Gay Marriage thread

[Elfie]

Originally posted by BluKitty
So your argurements are based on religious grounds?


Sorry, But I find that UNAMERICAN.  Maybe you should find another country if you want a theocracy.

I happen to belive in the Constitution and great men like Hamilton.

Freedom of Religion is as AMERICAN as it gets. I dont want a theocracy and have never stated such.

I guess you believe in the Constitution until you get to the Freedom of Religion part?

Vudak, you might be right about some wealthy individual helping out with legal fees, somehow I kinda doubt that groups of people that dont belong to any church would donate for the cause. To many folks think like Blukitty unfortunately.

[BluKitty]

Your the one who wants to base Laws on religous books of ambiguous orgin.

Seperation of church and state is to keep such things seperate.  

Any argurment made on religion is moot, you can find another realigion. and another and another.... where does it stop?  Well that's why the Consititustion explicitly says to not base the goverment on religion.

What's the largest religion in the world?  Should we just adopt it's rules because it's the majority?

No ... that would be UnAmerican

[Debonair]

HERMAPHRODITES!

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
no curval... you either admit that some exceptions are ok  and therfore gays can be excluded or... that there can be no exceptions between two humans.

That is the end of the match... you can't play any longer so it is over.

I can't play?  Why not?  Because you say so?  lol

You hair splitting example is about as silly as it gets.

Should gay people be allowed to marry?  THAT is the issue at hand.  If you want to start a thread about siblings getting married please do so.

[Elfie]

Originally posted by BluKitty
Your the one who wants to base Laws on religous books of ambiguous orgin.

Seperation of church and state is to keep such things seperate.  

Any argurment made on religion is moot, you can find another realigion. and another and another.... where does it stop?  Well that's why the Consititustion explicitly says to not base the goverment on religion.

What's the largest religion in the world?  Should we just adopt it's rules because it's the majority?

No ... that would be UnAmerican

I'm guessing you need to (re)read Seagoon's response to another poster on this exact same issue, so I copied and pasted it just for you.

What people believe determines the way they vote and ultimately the way they legislate in a representative democracy. Let's take an atheist for example, he believes that there is no God and that there are no absolutes, only rules of conduct determined via preference and then enforced by the civil magistrate. Let us say that this atheist happens to believe homosexuality is offensive and "unnatural." His preference therefore will be for the state not to redefine marriage in order to allow same-sex marriages. So he votes in accordance with this belief, and calls his legislators to express his desire that they act in accordance with what he believes. He is acting legally according to his preferences and his beliefs, and in a representative democracy he has a right to do that.

Now let us take a Christian. He believes that there is a God, and that this God has revealed his will unto mankind in the Bible, and he believes that the Bible teaches that marriage was established between one man and one woman, and that any other union would be wrong. So he too votes in accordance with his belief, and calls his legislators to express his desire that they act in accordance with his beliefs, and in a representative democracy he too has a right to do that.

So Billy would you prefer:

1) The right to vote and engage in political activity be taken away from religious people.

or

2) The right to vote and engage in political activity be taken away from bible-believing Christians

or

3) Put up with the fact that people who believe things that you don't are going to end up voting and engaging in political activity

Personally, I'm willing to endure 3 and have never suggested disenfranchising any citizen regardless of what he believes.

- SEAGOON

Blukitty if Homosexual marriages ever make it to the ballot in Colorado I will be exercising a *no* vote. That is my right to do so regardless of my reasons for voting no instead of yes. Just as it is YOUR right to vote yes for whatever reasons you believe to be right.

*edit* What your post implies is disenfranchising citizens with religious views to maintain Separation of Church and State.

The following is taken from http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/qmadison.htm a website dedicated to the First Amendment.

This is James Madison's summary of the First amendment. Madison is generally known as the Father of the Constititution.

Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730 - 731).

Separation of Church and State has nothing to do with me or any other Bible believing Christian voting our conscience based on our religious views.

[Elfie]

Originally posted by eskimo2
One more time:

Suppose that two siblings live together (non-sexually/incestually) and decide that they want to raise children together. Does the government have any right to deny them any rights or privileges that it grants a married couple? If so, why?

I would say yes, the government does have the right to deny privileges that married couples get simply because they are NOT married. /shrug

[BluKitty]

Most of the south wanted slavery too.... they would have voted for it.  How long were Jim Crow laws voted for?

So lets put it to a vote then, a national referendum.

Come on define the sexes.   I know your smarter than the worlds leading scientists... you can do it with your bible.

[Elfie]

Originally posted by BluKitty
Most of the south wanted slavery too.... they would have voted for it.  How long were Jim Crow laws voted for?

So lets put it to a vote then, a national referendum.

Come on define the sexes.   I know your smarter than the worlds leading scientists... you can do it with your bible.

Slavery has nothing to do with this issue. The slavery issue was rectified 140 yrs ago in this country and rightfully so. Imo it should have been stopped when it first started. Racist laws that made blacks sit in the back of the bus, drink from separate water fountains etc etc etc have been rectified in this country.....and rightfully so.

I have already stated that no one can define the sexes in the way that you want them defined. It just isnt possible because even the world's leading scientists havent broken the DNA code for humans (or any other species for that matter) completely. In fact, that work is still in it's beginning stages with the majority of our DNA code still being unknown.

As far as what the Bible has to say on the sexes:

Gen 1:27  And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.

If this issue does make it to a national referendum I suspect it will turn out like the vote in California did with approx. 61% of the people voting no.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Curval
You obviously haven't read many of my threads.

Way too many. Read one, you`ve pretty well read em all.

You cannot place me in a stereotypical "liberal" light.

I don`t have to. You have done a fine job of that all by yourself. I do not wish to place you period.

Canned bible thumping concervatism is what I see from you in this thread.

LOL I haven`t made reference to the bible or my religion other than to ask one to enlighten me on what he knew about my religion. I have stated my views and beliefs, nothing more , nothing less. I realize that`s hard for you to get a grip on, but hey.........................

you don't go anywhere.

I don`t. That`s strange. lmao

I was in Mumbai India in December, Boston last week, I go to Toronto on May 31st, the UK in July for the Farnsborough airshow and then I travel to Uganda (that is in Africa, just so you are clear) in August.

Shame you didn`t get to go anywhere worth going to, but hey, that`s not my fault.

Where have you been or where do you plan to travel during these times?

Oh I`ve just kicked around mindlessly in 7 or 8 states here in the good ole U.S. of A. Not all of us can have it so good, so don`t let it get ya down. Ya see, none of the places I went to I had to go to. I went because I wanted to, got to take my time and do what I wanted to do when and where I wanted to do it.

You are so anti gay marriage that "methinks you doth protest too much"

And I have still haven`t  gotten my answer to why a straight male would get so solidly "behind" ( Pun intended) the gay movement. Amazing.

Wearing pink shorts every once in a while will not change that.

[Vudak]

Jackal, I have responded to your question of why I am so solidly for gay marriage.  Page 3.

I do have a few gay friends though and they're good guys (and one girl), and good people. I feel bad for them and sympathize with their plight. Also they are a minority. If people like me don't step up for them then their votes are always going to be in the minority. Even with people like me, they still are, but perhaps not forever.

So that's why I stand up for them.

In fairness, it was preceeded by a lame joke about how you and I could get it on, so I could see why you would quickly scroll down and miss the rest

[Vudak]

I have to say, I find it interesting that some of the same people who say that supporters of gay marriage can't use interracial marriage and such because it's "Not the issue", are using hermanphrodite marriage and pedafiles wanting to marry children as some of their own main points.

C'mon, someone's gotta find that ironic

[RedTop]

Whats a chair turned upside down called in a gay bar?

Seating for 4

[Curval]

Originally posted by Jackal1
Way too many. Read one, you`ve pretty well read em all.

Try reading them without your blinding bias.

I don`t have to. You have done a fine job of that all by yourself. I do not wish to place you period.

Yes you do.  You want to "place me" into your stereotypical image of a liberal.  On so many counts you'd be wrong.

LOL I haven`t made reference to the bible or my religion other than to ask one to enlighten me on what he knew about my religion. I have stated my views and beliefs, nothing more , nothing less. I realize that`s hard for you to get a grip on, but hey.........................

Your views are simply regurgitated right wing ultraconservatism.  You show absolutely no original thought in anything you write.  Just because I said "bible thumping" does not mean I think you are religious....it is simply a way to describe your neoconservatism...it's right out of the bible-belt.
 
Shame you didn`t get to go anywhere worth going to, but hey, that`s not my fault.

Again, you simply demonstrate your ignorance.  
 
Oh I`ve just kicked around mindlessly in 7 or 8 states here in the good ole U.S. of A. Not all of us can have it so good, so don`t let it get ya down. Ya see, none of the places I went to I had to go to. I went because I wanted to, got to take my time and do what I wanted to do when and where I wanted to do it.

Guess what..I wanted to go to the places I went to also.  You should try and "get out more"...outside the good ole U.S.of A.  You might then have some valid opinions.

And I have still haven`t  gotten my answer to why a straight male would get so solidly "behind" ( Pun intended) the gay movement. Amazing.

A very close family friend, who just past away (from natural causes), was gay.  He was a doctor in charge of a very large New York hospital.  The man dedicated his life to pediatrics and saving children from abuse.  He wrote numerous books and helped thousands of children.  His foundation raised millions of dollars for various causes and he was recently honoured by the City of New York for his life's work.  

He saved my grandfather's life on two separate occasions and saved my father's life on another.

To an ignoramus like you he was just a studmuffin though.

[Vudak]

I'm sorry to hear that Curval, sounds like he did much for the world.

I have to wonder what would have been said if you didn't specify natural causes.

Oh and Jackal - If you have the means, definately travel the world, Sir! Such a culture shock, it's fun

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Vudak
Jackal, I have responded to your question of why I am so solidly for gay marriage.  Page 3.
"I do have a few gay friends though and they're good guys (and one girl), and good people. I feel bad for them and sympathize with their plight. Also they are a minority. If people like me don't step up for them then their votes are always going to be in the minority. Even with people like me, they still are, but perhaps not forever."

   Yea, I read it.....and it didn`t answer the question. As a matter of fact it pretty well sums up the asking of the question. Poor little twinkle toes are a minority. You betcha sweet bippy they are a minority in society. So are pedophiles and mass murderers also. You feel sorry for them based on that fact too?
They choose to live a life that disgraces themselves. They will get no sympathy from me. More importantly , they will get no "friendship". That is what raises the question that has yet to be answered.

Oh and Jackal - If you have the means, definately travel the world, Sir! Such a culture shock, it's fun

Since you seem to have come in late on this issue, we`ll go over it again.
I have seen the places of the world that I have a desire to see with a couple of exceptions. Some of the places I have seen I could have done without the experience if you get my drift. I have no desire , nor do I intend to or find it
necessary to visit some place that I have no interest whatsoever in to do the old "I`ve been there" bit. Waste of time.
One of the countries I wouldn`t mind visiting if the occasion arises is Aus. I have a couple of firends who live there. One in Sydney, one in Perth.
The other is certain areas of Africa . It wouldn`t be to absorb the country`s culture, but to spend thirty days in the bush to hunt. Seriously doubt that will ever happen, but you never know.
The rest you can have, along with the "culture shock".