Are you for or against gay marriage?

view all posts by Poision Envy

Edit history:

Opium: 2009-05-23 12:39:26 am

2009-05-23 12:34:47 am

Servin' you realness!!

Quote from Poision Envy:

So what you're saying is that dictionaries are never wrong, never will be, and never have been? If you look up "Jack ass" you'll probably find something related to a donkey, but if you ask anyone in real life what a jack ass is they will usually respond with something like, "Some kind of asshole person, idk".

I don't know what kind of dictionary you have been looking at, but it seems you are already in the habit of looking into a book, seeing what it says, and deciding that that must be reality in spite of what you see around you (ie the bible). Find a dictionary that's quite old and look up the definition of negro, for example.

Quote from Poision Envy:

When you say "skewed by religion" are you saying that the definition can only be political/governmental? Why can't it have a religious definition? Is it because Mr. Webster "claimed" that as the definition first, and is therefore unchangeable? (I hope this doesn't sound like I'm ranting or flaming, I'm just curious as why). Why is it that the definition of marriage is "skewed by religion" and not "skewed by politics/government", is it because the first definition wasn't religious?

If marriage has religious significance FOR YOU then that's fine. Don't assume that it has to have religious significance for others though. Marriage really has no religious meaning under the law - it's more like a contract. There are over 10,000 rights & responsibilities that come with that contract which gays and lesbians are denied. The main point I want to make to you is this: Nobody wants the church to change what they think of marriage - they just want the law to recognize same-sex marriage. It has been done in many countries now and it works just fine. Your religious freedoms are not compromised by the activities of others, you continue to go on doing what you believe is right, everyone is happy.

Quote from Outburn3:

For one thing, nobody is born gay. I care for you. Gay or not. I just disagree. Nothing is wrong with that. I will treat you just like I treat others. Heck, I have friends who are gay.

Ask tens of millions of gays around the globe and they will disagree with you. It's arrogant to assume that you are correct about something that you have not experienced yourself while tens of millions of people have. Besides, why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay?? Gay people have very hard lives filled with discrimination and ridicule and often are disowned by their families. The suicide rate among gays is 7 times higher than straights. Who would choose that life ?? Besides, did you CHOOSE to be heterosexual?
I feel sorry for your gay 'friends'. I think it would suck to think someone is your friend when the truth is that deep down inside they think you are an abomination.

[quote="Poision Envy"]
So what you're saying is that dictionaries are never wrong, never will be, and never have been? If you look up "Jack ass" you'll probably find something related to a donkey, but if you ask anyone in real life what a jack ass is they will usually respond with something like, "Some kind of asshole person, idk".
[/quote]

I don't know what kind of dictionary you have been looking at, but it seems you are already in the habit of looking into a book, seeing what it says, and deciding that that must be reality in spite of what you see around you  (ie the bible).  Find a dictionary that's quite old and look up the definition of negro, for example.

[quote="Poision Envy"]
When you say "skewed by religion" are you saying that the definition can only be political/governmental? Why can't it have a religious definition? Is it because Mr. Webster "claimed" that as the definition first, and is therefore unchangeable? (I hope this doesn't sound like I'm ranting or flaming, I'm just curious as why). Why is it that the definition of marriage is "skewed by religion" and not "skewed by politics/government", is it because the first definition wasn't religious?
[/quote]

If marriage has religious significance FOR YOU then that's fine.  Don't assume that it has to have religious significance for others though.   Marriage really has no religious meaning under the law - it's more like a contract.  There are over 10,000 rights & responsibilities that come with that contract which gays and lesbians are denied.  The main point I want to make to you is this: Nobody wants the church to change what they think of marriage - they just want the law to recognize same-sex marriage.  It has been done in many countries now and it works just fine. Your religious freedoms are not compromised by the activities of others, you continue to go on doing what you believe is right, everyone is happy.

[quote="Outburn3"]
 For one thing, nobody is born gay. I care for you. Gay or not. I just disagree. Nothing is wrong with that. I will treat you just like I treat others. Heck, I have friends who are gay.
[/quote]

Ask tens of millions of gays around the globe and they will disagree with you.  It's arrogant to assume that you are correct about something that you have not experienced yourself while tens of millions of people have.  Besides, why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay??  Gay people have very hard lives filled with discrimination and ridicule and often are disowned by their families.  The suicide rate among gays is 7 times higher than straights.  Who would choose that life ??  Besides, did you CHOOSE to be heterosexual?  
I feel sorry for your gay 'friends'.   I think it would suck to think someone is your friend when the truth is that deep down inside they think you are an abomination.

Poision Envy:

registered on 2008-10-25 08:56:26 pm.

Gender: female

Location: I'm outta place, I'm in outer space

Poision Envy

Edit history:

Poision Envy: 2009-05-23 01:13:55 am

2009-05-23 01:10:01 am

Death to skinfags, sieg heil.

Quote from Opium:

I don't know what kind of dictionary you have been looking at, but it seems you are already in the habit of looking into a book, seeing what it says, and deciding that that must be reality in spite of what you see around you (ie the bible).

Thats the complete opposite of what I was saying, I look into a book, see what it says, and then look around me and see if it all fits up then decide which one is right. I don't want to turn this into a religious debate, but I have read the Bible and looked around me and decided it must be reality because it makes sense (but perhaps this kind of argument doesn't belong here).

Quote from Opium:

If marriage has religious significance FOR YOU then that's fine. Don't assume that it has to have religious significance for others though. Marriage really has no religious meaning under the law - it's more like a contract. There are over 10,000 rights & responsibilities that come with that contract which gays and lesbians are denied. The main point I want to make to you is this: Nobody wants the church to change what they think of marriage - they just want the law to recognize same-sex marriage. It has been done in many countries now and it works just fine. Your religious freedoms are not compromised by the activities of others, you continue to go on doing what you believe is right, everyone is happy.

Yes it is true that under the law marriage has no religious meaning, I can accept that. I have no problem with gays having the same rights as a married couple, but I always thought of marriage as a religious thing, and I don't think the law should mess with religion. A solution to this would be to have a term for them that has all the same rights as marriage, but have it have all the same rights.

I do see the flaws in what I'm saying, I'm not ignorant of them. I can fully see both sides, but no side really seems to satisfy me for some reason.

Quote from Opium:

Quote from Outburn3:

For one thing, nobody is born gay. I care for you. Gay or not. I just disagree. Nothing is wrong with that. I will treat you just like I treat others. Heck, I have friends who are gay.

Ask tens of millions of gays around the globe and they will disagree with you. It's arrogant to assume that you are correct about something that you have not experienced yourself while tens of millions of people have. Besides, why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay?? Gay people have very hard lives filled with discrimination and ridicule and often are disowned by their families. The suicide rate among gays is 7 times higher than straights. Who would choose that life ?? Besides, did you CHOOSE to be heterosexual?
I feel sorry for your gay 'friends'. I think it would suck to think someone is your friend when the truth is that deep down inside they think you are an abomination.

I'm sure every single gay would disagree with him, but that is do to just being biased. That second part you say though "Besides, why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay??", ummm, maybe its because they like the same sex?? They obviously CHOOSE to be gay, since its proven a gay person can become straight, and a straight person can become gay, it's not as if there is a switch inside our brain that is either on the "GAY" setting or the "STRAIGHT" setting. Yes they do have more rough lives, but they CHOOSE it over being straight. You say "Who would choose that life??" Well they most certainly DO have a choice. It's not as if it is physically impossible for them to become straight, and if they think that then maybe some counseling would help.

Lastly "It's arrogant to assume that you are correct about something that you have not experienced yourself". So you're saying in order to understand a gay person, you would have to BE gay to understand them? I'm not sure which part about being gay that a straight person couldn't understand without having to be gay. A white person can understand what it was like to live as a black person back during slavery, anyone can understand what it was like for Jews during the holocaust, so why is it that straight people can't understand what its like to be gay? It's very easy to picture oneself in someone's shoe, without actually stepping into the shoe.

EDIT: I always hate going into these kinds of debates, because your guaranteed to tick people off (on the forums). I hate arguing against the people on here because I like you guys! and I don't wanna make enemies with anyone over a stupid debate like this, which is why I wanted to stay out of this in the first place.

[quote="Opium"]
I don't know what kind of dictionary you have been looking at, but it seems you are already in the habit of looking into a book, seeing what it says, and deciding that that must be reality in spite of what you see around you  (ie the bible).[/quote]

Thats the complete opposite of what I was saying, I look into a book, see what it says, and then look around me and see if it all fits up then decide which one is right. I don't want to turn this into a religious debate, but I have read the Bible and looked around me and decided it must be reality because it makes sense (but perhaps this kind of argument doesn't belong here).

[quote="Opium"]If marriage has religious significance FOR YOU then that's fine.  Don't assume that it has to have religious significance for others though.   Marriage really has no religious meaning under the law - it's more like a contract.  There are over 10,000 rights & responsibilities that come with that contract which gays and lesbians are denied.  The main point I want to make to you is this: Nobody wants the church to change what they think of marriage - they just want the law to recognize same-sex marriage.  It has been done in many countries now and it works just fine. Your religious freedoms are not compromised by the activities of others, you continue to go on doing what you believe is right, everyone is happy.[/quote]
Yes it is true that under the law marriage has no religious meaning, I can accept that. I have no problem with gays having the same rights as a married couple, but I always thought of marriage as a religious thing, and I don't think the law should mess with religion. A solution to this would be to have a term for them that has all the same rights as marriage, but have it have all the same rights.

I do see the flaws in what I'm saying, I'm not ignorant of them. I can fully see both sides, but no side really seems to satisfy me for some reason.
[quote="Opium"][quote="Outburn3"]
 For one thing, nobody is born gay. I care for you. Gay or not. I just disagree. Nothing is wrong with that. I will treat you just like I treat others. Heck, I have friends who are gay.
[/quote]

Ask tens of millions of gays around the globe and they will disagree with you.  It's arrogant to assume that you are correct about something that you have not experienced yourself while tens of millions of people have.  Besides, why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay??  Gay people have very hard lives filled with discrimination and ridicule and often are disowned by their families.  The suicide rate among gays is 7 times higher than straights.  Who would choose that life ??  Besides, did you CHOOSE to be heterosexual?  
I feel sorry for your gay 'friends'.   I think it would suck to think someone is your friend when the truth is that deep down inside they think you are an abomination.
[/quote]

I'm sure every single gay would disagree with him, but that is do to just being biased. That second part you say though "Besides, why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay??", ummm, maybe its because they like the same sex?? They obviously CHOOSE to be gay, since its proven a gay person can become straight, and a straight person can become gay, it's not as if there is a switch inside our brain that is either on the "GAY" setting or the "STRAIGHT" setting. Yes they do have more rough lives, but they CHOOSE it over being straight. You say "Who would choose that life??" Well they most certainly DO have a choice. It's not as if it is physically impossible for them to become straight, and if they think that then maybe some counseling would help.

Lastly "It's arrogant to assume that you are correct about something that you have not experienced yourself". So you're saying in order to understand a gay person, you would have to BE gay to understand them? I'm not sure which part about being gay that a straight person couldn't understand without having to be gay. A white person can understand what it was like to live as a black person back during slavery, anyone can understand what it was like for Jews during the holocaust, so why is it that straight people can't understand what its like to be gay? It's very easy to picture oneself in someone's shoe, without actually stepping into the shoe.

EDIT: I always hate going into these kinds of debates, because your guaranteed to tick people off (on the forums). I hate arguing against the people on here because I like you guys! and I don't wanna make enemies with anyone over a stupid debate like this, which is why I wanted to stay out of this in the first place.

Opium:

registered on 2008-08-19 01:51:50 pm.

Gender: female

view all posts by Poision Envy

2009-05-23 01:14:13 am

Servin' you realness!!

Every single 'point' you have made is so ignorant that I am speechless...

Poision Envy:

registered on 2008-10-25 08:56:26 pm.

Gender: female

Location: I'm outta place, I'm in outer space

Poision Envy

2009-05-23 01:40:12 am

Death to skinfags, sieg heil.

Quote from Opium:

Every single 'point' you have made is so ignorant that I am speechless...

Teeeeeeach meeeeeee I want to leeeeeearn

Tyjet66:

registered on 2008-06-12 07:12:15 am.

Gender: male

Location: United States, Minnesota

view all posts by Tyjet66

Tyjet66

2009-05-23 01:52:01 am

Where am I?

Quote from Poision Envy:

I always hate going into these kinds of debates, because your guaranteed to tick people off (on the forums). I hate arguing against the people on here because I like you guys! and I don't wanna make enemies with anyone over a stupid debate like this, which is why I wanted to stay out of this in the first place.

If you want my opinion on that, this thread was created just for our opinions; since it has lead to this we should use these arguments to vent steam, learn, and have fun. But anyone on here who takes this extremely personally to the point of no longer enjoying the presence of someone else who argues with them here is just pathetic in my eyes. Debate away Poison Envy. Wink

Opium:

registered on 2008-08-19 01:51:50 pm.

Gender: female

view all posts by tomatobob

2009-05-23 02:10:27 am

Servin' you realness!!

Quote from tyjet66:

Quote from Poision Envy:

I always hate going into these kinds of debates, because your guaranteed to tick people off (on the forums). I hate arguing against the people on here because I like you guys! and I don't wanna make enemies with anyone over a stupid debate like this, which is why I wanted to stay out of this in the first place.

If you want my opinion on that, this thread was created just for our opinions; since it has lead to this we should use these arguments to vent steam, learn, and have fun. But anyone on here who takes this extremely personally to the point of no longer enjoying the presence of someone else who argues with them here is just pathetic in my eyes. Debate away Poison Envy. Wink

Agreed. While the debate can be heated, none of us have resorted to anything out of line. I personally don't know anyone on this forum personally enough to take anything too personally. (personally)

tomatobob:

registered on 2004-03-27 12:44:30 am.

Gender: male

Location: O'er yon hill

tomatobob

2009-05-23 05:03:08 am

Never stressed

I just want to say that I'm proud of you all for not driving this topic straight into a shitstorm, go buy yourselves a beer for me, perhaps a cookie if you prefer.

I would also like to state that I am incredibly disappointed in myself for not driving this topic into a shitstorm.

Cpadolf:

registered on 2007-02-14 03:32:46 am.

Gender: male

Location: Sweden

view all posts by tjp7154

2009-05-23 08:12:47 am

Hurr Durr

Quote from Poision Envy:

That second part you say though "Besides, why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay??", ummm, maybe its because they like the same sex?

Wat? And why do they like the same sex to begin with? Because they are already gay, because they where (most likely) born that way. This argument is weird.

Quote from Outburn3:

I have stated my opinion on this matter and I will not get involved into a childish fight.

I wasn't intending to start a childish fight, I was interested in hearing why you thought as you did. And then maybe stating why I didn't think so, if I disagreed. Nothing unresonable.

Also @ Poision Envy. For a man pretending to be a woman you sure are more religious than I expected

tjp7154:

registered on 2005-04-25 06:31:26 pm.

Location: Place

tjp7154

2009-05-23 08:48:37 am

Bananas GOOD, Kremlings BAD

Gay marriage is a convenient redefinition of traditional marriage.

I am against convenient redefinitions.

I am against gay marriage.

Cpadolf:

registered on 2007-02-14 03:32:46 am.

Gender: male

Location: Sweden

view all posts by Gaius_4

2009-05-23 09:21:48 am

Hurr Durr

Quote from tjp7154:

traditional marriage

Things do change though, and has to change with the zeitgeist. This traditional marriage you are speaking of was defined in a time where homosexuality was seen as something horrible, possibly even punishable by death, and as that has changed so must the definition of marriage (just like for example the definition of a negro has changed). In my opinion.

And as far as I know, the tradition of marriage does not originate from the bible or christianity in the first place. So what the bible says on the matter should really not affect how the state acts on it.

Gaius_4:

registered on 2007-07-05 06:10:26 pm.

Gender: male

Gaius_4

2009-05-23 09:26:25 am

In the past few years there had been a study or 2 that showed that women that give birth to more male children... I think it had something to do with the mothers immune system (attacking?) the testosterone/male hormone that their child/fetus/embryo produces. That would cause the younger male children to exhibit more 'effeminate' characteristics.

Other things I've heard are- the boy's father didn't love them enough, so they looked for that "love" in another man (as bizarre as it sounds when put that way). Or their mother dressed them up like a girl. Or some straight men go into prison straight, then come out gay.

I don't believe anyone is born "gay" anymore than anyone is born "straight". It's just how you develop as you get older. And at some point for some people they can come to a fork in the road... Where they wonder if they're one or the other. Then there's Bi-sexuals, but I'm not touching that (that's a whole 'nother can of nasty worms).

Yet, there is a small percentage of gay people that have made the decision to be straight. Strangely enough they decide to make the change through religion... or faith -if you'd prefer.

It's out there on the interwebs if you're curious.

If you were to say that Gays are just "naturally gay" (or born that way) and they don't have any other choice.... A similar thing could be said about myself (as an example). I might say that I'm just naturally skinny and I have no choice. But actually I AM making a choice/decision by not exercising my muscles and choosing a sedentary lifestyle full of laziness. Then take the example of straight men going into prison... etc. The point I'm trying to make is: Things can change if the person wills them to.

Like 2 paragraphs up - Gays can make a decision to change. Not all of them want to, but some might. Not because of peer pressure or that it's a social taboo (in some places), but because they've come to terms with a Loving God that wants the best for them. If they choose to believe what the word of God says, who has the right to tell them they're wrong for THEIR decision? Yeah, I know that sword can cut both ways there... Wink

About legalizing Gay Marriage. I suppose religious types would think it's the government condoning "sodomy". And what if gay "unions" did have the same rights as married couples but it still couldn't be called a "Marriage"? Would that still be unfair? Or is it just the novelty of the "title" that they covet? Razz

I've thought that how so many decades ago anything "Gay" or "Lesbian" was unthinkable *shock and horror!* (that's not saying they didn't exist -of course). Then I've wondered how long it will take before people are defending things like pedophiles and child molesters? NO! I'm not comparing pedophiles to homosexuals and lesbians... I'm only comparing how their social(?) standing was so many years back and how THAT was evil and taboo. Pedophiles and Child Molesters are definitely a bad thing to be (last time I checked :-/)... But for how long? stern

In the past few years there had been a study or 2 that showed that women that give birth to more male children...  I think it had something to do with the mothers immune system (attacking?) the testosterone/male hormone that their child/fetus/embryo produces.  That would cause the younger male children to exhibit more 'effeminate' characteristics.

Other things I've heard are- the boy's father didn't love them enough, so they looked for that "love" in another man (as bizarre as it sounds when put that way).  Or their mother dressed them up like a girl.  Or some straight men go into prison straight, then come out gay.

I don't believe anyone is born "gay" anymore than anyone is born "straight".  It's just how you develop as you get older.  And at some point for some people they can come to a fork in the road...  Where they wonder if they're one or the other.  Then there's Bi-sexuals, but I'm not touching that (that's a whole 'nother can of nasty worms).

Yet, there is a small percentage of gay people that have made the decision to be straight.  Strangely enough they decide to make the change through religion...  or faith -if you'd prefer.  :smile_orig:  It's out there on the interwebs if you're curious.

If you were to say that Gays are just "naturally gay" (or born that way) and they don't have any other choice....  A similar thing could be said about myself (as an example).  I might say that I'm just naturally skinny and I have no choice.  But actually I AM making a choice/decision by [u]not[/u] exercising my muscles and choosing a sedentary lifestyle full of laziness.  Then take the example of straight men going into prison...  etc.  The point I'm trying to make is: Things can change if the person wills them to.

Like 2 paragraphs up - Gays [i]can[/i] make a decision to [i]change[/i].  Not all of them want to, but some might.  Not because of peer pressure or that it's a social taboo (in some places), but because they've come to terms with a Loving God that wants the best for them.  If they choose to believe what the word of God says, who has the right to tell them they're wrong for THEIR decision?  Yeah, I know that sword can cut both ways there...   :wink:

About legalizing Gay Marriage.  I suppose religious types would think it's the government condoning "sodomy".  And what if gay "unions" did have the same rights as married couples but it still couldn't be called a "Marriage"?  Would that still be unfair?  Or is it just the novelty of the "title" that they covet?  :razz:

I've thought that how so many decades ago anything "Gay" or "Lesbian" was unthinkable *shock and horror!* (that's not saying they didn't exist -of course).  Then I've wondered how long it will take before people are defending things like pedophiles and child molesters?  NO!  I'm not comparing pedophiles to homosexuals and lesbians...  I'm only comparing how their social(?) standing was so many years back and how THAT was evil and taboo.  Pedophiles and Child Molesters are definitely a bad thing to be (last time I checked :-/)...  But for how long?   :stern:

Cpadolf:

registered on 2007-02-14 03:32:46 am.

Gender: male

Location: Sweden

view all posts by tjp7154

2009-05-23 09:53:53 am

Hurr Durr

Quote from Gaius_4:

I've thought that how so many decades ago anything "Gay" or "Lesbian" was unthinkable *shock and horror!* (that's not saying they didn't exist -of course). Then I've wondered how long it will take before people are defending things like pedophiles and child molesters? NO! I'm not comparing pedophiles to homosexuals and lesbians... I'm only comparing how their social(?) standing was so many years back and how THAT was evil and taboo. Pedophiles and Child Molesters are definitely a bad thing to be (last time I checked :-/)... But for how long? stern

There is a big difference between homosexuality being taboo and child molestation being taboo. The former comes from peoples fear of what they don't understand or find different/weird, and the latter from the common consensus that harming children is a bad thing (how likely do you think it is that we will return to the morals of a hundred or so years back, when hitting your child was ok?). Furthermore, a homosexual relationship is a consensual act between two people, while child molestation is not. Trust me, child molestation will stay taboo, and illegal.

Note though that pedophiles are not necessarily bad persons, just like homosexuals they have not actively chosen what to be attracted to, and most of them will never try to get it on with a child because they know it is wrong (I have talked to pedophiles on the interwebs).

[quote="Gaius_4"]
I've thought that how so many decades ago anything "Gay" or "Lesbian" was unthinkable *shock and horror!* (that's not saying they didn't exist -of course).  Then I've wondered how long it will take before people are defending things like pedophiles and child molesters?  NO!  I'm not comparing pedophiles to homosexuals and lesbians...  I'm only comparing how their social(?) standing was so many years back and how THAT was evil and taboo.  Pedophiles and Child Molesters are definitely a bad thing to be (last time I checked :-/)...  But for how long?   stern[/quote]

There is a big difference between homosexuality being taboo and child molestation being taboo. The former comes from peoples fear of what they don't understand or find different/weird, and the latter from the common consensus that harming children is a bad thing (how likely do you think it is that we will return to the morals of a hundred or so years back, when hitting your child was ok?). Furthermore, a homosexual relationship is a consensual act between two people, while child molestation is not. Trust me, child molestation will stay taboo, and illegal.

Note though that pedophiles are not necessarily bad persons, just like homosexuals they have not actively chosen what to be attracted to, and most of them will never try to get it on with a child because they know it is wrong (I have talked to pedophiles on the interwebs).

tjp7154:

registered on 2005-04-25 06:31:26 pm.

Location: Place

tjp7154

2009-05-23 09:55:27 am

Bananas GOOD, Kremlings BAD

Quote from Cpadolf:

Quote from tjp7154:

traditional marriage

Things do change though, and has to change with the zeitgeist. This traditional marriage you are speaking of was defined in a time where homosexuality was seen as something horrible, possibly even punishable by death, and as that has changed so must the definition of marriage (just like for example the definition of a negro has changed). In my opinion.

And as far as I know, the tradition of marriage does not originate from the bible or christianity in the first place. So what the bible says on the matter should really not affect how the state acts on it.

The issue of whether or not something comes into law is actually decided by people's motives, beliefs, values, and biases. That's why there is controversy -- thus the issue of whether gay marriage should be legal. The reason for this particular controversy is the definition of marriage. The more people don't care about maintaining the current definition of marriage, the more support for gay marriage.

I call it convenient redefinition because people redefine terms to suit their own interests. Where are the boundaries, hmm?

Change is subjective. It is either good or bad. All things do NOT NEED to change. It is only natural that the laws of today's people change because the standards of the people lawmakers are always changing. Lawmakers are human, too. They have their own opinions, beliefs, and biases that affect their decisions and what is ultimately put into law.

That does NOT mean those changes are good. I don't support gay marriage because I claim that the Creator before man was even created designed marriage and how humanity should act. The tradition of marriage originates from God from the very beginning. God says that homosexuality was never intended and is a result from men disregarding His laws LONG before the decision for homosexuality occurred.

I have my own beliefs and biases, but my claim right now is that I am speaking on behalf of God, the Creator.

[quote="Cpadolf"]
[quote="tjp7154"]traditional marriage[/quote]

Things do change though, and has to change with the zeitgeist. This traditional marriage you are speaking of was defined in a time where homosexuality was seen as something horrible, possibly even punishable by death, and as that has changed so must the definition of marriage (just like for example the definition of a negro has changed). In my opinion.

And as far as I know, the tradition of marriage does not originate from the bible or christianity in the first place. So what the bible says on the matter should really not affect how the state acts on it.
[/quote]

The issue of whether or not something comes into law is actually decided by people's motives, beliefs, values, and biases.  That's why there is controversy -- thus the issue of whether gay marriage should be legal.  The reason for this particular controversy is the definition of marriage.  The more people don't care about maintaining the current definition of marriage, the more support for gay marriage.

I call it convenient redefinition because people redefine terms to suit their own interests.  Where are the boundaries, hmm?

Change is subjective.  It is either good or bad.  All things do NOT NEED to change.  It is only natural that the laws of today's people change because the standards of the people lawmakers are always changing.  Lawmakers are human, too.  They have their own opinions, beliefs, and biases that affect their decisions and what is ultimately put into law.

That does NOT mean those changes are good.  I don't support gay marriage because I claim that the Creator before man was even created designed marriage and how humanity should act.  The tradition of marriage originates from God from the very beginning.  God says that homosexuality was never intended and is a result from men disregarding His laws LONG before the decision for homosexuality occurred.

I have my own beliefs and biases, but my claim right now is that I am speaking on behalf of God, the Creator.

arkarian:

is in the group Administrator.

registered on 2004-09-01 04:15:32 pm.

Gender: male

Location: ellicott city, md, usa

view all posts by arkarian

arkarian

2009-05-23 12:04:36 pm

mindfulness

fully erect

you're comparing being gay to being skinny?

lol

Opium:

registered on 2008-08-19 01:51:50 pm.

Gender: female

view all posts by Metroid Menace

2009-05-23 01:09:33 pm

Servin' you realness!!

Quote from tjp7154:

The issue of whether or not something comes into law is actually decided by people's motives, beliefs, values, and biases. That's why there is controversy -- thus the issue of whether gay marriage should be legal. The reason for this particular controversy is the definition of marriage. The more people don't care about maintaining the current definition of marriage, the more support for gay marriage.

The proponents of gay marriage's motives, beliefs, values, and biases are for equality and when they succeed it will have no bearing upon how you live your life so to make a conscious effort to deny them that is just plain cruel. Your definition of marriage is whatever you want it to be, nobody is seeking to change that. It is the law's definition of marriage that is being challenged.

Quote from tjp7154:

I call it convenient redefinition because people redefine terms to suit their own interests. Where are the boundaries, hmm?

It's not a matter of 'convenience' for people who are fighting for equal rights. The boundaries are simple: People should be treated equally and have all the same rights, benefits, freedoms, and chances to be happy as everyone else as long as they aren't hurting anyone else. It's that simple.

Quote from tjp7154:

Change is subjective. It is either good or bad. All things do NOT NEED to change. It is only natural that the laws of today's people change because the standards of the people lawmakers are always changing. Lawmakers are human, too. They have their own opinions, beliefs, and biases that affect their decisions and what is ultimately put into law.

That does NOT mean those changes are good. I don't support gay marriage because I claim that the Creator before man was even created designed marriage and how humanity should act. The tradition of marriage originates from God from the very beginning. God says that homosexuality was never intended and is a result from men disregarding His laws LONG before the decision for homosexuality occurred. I have my own beliefs and biases, but my claim right now is that I am speaking on behalf of God, the Creator.

Similar arguments were made by those who opposed freeing slaves, and a myriad of other changes that we have made over the centuries. For the record, God never said homosexuality was never intended - in fact GOD never said anything at all. That dusty old book was written by primitive men a long time ago and if you believe it to be the word of some mythical being then I challenge you to apply the same logic that tells you there are no unicorns, leprechauns, etc. I would like to hear you make a valid argument against gay marriage using your OWN RATIONALE AND LOGIC and not 'because it says so in the bible'. If you're going to start quoting the bible then there are about a hundred things that are stated quite clearly in the bible that we absolutely deem to be morally wrong in today's world and would never practice. Do you just cherry-pick things from the bible to uphold and ignore others? And what do your religious beliefs have to do with anyone but yourself anyways? The idea that your religious OPINIONS are a basis for law is completely unamerican, as stated clearly in the quote from Thomas Jefferson I posted a couple pages back.

[quote="tjp7154"]

The issue of whether or not something comes into law is actually decided by people's motives, beliefs, values, and biases.  That's why there is controversy -- thus the issue of whether gay marriage should be legal.  The reason for this particular controversy is the definition of marriage.  The more people don't care about maintaining the current definition of marriage, the more support for gay marriage. [/quote]

The proponents of gay marriage's motives, beliefs, values, and biases are for equality and when they succeed it will have no bearing upon how you live your life so to make a conscious effort to deny them that is just plain cruel.   Your definition of marriage is whatever you want it to be, nobody is seeking to change that.  It is the law's definition of marriage that is being challenged.

[quote="tjp7154"]

I call it convenient redefinition because people redefine terms to suit their own interests.  Where are the boundaries, hmm?[/quote]

It's not a matter of 'convenience' for people who are fighting for equal rights.  The boundaries are simple:  People should be treated equally and have all the same rights, benefits, freedoms, and chances to be happy as everyone else as long as they aren't hurting anyone else.  It's that simple.

[quote="tjp7154"]

Change is subjective.  It is either good or bad.  All things do NOT NEED to change.  It is only natural that the laws of today's people change because the standards of the people lawmakers are always changing.  Lawmakers are human, too.  They have their own opinions, beliefs, and biases that affect their decisions and what is ultimately put into law.

That does NOT mean those changes are good.  I don't support gay marriage because I claim that the Creator before man was even created designed marriage and how humanity should act.  The tradition of marriage originates from God from the very beginning.  God says that homosexuality was never intended and is a result from men disregarding His laws LONG before the decision for homosexuality occurred. I have my own beliefs and biases, but my claim right now is that I am speaking on behalf of God, the Creator.[/quote]

Similar arguments were made by those who opposed freeing slaves, and a myriad of other changes that we have made over the centuries.  For the record, God never said homosexuality was never intended - in fact GOD never said anything at all.  That dusty old book was written by primitive men a long time ago and if you believe it to be the word of some mythical being then I challenge you to apply the same logic that tells you there are no unicorns, leprechauns, etc.  I would like to hear you make a valid argument against gay marriage using your OWN RATIONALE AND LOGIC and not 'because it says so in the bible'.  If you're going to start quoting the bible then there are about a hundred things that are stated quite clearly in the bible that we absolutely deem to be morally wrong in today's world and would never practice.  Do you just cherry-pick things from the bible to uphold and ignore others?  And what do your religious beliefs have to do with anyone but yourself anyways?  The idea that your religious OPINIONS are a basis for law is completely unamerican, as stated clearly in the quote from Thomas Jefferson I posted a couple pages back.

Metroid Menace:

registered on 2004-02-14 06:22:37 pm.

Gender: male

Location: Canada

Metroid Menace

2009-05-23 02:33:32 pm

I'd like to point out that this "therapy" that turns someone gay into a straight essentially just makes them a closet case again. I like how straight people pretend to know how it works, unless you've sat down and seriously tried to become gay for a day yourself like you expect gay people to turn straight by simple "will". How would one explain all the suicides? They've tried and tried and realize that it's something one cannot change.

Quote:

Then take the example of straight men going into prison

You don't understand how prison sex works.

Opium, <3.

RT-55J:

registered on 2004-11-03 09:20:11 am.

Location: Wild Side Arcade

view all posts by RT-55J

RT-55J

2009-05-23 02:57:59 pm

Armor Guardian

I'm too lazy to actually read through this topic, so I'll just say I voted "Against" and leave it at that.

SABERinBLUE:

is in the group Global Moderator.

registered on 2004-03-06 12:11:57 pm.

Location: Waco, TX

view all posts by SABERinBLUE

SABERinBLUE

2009-05-23 04:44:46 pm

Cook of the Sea

Let's have some facts, shall we?

FACT 1: No one in this entire world is 100% straight or gay. Sexuality is incredibly complicated within each individual and many different factors contribute to any given person's sexual identity.

FACT 2: Everyone can choose to become sexually involved with either gender.

FACT 3: People cannot choose who exactly, gender or otherwise, they can be happy with and fulfilled by in terms of a sexual relationship.

FACT 4: Homosexuality does not have to be genetic for there to be no choice involved about how straight or gay an individual is. If everyone is born neutral and the sexual identity is built up during the early life, that is still far beyond a person's ability to control. If, to take an absurd scenario, everyone who sees a stop sign at the instant they become seven years old will grow up fancying their own gender, that doesn't mean that they necessarily know this or are able to choose whether or not to do this. Even if they were, as a rule, able to choose, they would be too young at seven to be able to intelligently make this choice and should not be held accountable for this in their adult life, whatever form that accountability might take.

Let's have some facts, shall we?

FACT 1:  No one in this entire world is 100% straight or gay.  Sexuality is incredibly complicated within each individual and many different factors contribute to any given person's sexual identity.

FACT 2:  Everyone can choose to become sexually involved with either gender.

FACT 3:  People cannot choose who exactly, gender or otherwise, they can be happy with and fulfilled by in terms of a sexual relationship.

FACT 4:  Homosexuality does not have to be genetic for there to be no choice involved about how straight or gay an individual is.  If everyone is born neutral and the sexual identity is built up during the early life, that is still far beyond a person's ability to control.  If, to take an absurd scenario, everyone who sees a stop sign at the instant they become seven years old will grow up fancying their own gender, that doesn't mean that they necessarily know this or are able to choose whether or not to do this.  Even if they were, as a rule, able to choose, they would be too young at seven to be able to intelligently make this choice and should not be held accountable for this in their adult life, whatever form that accountability might take.

tomatobob:

registered on 2004-03-27 12:44:30 am.

Gender: male

Location: O'er yon hill

view all posts by tomatobob

tomatobob

2009-05-23 04:55:23 pm

Never stressed

Quote from Opium:

And what do your religious beliefs have to do with anyone but yourself anyways? The idea that your religious OPINIONS are a basis for law is completely unamerican

HEAR THAT! YOUR OPINIONS ARE UNAMURICAN TAKE YER SOCIALIST OPINIONS BACK TO CANADA YA DAMNED COMMIE PINKO FAGGOT!

Gaius_4:

registered on 2007-07-05 06:10:26 pm.

Gender: male

view all posts by Gaius_4

Gaius_4

2009-05-23 06:23:40 pm

Quote from arkarian:

you're comparing being gay to being skinny?

lol

I know it sounds... well, okay. Stupid. But lets say someone is naturally "straight". I'm suggesting that they could take the time and make themselves' gay if they put forth the effort. So why wouldn't it work in reverse?

The point I was trying to make was when someone says Gays don't have a choice in what they are or how they feel isn't a completely true statement. There is a "choice" in what they choose NOT to do. To those that hold religious/moral views on the matter might call it 'self correction'.

Cpadolf:

registered on 2007-02-14 03:32:46 am.

Gender: male

Location: Sweden