Like it or not, all 50 States must now recognize Gay Marriages!

Originally posted by A Fortiori
reply to post by Stylez

 

Exhibitionism is not necessarily "homosexual" and pedophilia is also not precluded to same sex. These psychiatric conditions occur in heterosexuals, as well.

However, if you look up the statistics you will find that lesbians account for the smallest minority of public exhibitionists and that is "homosexual" yes? You will find that lesbians have fewer sexual partners than heterosexuals and they are also "homosexual" yes? They have fewer venereal diseases than heterosexuals, too.

Maybe the problem isn't with "homosexuality" at all, but the male sex drive?

Sounds to me like ou're making excuses for them christian, you ever have a good friend die of aids? how bout a family member? Ya ever try to be politically correct by not taking them aside when they were first experimenting with that stuff and be all Jesus like while you watched them debase themselves further and further till they start dressing strange and start talking about which movie stars are really gay as if anyone gave a damn? Then they start looking skeletal. You ever wish you had said what needed to be said before they chose being gay or decided to give in to it because you didn't want to offend them by judging them?

back OFF Christian, the day people start mistaking you for Jesus is the day you can tell me how I'm doing it wrong. I have seen child predators through camera lenses and gays at truck stops do things you would vomit over. Ive talked to guys on computers that have sex with their sons and I can't say nothing not a thing that gives me away. You thijnk you got them all figured out and you think you got me all figured out.

Ive been in discussions like these for over ten years and in that time I have seen 175 gay people I personally knew DIE because they didn't want to listen to a condom AD ON THE RADIO! You think you're going to make a dent your way? NOPE!

Since you are a newbie here, I was willing to give you some leeway, but no longer. The gloves are coming off now...

Originally posted by Stylez

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
It is like saying gay marriage will lead to public masterbation, which is just ludicrious.

Then how about marrying ones self? if sexual prefernces is the issue then what about people who have a threesome sexual orientation? or are "a-sexual" That's consenting adults

Straw man.

As to why homosexuals want to be able to get married, let's look at what advantages civil marriage holds:

According to a report given to the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. General Accounting Office, here are a few of the 1,138 benefits the United States government provides to legally married couples:

Access to Military Stores
Assumption of Spouse’s Pension
Bereavement Leave
Immigration
Insurance Breaks
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Social Security Survivor Benefits
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Tax Breaks
Veteran’s Discounts
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison

Here are a few of the state level benefits within the United States:

Assumption of Spouse’s Pension
Automatic Inheritance
Automatic Housing Lease Transfer
Bereavement Leave
Burial Determination
Child Custody
Crime Victim’s Recovery Benefits
Divorce Protections
Domestic Violence Protection
Exemption from Property Tax on Partner’s Death
Immunity from Testifying Against Spouse
Insurance Breaks
Joint Adoption and Foster Care
Joint Bankruptcy
Joint Parenting (Insurance Coverage, School Records)
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner
Certain Property Rights
Reduced Rate Memberships
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Visitation of Partner’s Children
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison
Wrongful Death (Loss of Consort) Benefits

Source.

Yeah and many others not qualified for them can't have them either Jax Like unmarried hetero sexuals shouldn't THEY be given the same equal rights as anyone else? Just because their single? What does who they aren't loving have to do with it? They aren't causing anyone else any harm for having the same benefits .

Lack of logic. Unmarried heterosexual couples choose not to marry. The still have the right to do so, and thus these rights are not denied them. And if you are single, you don't need these rights and protections. Single homosexuals are included in this. This is also a Straw man.

It matters not whether or not the 'heterosexual community' cares to acknowledge our relationships anymore than it matters to non-Catholics that the Catholic Church does not acknowledge their marriages. It is about equality and civil protections, not social acceptance, which almost all are missing.

Their is not one of those rights you don't have and this isn't about equal rights it is about equal "access" under the law BIG difference. It is why we have womans restrooms for woman and boyscouts for boys not old woman. It's about letting the boyscouts BE the boy scouts even if the idiotic aclu sues to have girls be part of it.

And equal access is denied in this case. Nice try, but no dice! As to the rest of that 'argument', Straw man.

To those who keep arguing that 'the damn gubermint don't have no business in our marriages', I ask you this. Let's say you are married and your spouse's family just hates you. Now let's say that your spouse get very sick or critically injured and can no longer make decisions for themselves. Do you want the in-laws to have the power to swoop in, deny you visitation rights, deny you the right to make medical decisions for your spouse's care, take half of the stuff your and your spouse own, and forbid you to even attend your spouse's funeral because you do not have the protections provided by 'the damn gubermint'? Happens to gay people everyday. I know, I've seen it firsthand. Now do you see why we want equality?

Well now you know why creating civil contracts power of attorney etc is there for people like that.

So now you are endorsing the 'separate but equal' argument. If this is really what you think this country was founded on, then you, Sir, have no clue about the ideals that our Founding Fathers were trying to espouse in the Constitution. I suggest you give it a read, along with the Declaration of Independence. Perhaps you never studied these documents or American history. Maybe it was because you were too busy memorizing Bible quotes, while missing the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. You have shown me no signs that you hold or understand American ideals or values, nor have you shown me that you have any understanding of the lessons and values given by Jesus in the Gospels.

I would be willing to bet that you think of yourself as an American and a Christian. While you may be an American by birth and a Christian in name, in fact you are neither. Being a real American is more than being born a citizen, it's understanding and defending the ideals and principles this nation was founded on. And being a Christian is living your life in a Christ-like manner, not just knowing the Bible. Your posts show neither quality.

You are just another 'homo hater' who hides behind the Bible to justify your hate and use your right to vote to support that hate with legislation. But in the end, the Constitution will win out and equality will prevail. Thankfully, much wiser men than yourself, such as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, ensured that the rights, liberty and freedoms of the individual, not the majority, are the cornerstone of this country.

Wow, this thread's about to turn into a flame fest.

First, I'm straight. I was raised by two gay men. I came out just fine. And straight as an arrow. And I know the word 'breeder' has the same connotations as 'faggot'. Both words are an offense to their intended targets. Please drop that word.

Second. I don't know how 'take care of the poor' got brought into this, but if you wanna take care of em, quit giving them handouts and let them support themselves. You'd be surprised what a man will do with no options and an empty stomach. This may sound cruel, but if you baby them, they're just going to milk it. The sick and helpless? I can understand that.

Third. The bible is a collection of testimonies written about Jesus Christ. While I read and respect what is in the bible, there is no doubt that it is incomplete. There are many books which have been excluded. In the realm of free-will, you can't make me believe this was God's will. How many books are missing? How much of the story are we really getting? Doesn't matter. We know Jesus was our saviour, though some of the history has been left out. The best we can do is to do the best we can.

Fourth. The only way to resolve this issue may piss alot of you off. There will never be consensus on gay marriage. I want all gays who are fighting for 'equal rights' when it comes to marriage to consider ONE of the possible outcomes. You think that homo and heterosexual couples should have the same rights. I've been to these rallies. I've been told that the gay community will not rest until this is a reality. The only way it is ever going to happen is if marriage itself is no longer recognized. The complete destruction of the marital institution. This seem a bit extreme? Not remotely. As one of the basic tenets of MANY religions, homosexuality is wrong. Asking straights to violate their religion so that gays might practice their sexuality is a brick wall that will never be breached voluntarily. Gays can't force their sexuality down straights throats anymore than Christians can force the bible down a Muslim's. There is a reason the government has a non-interference rule when it comes to religion, and it should have the same for sexuality. If it did, the marital union would be without value and broken. The only way this will end is if straights are brought down because it isn't POSSIBLE for gays to be elevated without an all out war. People are just too damned hard-headed.

Flame me if you want, but remember, these threads are for the expression of opinions and ideas. As a straight man having been raised by gays, I keep a very neutral loyalty here. Of all the subjects I feel objective on, this one stands out.

reply to post by Stylez


If you are going to put external source material in your posts, PROVIDE A LINK! Otherwise, it is to be assumed that you are the author, thus rendering it crap!

Originally posted by Stylez
back OFF Christian

What, can't handle it when you meet a REAL Christian???

Ive been in discussions like these for over ten years and in that time I have seen 175 gay people I personally knew DIE because they didn't want to listen to a condom AD ON THE RADIO! You think you're going to make a dent your way? NOPE!

Oh, that's just rich!!! 175 gay people you personally knew, and yet you are such a homo hater!!! Gimme a damn break! Deceit is also not a 'Christ-like' attribute! Had you actually known that many homosexuals, you would never have the opinions that you have shared with us here! I smell a TROLL!!!

Religion used to be government - period. Religious leaders were law as much of the middle east today.

Many things used to be governed by religious leaders - - which is not allowed today.

Marriage used to be exclusively a religious ceremony.

When Marriage became a government document/license - - with the specific purpose of legal protection of rights and property of two people joining together as one household - - religion was no longer a factor - - there is no "religion" in government license. Religion is not required in any form to be legally married at a court house by a judge.

Religious people can believe whatever they want.

This is an Equal Rights issue - - not a "what you believe" issue.

The religious argument is null and void.

reply to post by Arrowmancer

Gays can't force their sexuality down straights throats anymore than Christians can force the bible down a Muslim's.

How exactly do homosexuals force their sexuality? If you are talking about extreme views in extreme situations, or in parades, or in extreme meetings, then by definition all you will hear is extremism. Just as many heterosexuals display their sexuality in overt, disgraceful, unintelligent and unsophisticated ways.
Most homosexuals live quietly respectable lives, bother nobody and mind their own business. They do not express opinion about their way of life and existence...UNTIL they get attacked and are told how sick and intolerable their existence is, and then they will rightly defend themselves.
How would you, as a straight person like to have that sort of vile condemnation expressed just because of who you are, whilst you hurt or affect nobody?
Nobody is asking heterosexuals to watch, admire or express any acceptance really. Homosexuals do not really bother themselves too much with the constant depravity of heterosexuals.
But homosexuals as equal tax paying members of society are expecting and working towards gaining the exact same rights, tax breaks and protection under law as everyone else. Do you see anything wrong with that?

Originally posted by Arrowmancer

Flame me if you want, but remember, these threads are for the expression of opinions and ideas. As a straight man having been raised by gays, I keep a very neutral loyalty here. Of all the subjects I feel objective on, this one stands out.

If you were neutral - you would see it as an Equal Rights issue.

It was very subtle - - but it seems to me you have religious leanings.

reply to post by Stylez

back OFF Christian, the day people start mistaking you for Jesus is the day you can tell me how I'm doing it wrong. I have seen child predators through camera lenses and gays at truck stops do things you would vomit over. Ive talked to guys on computers that have sex with their sons and I can't say nothing not a thing that gives me away. You thijnk you got them all figured out and you think you got me all figured out.

A Fortiori is my definition of a christian acting in a christian manner. Maybe you should not tell others how they are doing it wrong either, as you are clearly no reflection of Jesus.
Child predators as you put it are in the majority heterosexual. If you have talked to men who have sex with their sons, does that not imply a heterosexual union of 'great worth', in your eyes, has occurred. As you have stated the greatest spiritual contribution to mankind is in heterosexual man and heterosexual woman marrying and having children. That the male in that relationship would then debase, destroy and committ sexual abuse against that child, to you implies they must be secretly gay, as no heterosexual would do such a thing.
Wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.
And A Fortiori is almost right in that the problem is the male sex urge, but also the male need to control and dominate those considered weaker than them in order to bolster their feelings of inadequacy.
On the whole that has much less to do with homosexuals...and much more to do with certain heterosexuals.

reply to post by Annee


I reply both to Annee and oneclick, here. It's not about extremism. As I stated, I was raised by gays. I understand that it isn't forced down our throats in a visible in-your-face way. But asking Christians (used as an example, not the only group) to accept gay marriages as equal to their own is an impossiblity. My uncle didn't parade himself about like you've descrbed, oneclick. As a matter of fact, if he didnt outright tell you, you probably wouldn't know. There's nothing abnormal in regards to homosexuality when it comes to behavior. That wasn't my point. My point was that there are MANY religions that will never accept gay marriages. To see a gay marriage as equal to their own would, in their eyes, degrade the institution of marriage and make it worthless.

As for annee's comment. I have VERY strong religious leanings. The one rule by which I try to live my life which supersedes all others is the Golden Rule. Do unto others. That being said, the only logical option would be to completely destroy the institution of marriage because it's the only way I can see to put everyone one equal footing.

Originally posted by Arrowmancer

As for annee's comment. I have VERY strong religious leanings. The one rule by which I try to live my life which supersedes all others is the Golden Rule. Do unto others. That being said, the only logical option would be to completely destroy the institution of marriage because it's the only way I can see to put everyone one equal footing.

OH - it definitely shows - rather YELLS that you are religious.

Equal Rights by Law has nothing to do with religion.

annee, in a perfect world, this would be a non-issue. Everyone would accept that love is what it is... solid, undeniable, unbreakable. Everyone would accept that a marriage is just that, no matter who is involved. In a perfect world. I do not judge other people based on sexual preference. Anyone who would judge on merits OTHER than their character, intelligence, and personality needs to have their head examined. A gay man is every much the son of God as I am. I do beleive in God and I seriously doubt he'd like the little war we're engaged in.

Originally posted by Stylez
Sounds to me like ou're making excuses for them christian, you ever have a good friend die of aids? how bout a family member? Ya ever try to be politically correct by not taking them aside when they were first experimenting with that stuff and be all Jesus like while you watched them debase themselves further and further till they start dressing strange and start talking about which movie stars are really gay as if anyone gave a damn? Then they start looking skeletal. You ever wish you had said what needed to be said before they chose being gay or decided to give in to it because you didn't want to offend them by judging them?

Actually, yes. I said before that I was a hospice worker. I worked with HIV/AIDS on the hospice end and the health communication end. I worked with a religious service group oversees and I worked at Hospice in the US. I have absolute stressed that abstinence is the only sure-fire protection to both heterosexuals and homosexuals because people do get lazy. I've begged people to be careful, and I've held the hands of several people who were terminal.

St Therese Avila said: God has no hands on this earth but ours. I have used these hands to glorify God. God put in me this love that I feel, and not you or anyone else will take it away from me. I have it for you, too. I know you want to save people. other people see your anger, but I see and believe that your heart wants to save people from what you see is Death in this world and beyond. I see that, and I love you for it.

I just believe that St. Francis was correct when he said: I preach the Gospel every day and sometimes I use words.

Jesus did not give you or I permission to speak for him. He didn't give us the right to judge the sins of others. If we see our brother in Christ erring he said to pull him aside and speak to him privately, he also asked that we use love and compassion when we interact with our brother.

I do not believe using a message board is what Jesus was talking about when he said "privately".

If you hadn't mentioned Christian I wouldn't have even bothered, but I don't like my Lord to be judged by the inequities of you and I. Christ was loving, kind, and compassionate to the wicked and the sinful. The only anger he showed were for the hypocrites and the thieves in his Temple who turned people away from God with their duality and hypocrisy.

We who claim to love Christ will be judged if we turn those away from Him using his name in error. I do not believe you wish to do this. You are angry with me because my way is not your way, but deep down what others don't know or see is that we will both think about this later because we both love Christ.

If we can come to terms, if we can show compassion to each other in this debate and show the love of Christ we will change more hearts than a thousand whips.

So...God bless you, my brother in Christ.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


Well please explain why homosexuals should have their lifestyle that go against societies’ customs, ideology and traditions recognized by law and not every other behavior group too. The same logic can be applied to a military man marrying 25 women so they all can have BX, medical etc privileges, or marry his sister, or any other combination. Not to mention an extremely large number of other restricted actions like drug use…

If you believe all this should be allowed too then at least you’re not a hypocrite….

Originally posted by Xtrozero
They all are behaviors that are not the norm as to what the majority of society practice, so why lift one above the other?

uummh not really

we just need a male and a female to create life

all other things are out of the context for being a "norm"

reply to post by Xtrozero


I personally believe marriage is not a government institution, but a religious one. So...I'll say it, our Constitution allows for consenting adults to get married under the right to free exercise of religion clause.

So if three individuals over the age of 18 choose to get married and their church lets them...so be it. I wouldn't want to share a husband or even have three husbands, but that's my choice. The polygamous cults in Utah and other western parts are only an obscenity because of the "forced" wedlock and underage wedlock. If three twenty five year olds decide to get hitched, I really couldn't care less. Their life, their religion...glad it is not mine.

Now whether or not they get tax benefits is a civil manner, and that can be defined by the Fed.

reply to post by Xtrozero


It wasn't that long ago that interracial marraige went against society's customs, ideology and traditions. It wasn't that long ago that slavery conformed to society's customs, ideology and traditions. It wasn't that long ago that making African-Americans sit at the back of the bus, use separate bathrooms and drinking fountains, etc. conformed with society's customs, ideology and traditions. It wasn't that long ago that killing Native Americans and seizing their lands conformed to society's customs, ideology and traditions. Yet, somehow we rose above it all and embraced the ideals set forth in the Constitution. Are you suggesting that we now throw it in the shredder?

Originally posted by A Fortiori
reply to post by Stylez

 

Exhibitionism is not necessarily "homosexual" and pedophilia is also not precluded to same sex. These psychiatric conditions occur in heterosexuals, as well.

However, if you look up the statistics you will find that lesbians account for the smallest minority of public exhibitionists and that is "homosexual" yes? You will find that lesbians have fewer sexual partners than heterosexuals and they are also "homosexual" yes? They have fewer venereal diseases than heterosexuals, too.

Maybe the problem isn't with "homosexuality" at all, but the male sex drive?

Thats slick guy, breaking off the female equivalent to the homosexual and comparing to the male of heterosexuals. I think you'll find the same statistics about females in general "yes"?

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Since you are a newbie here, I was willing to give you some leeway, but no longer. The gloves are coming off now...

Then how about marrying ones self? if sexual prefernces is the issue then what about people who have a threesome sexual orientation? or are "a-sexual" That's consenting adults

Straw man.



NOT a strawman if it is than knock it down pal here let me help you. Two gays go in for a marriage license both are single wanting to marry but gays aren't allowed to. Two people heterosexual wanting to get married but one is the sister of the other ooops!

Learn your protocols for inductive arguments of logical fallacy before you start acting like you know what you're talking about jaxon

As for the gloves coming off? Ha ha ha that's funny, no really it is. cute too.

Whew! Hope I don't get hurt too bad, I have seen your posts to others and ya know, I just don't get skeeered that easily Jax.

Lack of logic. Unmarried heterosexual couples choose not to marry.

LACK OF LOGIC IS RIGHT!

YOURS!

X meets Y

X marry's Y

Therefore all X's and Y's that arn't married don't want to be

The still have the right to do so, and thus these rights are not denied them.

They aren't denied to gays either nor are they to group sexer's people into beasts all kinds of people can get married but what they have sex with is really not out business.

And if you are single, you don't need these rights and protections. Single homosexuals are included in this. This is also a Straw man.

According to the Government couples do not a family make


Their is not one of those rights you don't have and this isn't about equal rights it is about equal "access" under the law BIG difference. It is why we have womans restrooms for woman and boyscouts for boys not old woman. It's about letting the boyscouts BE the boy scouts even if the idiotic aclu sues to have girls be part of it.

And equal access is denied in this case. Nice try, but no dice! As to the rest of that 'argument', Straw man.


You keep showing me the strawman argument as if it means something to me. It means you ought to read it Jax because men and woman are not defined by the kind of sex they have nor are we defined by which gender we have it with. We are by our own gender and our own race even our religion but who we do the wild thing with is none of our business and we the people like to keep that way else we have Big Brother in there with us. Gays may think that makes them a class distinction for equal access but sorry dude you ain't

I would be willing to bet that you think of yourself as an American and a Christian. While you may be an American by birth and a Christian in name, in fact you are neither. Being a real American is more than being born a citizen, it's understanding and defending the ideals and principles this nation was founded on. And being a Christian is living your life in a Christ-like manner, not just knowing the Bible. Your posts show neither quality.

Oh I defended your rights to say all that drivel about me in the military Jax so I think I know al about the constitution and I'm pretty good with laws too but I won't bore you with that, I know you got a lot to get off your chest. Oh about the defending your right to say all that "stuff"

You're welcome.

My posts show neither quality of a Christian nor do they show I am any good with the scriptures?

Explain and show me some examples of "good enough to pass the jax test Christian" Please share with us Jax, just show me how good you reaklly are . I am still standing here with my gloves off waiting for you to come out of your little corner you got yourself painted in son.

You are just another 'homo hater' who hides behind the Bible to justify your hate and use your right to vote to support that hate with legislation. But in the end, the Constitution will win out and equality will prevail. Thankfully, much wiser men than yourself, such as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, ensured that the rights, liberty and freedoms of the individual, not the majority, are the cornerstone of this country.

and you act just like every unsaved person I have ever met when they are so given over to a particular sin the truth becomes hate to those that hate the truth.

Jax please stop hating Christians, your bibliobigotry and hatred of straight Christians is not good for your health and much wiser men than you were not so against religion like all those you cite but Ill betcha Thomas Jefferson if he were alive today and saw what you are trying to do with same sex marriage, ha ha well lucky for you he is dead.

[edit on 5-9-2009 by Stylez]

Originally posted by TheMightyGuri

Originally posted by Xtrozero
They all are behaviors that are not the norm as to what the majority of society practice, so why lift one above the other?

uummh not really

we just need a male and a female to create life

all other things are out of the context for being a "norm"

Isn't that what I said? :0


When I said "lift one above the others", I'm saying life one behavior not of the norm above all the other behaviors not of the norm.