US Supreme Court to Hear Case on Same-Sex Marriage

[semaphore]

Again, no. I am stating my opinion on this subject just like you are. There is no need to call me irrational and over-defensive. I could say the same to you about how you are defending gay rights, could I not?

You could, if you can back them up with reason. So I guess you couldn't.

We are having an argument. I am accepting your opinions, yet you are criticising me for mine.

But that's the essence of an argument. All you're doing is asserting what your views are, without offering any credible support for them beyond "bible", and complaining that people are pointing out flaws in your claims.

[Puck]

Because people use to have standards. They use to have morals. People lack both of those in these days. Now I will say that that, is a fact.

Just gunna add that I highly disagree with burning people at the stake.. Because I know someone will say that I do not have a problem with it..

See this picture?



That is the future of America. You can whine and moan, but there is nothing you can do to stop it!

/cackle

[Hyve]

Because people use to have standards. They use to have morals. People lack both of those in these days. Now I will say that that, is a fact.

Just gunna add that I highly disagree with burning people at the stake.. Because I know someone will say that I do not have a problem with it..

Not entirely sure if you're making a blanket statement here, or are apposed to gay marriage, but...

... There are thousands of references within the Bible that put major figures of it, in the scene of homosexuality, and they were not killed or beaten for it. The Bible has been taken massively out of context, and many figures within Christianity were gay. By todays standards, they would also be peadophiles.

I'm really not trying to cause offense or an argument. But I just detest anyone who hates homosexuality on religious grounds, when most religions actually have nothing against homosexuality until the texts were re-written.

[nnelson54]

Your opinion of a morally upstanding place is different than mine.

Thank God for that!

Yes, there are people who do hate. If you think I am one of them, then you have failed to read my posts correctly since I have repeatedly said I do not hate homosexuals.

White slave owners repeatedly stated they don't hate blacks every time Abolition came up, they just think they're inferior and don't deserve the same rights.

[semaphore]

Not quite sure what you're getting at here, but my point is I am for Gay Marriage, but to break down the barriers is going to take a very long time. As I just said above, I know a few gay couples who would much rather have the benefits of marriage now, and then work on getting the same ceremonial rights later.

It's not like marriage is up to the churches to begin with, I don't know why you need a new class specifically. Just not have the church ceremonies for now, that's fine, it's arguable up to the churches. But the government can, and therefore should, provide marriage status to homosexuals.

Separate but equal ought to be opposed generally.

[rawdude]

See this picture?



That is the future of America. You can whine and moan, but there is nothing you can do to stop it!

/cackle

Very mature. You make the gay community very proud, I'm sure.

[Chrysia]

Your opinion of a morally upstanding place is different than mine.

Yes, there are people who do hate. If you think I am one of them, then you have failed to read my posts correctly since I have repeatedly said I do not hate homosexuals.

My opinion of a morally upstanding place is one that upholds rights for all, and only takes a stance against those that harm others.

Pedophiles, rapists, murderers and thieves harm others, thus it is morally right to stand against them. A scientific argument can be made for the harm incest brings.

Can you bring me an argument for what harm homosexuality brings?

[Endus]

Your opinion of a morally upstanding place is different than mine.

Well, if your definition is "what my faith/religion/holy book says", then it's fine that we can disagree, but your opinion on morality also holds absolutely no weight or relevance to anyone, anywhere, and should be not only ignored but studiously and rigorously opposed at a legislative level.

I've yet to see you offer a non-religious explanation for anything you've said.

You're free to hold whatever opinion you like. That doesn't mean you have the right to express that opinion without opposition and/or ridicule, nor is there ANY suggestion that anyone's opinion should be given any credence when determining matters of law.

Heck, even juries aren't allowed to convict because, in their opinion, they really think they guy probably did it. They need to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. Opinion is irrelevant.

Yes, there are people who do hate. If you think I am one of them, then you have failed to read my posts correctly since I have repeatedly said I do not hate homosexuals.

You just want them to not have the same rights as everyone else.

Sorry, but declaring that you think certain people are inferior and thus less deserving of human rights is a pretty succinct statement of hatred.

[nnelson54]

... There are thousands of references within the Bible that put major figures of it, in the scene of homosexuality, and they were not killed or beaten for it. The Bible has been taken massively out of context, and many figures within Christianity were gay. By todays standards, they would also be peadophiles.

The best thing is that he appears to be Christian. Christians follow the teachings of Jesus. Jesus never once spoke on homosexuality.

[Puck]

Very mature. You make the gay community very proud, I'm sure.

Just saying, you're resisting the inevitable. Ask yourself, what side of History will you be on? When people a hundred years in the future look back on this, how will they remember you and people like you?

[link4117]

Because people use to have standards. They use to have morals. People lack both of those in these days. Now I will say that that, is a fact.

Just gunna add that I highly disagree with burning people at the stake.. Because I know someone will say that I do not have a problem with it..

I don't think people lack standards or morals now more than in history. Historically there's always been violence, rape, persecution for various reasons, and other such immoral acts. In fact crime rates seem to be going down, at least in the US and Britain... I can't seem to find worldwide statistics right now. If you mean immoral and standards in terms of the Bible, then perhaps. Still, I think not. What we do have, which we haven't had historically, is the internet and tv. We get news and such much faster and easier now and that could have an influence on the subjective feeling that immorality is spreading.

[Thage]

The best thing is that he appears to be Christian. Christians follow the teachings of Jesus. Jesus never once spoke on homosexuality.

Do not call him a Christian. He is a Levite. Christ was about tolerance, acceptance, and love and I will be damned if I stand by and let Christ's name be dirtied by a Levite.

[Rommon64]

On the whole, moral decay thing:

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on
frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond
words... When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and
respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise
[disrespectful] and impatient of restraint"

-Hesiod, 8th century BC

"What is happening to our young
people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They
ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions.
Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?"

-Plato, 5th-4th century BC

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

-Socrates (apparently disputed), 5th century BC

People have been claiming moral decay since there's been written word, and I dare say even before that. Enjoy being on the wrong side of history Rawdude, and here's hoping the Land of the Free lives up to the title.

[Hyve]

It's not like marriage is up to the churches to begin with, I don't know why you need a new class specifically. Just not have the church ceremonies for now, that's fine, it's arguable up to the churches. But the government can, and therefore should, provide marriage status to homosexuals.

Separate but equal ought to be opposed generally.

I agree, but my original point was that Marriage has in recent history been something that the Church deals with. Offering Civil Partnerships with the same protection rights, would solve the issue for now, and be a big step forward. You could then start work on Marriage.

[rawdude]

Not entirely sure if you're making a blanket statement here, or are apposed to gay marriage, but...

... There are thousands of references within the Bible that put major figures of it, in the scene of homosexuality, and they were not killed or beaten for it. The Bible has been taken massively out of context, and many figures within Christianity were gay. By todays standards, they would also be peadophiles.

I'm really not trying to cause offense or an argument. But I just detest anyone who hates homosexuality on religious grounds, when most religions actually have nothing against homosexuality until the texts were re-written.

Well, if you have been reading any of my posts at all, then you would see that I am indeed against it.

The Bible speaks against homosexuality, and even calls it an abomination. Sodom and Gomorrah is an example. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because they were such a corrupt people and homosexuality was rampant in their society. The Bible has been taken out of context, and you are one of the people who is taking it out of context. People always take the Bible out of context in order to attack Christianity.

Does the Bible speak against homosexuality? Yes. Does the Bible say to love your neighbors? Yes. This is such a huge argument that pro-gay people use to attack Christians with. That Christians are attacking and hating them for who they are and what they do. And sadly, many Christians and other religious groups do hate gays. But gays attack Christians as well, blacks attack whites, whites attack blacks. Do you see what I'm saying here? Different people persecute other people. And none of it is right.

[Endus]

Do not call him a Christian. He is a Levite. Christ was about tolerance, acceptance, and love and I will be damned if I stand by and let Christ's name be dirtied by a Levite.

It bears mentioning here that many quote Leviticus. Leviticus translates from the original Hebrew as something along the lines of "Relating to the Levites". It's a book of instructions for Jewish people of the tribe of Levi, the tribe from whom the priests were traditionally drawn.

If you're not of that tribe, it holds no relevance at all. And if you're going to quote Leviticus, you need to be aware that it states that wearing cotton-poly blends, eating lobster, or touching a woman during her period are all just about as damning as having gay sex.

There's a few notes in the New Testament about homosexuality, but they're pretty few and far between, and aren't anywhere close to as conclusive as anti-gay Christians like to pretend. That's part of the issue with them just reading the KJV, though, and not trying to understand the effect than translation to English from Hebrew through Greek has had on the text.

[Hyve]

The best thing is that he appears to be Christian. Christians follow the teachings of Jesus. Jesus never once spoke on homosexuality.

Exactly. The Bible has millions of references to homosexuality being tolerated and accepted. Yet, in recent writings, it is hated and loathed. I would laugh about it, but it really isn't funny how totally wrong some people are about their own religion.

[Chrysia]

It bears mentioning here that many quote Leviticus. Leviticus translates from the original Hebrew as something along the lines of "Relating to the Levites". It's a book of instructions for Jewish people of the tribe of Levi, the tribe from whom the priests were traditionally drawn.

If you're not of that tribe, it holds no relevance at all. And if you're going to quote Leviticus, you need to be aware that it states that wearing cotton-poly blends, eating lobster, or touching a woman during her period are all just about as damning as having gay sex.

There's a few notes in the New Testament about homosexuality, but they're pretty few and far between, and aren't anywhere close to as conclusive as anti-gay Christians like to pretend. That's part of the issue with them just reading the KJV, though, and not trying to understand the effect than translation to English from Hebrew through Greek has had on the text.

More specifically of note, the only notes that I've ever seen on homosexuality in the New Testament were from the apostles, not Jesus.

[Endus]

I agree, but my original point was that Marriage has in recent history been something that the Church deals with. Offering Civil Partnerships with the same protection rights, would solve the issue for now, and be a big step forward. You could then start work on Marriage.

Marriage isn't something the church deals with. It is and always has been a legal construct. Churches have the authority to perform marriages, but you still need marriage licenses from the government and you need to file the paperwork and have your church be recognized as such by the state.

The whole thing boils down to the state. Which is also why you can get married in front of a justice of the peace; because "marriage" has no necessary religious component. Priests and other religious leaders are allowed to perform marriages, but they still need to make sure the paperwork is filed with the government, because a priest saying "do you, and do you, I now pronounce you" does not marry you in the eyes of the law.

[Thage]

That's because real Christians aren't out there justifying oppression and hate. Levites are. Satan comes bearing the cross and the goat comes in sheep's clothing. Nobody here is attacking Christianity. Every Sunday morning I go to a non-denominational church and have my time to speak with my God. The Bible says many things, and outright contradicts itself every time you read a new section written by someone else.

We are, however, attacking the mindset that we must conform to societal norms from thousands of years ago written down by an extremist who was laughed at as the Ayn Rand of his day. We are attacking the mindset that society cannot evolve beyond heteronormative and male-dominated without giving up moral ground, when Christ himself preached tolerance, love, and acceptance, and who only once ever lost his temper--when there were people perverting the temple for secular use.