General Chat / San Francisco Allows Gay Marriages

[font="Arial"]
In S&G wasn't it angels that came down and just destroyed the place?
[/font]

Pym, being closed-minded and not agreeing with the Bible are different. I've grown up listening to the stories of the Bible. I've gone to Catholic school all of my life. I've experienced baptism, reconciliation, communion and confirmation. I've been going to church since I can remember. Religion has been a big part of my life. Thing is, I didn't choose it. I didn't really think about what I've read and what I've been taught until now. And, after thinking about it, other things seem to make more sense than what I've been taught out of the Bible and in church. There's also a major difference between being closed-mided in the Bible and God. I don't really agree with the Bible as of right now, but that in no way means that I am rejecting God. I don't need that to believe in God. I feel like all of that is trapping me from exploring what all is out there, all those different opinions that I have yet to know about. I've never been really happy to go to Church, my religion classes haven't taught me anything of importance, and just relying solely on one book like the Bible is terribly unfortunate when there is alot more out there to be explored, I suppose it is I who feels sorry for you.

pyms post makes no sense...
and the whole conversation with ed went right over dawg's head.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience with a GAY person.
But what led you to believe that sodomy is a sin?
You gave up when you said:

. I know one man's actions can't speak for all homosexuals, but that event did have a major impact on my opinion.

this is you admitting that your argument is flawed, because you admit your empty bias.
If you know that one man's actions can't speak for all, then why let it? You are just being weak minded, and that's why ed gave up on you.


oh...
and heres how soddom works:
for one, the part which describes the men of soddom as "wanting to know" the angels was not an allusion to wanting consenting homosexual sex. It's talking purely about rape, intent to hurt; most likely kill. You know why? Lets look at the info provided there shall we?...

The first proof that it was simply rape, and not homosexual sex being implied is due to the man offering up his daughters to the men of soddom. Now tell me... why would he, living in this city, be so ignorant to not know that all those men of soddom were gay? The answer is he wouldn't, he simply would not offer anything of that sort if he knew they were homosexual. He would not have done it in panic either.
The second proof is that of the word "know". When it was taken from the older scripts, it was kept intact from the original hebrew. Yet, the instances of the word "know" outside of sodom to describe sexual advance is zero. However, the number of times "know" is used to allude to violent threat is in the hundreds. So the context before it even got the first english translation (king james... i think) wasn't even sexual in nature at all.

Just think about that for awhile.

I have been going to church as a methodist since I was 10. Now Methodist is one of the lighter Christian groups but my opion was changed when in 6th grade we studied different religons and it really made me start questioning what I was taught. When I searching for a religon a truely believed in I found a flaw in each religon. Most of them condoned things they could not explain or that was "different" such as gays. I relised that religons arent perfect but the closet was deism. Deism is based on natural rights and reason. As a quote says by a deist writer; "Until proven that The Bible is word from God it will be no more than strictly a man-made collection of mythology." So if your going to say that gay marriages are wrong find more proof then its different or that the bible says so.

[font="Arial"]
In S&G wasn't it angels that came down and just destroyed the place?
[/font]

The actual description of the destruction was very vague, the most specific description was that it was "fire from the sky."


Regardless, the point is that using the argument that San Fransisco will suffer the same fate as Sodom and Gommorah because of it's sinfulness is fundamentally flawed for two main reasons.

First of all it makes the assumption that the acoount in the Bible is actually factual. The story was more likely meant to be a parable or a fable meant to teach a lesson that sinful ways are punished. There is references to these particular sins being sodomy, but there is also the possibility that that was added by a later author due to cultural bias. There is no proof that it really was changed, but assuming that it wasn't leaves a hole in your argument. I doubt God will strike down San Fransisco for legalizing gay marriage, and I also doubt that Sodom and Gommorah were struck down either, and historically their very existence is questioned. Historians belived that thhe said cities were parodies of two real cities in Israel that had a reputation at the time for being crime-ridden, but they were never destroyed by God, or anything for that matter.

Second of all the act in question is marriage, not sodomy. San Fransisco has not condoned sodomy, they've condoned the legal union of people of the same gender. You make the assumption that all gay men have anal sex, which they do not. I know a number of gay men who say they they would never under any circumstances partake in anal sex, they find it revolting and disgusting. They prefer oral sex, which is just as common among heterosexuals as it is homosexuals, so they haven't sinned in that any more than any experimenting married man and woman have.

As for ruling the governmental laws under the same laws as God, that goes back to the seperation of church and state. According to who you ask, the laws of God are viewed differently by every person, some don't even belive God exists. So who's set of holy laws do we use? yours? mine?

People suggest the laws given in the Bible. The Ten Commandments. Well if you read the those ten rules, homosexuality is not mentioned. You could interperet one to mean something that would discourage it, but then you have conflicting interperetations, which puts us in the same boat as we were before.

What about the laws in the various books of the Pentateuch, well that assumes that we are going to go along with the interperetations of a specific group of people, Christians and Jews, and also many of the Muslims who also use those five books. This completely alienates all Buddhist, Hindi etc. religions who do not recognize the Bible.

So the laws of God can't be used to govern a country that advocates freedom of religion.

An effective goverment knows it's people, it knows their religions and it knows their beliefs and takes them into account, but it cannot be wholly governed by one specific set of beliefs.

Are we One Nation Under God? some of us are under Allah, some under Buddha, some under Yahweh, Jahova, Vishnu, Shiva, Krishna, Ganesha... does the print on a dollar bill define us as a nation?

So I say we allow it to be legal, and let the individuals decide for themselves, based on their beliefs, whether or not they want to participate, and leave to each his own, bringing about greather understanding and harmony between all people.

Are we One Nation Under God? some of us are under Allah, some under Buddha, some under Yahweh, Jahova, Vishnu, Shiva, Krishna, Ganesha, does the print on a dollar bill define us as a nation?

Thats a major point may Christians are afraid they will lose political power. Same as when the pledge was chalenged because of the "Under God" quote. God what might happen next if we let gays amrry we might have to change our money, our pledge, etc. And god forbid that other religons actually get some politcal power. Wether you believe it or not Christians have more politcal power in our government. Last time I checked none of our presidents have worshipped any other religon.

also note that eisenhower is the one that changed it TO "under god".

Not to be a post whore but just for you guys to know the bible was formed for politics. The official bible had not been formed until Constantine needed to seddle down his empire polticly and religously too. He payed a group of Christians to all agree upon which books would make up the bible and he would also approve it to his liking. After they finished he saved his empire form extinction. So for Christianity it has always been block this or that for political power.

Oh, I'm ignorant? For stating my opinion? Or am I ignorant because I have the opposite view of your opinion? Very mature, Ed. I didn't bash anyone's opinion. I merely stated my own.

No, you aren't ignorant for stating your opinion, you are ignorant because you stated an ignorant opinion.

Basically, you like the stereotypical humorous gay person (on will and grace), yet don't know any other gay people other than one who you don't like. Way to base your opinion off this.


You guys can argue this soddom and gommorah crap all you want, I'm staying out. The fact of the matter is, say 70% of people belevied that you should go to church on sunday. Should the government make a law that forces everyone to go to church on sunday? That's the definition of democracy, rule by majority!!! Well, what if 99% decided that the color blue shouldn't be worn. Make it illegal? What if 80% decided that they should enslave the other 20%? Democracy! The fact of the matter is we have a constitution, and to grant rights based on race, religion, creed, gender, or sexual preference is unconstitutional. Apparently, this doesn't matter, as some and our Great President would rather ammend the constitution than grant committed adults legal rights.

The bottom line is, I care not what you beleive, and I don't care that you think your religion justifies it. It's fucking unconstitutional, and until the bible is our country's constitution, you're opinions on what God thinks of homosexuality are absolutely irrellevant.

You guys can argue this soddom and gommorah crap all you want, I'm staying out.  The fact of the matter is, say 70% of people belevied that you should go to church on sunday.  Should the government make a law that forces everyone to go to church on sunday?  That's the definition of democracy, rule by majority!!!  Well, what if 99% decided that the color blue shouldn't be worn.  Make it illegal?  What if 80% decided that they should enslave the other 20%?  Democracy!  The fact of the matter is we have a constitution, and to grant rights based on race, religion, creed, gender, or sexual preference is unconstitutional.  Apparently, this doesn't matter, as some and our Great President would rather ammend the constitution than grant committed adults legal rights.

The bottom line is, I care not what you beleive, and I don't care that you think your religion justifies it.  It's fucking unconstitutional, and until the bible is our country's constitution, you're opinions on what God thinks of homosexuality are absolutely irrellevant.

Well said, this is what I was trying to say in my previous post aswell, but I can't explain things that I would like to say correctly.

Alright, I'm making my last post in this thread, mainly because I'm tired of defending what I believe, but what the hell? Let's have one last go at it, and see if my beliefs are accepted.

First off. I disagree with homosexuality. That's how I was brought up, and aside from that, that's how I feel by my own thought. Ed can cuss me out for this, but I don't care. Overall, I'd like to think by the age of 16 that I can think for myself. Just because my views coincide with those of my parents doesn't mean that they can't be my own, so I'd appriciate it if people would stop assuming that I just take what I'm told and make them my beliefs. I have a teacher this year who began the year with the term: TFY/QA. Those unfamiliar with this term should know that it stands for: Think For Yourself/Question Authority. It doesn't mean rebel for the sake of rebeling, rather that one should always take what they hear, and do a bit of their own research on it, and formulate their own opinions. That term will always stick with me, especially since it came from a teacher (usually you don't get that kind of advice from those in that profession).

Now, all of that being said, that doesn't mean I dislike homosexuals, and I certainly understand where they are coming from. The friends I have that are homosexual, and even bisexual, have told me that it wasn't a choice. You know what? I believe them and I don't feel that they chose to be gay. I support them, and I treat them with the same respect I do to anyone. Like Martin Luther King wanted us to, I judge them on their character and nothing else. I disagree with their lifestyle, but that's my opinion, and I don't let it affect how I treat them.

I don't support homosexual marriages because I disagree with them and believe that it is wrong. I'm not trying to be an asshole in doing so, and I certainly hate the fact that this hurts people, but I have to stand by my feelings on this issue. I honestly want them to be treated just like everyone else, but I think this is one issue that leads me to say that they shouldn't.

My religion (Non-denominational Protestant Christian) has taught me a lot about society. You'd be suprised. It's how I view morals and what is right and wrong, but it also serves as a great guide to how the world has acted in the past, and how it does now. So those of you so quick to condemn religion might want to consider its other uses. This being said, I am still quite hurt by some of the things I've read in this thread. The immaturity shown by those that have never actually given religion a chance doesn't need to be addressed. It's just pure ignorance. Those of you who understand a bit of religion but disagree with it are welcome to your opinions, but careful what you say. I've seen a lot of you declaring that you know what those that are religious believe, but I laugh due to the fact that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Please don't just open your mouth to show that you disagree with something. Support what you have to say with facts and information. Even those with opinions alone can support them with life experience. Otherwise, see how much there is to learn about religion before you judge those that support it.

This brings me to those that don't fit into the said categories I've mentioned thus far. I appriciate that you aren't calling all those that are religious, assholes, and I thank you for supporting your opinions with some sort of backing.

Does religion really play a part in this, and should it? Honestly, I don't see any way to avoid it. The fact remains that many citizens of California, the USA, and the world, practice some sort of religion, whether it be Christianity or not. Of course their religious beliefs are going to play a role in what they support in this issue. There's no way it couldn't. There is an amendment, however, that declares the separation of church and state. Do I feel this is a good thing? Yes, it promotes equality between those that are religious and those that are not. I think that it is hard to realize in today's society, mainly because there are just so many people that follow a specific religion that assert what one can and cannot do/support.

As for Christianity and the Bible, many people have different beliefs on that as well. Some Christians find it to be a historical book, some people disregard it as crap, but those like me find it to have a bit of historical content, but mainly as a book to teach. It's not a random piece of literature that they advertise on TV and online though. It's a very sacred book that I believe was written by those inspired by God. Some of the stories there were written to get a point(s) across to the reader. Many interpretations of it exist, which makes some people question it, but think about that for a minute. Take another work, such as The Wasteland or The Cantos. Those also have many interpretations, yet aren't called shit by all of those that dislike them. So why are some of you guys doing that to something sacred in our culture?

I'm not sure what else to say. I ask that you all would at least respect our beliefs, rather than knock them down and consider us horrible people for believing them. I hope you all can get a better view from what some (or at least I) of us believe from this post. I'm not trying to be hostile with this post, and apologize if that's what it seems. It just hurts to see the beliefs that you've believed all your life torn apart by those not willing to open themselves up to them. I respect all the views posted on these boards, whether I agree with them or not, and I ask that some of you do the same.

-Freak

You just summed up my thoughts perfectly.

Christianity is a good religion, with good intentions, that has been interpreted wrongly by a few bad people throughout history. Most Christian people are good, honest people, so don't draw conclusions on a whole religion from a few black marks. Every religion's gonna have them if it develops enough.

Freak, that was a very good post, and I respect your views on it, because you are more mature about it than others, and not ignorant at that.

Now, can we get on topic?

I agree with some of what you said, Freak.

I'm not against gay marriage, but I actually know a homosexual couple that is; and that alone says a lot.

That was definately a well put-together piece of writing. As far as I can tell though, this is what you said through the course of that post:

-You agree with everything who supports gay marraige has said, except you think it's wrong because of your religion. You also agree with gay marriage supporters in that you believe teenagers begin to form their own opinions. You claim that you have made the decision through evaluation of knowledge that you agree with your parents.

Yet you continually bash seemingly invisible "immature," "hypocritical," "ignorant" supporters of gay marriage. Please quote someone who is in support of gay marriage and displays the aforementioned qualities. Well actually don't, since you already said that was your last post in this thread and I respect that. But I have found that the members in support of gay marriage are some of the most mature, open-minded people on the site. Some are knowledgable beyond their years, some are going through college right now, and some have been through life. And, although the point is probably moot, only one of them is actually a homosexual. Quite a few of them are religious (myself included), some even being members of the Christian faith. I am not trying to say that everyone opposed to gay marriage is of the Christian faith--that would be extremely rash--which is not the point. The point is that it appears to me that everyone in agreement with the gay marriage issue is very knowledgeable about the situation. They have all done their research. It is only my opinion, but it seems to me that the supporters have many, many more rational reasons why gays should be allowed to be married, officially, by the state and the country, and given the same rights given to a man and a women joined together in marriage...by that name. I personally associate myself with very few groups so that I may make my own decisions on EVERY issue. I feel that I can make the right choice about every issue by associating myself with the most rational, open-minded, agreeable side (in general, this is NOT a direct bash at you) and on this issue, I choose to support the side that agrees with gay marriage.

I have a bad habit of getting carried away and saying things I don’t want to. I started out in this topic preaching tolerance and somewhere along the line I stopped being tolerant myself. I’m sorry that I may have offended people. I’ve apologized so many times on this website. I’m not perfect by a long shot but I’m really trying so forgive me when I get a little carried away. I really appreciate that you took the time to respond freak, I can tell it comes from the heart.

When I first responded I said this:

And for christ's sake, let's not turn this into another example of the bipolar phenomenon. It isn't us against them. It isn't liberals against conservatives. It isn't fanatics against heathens or the rightous against the wicked or the nonconformists against the status quo. It's about people - people who are different - figuring out what's best for themselves and what's best for others. You may disagree, but you are all the same as human beings and deserve equal respect. You need to listen to people and see them as people, not as whatever label they may represent to you.

I meant it at the time and I still mean it, but I forget sometimes. Look at my sig and my avatar. It’s no accident that my face is half shadow and half light in that picture. I definately have some kind of bipolar disorder. I try my best to see all sides of issues and I often just end up confusing myself. Can I just say that we’d all be better off if we respected the opinions of every one? If I ever come across as elitist, know that I don’t really think I’m better than anyone else. But I do have problems sometimes with feeling depressed and it’s hard not to feel a little bitter when I see other people succeeding where I fail because I don’t believe in myself enough. As much as I’d like to pretend otherwise, I’m essentially irrational and I find myself doing a lot of things that I disagree with. I’m not trying to make you feel sorry for me and I’m not trying to make excuses. I just think that most of the time arguments are the result of poor communication and if I’m as honest as I possibly can be about what I’m thinking, people might not get so angry.

I've never sat down and written out all that I believe so you're only getting my thoughts in an organized piece meal fashion. Some day I may just post a summary of my beliefs on life in general and why I came to believe them but this is not the place for that. What it comes down to (let me say for I hope the last time) is that homosexuals are people too and they deserve the same rights as everyone else regardless of what your other beliefs may tell you. To accept constitutional democracy is to accept equal rights. Remember 'seperate but equal' ? That wasn't really equality and it still isn't. Civil rights are not solved in this country by a long shot. It's only a matter of time before things get violent again and it doesn't need to be that way.

I have a bad habit of getting carried away and saying things I don’t want to. I started out in this topic preaching tolerance and somewhere along the line I stopped being tolerant myself. I’m sorry that I may have offended people. I’ve apologized so many times on this website. I’m not perfect by a long shot but I’m really trying so forgive me when I get a little carried away. I really appreciate that you took the time to respond freak, I can tell it comes from the heart.

When I first responded I said this:



I meant it at the time and I still mean it, but I forget sometimes. Look at my sig and my avatar. It’s no accident that my face is half shadow and half light in that picture. I definately have some kind of bipolar disorder. I try my best to see all sides of issues and I often just end up confusing myself. Can I just say that we’d all be better off if we respected the opinions of every one? If I ever come across as elitist, know that I don’t really think I’m better than anyone else. But I do have problems sometimes with feeling depressed and it’s hard not to feel a little bitter when I see other people succeeding where I fail because I don’t believe in myself enough. As much as I’d like to pretend otherwise, I’m essentially irrational and I find myself doing a lot of things that I disagree with. I’m not trying to make you feel sorry for me and I’m not trying to make excuses. I just think that most of the time arguments are the result of poor communication and if I’m as honest as I possibly can be about what I’m thinking, people might not get so angry.

I've never sat down and written out all that I believe so you're only getting my thoughts in an organized piece meal fashion. Some day I may just post a summary of my beliefs on life in general and why I came to believe them but this is not the place for that. What it comes down to (let me say for I hope the last time) is that homosexuals are people too and they deserve the same rights as everyone else regardless of what your other beliefs may tell you. To accept constitutional democracy is to accept equal rights. Remember 'seperate but equal' ? That wasn't really equality and it still isn't. Civil rights are not solved in this country by a long shot. It's only a matter of time before things get violent again and it doesn't need to be that way.

Is it a bad habit or is it just human nature?

I've never met a person who didn't get carried away if the argured the same thing long enough.

Hello.


I'm back from New York.


Minnimee. If they could change the name of civil marriage for everyone so that it was the same name (i.e. call the civil part of a marriage license a "civil union license") for BOTH heteros and homos, then yes, I would unequivocally support that. My relationship with God, and the love that I have with Christopher is in no way affected by what some fat slag at a Baptist pie bake off in Florida thinks of me. If however, I am sending that fat slag's kids to school, and paying for her welfare food stamps, and cannot inherit any of my beloved's estate, and debt, without a hefty 45% estate tax, then we have a problem.

Freak, I respect your opinion. And as I started my post off, I said that I feel sorry for anyone without faith. But what we are talking about, (and this fucking stupid word marriage seems to be constipating EVERYONE) is FISCAL and LEGAL equality under the law. This is "Brown vs. Board of Education" all over again. And though I wasn't alive then, my mother tells me that religious conservatives (sadly influencing politics) stated that that issue would be "the moral end of society". But we are still here. And we'll continue to be, as long as we don't blow ourselves up. But I digress.

Mad Dawg. I am truly sorry you feel the way you do. And I am even more sorry that your opinions of us are shaped by an "experience" you had when you were younger. That said, you can't and shouldn't judge a book by it's cover. Some of my dearest friends are members of the Christian faith. I also hang out with (gasp) straight people. Yet, following your example, I should find straight people disgusting as several of them have actually tried to "fag bash" me. Thankfully I learned to fight at a very young age. Do I then find all straight people disgusting because of the unfortunate acts of a misguided few? Mostly you just really bummed me out though Scott, cause I thought you were more down to earth than this. Oh well, again, I am wrong. Don't worry. I won't let it affect my opinion of straight people.

On a last note (cause I really need to cook dinner for my niece), I am sick to death of what should be a non issue. Those that are vocally against equality in the name of religion belie the very thing they purport to espouse. It just makes me very sad for America. Europe and Canada seem to be the way to go. Think we'll move now.

Ciao.

And, CG, to be a Christian you've had to accepted Christ into your heart (not literally, but just follow his examples and believe that he died for you and stuff).

yes, and i have. the example christ set, has lead directly to my belief that disregarding the basic of rights of homosexuals, especially one as sacred as marriage, is wrong.

anywho...

from a moral/relegious perspective, i believe homosexuals should be allowed to marry. from a political/social perspective, i believe homosexuals should be allowed to mary. from a legal perspective, i believe homosexuals should be allowed to mary. and just from the depths of my heart, i believe homosexuals should be allowed to marry.

as such: i say, let them marry, if they so desire.

this topic has really gone on too long, as everyone has stated their opinions, their reasoning for their opinions, etc, over and over, with few minds changed. so, i think it's time for me to just hush up, and move on.

bye, bye, i guess.