention to in the Old Testament is the 10 Commandments, and hating on the gays. If you read the New Testament, there's an incident where God basically revokes all the old laws dealing with which foods to eat and such. Also, a lot of the Old Testament laws no longer apply, because unlike the Israelites, we're not out wandering in the desert for forty years as part of a massive migration. Jesus did say to follow the Ten Commandments, and also "love thy neighbor as yourself."
EricMM Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I'm a Christian first. An American 2nd. Marriage is between a man-woman. The Bible spells this out perfectly clear. Therefore, if I were to vote for someone that would vote for gay marriage, it would in effect be going against my religious beliefs. Hey sunshine, we don't live in a Theocracy. Just because you prefer something doesn't make it right or constitutional. Your preference for something because it is listed in the bible means NOTHING and is ILLOGICAL. Live your life the way you want. Your legalizing something you consider immoral is not forcing you to do it in any way. Any way. Your religion may be making you into a good "christian" (notice the quotes since you're ACTUALLY a quite shitty one) but you are a terrible American. Naitch.
Guest JustPassinBy Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I'm a Christian first. An American 2nd. Marriage is between a man-woman. The Bible spells this out perfectly clear. Therefore, if I were to vote for someone that would vote for gay marriage, it would in effect be going against my religious beliefs. but you are a terrible American. I've seen irony, but this is off the charts.
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 What would justpassinby have thought of that Damn Catholic Kennedy's candidacy had he been around 1960?
EricMM Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I'm not attacking your religious beliefs as an American, I'm attacking your attempts to impose your religious views on others. No irony.
Big Ol' Smitty Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Snuffy, you'll be glad to know your boy Sassy Sam Brownback was all over this gay marriage debate in the Senate like a fly on a turd.
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I caught most of the debate on C-Span...including my buddy Brownback's strange diatribe. Even though all of his reasoning seemed to be miles away from the 'issue', he still made me proud. He really honestly believes hes doing the right thing by his religion by banning gay marriage...but always muddles his vision with his support of African Americans as balanced against the Bible's strong condoning of slavery. Speech of the week - Dick Durbin arguing against repeal of the Death Tax. It was the best effort I have ever personally seen from Durbin. Id like to see something done about that Tax hurting small business owners and farmers...but its plainly obvious that those folks arent the ones the Republicans are trying to help with the repeal. Durbin totally blasted the fiscal irresponsibilty of this repeal during our time of great debt and spending...and made proper clowns of Republicans who claim to be All-American Patriots but only favor helping those who need no help/taxing only those who desperately need their earned funds.
Slayer Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I hate (hate hate) Brownback Every other week or so it seems the local papers talk about him seriously running for Pres in '08. Shudder.
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 I hope to God he gets the nomination. It could be like 1964. Only it wouldnt be a guy I like getting trounced.
Slayer Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Next you'll be advocating a Frist-Brownback ticket
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Thatd be for the best...that way the Democrats can shoot off every single toe on each foot and still maybe win in '08.
Big Ol' Smitty Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Id like to see something done about that Tax hurting small business owners and farmers...but its plainly obvious that those folks arent the ones the Republicans are trying to help with the repeal. Factcheck. Anyway, Feingold tried to introduce an amendment that would exempt the first $100 million of an estate from the tax, but that was roundly defeated by the Rs.
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Its amazing that Republicans can so blatantly work against the interests of the vast majority of Americans (workers and their families) yet many will still vote for them...for 'reasons' like justpassinby has.
EricMM Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 100 million isn't enough? BUT IT"S STILL ATTACKING FARMERZ *smacks forehead*
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 http://www2.ljworld.com/blogs/lawrence_blo.../promoterupset/ Another example of the Stalin-esque police state we're leaning towards now. Our federal govt gave a grant to have a police/dea/fbi checkpoint outside the Wakarusa Music Festival. Disgusting and a huge waste of money we dont have to just waste.
Guest JustPassinBy Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Speech of the week - Dick Durbin arguing against repeal of the Death Tax. It was the best effort I have ever personally seen from Durbin. Id like to see something done about that Tax hurting small business owners and farmers...but its plainly obvious that those folks arent the ones the Republicans are trying to help with the repeal. Durbin totally blasted the fiscal irresponsibilty of this repeal during our time of great debt and spending...and made proper clowns of Republicans who claim to be All-American Patriots but only favor helping those who need no help/taxing only those who desperately need their earned funds. How was repealing the death tax a bad thing? You said you hate taxes. The GOP got rid of one. The Dems want to bring it back. Do you even read what you write?
Special K Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Republicans basically want to repeal taxes (favoring the very rich) and spend more than the Dems ever have. That's not fiscally responsible. If the Dems tax and spend, you may disagree with the policy, but it's not going to end up with half our country owned by foreign interests. If they cut taxes and cut spending, that'd be one thing. I think the best situation is a Dem prez with a Rep legislature. They got the budget balanced, remember that? That was AWESOME!
EricMM Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Look, JPB, it seems like the Democrats are focused on protecting and helping people, while the Reps are focused on protecting and helping money. Which do you think is more important?
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Speech of the week - Dick Durbin arguing against repeal of the Death Tax. It was the best effort I have ever personally seen from Durbin. Id like to see something done about that Tax hurting small business owners and farmers...but its plainly obvious that those folks arent the ones the Republicans are trying to help with the repeal. Durbin totally blasted the fiscal irresponsibilty of this repeal during our time of great debt and spending...and made proper clowns of Republicans who claim to be All-American Patriots but only favor helping those who need no help/taxing only those who desperately need their earned funds. How was repealing the death tax a bad thing? You said you hate taxes. The GOP got rid of one. The Dems want to bring it back. Do you even read what you write? As was already pointed out (in this very thread!) Sen Feingold offered an amendment to repeal the estate tax for anything under 100 million dollars...the Republicans said no. They are not interested in cutting any taxes for the people that really need their funds. They will only cut taxes for wealthy people, thus making the tax burden on workers even greater....they also cut federal funding to states, so workers' state taxes go up as well. What is so conservative about making the vast majority of America pay heavy taxes to ensure this Big Govt and the wealthiest people have plenty? Where are you employed, justpassinby?
NoCalMike Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Speech of the week - Dick Durbin arguing against repeal of the Death Tax. It was the best effort I have ever personally seen from Durbin. Id like to see something done about that Tax hurting small business owners and farmers...but its plainly obvious that those folks arent the ones the Republicans are trying to help with the repeal. Durbin totally blasted the fiscal irresponsibilty of this repeal during our time of great debt and spending...and made proper clowns of Republicans who claim to be All-American Patriots but only favor helping those who need no help/taxing only those who desperately need their earned funds. How was repealing the death tax a bad thing? You said you hate taxes. The GOP got rid of one. The Dems want to bring it back. Do you even read what you write? As was already pointed out (in this very thread!) Sen Feingold offered an amendment to repeal the estate tax for anything under 100 million dollars...the Republicans said no. They are not interested in cutting any taxes for the people that really need their funds. They will only cut taxes for wealthy people, thus making the tax burden on workers even greater....they also cut federal funding to states, so workers' state taxes go up as well. What is so conservative about making the vast majority of America pay heavy taxes to ensure this Big Govt and the wealthiest people have plenty? Where are you employed, justpassinby? Seems the ®'s were exposed for what their true intentions were, keep the extremely wealthy.........extremely wealthy.
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 Conspiracy Theory - justpassinby is actually my own gimmick account for the masochistic/retarded side of my schizophrenia.
snuffbox Posted June 8, 2006 Report Posted June 8, 2006 http://www2.ljworld.com/blogs/lawrence_blo.../promoterupset/ Another example of the Stalin-esque police state we're leaning towards now. Our federal govt gave a grant to have a police/dea/fbi checkpoint outside the Wakarusa Music Festival. Disgusting and a huge waste of money we dont have to just waste. Coincidentally, Headcount will be registering (presumably young liberal/greem/libertarian) voters by the thousand at this festival.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now