Should gays be allowed to marry?

[graigdavis]

i dont only support rights that benefit me like most people do "fair weather" fans i call'em

people are quick to throw moral issues down that benefit them .. "gays are against god" .... but yet, they forget about "thou shall not kill" ... but they support war and capital punishment ... people like this have holes in their argument ... it doesnt hold water because they are hypocrites .. they do things that are against "god" everyday ... fornication, booze, drugs, fight and kill people in wars and all un-godly things ... but these hypocrites want to pass judgement on someone else and the sinner is in the mirror? ... how dare these people i say ...

I agree that there are hypocrites. But whats sad is that there is one hypocrite for every 50 true people. That one person is just so much louder. One so called "christian" bombs an abortion clinc and now all christians are labled because of that one idiot. (he was not a christian, christians wouldnt do that)

Im personaly against gays being married. But I dont believe being gay is rite in the first place. It has nothing to do with the person. It has everything to do with the act. Gays are no more of a sinner than I am. Dont hate the sinner, hate the sin.

As far as war and capital punishment and thou shalt not kill. The bible talks that there will be wars. There will be people slain in wars. It will be part of a sinfull world. But its not exactly smiled upon. There are christians fighting in the war, and they do kill people. But its seen as protection. Both for them self (they are getting shot at) and they are fighting for us. They are not killing out of pure hate such as murder. I hope that makes some sense.

 

[Dew]

i think people should follow their own advice ... a dead body is a dead body ... war, murder, or defending ... the body is dead...

the president for example .. he calls abortion murder .. so is war, so is capital punishment .. dead is dead .. my brother is figting in this war in iraq ... but he believes in murder

frankly, i could care less how people choose their sword ... whether it be through a doctor or an assault rifle .. but people in glass houses shouldnt throw stones ... if your backyard isnt too tidy .. dont yell at your neighbor to clean theirs up

thats like telling your kids to not do drugs and you're smoking pot ... that doesnt make since

 

[Osmer_Toby]

you know what i think is sad is that people forget about the spiritual bond between two gay people. these people LOVE each other, and whether we think it's right or wrong is totally irrelevant. trying to regulate a the human capacity for love is the unnatural act. when people argue this subject (gay marriage rights), they argue it on the basis of the sexual act alone. anyone who argues for the right to be married has to be either a) in love b) certifiably insane or c) just plain stupid. there are just too many gay people, statistically, to blame their desire to be recognized as spousal mates on choices b and c. therefore, the vast majority of gay people who want to be married must be in love. who the hell is anyone to deny the right of any human to sanctify that love in holy matirimony? and i mean holy in whatever is their definition of holy. the underpinnings of our very way of life are based on certain unalienable rights- the right to freedom of religion, the right to love, the right to pursue happiness(even if that path does lead to marriage),

the right to be human.

to deny anyone these rights is to enslave them spiritually. shame and damnation on anyone who would attempt to be such a master.

for the record, i am straight.

 

[vonnagy]

I agree that there are hypocrites. But whats sad is that there is one hypocrite for every 50 true people

This made me smile, sorry i don't mean to pick on you. One of my wise friends said that its impossible to live life without being a hypocrite - if anyone really examine your life you'll find this quite true. If someone is being loud and obnoxious and blatantly hypocritical (even if they are 'christian') chances are you have been at one point too, and probably in the future as well. Its just part of being human! So I do agree with that there are hypocrites - all of us!


NOW AN DIFFERENT SPIN ON THE GAY MARRIAGE THINGY (sorry for the all caps )

New Zealand actually has a problem with birthrate, a declining one that is! The birthrate of New Zealand stands at 1.7, for a population to sustain itself its needs a birthrate of 2.1... with a population of 4 million and a landmass approximate about the size of the state Colorado, this presents a serious problem.....

and here is what could really happen:

So if everyone was gay in NZ, the country would the population would drop, then 'W' would invade it and take over all our sheep. Then they would genetically modify the sheep, so that people who consume the sheep would be secretly aroused by them and go off buggering them.

They would sell this tainted lamb to their enemies, and the population wouldn't reproduce because they are off shagging sheep, then 'W' and the illuminati would take over the country with its dwindling population.

Its a conspiracy I tell you!

Or it could be the population is dropping here because everyone here is already shagging sheep? :scratch: Sorry... just taking the mickey out all of ya and including myself Think we take ourselves too seriously sometimes, no matter what side of the fence you may stand or straddle

 

[Osmer_Toby]

There are sheep in New Zealand?

your plan is sound. i, myself, intend to move to england and take a stand with the Knights Templar. we'll re-invade NZ and force-feed W one of those sheep. Course, that would make him a cannibal since he's really nothing more than a sheep in wolf's clothing. Once we liberate NZ and restore it to its rightful citizens, i will grab me a sheep and hop on the next plane back to the U.S. 8)

you're right about the conspiracy.
:::twitch.... twitch:::

 

[oriecat]

I could be wrong about this, but seems to me that up until now, it has been understood that a marriage was between two people of different gender - a universal truth, if you will.

Here's a link for ya on this...
http://www.simonsays.com/titles/0684824043/sameexce.html

 

[Tammy]

Thanks for the link.... very informative.

 

[Dew]

i guess population has to occur, you're right vonnagy .. i'm switching my position

.... we are married and have no children ... i want them, the hubby says were not ready yet ... and to tell u the truth, i think he wants me all to himself ... its a conspiracy i tell u :bounce: (im making fun of the situation, but im dead serious *smug*)

 

[steve817]

i dont only support rights that benefit me like most people do "fair weather" fans i call'em

people are quick to throw moral issues down that benefit them .. "gays are against god" .... but yet, they forget about "thou shall not kill" ... but they support war and capital punishment ... people like this have holes in their argument ... it doesnt hold water because they are hypocrites .. they do things that are against "god" everyday ... fornication, booze, drugs, fight and kill people in wars and all un-godly things ... but these hypocrites want to pass judgement on someone else and the sinner is in the mirror? ... how dare these people i say ...

I'll try to plug a couple of those holes. The "thou shalt not kill" you were referring to in the book of Exodus Chapter 20 verse 13 does in fact say " thou shat not kill" in the king james version in the NIV it says "thou shalt not murder".

The word that was used in the actual hebrew text was "rasah" which could mean murder or kill with more emphasis on murder. I believe in this case it means murder and yes there is a difference. The reason for this is because when you look at Ecclesiastes Chapter 3 says

"1
There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:

2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
3 a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
4 a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
5 a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,
6 a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
7 a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace. "

And all this time you guys probably thought it was just a song from the 60's

Anyway the hebrew text used in this case was "harag" which could mean kill or murder but in this case the emphasis is on the word kill. As far as the rest of your statement goes you are absolutely right, but it's not about my passing judgement.

My problem is with the way they are going about it. Right now they are breaking the law. The mayor of San Francisco and other officials who are allowing this are guilty of civil disobedience. It is illegal according to their state laws and these officials need to be removed from office.

If you think I'm wrong I'll point out another case of civil disobedience where Alabama chief justice Roy Moore was thrown off the bench for installing the Ten Commandments monument in the state couthouse.....So who did he hurt? Did Roy Moore doing that change your life?

Somebody had asked where the president stood on this and the reply was he was against it. What they failed to mention is that he also said the states needed to make some kind of arrangement allowing some type of civil union affording them the same basic rights as married couples.

For what it's worth I picked the second option in the poll. I to have friends that are gay and yes they know where I stand on the issue. Dew, I hope you don't think that I was attaking you buy quoting you. I think much to highly of you to ever do that, and I think you missed your calling in life (You would be a great lawyer).

 

[oriecat]

I really don't understand the "civil unions with all the same rights yada yada"... maybe someone who supports that can explain it to me... if you support offering civil unions with all of the same right and benefits as accorded to married people, then what is the difference other than in name?! And if there is no difference, why should we have two names for it?!

Here's an analogy I cooked up...

I've got two roses. Both roses smell the same, are equally pretty, same thorns (marriage ain't all great, right? ) One rose is pink and one rose is yellow. To me, they're both roses. But someone else comes along... this person doesn't like the color yellow so decides to call my rose a dandelion. But it's still a rose.

Make sense? Am I missing something? Write me an analogy that I can understand...

 

[Dew]

... my friends use to tell me that ... i should have been a lawyer .. but for what its worth, i was on the debate team in college

nah, i just dont think its fair to pick on gay people .. i think its prejudice .. if that's where the president stands, then he's not such a bad guy after all ... he's got the republican party up his arse and i dont think he can be too liberal being a conservative ... this is a democracy .. and gay rights will prevail ... i promise u

 

[tr0gd0o0r]

Do yall think that supporting civil unions that "give the same rights" as marriage are an acceptable solution to this situation? Because i'm personally against that, despite believing homosexuality is a sin, the civil union thing goes against what our country stands for. It tells gays that they are not good enoug hto get married. Turns them into a second class citizen. sort of seperate but equal.

 

[steve817]

Orie I get where your coming from. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it's so much marriage that they are after. They want the legal protection that marriage offers. I don't think they would care if it was called marriage or a tuna sandwich as long as it offers the protection that they seek and deserve.

It's simply a compromise but one that could and I believe would work. I also think it's a solution that could be reached alot quicker than waiting for the marriage thing to pass.

Although the sentiment on this board appears to support it. The country as a whole is against it. A recent article said that it was opposed by a margin of more than 2-1. The good news is that when asked if they consider a constitutional amendment a top priority, they placed it 21st in a list of 22 possible choices.

Another ABC poll shows the margin alot narrower 55% against to 41% for.
Still only 38% support a constitutional amendment.

That article can be found here
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Relationships/same_sex_marriage_poll_040121.html

 

[havoc]

Well i am sure that all gay people are looking for the same legal benefits and protections that marrage entitles straight couples. But i guarantee you that they also don't want to be separated and singled out as a group by calling it a "civil union" They want equallity, benefits and protections should be a given not an arguement. But to be truely equal, they will require us as straight people to acknowledge and accept their way of life, and one of the most fundamental rights of relationships is the ability to marry. There is no other term that straight people use, unless it is by "their" choice. So to some gay people the union of "Tuna sandwich" may be acceptable, but to the majority it will not be.
Also the books Exodus and Ecclesiastes are both old testament. In all fairness to my argument you forgot the book of Lividicus (don't know how to spell it) which also includes the rules that man should live by. i.e. don't lie with another man or woman, don't have sex with animals, don't eat split hooved aminals, only have sex in the union of marrage, and only to procreate etc. In my life i have been exposed to Christianity a great deal, and everyone i have ever talked to or listened to regard the old testament as the way it was, not the way it is. They explained to me that the New Testament is the way to live a good Christian life, to accept and follow the teachings of Jesus. I have found no place in the new testament that says anything about being gay as a sin, or that you are doomed to hell if you are. Show me specific verses written in the books John, Luke, Matthew, etc where it says this. I will accept it from one of the books of Jesus's disciples, but not from Corinthians or any other book not directly related and written about the life of Jesus, from someone (like his Disciples) that followed him and learned directly from him. To my knowledge i could be wrong, but i don't remember any verses directly calling gay people condemed or even sinners for that matter. If i am wrong i would like to know the verses that prove me wrong, so i no longer go spouting out my ass like i am now
Also, if the old testament says that being gay is a sin, it also says, (Levicitus) that sex for any means other then procreation is a sin as well. So why is it ok to have sex when your married even though you have no intention or wish to get pregnent? Most Christians believe in birth control, or use a form of it. By doing this are you not braking God's rules? Commiting a sin. Lets look at it another way, when women stop menstrating do Christian couples stop having sex? No. Their wives can no longer get pregnant, so they aren't doing it to procreate. That then, we must be sinning according to the old testament. So then is it ok to sin one way but not another?
To sin is to sin, or is it? the Vatican came up with the 7 deadly sins to make living as a Christian easier. They made these up so that Christians can identify what is a sin, confess it if they are commiting it, and gain absolution from it. These are considerd the most dangerous of all sins, these sins are listed below.
1. Pride
2. Envy
3. Anger
4. Avarice
5. Sadness or Sloth
6. Gluttony
7. Lust

I don't see homosexuality listed here. Its a bit of a stretch to consider homosexuality in the category of lust as we all seem to agree that gay people can love each other, and i think we all agree that straight people can want or lust as well as gay people. So it doesn't seem to apply to the most "vile" or recognized sins. This seems to make any other sin, whatever it may be forgivable, perhaps even acceptable, as long as its recognized as a sin.
I don't see an arguement against gay people here in religion is valid, as long as all sins are created equal. Because if that were the case, then we would all be condemed when we have sex with our wife or husband. If sins aren't created equal, i don't know of any place in the "New Testament" that says you will die or be condemed if you are gay. My understanding is that you are only condemned if you have word the teachings of Jesus, God i.e the same thing, and choose not to accept him as the son of God.

Sorry i didn't mean to get this deep into it, i appologize for ranting on.
If anyone can enlighten me about this, i would appreciate it, sounds like a bunch of hooee to me though.
Oh the scriptures i was talking about in Levicitus are 18:18.22 & 20:17.13

 

[steve817]

Havoc,

I haven't been ignoring you. I had to have an emergency appendectomy yesterday so I ask for your patience in waiting for a full blown answer. The short answer is in Matthew chapter 5 I believe. "Do not think I have come to abolish the law" sorry to be so short. I'm going back to bed. I'll see ya'll in a few days.

Take Care,

Steve