Why is a person considered intolerant if they are for the Gay Marriage Ban. Let's take that question a bit farther, why is a person intolerant if they teach their children that being gay is wrong. And in teaching that lesson a parent also says that you do not hate, make fun of or otherwise belittle the person you just feel sorry for them. That you always stick up for your views and not let the liberal left thinking creep into your thought process. Why is someone that does that considered to be intolerant. If that's their belief why are they considered to be bigots, and hate mongers. I really hope someone can answer this because it seems that anything goes today but if you disagree and try to teach your children what you believe to be the right way to live, your perceived by some as intolerant. If you even talk about your views and share them with others your spreading hate. I will check back often as the answers I'm sure will be interesting.

Let me ask you a question.

Is it okay to discriminate against fat people? Should we ban fat people? Should we teach our children that being fat is wrong, after all, it isn't good for you, can ultimately kill you. Do you believe that being fat is okay? Do you talk to others about fat people? Be honest.

There are many people that are overweight, obese that have a medical condition that prevents them from losing weight. As a society we view being obese as wrong, some people are very intolerant towards overweight people. Is that okay?

If you say no to that question then you have to ask yourself if it's okay to be intolerant of gay people. Being gay is not a choice, you either are or you aren't. Nobody would choose to be gay, there are too many hurdles to jump when you come out, who would willing do that? No one. So, being intolerant of something that someone cannot change, well yes, I think that is bigoted, I do think those people are hate mongers.

Do you expect people to accept your way of life, your decisions? Of course you do, everyone does. What do you hope to gain by teaching your children to be intolerant of a large group of people? What if one of your kids ends up being gay?

If everyone could just love each other for who they are, well, the world would be a better place.

In other words, I think gays should have the right to marry, just like the rest of the human beings on this earth. I teach my kids tolerance, acceptance. Everyone is different, who are we to decided what is right and what is wrong?

Let me ask you a question.

Is it okay to discriminate against fat people? Should we ban fat people? Should we teach our children that being fat is wrong, after all, it isn't good for you, can ultimately kill you. Do you believe that being fat is okay? Do you talk to others about fat people? Be honest.

There are many people that are overweight, obese that have a medical condition that prevents them from losing weight. As a society we view being obese as wrong, some people are very intolerant towards overweight people. Is that okay?

If you say no to that question then you have to ask yourself if it's okay to be intolerant of gay people. Being gay is not a choice, you either are or you aren't. Nobody would choose to be gay, there are too many hurdles to jump when you come out, who would willing do that? No one. So, being intolerant of something that someone cannot change, well yes, I think that is bigoted, I do think those people are hate mongers.

Do you expect people to accept your way of life, your decisions? Of course you do, everyone does. What do you hope to gain by teaching your children to be intolerant of a large group of people? What if one of your kids ends up being gay?

If everyone could just love eachother for who they are, well, the world would be a better place.

In other words, I think gays should have the right to marry, just like the rest of the human beings on this earth. I teach my kids tolerance, acceptance. Everyone is different, who are we to decided what is right and what is wrong?

This was answerd right down to the exact point! Thank you... very much agreed and I would love to give you some rep. but unfortunately I tend to agree on a lot of things you write so I must spread the rep.

Why would anyone object to someone marrying the person they love? Why would anyone tell an entire class of people to conceal who they are as if who and what they are were somehow shameful.

As Alty says, should fat people be banned from restaurants and grocery stores? Should they "go back into the closet" and order groceries and meals from home, hiding behind their doors when the delivery person comes to conceal their condition? Should they refrain from marrying and having children so that they do not pass on their fat lifestyle to the next generation? Why shouldn't we propose legislation to begin this fat lifestyle control? The fat marriage ban? Would someone who advocated the extreme repression of the overweight be considered intolerant?

It is okay to have your opinons, that is what this site is about, but you crossed the line in your opinons and tried to make it seem like a fact.

In your other post you stated children is a same sex marriage are abused and it is horrible for kids and when other members asked you for facts to match your therory you tried to bashed the other members why saying it is common sense and basically everyone didn't have common sense when your false fact was question.

Now you stated being gay is not right and it states so in the bible but I have a question for you. Why is it that God can forgive mass murders, serial rapists, people that commit crimes against kids, etc but when it comes to gay peoole they are damn to hell? They deserve to be accepted they aren't hurting anyone. How is then getting married effecting you? A lot of them don't even get married in a church due to the judgement but have civil marriages instead but if they're gay it means they can attend church like you and I.

I think you need to think before you write because if you take a look at what you wrote in you're the other post it came out as a hate speech with no facts and crossed the line of being an opinon.

It is to try and make their view point sound more acceptable. When there is little productive argument for your case, you attack those that are against it.

By trying to show those that stand up for moral values and family values as bad, they then make their view point appear to be the socially acceptable one.

By doing this, too many people who really feel it is wrong are to scared to stand up for their personal beleifs.

By trying to show those that stand up for moral values and family valuesBoth sides stand up for moral values and family values so that's not really the point.

Other than that the OP seems to be just trolling this site.

Let me ask you a question.

Is it okay to discriminate against fat people? Should we ban fat people? Should we teach our children that being fat is wrong, after all, it isn't good for you, can ultimately kill you. Do you believe that being fat is okay? Do you talk to others about fat people? Be honest.

There are many people that are overweight, obese that have a medical condition that prevents them from losing weight. As a society we view being obese as wrong, some people are very intolerant towards overweight people. Is that okay?

If you say no to that question then you have to ask yourself if it's okay to be intolerant of gay people. Being gay is not a choice, you either are or you aren't. Nobody would choose to be gay, there are too many hurdles to jump when you come out, who would willing do that? No one. So, being intolerant of something that someone cannot change, well yes, I think that is bigoted, I do think those people are hate mongers.

Do you expect people to accept your way of life, your decisions? Of course you do, everyone does. What do you hope to gain by teaching your children to be intolerant of a large group of people? What if one of your kids ends up being gay?

If everyone could just love eachother for who they are, well, the world would be a better place.

In other words, I think gays should have the right to marry, just like the rest of the human beings on this earth. I teach my kids tolerance, acceptance. Everyone is different, who are we to decided what is right and what is wrong?
Your serious, this is your answer. Fat People and Restaurants? Where does tolerance stop. If your correct shouldn't I also teach my children to be tolerant of someone that chooses to have sex with a minor (as long as the minor gives consent ofcourse). And should I teach tolerance of say abortion since it's legal. What about someone who commits murder, who are we to say they shouldn't have killed someone maybe they had good reason. Heck why teach them anything, if everythings OK then I guess I don't need to even be a parent. If they ask me anything I will just tell them to be tolerant of everything. Wow thanks you just made my parent job so much easier.

Both sides stand up for moral values and family values so that's not really the point.

Other than that the OP seems to be just trolling this site.
Both sides stand up for moral issues? Find that in the bible for me, I missed that verse.

both sides stand up for moral issues? find that in the bible for me, I missed that verse.
Noted. Christians don't stand up for moral values, non-christians do. Thanks for the clarification.

Where does tolerance stop? Shall we go back to prosecuting single men and women for having sex outside of marriage? Shall we prosecute married couples for engaging in oral sex? Shall we prosecute anyone who charges interest on a loan, even if it's only a quarter percent? Shall we prevent blacks from using the same drinking fountain as white skinned people? Shall we jail women who attempt to vote or try to sign legal contracts? Shall we allow vivisection of dogs and cats?

All of these things used to be considered socially acceptable or intolerable at some time in history. Now we feel the opposite. If moral values are not set in stone, how can we be sure they have any meaning? Is it wrong to cut up dogs or not? You feel so certain that it is, as I do, yet our ancestors didn't think much of it.

It IS hard to tell what's wrong and what's not wrong. But one way to tell is if the action directly affects another person or animal. Cutting open a living creature hurts it. Preventing blacks from voting or owning property is unjust and hurts them politically and economically. And likewise, oral sex between a husband and wife is not considered to harm anyone and it's up to them as consenting adults.

Yeahitsme, you argue that gay marriage hurts others. So show us how two men marrying hurts you personally. They could be in another city, but let's say they live in your town but don't go to your church. They live half a mile a way and you see them once a month or so at the grocery store or the dry cleaners. They would be together whether they were allowed to marry or not. But with a marriage, they can inherit from one another and visit each other in the hospital without making a lot of special arrangements and arguing with hospital staff at a difficult time when one of them is ill or injured. You would like to prevent them from having those legal rights.

So everything is the same, except for this legal connection of theirs. Being gay is already legal and living with someone you love is legal. How does that extra step, a legal (not your church) marriage hurt you? Please explain because I want to know.

your serious, this is your answer. Fat People and Restaurants? Where does tolerance stop. If your correct shouldn't i also teach my children to be tolerant of someone that chooses to have sex with a minor (as long as the minor gives consent ofcourse). And should i teach tolerance of say abortion since it's legal. What about someone who commits murder, who are we to say they shouldn't have killed someone maybe they had good reason. Heck why teach them anything, if everythings ok then i guess i don't need to even be a parent. If they ask me anything i will just tell them to be tolerant of everything. Wow thanks you just made my parent job so much easier.


Wow, sarcasm, great!

Do you tolerate anyone, I'm beginning to think you don't. You certainly aren't tolerating any of us, all because we don't agree with you.

You asked for an opinion, I gave it to you. You don't have to agree, but, last time I checked, I have a right to my opinion, or don't I? Maybe in your world only your opinion matters and counts.

As for your examples, those are extremes where other people are actually hurting those around them. Contrary to what you believe, gays don't hurt anyone just by being gay. I have gay friends, here in Canada gays can marry, really, it hasn't changed the way I live, it's only changed the way they do.

I feel really bad for kids who are raised to be intolerant, to be prejudice against people. You are in charge of their young minds, what you plant in there will effect them their entire lives. You are raising children that will be intolerant of others.

I'm not a perfect parent and I don't have perfect kids, but I do have kids that accept everyone around them for who they are, not what they are. If that's wrong then I don't want to be right.

When anybody makes a judgment on the worth and value of a human being, based on what they believe to be true, they are not necessarily wrong. Guilty of being blinded by discrimination? Yes. Guilty of fostering intolerance? Yes. Guilty of presumptive assumptions as to others worth to their families, children, employers, societies? Yes.

When we take what we think to be judgment 'markers' such as biblical reference, that is seen as the truth. For those who choose to live by these rules, have created not a tolerant stance, but one of 'us' vs. 'them'. Why would any gay person have to live up to anybody's religious interpretation of who they are. Not even God would expect that.

It is the churches and the flock that feeds them (money, power, and influence), that keeps the issue of inequity alive.

To go beyond that narrow vision, for some, is impossible. To realize that it is simply unjust to judge, and even more unjust to categorize people according to gender preference, is barbaric, and limits those that live by rules that were not meant to discriminate in the first place.

Love knows no boundaries, and love is not defined by any religion, or anybody's interpretation of their religion. It is far beyond the scriptures, and surpasses all earthly restrictions, and interpretations. Love is accepting, love is all encompassing, and love applies to everyone.

Take religion out of the argument, and there is no argument.

Love is one thing, right and wrong from a exact moral value is another.

When my son has to see two men kissing in public after knowing that homosexual relationship is morally wrong by our beliefs, is not our rights hurt, are we not being discriminated against, guess that does not matter.

But the religious moral values have often been the minority and often the criminal element of society, so I guess today should not be any different.

So if being moral is wrong, I am proud to be so, If teaching the absolute truth of the bible or even the Koran or Torah is evil, I am glad to be the most evil of them all.

I'm not saying you are wrong, I am not saying anybody is wrong. But to judge others, is.

I really do understand both ends of this. My younger sister announced she was gay when she was 22 years old. It was a antecedent for my mother's first heart attack, and it caused a huge rift in our family. That was 20 years ago. We were devastated. She was heartbroken.

They were different times then, and ignorance ruled the day. It was a situation that we eventually chose to accept, what else could we do. But, when it hit that close to home, it really shook everything up. Today it is no big deal, and it has come to be something that is just a normal part of our existence now. Children do not naturally discriminate gay people from straight people, that is learned from their parents.

That 'education' for lack of a better word, forced us to realize that although some did not approve, or were morally offended, those feelings and personal opinions were put aside, and the person she was before the big announcement, was the same person she was after. It was not her 'problem', it was ours.

She is an educated, well adjusted, funny, loving person. She just happens to be gay. It was not an easy adjustment for any of us, particularly my mother, but turning our backs on her was not an option. Her life is truthful and honest, and she is morally and intellectually a match for anybody. It hurts that people like her, are seen to be less deserving of love, respect, and support, simply because they are gay.

We just need to accept people, as they are.

Why, should people accept her the way she is.

My next door neighbor steals, he can not help hisself. He does not beelive he has a problem, and he is happy with life just the way he is. So am I suppose to just accept him the way he is, or do I want him to stop.

And I can go on and on with people who do all sorts of things, that today's society calls wrong, but they are happy doing what they are doing,
Should we also have to accept them, if they claim they are born that way, and if they are happy with their lives doing what ever.

Hello:

Sorry. This ISN'T about morals... It ISN'T about acceptance/tolerance. And it for sure ISN'T about what YOU think about homosexuality. SCREW those things!!

It's about the LAW, the CONSTITUTION, and CIVIL RIGHTS.

I couldn't care less whether you HATE gay people or not. It matters NOT that you may think they're the most IMMORAL people in the world... In fact, YOUR views on MORALITY don't have ANY place in this discussion.

If YOUR rights were based upon YOUR morality, I'll be you'd lose 'em real quick. Unless, of course, you're one of those NON sinning Christians.

However, since you brought it up, the TRUTH of the matter is, keeping an ENTIRE class of people from enjoying the SAME RIGHTS YOU HAVE, is pretty damn IMMORAL – pretty damn immoral, indeed!!

excon

excon, to many people it IS about morals, because their moral compass is pointed and directed by religious beliefs. There is nothing wrong with that.

Fr_chuck, it isn't about compromising morals. That you accept gay people is not the same thing as accepting bad behaviour like liars, cheats, thieves, etc.

Because somebody is a gay burgler who robbed you blind, has nothing with him being gay. It is only about him robbing you. I'd be making a judgment too.

Being gay does not predispose you to bad behaviour. It does not also make you any less moral than anybody else. People do bad things, it matters not whether they are gay or straight.

To accept gay people, is to accept a sexual orientation, nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't mean judging them by different standards that we judge anybody else.

It really is simply a matter of accepting people for who they are. Meaning sexual orientation. That is not the same thing as compromising your morals and standards.

There are many intellectually bankrupt people of all persuasions, and it has nothing to do with them being gay or not.

excon, to many people it IS about morals, because their moral compass is pointed and directed by religious beliefs. There is nothing wrong with that.Hello Jake:

Oh, I understand that's what MOST people THINK it's about. I just tried to show them (and you), that it ISN'T.

You're asking people to be accepting. That's nice. I'm demanding they obey the law! BIG difference, in my view.

I agree further, people are ALLOWED to have ANY moral compass they want, pointed in any direction they, or their church, likes... What they DON'T have the right to do, is DENY gay people, or ANYONE, the very same RIGHTS they themselves, enjoy.

excon

I agree with you excon, except prop 8 has done just that- taken away legal rights.

And who took away these rights? What was behind it? Who's money reversed it?

Again, it isn't about morality, it's about religion. That is the legal hammer used to maintain discrimination.

Would you say that's criminal? I would.

prop 8 has done just that- taken away legal rights.....Again, it isn't about morality, it's about religion. That is the legal hammer used to maintain discrimination. Would you say that's criminal? I would.Hello again, Jake:

Proposition 8 took away rights TEMPORARILY. I promise you, they will be restored. Jerry Brown, California Attorney General understands the Constitution.

The Constitution grants ALL men (people) rights. Every one of us, as individual sovereign people, hold these rights. The majority cannot vote out the rights of the minority, even if it is only a minority of ONE.

Is it criminal for religion to try to impose THEIR idea of morality on the rest of us? Nahhh. They been doing that since time immemorial. It's just a constant pain in the @ss.

excon

Good!

I am Canadian, with relatives and friends in California, and they too are optimistic that this will be resolved sooner rather than later. I am one of three sisters, one of whom is gay, and although it is a difficult thing to get past (she came out 20 years ago), when you do, you're left with the same person that was there before, only happier.

As you probably know gay marriage is legal here. It really isn't a big deal. It was, until it was entrenched in the Charter of Rights and Freedom's, but after it was the law of the land, you don't hear boo about it.

It is kind of nice to get past the b.s.

Hello again, Jake:

Proposition 8 took away rights TEMPORARILY. I promise you, they will be restored. Jerry Brown, California Attorney General understands the Constitution.

The Constitution grants ALL men (people) rights. Each and every one of us, as individual sovereign people, hold these rights. The majority cannot vote out the rights of the minority, even if it is only a minority of ONE.

Is it criminal for religion to try to impose THEIR idea of morality on the rest of us?? Nahhh. They been doing that since time immemorial. It's just a constant pain in the @ss.

excon


Define "rights."

So if one "man" wants to steal 50 billion should that be his constitutional "right" even though the majority think it illlegal? Should he get Jerry Brown to make it his "right" to do this?

What is criminal is using the court to supercede a public vote on the issue.

Whose "morality" are we talking about? How about getting rid of that "religiously imposed " morality against murder or stealing or lying? Are we talking about your morality? How is your morality any better than the majority voters in CA on prop 8? :confused:

And lets be clear here, just because I am, or someone is, not for gay marriage does not necessarily mean we are anti - gay. We can accept and love the person yet disagree or be against a [the] behavior [s].

John 8




g&p

Define "rights." So if one "man" wants to steal 50 billion should that be his constitutional "right" even though the majority think it illlegal? Should he get Jerry Brown to make it his "right" to do this?....If it is about the llaw, 1] why not respect the vote in CA 2] you just refuted yourself by calling it immoral :>Hello again, in:

Where or where shall I start?? How about this? You should know that I don't use the "right" word carelessly at all. There are a lot of people who claim rights but have no idea what they're talking about... I'm not one of those. When I say RIGHT, I know whence I speak.

Rights aren't made up like you seem to think I think... My rights, your rights, and everybody's rights emanate from the Constitution of this here country of ours. THAT'S where they come from - nowhere else...

Maybe if you read and understood the Constitution, you wouldn't ask such stuff. Frankly, I wish you would read it. Then we can defeat this thing together... What?? You're not going to disagree with the Constitution, are you?

Pay particular attention to Amendment number Nine, and number Fourteen, section #1. If you understood THESE amendments, you'll understand why gay marriage is a Constitutional Right.

In terms of you thinking the vote is the law, you're just flat wrong on that issue. Voters cannot remove your rights. Nobody can. Nobody! That's the way it SHOULD be.

(edited) Ok, I'll save you some trouble. I'll reprint the relative segment here from the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution... "..nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws...." The passage is simple, short and sweet.

Can you understand EQUAL protection of the LAW? That means, in the simplest terms, that if you have the right to DO something, SO DOES EVERYBODY!! It can't be plainer than that. Ok, let me try it another way. IF the government is going to give YOU rights for being married, then EVERYBODY can get married. Certainly that would be the case if those rights are to be given EQUALLY, and the Fourteenth Amendment says they are. No?

excon

Hello:

Sorry. This ISN'T about morals.... It ISN'T about acceptance/tolerance. And it for sure ISN'T about what YOU think about homosexuality. SCREW those things!!!

It's about the LAW, the CONSTITUTION, and CIVIL RIGHTS.

I could care LESS whether you HATE gay people or not. It matters NOT that you may think they're the most IMMORAL people in the world..... In fact, YOUR views on MORALITY don’t have ANY place in this discussion.

If YOUR rights were based upon YOUR morality, I’ll be you’d lose ‘em real quick. Unless, of course, you’re one of those NON sinning Christians.

However, since you brought it up, the TRUTH of the matter is, keeping an ENTIRE class of people from enjoying the SAME RIGHTS YOU HAVE, is pretty damn IMMORAL – pretty damn immoral, indeed!!!

excon


Again - self refuting.

Tell me - do you think the founding fathers would ever have imagined that the Constitution would be used to create new rights? Like abortion or the marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman?

What is the next right that you think you can use the Constitution to create? How about marriage between man and animal or between 2 children?

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion)

"first intended to secure the rights of former slaves"

How does this relate to gay coupling? How do you make the logic leap from race and slavery to gay coupling?

70% of African Americans backed Prop. 8, exit poll finds | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/70-of-african-a.html)

Do you think the 70% of blacks think that civil rights is the equivalent ot gay marriage?







G&P

Tell me - do you think the founding fathers would ever have imagined that the Constitution would be used to create new rights? Hello again, in:

I asked you to read and try to understand the law of our land... You didn't. I can't help it.

There are no NEW rights. There's only the ones we've ALWAYS had. That's the way it IS, and that's the way it should be.

I knew you'd mention marrying dogs and stuff... That's stupid. I'm not going to argue stupid.

excon

Ex


You state:



Rights aren't made up like you seem to think I think... My rights, your rights, and everybody's rights emanate from the Constitution of this here country of ours. THAT'S where they come from - nowhere else...







How is gay marriage a right "we've always had?"

Where in the constitution does it state that gay marriage is a right?

Yes, I read the 9th and 14th amendment like you asked and I see no logical interpretation that can be used to justify gay marriage.

Obviously you do. All I'm asking is for you to make that case since you brought up that line of "thinking."

I don't consider you stupid, so I find it disappointing that you can't or won't answer the questions that your line of thinking brings up.



g&p

Where in the constitution does it state that gay marriage is a right? Yes, I read the 9th and 14th amendment like you asked and I see no logical interpretation that can be used to justify gay marriage.Hello again, in:

I thought maybe a reading of the Constitution would do it for you. I guess not. You still DON'T understand the Constitution. If you did, you wouldn't have asked the question you asked. Let me see if I can help.

The specific answer to your question is this:

The Constitution doesn't list rights. Our founders were TOO smart to write a LIST. For example, you DO have the right to own a safety pin, don't you? Yes, of course you do, yet, you won't find THAT right listed either. Nope. Our founders, in their wisdom, realized that if they LISTED rights, they couldn't list EVERYTHING one was free to do. So instead of listing the things we CAN DO, they LISTED the things the GOVERNMENT CAN'T DO. The implication being that we were free to do EVERYTHING else.

That's what freedom is, no?

They thought people would UNDERSTAND that, but they wanted to MAKE SURE, so they wrote the Ninth Amendment to seal the deal. It says there, quite clearly, exactly THAT. It says, because certain rights are enumerated (listed), that doesn't mean that there aren't OTHER RIGHTS retained by the people...

The term "other rights retained by the people" is QUITE significant. THAT is where you'll find your right to own a safety pin, to MARRY, or do ANYTHING that is not constrained by the government. Really, that's where it is. It SAYS so.

The Fourteenth Amendment simply says that the laws will be applied equally.

So, if YOU have the right to own a safety pin, AND YOU DO because the Ninth Amendment says so, so does everybody else. Those are the TWO concepts imbued in those two Amendments and the Constitution as a whole.

Those founders of ours were really, really smart. Now, YOU are too.

excon

Exy, had to spread the rep, but I agree 100%.

Marriage is a right, whether you are gay or straight!

Why are some people so opposed to this, it's not like we're telling you to go out and become a homosexual. You don't have to be in a gay marriage, heck, you don't even have to accept gays, that's your right, but to deny them the right to be married, well, that's not your right, never was, never will be.

Live and let live already!

And think of all the fornicators and adulturers that sit in the pews every Sunday - no one seems to have a problem with that.

They thought people would UNDERSTAND that, but they wanted to MAKE SURE, so they wrote the Ninth Amendment to seal the deal. It says there, quite clearly, exactly THAT. It says, because certain rights are enumerated (listed), that doesn't mean that there aren't OTHER RIGHTS retained by the people...




So by that same logic the right for man and animal to marry or the right of two children to marry can be included in those rights not specifically enumerated by the constitution.
How about the "right" to drive around naked, or the "right" to have several wives. Your interpretation leaves a whole pandora's box of "rights" open.






that is not constrained by the government


implying that government can constrain rights like driving - [ dui laws ]

and that government follows laws that may be made at the will of or voted on by the people... so what is the problem with prop 8?


Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause)

again explain how this pertains to gay coupling?

How can there be "equal protection" when we have :

1] a progressive tax system where the more you make in adjustd gross income the greater the percentage in taxes you pay

2] affirmative action?

3] in abortion ? Where is the "equal protection" for the unborn?

4] why do single tax filers pay more per same agi? Why do taxpayors that have dependents have special deductions?



And think of all the fornicators and adulturers that sit in the pews every Sunday - no one seems to have a problem with that.


Who told you, that you had to be perfect and sinless to go to church? Did not Jesus come for the sinners? Sin does include fornication, adultery, homosexuality [ no special dispensation there ] greed, hate etc...




Luke 18:9-14 (New International Version)

The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
9To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: 10"Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11The Pharisee stood up and prayed about[a] himself: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.'
13"But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'

14"I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."









G&P

Hello again, in:

You're not listening.. I'm telling you what YOUR CONSTITUTION says. I know you don't like it. I don't know why. It is YOUR country, and the laws ain't too bad. The Constitution is pretty cool too.

But, I know you're not interested. That's a shame for an American. Ok. You don't want to know the law. You keep making silly suggestions, that could only have come from your church. I ain't interested in your SILLY stuff. I'm interested in the law. You aren't.

Later.

excon

Ex

If prop 8 is what you may think of as "unconstitutional" why did it even make to the ballot in the first place?



I'm telling you what YOUR CONSTITUTION says.




And it does not, specifically in writing, list gay marriage as a right.

Those "rights" not enumerated are then open to interpretation [ see prior posts ] and the majority of CA voters on prop 8 were in favor of it.

You make a number of false assumptions about my view point that just serve as a detraction from a discussion.





G&P

it does not, specifically in writing, list gay marriage as a right.

It doesn't list your right to bowl either, but believe me, you have the right to bowl.

I'm not even American and I understand the constitution, it's not hard.

Marriage is a basic right, for all human beings. The last time I checked, gays and lesbians are indeed humans, therefore they have the right to marry and all the rights that marriage allows.

Why did it this proposition make it to the ballot in the first place? Because of religious nuts that think that being gay or lesbian is against God's words. I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but a lot of things that everyone does is against "God's law". You can't pick.

Where is the proposition against bowling?

Anyone, please explain how "gay marriage" is a "right" justified by the Constitution.

Maybe you pro gay marriage lawyers out there can state your legal case beyond;

"Its there in the Constitution"

What case law or precedent establishes it as a right?

By what standard is it a right? If one group says it is a right by their standard and another group, going by a different standard, states it is not; was that not voted on in Prop 8?

Please, state your case in a logically manner.

Terms like "stupid" "religious nuts" " you this or that .." "tolerance"... would they make it as reasonable legal argument?





G&P

Here in Canada, the entire country is subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is not within our constitution to discriminate against who gets married, it is entrenched that anybody has the right to get married.

To deny someone their right, under the Charter, not to marry simply because they are gay, is unconstitutional, and discriminatory, and illegal.

As I said before, take religion out of the equation, and there is no argument.

For you to understand this, you must look at all people as being equal under the law.

Imagine that you and your wife (as an example here, no idea if you are married or not), are seen, in the eyes of the law, as equal to a same-sex couple. It is not lawful to deny either of the two parties the right to marry.

You may disagree because of your religion, however, because it is the law, your religion cannot influence what is lawful for ALL citizens. No offence, but you having religious arguments, does not make any difference in what is lawful, and available to all people.

Your religious beliefs do not represent all people, equally. Your religion discriminates. It is unlawful, at least in this country, to deny same-sex couples their legal right to marry, simply because your particular religion does not agree.

Please, state your case in a logically manner.Hello again, in:

If you don't think the way I've presented it so far is logical, then we have nothing further to discuss.

excon

Where is the proposition against bowling?Hello again, in:

Nahhh. I'm not going to give up. If you want logical, I'll give you logical.

It's been pointed out here that you have the right to own a safety pin and you have the right to bowl. You don't deny that, but you say that THOSE rights don't have to be listed in the Constitution because they aren't being challenged.

What??

You ask for logic, but logically, that makes no sense at all. What if somebody DID challenge your right to bowl, and you couldn't justify it with it being on the list? By the way, when you read the Constitution, did you find ANY list??

You'll probably say something like bowling isn't a moral issue, as though that has some LEGAL distinction... It doesn't.

Unless, of course, you can show ME where it says that laws and/or rights need to be based upon morality. Where is THAT stuff in the Constitution??

I've shown YOU where your rights are, including the ones where you can bowl and own a safety pin. You didn't like that. You scoff at my legal analysis, yet you show me NONE of yours.

Instead, you provide religious dogma.


If prop 8 is what you may think of as "unconstitutional" why did it even make to the ballot in the first place?You think that laws can be made, but if they were UNCONSTITUTIONAL, they wouldn't have been made in the first place. That's just flat out wrong. It makes NO sense whatsoever. I have NO idea what you might think the role of the Supreme Court is, if it's NOT to rule on the constitutionality of a law.

You think that the majority can vote out the rights of the minority. That too, is just flat out wrong. If we lived in a democracy where the majority DOES, in fact, rule, then you'd be correct... But, we live in a republic where the majority does NOT rule.

I don't know how you missed THAT piece of law and/or history, but you did.

I again, suggest that if you understood the Constitution, and WHY it was written, you'd understand why gay people have the right to marry.

Nobody here is asking you to ACCEPT that gay people can get married. They're just telling you that it's the LAW of the land.

excon

Ex

"law of the land"?

State the law - the link - perhaps in Mass but in California?

If it is a "law of the land" why are /were there state ballot initiatives in2004 and 2008 regarding same sex marriage? Then this becomes a states rights vs federal power issue.

If you believe in an activist judicial system, yes, they can interpret law anyway they see fit - make up laws - regardless of what the Constitution states.

You, as a reported libertarian, should be more fearful of a couple of people [ judges ] that can alter laws arbitrarily, like eminent domain,
rather than a vote by thousands of your fellow citizens.


G&P

Actually, I had this conversation recently with someone I respect--and I've come to the realization that it IS a state's rights vs federal rights issue---just like slavery was.

So--every state can rule on it however they want to, but if someone gets married in a state where it is legal and then MOVES to another state where it is NOT legal---the state where it is NOT legal must still recognize the legality of the relationship.

Just like in the days of slavery where a state could decide whether slavery was legal in their state, but could not say that a slave was no longer property just because the owner of the slave travelled to a state where slavery was NOT legal.

Either way--MY religion says that gay marriage is okay. Are you going to say that MY religion is wrong, when YOUR religion practices cannibalism by proxy (the body and blood of Christ). Isn't cannibalism wrong? I mean, even if you ARE substituting bread and wine, isn't the very idea of eating another person repellent to you? It is to ME! I think that's morally WRONG! Let's BAN IT! I bet that I could get a "cannibalism by proxy is wrong" ballot going, and people would only get worked up about it because it's discriminating against a religion, not because cannibalism IS wrong, morally.

So... since your religion is doing something disgusting to me, should I teach my children to hate and scorn all Christians? I mean... you can't really justify cannibalism! And really, you can STOP yourselves! It's not something you HAVE to do! You just CHOOSE to do it because you FEEL that way about your morals or something.

Anyway, maybe I am rambling a bit, but I think my argument no more ridiculous that the people marrying pets argument, or the pedophiles marrying children argument (stupid arguments, by the way--what part of TWO CONSENTING ADULTS do people just not get?). It's also no less stupid than the morals trump laws argument.

Anyway... I'm off to start my campaign against "Cannibalism by Proxy" or something.

Synn, I had to spread the rep, I hate it when that happens. I agree 190%!

If you need signatures for your new campaign, let me know, I'm not American, heck, I'm not even Canadian, but I'll sign. :)

Love is one thing, right and wrong from a exact moral value is another.

When my son has to see two men kissing in public after knowing that homosexual relationship is morally wrong by our beliefs, is not our rights hurt, are we not being discriminated against, guess that does not matter.

But the religious moral values have often been the minority and often the criminal element of society, so I guess today should not be any different.

So if being moral is wrong, I am proud to be so, If teaching the absolute truth of the bible or even the Koran or Torah is evil, I am glad to be the most evil of them all.

So Chuck,
What if your son WAS one of two men kissing in public? private or anywhere else.
You don't control what is the essence of another human being.
If he was gay, he would be gay and no amount of teaching that it is morally wrong would change that. Sure, he may suppress himself, since his christian father has scared the bageebies out of him, but he would still be what he is. When teens are shamed for who they are they are depressed, may turn to drugs, or even resort to killing themselves.

Being gay does not just come down to sex. You are still gay whether you have sex with a same sex partner or not. Is that the part that christians are so irate about?
Don't you think God has bigger fish to fry than to worry about who is loving who. Love is encouraged.

Your intolerance is turning people away from your religion. Not because we don't want any rules and we want to do what we want to do. It's because you preach division, judgment, and condemn any love that does not fit your narrow definition.

[QUOTE=inthebox;1448682]Define "rights."

So if one "man" wants to steal 50 billion should that be his constitutional "right" even though the majority think it illlegal? Should he get Jerry Brown to make it his "right" to do this?

What is criminal is using the court to supercede a public vote on the issue.

Whose "morality" are we talking about? How about getting rid of that "religiously imposed " morality against murder or stealing or lying? Are we talking about your morality? How is your morality any better than the majority voters in CA on prop 8? :confused:

And lets be clear here, just because I am, or someone is, not for gay marriage does not necessarily mean we are anti - gay. We can accept and love the person yet disagree or be against a [the] behavior [s].


John 8

Notice that once again sarcasm is applied when you don't have a leg to stand on.
Notice that the things that you mentioned do harm to someone else. They infringe on someone elses property or life. How does being gay take anything away from you?
Why is it any of your business? How can love between two people be wrong?

What I can't understand is the hate. Why so much hate for another human being? If this hate is condoned in the bible, then that's another wonderful reason for me to keep it out of my life.

I thought that Christians were supposed to be loving, caring, the essence of humanity. What about all this talk of "love thy neighbor", what happened to that? Are you really allowed to chose which neighbor to love?

Love is a wonderful thing, how does same sex love affect you personally? I don't understand what you think a gay couple can do to you if given the right to marry. Please, someone explain it to me, because I'm in the dark. What powers will they have once they're allowed to marry? Is it that you can't stand them having the same rights as the rest of us? Aren't they human? Last time I checked they were, maybe I'm wrong.

So, in other words, the bible preaches that we should love everyone, except the ones that we don't want to love. Guess I missed that part in bible class. :(

[QUOTE=inthebox;1448682]Define "rights."

So if one "man" wants to steal 50 billion should that be his constitutional "right" even though the majority think it illlegal? Should he get Jerry Brown to make it his "right" to do this?

What is criminal is using the court to supercede a public vote on the issue.

Whose "morality" are we talking about? How about getting rid of that "religiously imposed " morality against murder or stealing or lying? Are we talking about your morality? How is your morality any better than the majority voters in CA on prop 8? :confused:

And lets be clear here, just because I am, or someone is, not for gay marriage does not necessarily mean we are anti - gay. We can accept and love the person yet disagree or be against a [the] behavior [s].


John 8

Notice that once again sarcasm is applied when you don't have a leg to stand on.
Notice that the things that you mentioned do harm to someone else. They infringe on someone elses property or life. How does being gay take anything away from you?
Why is it any of your business? How can love between two people be wrong?

My leg is the majority vote of the people in California.

John 8 - Yes, you are forgiven, sin no more.

Prop 8 has nothing to do with to gay people loving each other. It was about MARRIAGE.

If 2 homosexuals want to love each other - hey go for it! - I never stated I was against LOVE.

I'm not homosexual so "being gay " does not take or add anything away from me ;) - sarcasm intended.




G&P

I wish for one moment that the religious anti prop 8 people, could come and spend a few days with me here in Canada.

Not only do gay married people not glow in the dark, steal children for sactifice, or corrupt our airwaves with hypnotic messages to convert straight people, they are surprisingly hard to spot.

They are hard to pick out of a crowd of teachers, bankers, shoppers at the mall and spectator events such as hockey or soccer.

They ARE your neighbours, friends, co-workers, lawyers and optometrists. They have two arms, two legs, usually wear shoes, and some even teach bible study at your local church, or are pastors and ministers themselves. Last I heard, they are more than welcoming of straight people in their flock.

Come during the Gay Pride Parade, which is the larges of its kind in the world. EVERYBODY comes out and has a great time. Even the Mayor of Toronto rode in one of the floats.

I have seen both sides of this coin, both before gay marriage was legal, and afterwards when everybody wondered what all the fuss was about.

I hope for the good people of California, that the 'after' comes sooner rather than later and everybody can get back to minding their own business. It really isn't a big deal.

both sides stand up for moral issues? find that in the bible for me, I missed that verse.

I think he meant both sides believe in a moral issue. Both sides simply don't agree on either the moral or the interpretation of the moral.

I would also like to point out that the word moral implies that there is right and wrong. That there is only one way. That's what makes tolerance difficult. However, the word tolerance is interpreted in many different ways by many different people.

In general, if both sides have 'truth' to it then there are two possibilities. #1 one side is wrong, meaning one side isn't really true; one side isn't valid or doesn't have merit. (However, personal experience never fails, so therefore it must be true.) Or #2 We fail to see the connection between both truths. Since truth cannot contradict truth, when looking at a moral issue, perhaps we fail to see how the two pieces of the puzzle fit together?:)

why, should peopel accept her the way she is.

My next door neighbor steals, he can not help hisself. He does not beelive he has a problem, and he is happy with life just the way he is. So am I suppose to just accept him the way he is, or do I want him to stop.

And I can go on and on with people who do all sorts of things, that todays society calls wrong, but they are happy doing what they are doing,
Should we also have to accept them, if they claim they are born that way, and if they are happy with thier lives doing what ever.

If your neighbor steals from you, he takes away your right to your own property.
If your neighbor is gay, what right of yours does that take away?
In fact, if you prohibit him from marrying and having the same legal rights as you, then YOU are actually taking away his rights.
See the difference?

How can someone compare being fat to being gay?? Being fat is just who someone is. Some people mihgt say being gay is just who someone is I'm not that someone. Being gay does not work a gay couple can not have a child. This world started wit a man and a woman and if u ask me that's how its intended to be. If lesbians don't need men why go and buy dildos ha ha and gay men having sex leads to aids that sounds like a great idea. Being gay is a dysfunction in the brain and makes me sick

being gay does not work a gay couple can not have a child.

My husband and I are infertile, and unable to have a child. Does that make us "not work" either? Is being married only about having children?


this world started wit a man and a woman and if u ask me thats how its intended to be.

That's YOUR opinion. MY opinion is that you place your religious views above the rights of other people. Know what? There were people that argued the same sort of thing to promote slavery. They said the reason blacks were slaves was that they were descended from Ham, who looked on his father Noah and laughed at his drunkenness, and that being forced to serve his brothers was God's punishment. So--if that's the case, should be go back to having slaves, then?


if lesbians dont need men why go and buy dildos ha ha and gay men having sex leads to aids that sounds like a great idea. being gay is a dysfunction in the brain and makes me sick

They don't NEED to buy a dildo any more than I, a married woman, NEEDS to have a vibrator. I have one, though, and it enhances my sex life. I can see why lesbians got away from men like YOU, though--you have no idea how much more important a good tongue is than some phallic thing.

Unprotected sex leads to AIDS. ALL unprotected sex. It doesn't matter if it's homosexual sex or heterosexual sex--AIDS is passed by stupidity, not by homosexuality.

Being stupid is a dysfunction of the brain, too. It makes me sick. Let's round up all those people who have below average intelligence and give them fewer rights because it's a dysfunction of the brain and makes me sick, shall we?

how can someone compare being fat to being gay ??? being fat is just who someone is. some people mihgt say being gay is just who someone is im not that someone. being gay does not work a gay couple can not have a child. this world started wit a man and a woman and if u ask me thats how its intended to be. if lesbians dont need men why go and buy dildos ha ha and gay men having sex leads to aids that sounds like a great idea. being gay is a dysfunction in the brain and makes me sick

I had to check the calendar to make sure it was 2009, and not 30 years ago!

Being gay is not a choice.

Being gay does work, and it has worked since the beginning of man's history.

Gay people do have children the same way anybody else who cannot naturally conceive do, they adopt if they are male. Many females have in vitro.

Sex toys are sex toys, and who cares who uses them for what, gay or straight.

Gay men having sex leads to aids? Here is something to ponder from statistics in Ireland.

Unprotected sex between men and women accounted for the highest number of cases, followed by drug use and sexual contact among homosexuals.
Northern Ireland News - Shadow Of AIDS Cast Over Ireland (http://www.4ni.co.uk/northern_ireland_news.asp?id=72305)

The WHO (World Health Organization) considers Ireland's increase in AIDS as epidemic. (just Google AIDS epidemic in Ireland for 344,000 pages of information on that topic.

As to mental illness, Homophobia (fear of homosexuals) is one. Here are 1,390,000 hits on that topic alone.
fear of homosexuals - Google Search (http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=fear+of+homosexuals&meta=)

I truly hope you attempt to educate yourself. Your ignorance is alarming.

They only gave percentages.

300 % increase in a small number is still a small number:

For example:
If group A had 10 case last year a 300 % increase means 40 cases.

If group B had 100 cases and a 50 % increase, that means 50 new cases.

Also, 42% were born in subsahara - HIV is transmitted heterosexually more so than in western countries.

It is intolerant because your teaching your children to be bias.

If your neighbor steals from you, he takes away your right to your own property.
If your neighbor is gay, what right of yours does that take away?
In fact, if you prohibit him from marrying and having the same legal rights as you, then YOU are actually taking away his rights.
See the difference?

Chuck, you never said if you see the difference. I'm curious.

Fact Sheet: HIV/AIDS among Men Who Have Sex with Men | Resources | HIV/AIDS and Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM) | Topics | CDC HIV/AIDS (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/resources/factsheets/msm.htm)








In the United States, HIV infection and AIDS have had a tremendous effect on men who have sex with men (MSM). MSM accounted for 71% of all HIV infections among male adults and adolescents in 2005 (based on data from 33 states with long-term, confidential name-based HIV reporting), even though only about 5% to 7% of male adults and adolescents in the United States identify themselves as MSM [1, 2].

Homophobia a made up pretend word by the liberals to try and make normal moral people who are against homosexual behavior sound like something bad.

The fact is, it is a joke, I laugh when anyone tries to use the word seriously. In fact the entire world used to be that, and should be proud to do so. So are they scared of them, no of course not, exact fear that they will force their beliefs upon the majority of the US though court action
Fear, yes that the moral society which is already in the gutter will go on down the draim.

See the difference, yes I see a big difference between a right and a sexual preference and desire.
There is no special protection or right for sexual preference or gender issues. The right to be protected from thefts is one thing,
But everyone has the same right to get married, they may marry someone of the opposite sex, everyone has that right,
And everyone has the same restriction of not with someone of the same sex. So everyone is equal. What they want is their speical right,

I said this many years ago, when it all started, and people laughed at me when I warned about this sexual movement, they want this now, and more down the road, to destroy the fabric of marriage, and society.

Fact Sheet: HIV/AIDS among Men Who Have Sex with Men | Resources | HIV/AIDS and Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM) | Topics | CDC HIV/AIDS (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/resources/factsheets/msm.htm)

And without even having to quote the CDC, 100% of all unplanned pregnancies are between heterosexual couples. That accounts for 100% of all abortions, too.

So if being gay is bad because it spreads AIDS, then being straight is bad because it causes abortions.

Well, statistics aside, increases are alarming, and my point was, right in everybody's back yard, no portion of the population is exempt.

That it is not restricted to homosexuals, was the simple point I was trying to make to the original poster.

I don't think it would make a dent anyway.

and without even having to quote the CDC, 100% of all unplanned pregnancies are between heterosexual couples. That accounts for 100% of all abortions, too.

So if being gay is bad because it spreads AIDS, then being straight is bad because it causes abortions.


Ahhh... but is not abortion a "choice." And that choice could and should be made for LIFE.
Are you implying that homosexual acts are choices?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Another thing, in my post you are referring to, there is no moralizing about sexual preference.

Even the CDC does not use the term homosexuals or heterosexuals but MSM [men having sex with men ].

And yes statistics are based on facts, not opinions.






G&P

People that are gay are born gay, people who are retarted are born that way, and do you do you tell your children people with special needs is a wrong way of life. If you fell in love with someone and your mother or father told you not to marry them because they don't like them would that bother you? Your not involved in someone's love life to care weather they want to marry each other or not. Gay people are just like everyone else they sleep eat work cry laugh love and everything else. So why be against them? Why point fingers. Its not a big issue

Ahhh...but is not abortion a "choice." And that choice could and should be made for LIFE.
Are you implying that homosexual acts are choices?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Another thing, in my post you are referring to, there is no moralizing about sexual preference.

Even the CDC does not use the term homosexuals or heterosexuals but MSM [men having sex with men ].

And yes statistics are based on facts, not opinions.






G&P

Abortion is a choice. Having unprotected sex is a CHOICE. Whether one is a homosexual is NOT a choice.

My statistics were based on facts, too. I was just pointing out that statistics don't mean CRAP, because you can twist them to mean whatever you want.

Abortion is a choice. Having unprotected sex is a CHOICE. Whether or not one is a homosexual is NOT a choice.

My statistics were based on facts, too. I was just pointing out that statistics don't mean CRAP, because you can twist them to mean whatever you want.


So statistics from the CDC are crap?


G&P

I'm saying that what people take the statistics to MEAN is crap.

So male-to-male sex is the most common way to pass AIDS--so what? Female-to-Female sex is the LEAST common way to spread AIDS sexually.

HIV/AIDS and Women | Topics | CDC HIV/AIDS (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/women/index.htm)

So two women should be able to get married before a man and a woman should, by those statistics?

Your statistics are crap because they only say the part you WANT them to say, not the whole story.

Perhaps if male/male relationships were more accepted by society, there would be more openness about homosexual relationships in general, and therefore more stable relationships among homosexuals, rather than clandestine sexual meetings and nothing more, which would cut down on the male-to-male AIDS transmission.

Statistics tell only PART of any story--and usually only the part that the person quoting the statistics wants to say.

Again--I gave you perfectly accurate statistics as well, about abortion. There's not a single abortion out there that was because of a gay marriage. Granted, the CDC is a respected scientific community, but can you really say that my statistics are inaccurate?

So--if my statistics are as accurate as the CDC's, then what does that say about statistics in general?

Basically--what the hell is your point? Should people with AIDS not be allowed to get married? Or just anyone that has had unprotected sex, therefore putting others at risk for any STD?

Or is it just gay men that can't get married, because somehow that thought sickens you, and you're hiding behind the AIDS argument because it's convenient?

I was originally replying to an assertion that hiv is transmitted via heterosexual sex as easily as it is among homosexual sex.

This is true in subsaharan Africa, not the USA.

I NEVER made risk for hiv or aids a litmus test for marriage.

Maybe you might , but I don't.





G&P

I support civil unions but I think marriage should be between a man and a woman. I have no problem with gay people, I know several of them.

Hello again, in:

You're not listening.. I'm telling you what YOUR CONSTITUTION says. I know you don't like it. I dunno why. It is YOUR country, and the laws ain't too bad. The Consitution is pretty cool too.

But, I know you're not interested. That's a shame for an American. Ok. You don't wanna know the law. You keep making silly suggestions, that could only have come from your church. I ain't interested in your SILLY stuff. I'm interested in the law. You aren't.

Later.

excon
That is why I do not like conformed religion they bend everything around a book that man wrote, oh and also I don't like a religion that gives birth to biggots and hypocrites... people who drink and do drugs and cuss like sailors all week long think that one day athe e and of the week makes up for it I know this from experience I watch people that I know... I used to be christian until I found out that most are worse than the non christian people gossipping all the time and back stabbers I would rather be a sinner and a good person that be saved and be horrible

What the Bible Says - And Doesn't Say - About Homosexuality (http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian) take a look all christians and curious others please

Thank you liz I was wondering what kind of response I would get

Being against gays IS being intorerant because you you are not tolerant of gays. Teaching children that it is wrong to be gay is wrong. People should believe in what they want not what their parents want. If they agree with you enforce what they believe, but don't brainwash them into believing what you want them to. I don't know why people who are against gays even care! I can't stand people who protest against people they don't even know that are doing nothing wrong. Why do they care that gays they don't even know are getting married? Just because they they think it's sinful? It's like protesting it front of a house with a couple that cheated on each other. You would be knocking on half of all the world's doors. Why bother?

that is why i do not like conformed religion they bend everything around a book that man wrote, oh and also i dont like a religion that gives birth to biggots and hypocrites... people who drink and do drugs and cuss like sailors all week long think that one day athe e nd of the week makes up for it i know this from experience i watch people that i know... i used to be christian until i found out that most are worse than the non christian people gossipping all the time and back stabbers i would rather be a sinner and a good person that be saved and be horrible


Kind of oxymoronic there ;)

It is religion that makes someone think they are better than another when they are not.

Are you not doing the same thing?

I have no problem saying I am a sinner, I am not perfect, and never will be in this lifetime.
A true church is basically a sinners anonymous meeting with all declaring dependence, trust, and love for God.

Oh, by the way, that includes sins other than homosexuality. :)




G&P

Nitelight I agree with everything you said and like the link.

You know I dislike the most about people? People who say "I have no problems with gay, I even know some, I support civil unions but marriage is only between man and woman". I think that is a contradiction.

My friend is a Christian and she is a pastor in NC. She is a lesbian and been together 11 years with her partner. They got marriage and recently adopted twins.

Now I have another friend that is Christian and he is totally against my other friend. He judges her because she is a lesbian and a pastor and swears she is damn to hell.

Now my other friend, that is the lesbian, accepts everyone in her church without judgement and the sweetest person you know and a friend you can count on. A lot of people, especially people in her own religion, doesn't accept her but she doesn't let them get under her skin nor pay them any mind for that matter. I am proud of her.

The gay communication have to deal with a lot on a day to day basic but I must say they all have tough skin and stick together. When I go to Gay Pride day, I've so much fun and laughs with them so that is why I go there every year to support them and to have a fun time.

You know I dislike the most about people? People who say "I have no problems with gay, I even know some, I support civil unions but marriage is only between man and woman". I think that is a contradiction.
No, that's not a contradiction, those people are saying they're tolerant. According to that sentence, those people may not dislike gay couples, but that doesn't mean they want them take part in the "exclusivity" of marriage.

The misnomer is tolerance means respect or admiration, and it doesn't, not even close. People like that tolerate their existence only.