inthebox
Just wanted to say I don't have time to respond to you tonight--- some of the points you raised I already addressed- others I will get to either tomorrow or Friday when I get back on here.
Have a good night!
|
inthebox
Just wanted to say I don't have time to respond to you tonight--- some of the points you raised I already addressed- others I will get to either tomorrow or Friday when I get back on here.
Have a good night!
Men have penises,
Women have Vaginas.
1 + 1 = 2
Penises fit into vaginas.
Male and Female organs are for reproduction.
Male and Male has no purpose.
Female and Female has no purpose.
Survival of the fittest. There is no survival with homosexuality and that is why it is unnatural.
Penises and Vaginas fits together like a GLOVE.
EDIT:::::::
Marriage is an institution that was created for a man and a women to come together and create children together and create a family. Marriage has always been about a man and women coming together. Marriage is about becoming one and literally joining together as one. That can not be done with homosexuals.
See the problem here with communication is that religion EQUALS morals for some people.
I would hazard a guess that the 10 Commandments are the top ten rules in EVERY RELIGION in the world. Or close to it. So... they're common sense rules, to me. Don't hurt other people. Take a day to rest here and there. Honor your ancestors and elders, and make time for your god. Sounds like a pretty balanced life there, and it's not even solely a Christian idea!
I really believe that morality, in general, is common sense. If it doesn't hurt anyone else, and I like to do it--well, why shouldn't I? It's not hurting anyone!
The question it keeps coming back to, for me, is what or who exactly is homosexuality hurting? Really, truly hurting? I'm not talking about it turning you off, or making you feel ill or whatever--who is it HURTING?
Similar argument with gay marriage--who is it HURTING? If you tell me that it ruins the sanctity and the idea of marriage for heterosexuals, I'm going to laugh at you. Heterosexuals NOT getting married and living together, or having children out of wedlock, and the HUGE divorce rate did more to ruin the "sanctity" of marriage than anything the gays could do.
And again--if sex organs are ONLY for procreation, and not pleasure--well, I really hope you are trying for kids on a regular basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by margog85
You too, got to catch the end of "So you think you can dance" ;)
Practise makes perfect. Having pleasure while trying to create.
Yes, for some people it seem to be that way. But has that claim any validity for people outside that group?Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
The problem with all these religious views is that their (possible) validity is based on unsupported wild claims, and that those who think that way seem to assume that these views are valid also for all of those of other pursuation.
When people select morals for themselves... fine with me !
But what morality is there in trying to enforce unsupported religious claims unto others?
Nobody is forcing or trying to force those "some persons" into homosexual practices.
So why are these "some persons" such noseyparkers who insist to interfere with other people's lives and freedoms ?
If only these "some persons" were "without sin"... Specially as it is them who long ago already started throwing stones...
:rolleyes:
So basically, Margog, you're trying to figure out what makes religious people tick without their religion?
Well, speaking for myself as a dedicated Christian, it's a way of life for me since our grand creator set out guidelines for us all through His Word and hopes that we follow them. If not, then that's our choice and we reap the consequences. If I put my beliefs aside I put the Almighty aside and choose to go it alone. Who or what gets hurt if I accept homosexuals etc? GOD. Just like you would be hurt if you repeatedly told your child not to do something and they turned around and did it anyway. Many don't feel that such a being exists, and that is their choice, but MY choice is to dedicate my whole life as in thoughts, actions and words to trying to please God.
Sorry, but I see it as impossible to give you an answer to your question without seeing it from God's point of view.
To me it's about lust and is unhealthy.
If we should accept this kind of behaviour, why then does society as a whole not accept fathers marrying daughters or mothers marrying sons? I mean, some have been known to fall madly in love. Must they be denied these feelings?
"For us all"? ----> As this implies that your religious views and the consequences of these views in this wording does not only involve yourself, but includes every human being now , it becomes time to demand from you objective supported evidence for :Quote:
Originally Posted by Moparbyfar
- the existence of "god/gods".
- the supposed supranatural powers of that "god/gods".
- the claim that the bible is the word of (one of these) "gods".
If all you can do is believe in your religious claims, no problem, no problem at all !
But than do not try to shift your religious beliefs unrequested onto others. Without that requested evidence your words as quoted are just empty religious claims, and are for others than yourself without any value or consequence.
Note that JC is claimed to have asked every Christian to "Go forth and spread the word"
JC never was claimed to have asked to "Go forth and force the christian word upon every human being".
Your religious claims have no hold for other people. They are no guidelines "for us all". They are guidelines for all christians. Many years of inquisition tried to do the same, but failed.
And I note that even christian people seem unable to keep to these guidelines, so why you don't start with yourself and your own and to start displaying how people should live, and show others the way by example?
Your "grand creator" did not set out guidelines "for us all" through His Word. That is what you BELIEVE ...
:rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesushelper76
Then you ONLY have sex when you're trying to create, right? No birth control, EVER. No oral sex that leads to culmination. Absolutely no anal sex.
Marriage is two people in love sharing a life together. I don't care what the gender of those two people are. Let GOD sort that out, if that's your thing--Are YOU God, to determine what's right and what isn't? And again--IF the Bible says that homosexuality IS wrong--the Bible also says that birth control is wrong, and incest is okay (Lot and his daughters), and St. Paul has a TON of stuff in there about how women should be subjugated and never equal to men.
At one point, the Bible was used to justify slavery--the story of Noah getting drunk and one of his sons laughing at him. Amazing how THAT has changed, though.
Well said Syn. If its not hurting anyone why do we care?Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
I believe that those that hide behind the "sanctity" of marriage are grossly uninformed. There is so much more to a marriage then sex and like Syn said heterosexuals are doing an outstanding job ruining that sanctity all alone. Honestly, how can we condem if 2 people who love each other and want to build a life together? My aunt is a gay woman with a wonderful girlfriend. They attend church every week, give to that church every week, and yet they cannot be married in that church. THAT KILLS ME! The church says hey your money is good enough for us, but you are not. I hate that... it leaves a sour taste in my mouth every time I think about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
Right on Syn! Finally a voice of reason! Perfect ending to a wonderful post.
I would also like to add that the bible is a piece of literary work open to interpretation. How you interpret the bible might not be how I interpret the bible. Often when I sit in church and the Father is giving his homily I think- wow I did not get that out of what the gospel says... I got this. Does that make his interpretation wrong? No... Does it make mine wrong? No. But we need to learn all coexist and get along. Gay or straight we are all human... why all the hate...
Also, to all of you in a heterosexual marriage... can you imagine if your wife/husband was critically hurt and you were told that you could not see them or make decisions on their health. Could you imagine being powerless as the one you love lay in a hospital bed? Homosexuals are looking for equal rights... just like African Americans did in the 60's. Everyone deserves to be treated equally... no I know that it does not happen, but that is what people deserve.
"Love is an emotional rollercoaster and when we fall in love with someone it does not matter where they came from or what they are." Gays/Lesbians are people who just happen to love one another the same as hetrosexuals do.
AND IT HAS CERTAINLY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANIMALS - OR HAS IT? YES That's RIGHT WE AS HUMANS ARE ANIMALS TOO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppysue
Well said Poppysue... why do we care who or how other people love? We should just be happy that people are finding others to love. It's a long lonely world without the love of another person.
I know I said I would respond today, but my time is limited at the moment- I will try to add more later, but a lot of what I wanted to say has already been said by others.
I just want to interject one thought at this point- homosexuality is not about LUST anymore than heterosexuality is about LUST. Heterosexuals tend to focus on the act of sex because that is what makes them most uncomfortable about homosexuality. But the 'homosexual lifestyle' is really not much different from the 'heterosexual lifestyle', aside from who we choose to share our lives with. My partner and I are not constantly having sex, and sex is not the focal point of our relationship. When I see a straight couple together, I don't automatically think of their sex life, and it frustrates me to no end to know that when I am seen with my partner that is often where the thoughts of other people immediately go.
Just something I wanted to put out there for now...
Its not about the Church or religion or morals. Its just about drawing the line on what the state should accept as a valid union. Man and woman is a normal and valid union. Man and man or Man and dog/animal is not normal and the state should not be forced to validate abnormal marriage unions in the name of "fairness".Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
Again--why is man and man NOT normal? I mean, how many gay people are there, really, who would like to have validation for their love?
And again--man and animal isn't even in the same class---it's like oranges and boxes, for pete's sake!--because the animal CAN NOT GIVE CONSENT.
Until 40 years ago or so, blacks and whites marrying was considered abnormal. Until a couple hundred years ago, marrying outside of your religion was abnormal. Until a couple thousand years ago (or so) marrying only ONE woman was considered abnormal. Until the last couple centuries or so, marrying for LOVE was abnormal--you married who your parents told you to marry, because it would be an advantageous match in some way.
So--are you equating being gay with marrying for love? I mean, if one was abnormal by cultural standards, and the other IS abnormal by cultural standards... isn't that what you're saying?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
What you view as normal is not necessarily what others view as normal. I see love between two humans as normal... man to woman, woman to man, man to man, or woman to woman. Love is love.
I hate to quote myself, but I am...this is from a previous post on this thread.
I would also like to add that the bible is a piece of literary work open to interpretation. How you interpret the bible might not be how I interpret the bible. Often when I sit in church and the Father is giving his homily I think- wow I did not get that out of what the gospel says... I got this. Does that make his interpretation wrong? No... Does it make mine wrong? No. But we need to learn all coexist and get along. Gay or straight we are all human... why all the hate...
Also, to all of you in a heterosexual marriage... can you imagine if your wife/husband was critically hurt and you were told that you could not see them or make decisions on their health. Could you imagine being powerless as the one you love lay in a hospital bed? Homosexuals are looking for equal rights... just like African Americans did in the 60's. Everyone deserves to be treated equally... no I know that it does not happen, but that is what people deserve.
Hello sassy:Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
If it's NOT about those things, then the state must grant equal access to any contract that bestows RIGHTS upon people. Those RIGHTS are available to ANYBODY. That's how our wonderful system works, and THAT'S where they should draw the line - when EVERYBODY shares the same rights.
excon
Excon, honey... if I could buy you a beer, I so would.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
[QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuscany
Yeah but someone else will see love between a man and a dog/animal as normal but does that mean the state should also recognise it?
What people see as normal can be subjective, but the State should have an Objective unwavering standard of what the definition of marriage has always been one MAN and one WOMAN.
All of the obove is your opinion on the Bible not facts, but like I said before this has nothing to do with the Bible religion morals, it is just about the state having standards of what is normal.Quote:
I hate to quote myself, but I am...this is from a previous post on this thread.
I would also like to add that the bible is a piece of literary work open to interpretation. How you interpret the bible might not be how I interpret the bible. Often when I sit in church and the Father is giving his homily I think- wow I did not get that out of what the gospel says... I got this. Does that make his interpretation wrong? No... Does it make mine wrong? No. But we need to learn all coexist and get along. Gay or straight we are all human... why all the hate...
I don't know why people like to compare being gay and being African American, the two are mutually exlusive and can not be comparable. Race and Sexual orientation are not the same thing.Quote:
Also, to all of you in a heterosexual marriage... can you imagine if your wife/husband was critically hurt and you were told that you could not see them or make decisions on their health. Could you imagine being powerless as the one you love lay in a hospital bed? Homosexuals are looking for equal rights... just like African Americans did in the 60's. Everyone deserves to be treated equally... no I know that it does not happen, but that is what people deserve
[QUOTE=sassyT]I am amazed that you can compare the love between 2 humans and love between a human and an animal.Quote:
Yeah but someone else will see love between a man and a dog/animal as normal but does that mean the state should also recognise it?
What people see as normal can be subjective, but the State should have an Objective unwavering standard of what the definition of marriage has always been one MAN and one WOMAN.
.
[QUOTE=sassyT]You are wrong on this. Those that oppose gay marriage often point to the bible (a piece of literary work) and moral decay.Quote:
All of the obove is your opinion on the Bible not facts, but like I said before this has nothing to do with the Bible religion morals, it is just about the state having standards of what is normal. .
Standards of normal... wow there is no such thing. What's normal in the North East is not "normal" in the south. How can you have standards for normal when normal is so subjective?
[QUOTE=sassyT]Quote:
I don't know why people like to compare being gay and being African American, the two are mutually exlusive and can not be comparable. Race and Sexual orientation are not the same thing.
I am sorry but aren't you the one that compared sex between two humans and sex between an animal and a human. I am comparing 2 minorities of humans who have been oppressed.
So should the State Bestow the RIGHTS on an Individual who wants to marry a dog? Where does the State draw the line? The person who wants marry a dog could present the same argument as gays and demand exqual rights to marry whom or what ever he want to. He could also say he is in love with his dog and wants to be able to marry it and receive the same benefits as a normal married couple.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
It could become a real circus unless the State establishes an unwavering standard of normality of what marriage has always been... One MAN and One WOMAN.
Actually, if you're really that Christian, you'd realize that marriage has not ALWAYS been ONE man and ONE woman.
It's been, even in the Bible, one man and SEVERAL women. Isn't THAT against your definition of marriage too?
AGAIN--because you aren't getting this apparently--Two men (or two women) can CONSENT to marry each other. They have brains, and voices, and the ability to state that this is what they want.
A DOG (or any other animal) can NOT voice CONSENT. Therefore, it's not even in the same subject here.
Seriously--what part of CONSENTING ADULT are you not getting?
I am sorry but I fail to see your connection. The Declaration of Independence says all MEN are created equal not all men and animals. How can you compare the love between two people to bestiality?Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
People have their own reasons to oppose Gay marriage, I opposed it just based on common sense of what is normal.Quote:
You are wrong on this. Those that oppose gay marriage often point to the bible (a piece of literary work) and moral decay.
Marriage has always been between a man and woman in america and around the world. I don't see why it should be redifined just because a small minority of people who have made a decision to live their lives in defiance to nature. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate gays, in fact I have a lot of gay friends and co-workers I talk to and they all know my views on the subject. I don't care if they want to make commitents to each other, I just don't see why the State should forced to recognise such unions valid because then they may as well change the definition of marriage to include who ever wants to marry another man, animal, plant or object. You know there will be a minority of people who will want to marry their dog or cat. If you redifine marriage you may as well include anyone and anything right?Quote:
Standards of normal... wow there is no such thing. What's normal in the North East is not "normal" in the south. How can you have standards for normal when normal is so subjective?
/sigh
CONSENTING: Able to give permission
ADULT: Those over 18 years of age.
Do you honestly believe that someone or something unable to give personal consent to such a union would be allowed?
When the United States started, it was known that slavery would ALWAYS exist, and the women were the PROPERTY of their husbands. Want to go back to that, because it's such a slippery slope--I mean, my god! Someone, somewhere (probably a politician) wants their DOG to be able to vote, I'm sure! Or since kids are people too--let's let THEM vote! I mean, since we redefined a couple times who is a valid voting citizen of this country, that's a slippery slope, and the next thing you know, someone will bring their PLANTS to the voting booth for them!
Your analogy does nothing for your argument because you are not comparing apples to apples here we are talking about marriage. Changing slavery laws and redefining the union that makes marriage is not the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
IF your argument is about consenting adults then are you saying the state should also be forced to recognise polygamous marriages too.
If we are going to give marriage right to everyone who demands them, then The state may as well give rights to a woman who want to marry 5 willing men or a man who wants to marry 20 willing wives. The state should recognise it? These are all "CONSENTING adults" so Where do we draw the line here?
Yes... homosexuality is wrong. Parts entering "exit only" parts, damaging vital organs. It is just not the way we were intended to be. You know it is funny when I hear that homosexuals were born that way, because if that was the case than why have I met so many people that use to be gay or lesbian, but now they aren't?hhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm, interesting.
They are not looking to marry an animal plat or object. They want to marry another HUMAN BEING that they love honor and respect. How would you feel if you were told how and who to love?Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
I just don't see your connection to animals. When has anyone asked to marry an animal??
Wolf- my aunt was married prior to coming out. If you ask her, she was always gay. She just tried to be what society wanted her to be. Now she has put herself first. Closeminded people can just look the other way.
Quote:
Is Homosexuality Wrong?
Not to homosexuals, its natural as breathing. The only time its a problem is when people stick their noses in someone elses business.
[QUOTE]Who said anyone is telling them how and who to love? They can love and get "married" or make comitments to one another, but just don't force the state to recognise it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuscany
If you don't get he animal connection then see what I said to synnen.Quote:
I just don't see your connection to animals. When has anyone asked to marry an animal??
They still are or never were... I honestly believe that you are born with a sexuality just as you were born with chosen genetalia...Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf200050
Also, it appears you are only referring to gay men here, at least in the first part of the statement. 1. Where did you hear anal intercourse "damages vital organs"? 2. Not just homosexual men have anal intercourse, so I don't think that argument is arguable...
I also want to applaud whoever disabled the reputation here... that could have not been good!
Hello wolf:
I don't know. If you're a guy, it's too bad you'll never experience the wonder of a great blow job. If you're a girl, you're only giving your guy 10% if'in you don't give him head.
Poor, poor Christians..
excon
I must have missed that part...Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Why NOT? Why would THAT be a problem, either? Who would it be hurting? The poor, poor people who think marriage = ONE man + ONE woman? BTW, I really hope you don't believe in divorce, either. Since marriage is supposed to be "til death do us part", then they should either kill one another or stick to it for life, hmmm?
As far as why the state needs to be involved--we've told you, over and over: Because the STATE is the one who makes inheritance laws. The STATE is the one who decides who can make medical decisions for an impaired adult. The STATE is the one who makes custody decisions. The STATE is the one who determines property ownership. The STATE is the one who determines who gets tax cuts.
If you were arguing that the CHURCH should not have to recognize gay marriage, I'd agree with you. I don't think the CHURCH should have to recognize anything outside of its set tenets. However, we're talking about the STATE, not the CHURCH.
PS--we're talking about changing laws that affect a group of people NOT in the majority of thinking, and NOT in power. THAT is why bringing up women's right to vote/hold property and slavery are valid arguments.
Hello mamma:
This is a person who thinks there's a part of a body with an exit only sign on it, meaning that it's no place for penis's. Therefore, for the sake of consistancy, I'm assuming that he thinks her mouth also is no place for penis's.
If not, he's just making up the rules as he goes along to suit himself.
excon
Very well said Synnen!! I agree 110%
I see I see, makes sense...Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
An organized society, no matter how small a population, sets laws for its cohesiveness and order. Those rules became equated with religion when rel became a seemingly imp't part of the society. My morality is not in the least based on religion. The closest I can come to admitting that is that I see only the need for 1 'commandment.' It shows up in all major religions (and, I think, most minor ones as well) and cannot be claimed solely by any one rel. It is not listed as one of the Judeo/Christian 10 C, though it is in the Bible: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. A group that believes doing harm, theft, etc is "doing unto..." wouldn't last very long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
Hey Listen! Because we are HUMAN! We have the ability to think, decide, This is the only thing which makes us different with the other creatures! Ability of thinking, ability of deciding!
Another reason is that, we are not here in this damn world, to enjoy our BODY! We have spend our time on another things such as enjoying nature, learning, understanding, thinking!
And I appreciate you because you have thought on this matter, this pcychologically means that you still are ration and yourself know that this is not true
Personal info deleted
Be Happy,(not in a stupid way)
;-)
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:19 PM. |