I had no idea (caution gay thread)

[Chucktshoes]

I have strong religious beliefs against homosexuality and gay marriage. I also believe that lying, stealing, murder, and many other things are wrong, too. The fact that some of these things are illegal and others are not makes no difference. I'm not against murder because it's illegal. I'm against it because it's wrong based on my Christian upbringing.

That doesn't mean everything I believe is wrong should be illegal and it doesn't mean everything I believe is right should hold the power of law either. If it did, blasphemy would be illegal and being truly repentant would get you out of jail.

So, I believe that gays should be allowed every privilege under the law that I have and that the government should not honor Church marriages. We should all have to get civil unions to appease the government in order to get all the benefits they dole out to get our votes. Likewise, I'll get married in a church, if want all the benefits God doles out.

Another +1 here. You said it much better than I was able to.

As an aside: I have been saying that the .gov needs to be out of the business of marriage for years. Civil union contracts for all to handle the inheritance, property, next of kin, and the other issues currently associated with marriage are the way to go. It is really awesome to hear more and more people from all political persuasions take up this position.

Edited September 4, 2012 by Chucktshoes

[Links2k]

You'd think so Strick, but you'd be wrong. You've been talking to the American Taliban.

I don't have the adjectives to describe how much I agree with this statement.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Hey, I'm proud to be an American Heathen.

Seriously, I find the suggestion that this country should legislate based on anyone's interpretation of "god's will" to be quite repugnant.

Perhaps we should harken back to the days of our heritage when the King of England was also the head of the Church, and the Pope was his veep.

- OS

Yeah, you've stated many times on this forum you're a nonbeliever, but at this time you're still in the minority of people of our country that believe in God. This country may yet eventually become a heathen nation, but maybe we should harken back to the days of the Old Testament when the Jews followed God's laws, and they lived securely and prospered abundantly until they became stiff necked and started worshiping false idols, and forgetting God's laws. Then God would punish them and they would turn back to God for awhile, but then would return to their sinful living until God tired of their sin, and he finally decided to disperse them them all over the world for over two thousand years until 1948 when Israel regained their statehood of a nation. I believe there are parallels of America today and the OT Israel. To most believers, it is no wonder to what is happening to America in regards to moral decadence, decline in prosperity, decline in world influence. Maybe the chickens are really coming home to roost in America because of our sin against God. But of course I'm not going to convince you or other nonbelievers.

Edited September 4, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Smith]

If only they would see that when the wish to legislate morality and behavior based upon their religious beliefs, they are acting exactly the same the Taliban. I say this not as an atheist or even a very liberal Christian, but as a reasonably conservative one. The Lord's desires for us must be taken on willingly and happily. Just as the liberals get no credit for charity by using the government's gun to support people by way of social welfare programs, we get no credit for morality by forcing folks to live in a manner in which we approve by legislating Christian morality.

Or entire system is built on Christian morality and all legislation is morality. Not sure where you guys think they septate? You can't have your cake and eat it to. You want Constitutional law? You have to accept the precepts it was founded on. If not you destabilize the entire system and no longer have rule of law, but rather rule of anarchy. Or as the rest of the world knows it... Europe.

[Chucktshoes]

Have you ever read "The Law" by Frederick Bastiat? In that he lays out a very simple and succinct definition of what constitutes a valid basis for any law. My summary of it is that if a law exists to protect the liberty of the individual from being violated by others then it is valid. Any law that does not directly protect the individual's liberty, especially if it violates the individual's liberty is invalid. Life, liberty and property are not granted by government, but predate its existence. The only valid basis for any government is the protection of life, liberty and property.

If we applied that measure to our own local, state and federal statutes I would WAG that over 90% of our laws would disappear. We would be better off for it.

Edited September 4, 2012 by Chucktshoes

[TMF]

I have strong religious beliefs against homosexuality and gay marriage. I also believe that lying, stealing, murder, and many other things are wrong, too. The fact that some of these things are illegal and others are not makes no difference. I'm not against murder because it's illegal. I'm against it because it's wrong based on my Christian upbringing.

That doesn't mean everything I believe is wrong should be illegal and it doesn't mean everything I believe is right should hold the power of law either. If it did, blasphemy would be illegal and being truly repentant would get you out of jail.

So, I believe that gays should be allowed every privilege under the law that I have and that the government should not honor Church marriages. We should all have to get civil unions to appease the government in order to get all the benefits they dole out to get our votes. Likewise, I'll get married in a church, if want all the benefits God doles out.

It is really this simple. The complicated part would be getting the folks on the far side of each issue to compromise to this. Instead it will be a game of tug-a-war that will continue on for the foreseeable future with both sides being unreasonable and over the top. In the end, gay marriage will be recognized by the gov and the country will continue on, or we'll all die in a fiery brimstone hailstorm, just like when women got the right to vote.

[daddyo]

It occurs commonly in animals. Doesn't get much more natural than nature. Besides, the argument from most gay folks is that it is natural to them.

Ah, I found it. Abijah had 14 wives in 2nd Chronicles 13:21, and Abraham took Hagar the Egyptian as a second wife in Genesis 25:1. There are others, but thos are the first two that I found.

Animals have no choice. We do.

[Guest ThePunisher]

So your suggestion is that homosexual behaviors do not exist in nature (outside of humans)?

What I'm saying is that homosexuality among man and woman is against Nature. God said to Adam and Noah: "Be fruitful, multiply and replenish the earth". If Adam or Noah or their sons and daughters had adopted a life of total homosexuality, the human race would have come to an end.

Genesis 19 explains God's view about homosexuality.

[Guest ThePunisher]

It occurs commonly in animals. Doesn't get much more natural than nature. Besides, the argument from most gay folks is that it is natural to them.

Do you think it would be natural for you to have homosexual sex?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Interesting how people would rather

take the easy way out and give gays

something they don't have, rather

than fix an existing law or two to make

their so-called marriage like a traditional

one by changing a couple legal matters.

Hell, Y'all keep it up. You like your

government and keep on giving it

up to them. Doesn't matter what it's about.

Nothing like a gay thread to confuse

and divide.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BigK]

I wish we could garner as much support (not laws, mind you) against wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony as we do against gay marriage. I feel we Christians often pick out battles unwisely at some times. There's way worse things going on out there than 2 homos shacking up.

To be fair...the sloths and gluttons of the world aren't pushing their "sins" in our face demanding acceptance.

It wasn't too long ago that women and blacks didn't have all the rights they do now. It took this country a while to get it's act together, but in the end, they got the equality they deserved all along. However, both groups still claim to be oppressed in some way and say most of America is still sexist and/or racist.

With gays, they already have all the individual rights, but not the "couples rights". Will gay marriage really end all their "problems" or will America still be homophobic long after equality is legislated?

Edited September 4, 2012 by BigK

[Mike.357]

Do you think it would be natural for you to have homosexual sex?

I would think it is very natural for a gay man to have sex with another man. not natural for a hetero man to have gay sex.

I don't think it is something a person wakes up one day and just decides. You are either gay or straight or even a little of both. It's how God made you.

(assuming you believe in God)

[daddyo]

I would think it is very natural for a gay man to have sex with another man. not natural for a hetero man to have gay sex.

I don't think it is something a person wakes up one day and just decides. You are either gay or straight or even a little of both. It's how God made you.

(assuming you believe in God)

Did they find the gay gene while I was asleep last night?

[BigK]

I don't think it is something a person wakes up one day and just decides. You are either gay or straight or even a little of both. It's how God made you.

(assuming you believe in God)

Pedophile priests use the "I am as God made me" excuse too. By that same argument in a theocratic society, someone might use a "natural-born killer" excuse some day. Fortunately for our society, both crimes have victims and that is not allowed to be used as an excuse!

I like steak and fried taters and eat too much of each whenever I get a chance. I don't blame God for making me fat, because I like both too much. I know I shouldn't overindulge in either. There's way more scientific support for the existence of "fat genes" than there are "gay genes", but I don't agree with either.

[Mike.357]

why does being gay have to be genetic?

I think Robin Meade is hot, is that my genes doing the thinking?

[TMF]

I think Robin Meade is hot, is that my genes doing the thinking?

Perhaps it isn't genetic, but it WOULD be unnatural to not find her incredibly hot. If I was to take up stalking, she is where I would start.

[Mike.357]

That's the point. You, I and roughly 90 odd percent of men find her hot. The ones that don't did not wake up one day and decide she does not do it for them, she never did, no woman did. They like men and I am fine with it. They should be able to pursue happiness and for many that would include getting married.

[Smith]

I would think it is very natural for a gay man to have sex with another man. not natural for a hetero man to have gay sex.

I don't think it is something a person wakes up one day and just decides. You are either gay or straight or even a little of both. It's how God made you.

(assuming you believe in God)

why does being gay have to be genetic?

I think Robin Meade is hot, is that my genes doing the thinking?

Mike?

I have no problem with it being genetic like any other of the many problematic genetic disorders and tendencies that people have. That being said it is not an excuse to choose the wrong thing. I feel for the guy who struggles with alcoholism but I don't just condone it because he was "born that way". There are people born with tendencies towards violence and murder. Does that make it OK? Just because a choice is hard does not mean you don't have to make the right one and the deal with the consequences that come with it choosing the wrong one.

[Mike.357]

seriously you equate being gay with tendencies to commit violent crimes or be an alcoholic?

why should their be consequences for being gay? They aren't hurting anyone. All I have known ( quite a few actually) are normal people.

[Guest HvyMtl]

A lot of you go back to your religous beliefs to point out the 'wrongness' of gays. Other religions may not have the same beliefs as you. Do you wish to push your religious beliefs upon those who do not agree with them? Do you want them to do the same to you? Think hard. The separation is there for purposes and reasons.

Again, Think.

Now, lets see what the U.S. would look like if the separation was not there. The majority of the population is Catholic. So. We would all be forced to be Catholic. Many of those positing their religious views here certainly are not Catholic. Would you like to be forced to be Catholic? (Recall the Spanish Inquisition, as an extreme of forcing religion on others.) If the majority of the population was Muslim, would you like to be forced to become Muslim by the government?

Of course not. I bet you even condemn governements who force one religion over the others. So, I ask you simply this: Please keep religion out of the government as much as possible. It can get out of control and be very detrimental.

Now, what non-religous barrier would prevent homosexuals from having the same governmental granted privileges and rights as you?

Edited September 4, 2012 by HvyMtl

[Smith]

seriously you equate being gay with tendencies to commit violent crimes or be an alcoholic?

why should their be consequences for being gay? They aren't hurting anyone. All I have known ( quite a few actually) are normal people.

Mike, I equated genetic disorders and abnormalities to homosexuality. Before you get bent out of shape by that, if that stats are right even on the high end and it is 15% of the population is homosexual worldwide, then by those facts alone it is scientifically an abnormality. An no color of eyes, skin color, etc are not abnormalitites they are traits.

A lot of you go back to your religous beliefs to point out the 'wrongness' of gays. Other religions may not have the same beliefs as you. Do you wish to push your religious beliefs upon those who do not agree with them? Do you want them to do the same to you? Think hard. The separation is there for purposes and reasons.

Again, Think.

Now, lets see what the U.S. would look like if the separation was not there. The majority of the population is Catholic. So. We would all be forced to be Catholic. Many of those positing their religious views here certainly are not Catholic. Would you like to be forced to be Catholic? (Recall the Spanish Inquisition, as an extreme of forcing religion on others.) If the majority of the population was Muslim, would you like to be forced to become Muslim by the government?

Of course not. I bet you even condemn governements who force one religion over the others. So, I ask you simply this: Please keep religion out of the government as much as possible. It can get out of control and be very detrimental.

Now, what non-religous barrier would prevent homosexuals from having the same governmental granted privileges and rights as you?

Are you reading? The main reason I believe is to prevent the very thing you are proposing above. Whether it comes from the religion of gnosticism, aethism, secularism, or any other ism.

All the benefits of marriage can be had through civil unions, living trust, wills, etc. As far as insurance is concerned ether problem with that is that family policies are built around the idea of child producing families. I'm still against the government writing policies based on socio political ideology.

The biggest impact reason I'm against gay marriage, outside of the moral and definition reasons already mentioned, is that the state well be dictating to the church what it can and can't believe and hold to as far as theology and practice. I believe that if it is made legal there will be "new" civil rights and discrimination suits against churches and pastors who do not acknowledge or accept the practice. If it its recognized as a right, them it has to be protected by the government and that is done through the legal system. You will then have the very thing strickj was arguing so adamantly against. The starte, in essence, would become the religious author of theology and practice. Some will say that is far fetched, but I always thought it was far fetched that the generation that lived thorough the Cold War would elect a a socialist President. Just look at what Obama Care is threatning to do to hospitals who well not preform abortions.

[Mike.357]

Mike, I equated genetic disorders and abnormalities to homosexuality. Before you get bent out of shape by that, if that stats are right even on the high end and it is 15% of the population is homosexual worldwide, then by those facts alone it is scientifically an abnormality. An no color of eyes, skin color, etc are not abnormalitites they are traits.

I am not bent out of shape, lol. If 10% of the population is gay I don't consider it an abnormality, but rather a variance. That is a lot of people.

Being gay is very normal. Ask a gay person.

[daddyo]

Gays may be very comfortable with being gay, but that doesn't mean it's normal.

[Smith]

Smith, on 04 September 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

Mike, I equated genetic disorders and abnormalities to homosexuality. Before you get bent out of shape by that, if that stats are right even on the high end and it is 15% of the population is homosexual worldwide, then by those facts alone it is scientifically an abnormality. An no color of eyes, skin color, etc are not abnormalitites they are traits.

I am not bent out of shape, lol. If 10% of the population is gay I don't consider it an abnormality, but rather a variance. That is a lot of people.

Being gay is very normal. Ask a gay person.

so is alcoholism drug abuse obesity and a number other genetic disorders. ask anyone in prison.

[Smith]

by the way there a number who seek counseling and help who are not comfortable with who they are.