|
Post by alpacas4eva on Nov 19, 2006 2:11:12 GMT -5
I never said Christians did. Atheists can get married, Jews can get married, Buddists can get married and they do all the time. If Christians owned marriage, then why would all the other religions be able to get married? Christians do have a belief of how marriage should be, though. I think that's what Gandalan meant. For a Christian a marriage is a holy ceremony that bonds together a man and a woman before God. To Christians that is what marriage is. Christians do not own marriage, but that is how Christian marriages are. Yours doesn't have to be that way, but if your a Christian that's how it is. gambitia: Lol, it's 2 am here.
|
|
Horyo
RP Admin
All your bending are belong to us.
Posts: 2,572
|
Post by Horyo on Nov 19, 2006 3:05:46 GMT -5
^That's all fine. But when the government is influenced to ban it, is when it's wrong. Because of this, people's rights are denied.
|
|
force
Sokka
Yes, it's a band.
Posts: 133
|
Post by force on Nov 19, 2006 14:08:04 GMT -5
I never said Christians did. Atheists can get married, Jews can get married, Buddists can get married and they do all the time. If Christians owned marriage, then why would all the other religions be able to get married? This is an excellent point. For years now, other religions have been using marriage, which is supposedly God's, and we've never herd a peep out of these fundamentalists. They say gays can not be married as homosexuality is a sin. By this logic, you'd have to mandate that anyone who wants to be married has to be completely free of all sin. If you lied last week, well, you shouldn't be married! If you had an exotic dancer at your bachelor party last night, sorry! No wedding for you, that's an affront to God. Right now in Vegas, two people, probably a vacationer and a local dancer are meeting for the first time. By tonight, they could be married in and surrounded by "sin". But that's ok, right? I mean, God doesn't care about that, he only wants to keep those nasty queers from being married, right? It's ok to have a double standard; we have to keep those gays from being accepted at all costs! Right?!?
|
|
Wilderness Writer
Wolf Sokka
Zutarian Propaganda Writer
~Weaver of Words~
Posts: 2,802
|
Post by Wilderness Writer on Nov 19, 2006 20:24:22 GMT -5
Lol, calm down, force. You seem to have the same attitude toward Christians as my conspiracy-theorist neighbor has toward the government. We're not out to get you, or any specific group. We don't huddle in our basements and plot the overthrow of the world, or how to really hassle gays.
For the record, I really don't care if gays get married or not. I don't think the marriage should ever be recognized in the church, but as for what the state does, I really don't care. No, I don't think it should be legalized, but I'm not going to push that idea on other people, so whether they get married or not is not that big a deal for me. But it's not going to end at marraige.
Already it's mandatory in California and other states that children recieve homosexual promotional material as part of their schooling. Already there are rumors from the gay rights front that there is, or could be, pushing to establish homosexuals as a minority group and therefore eligible for tax breaks and government benifits afforded as such. In Canada, there have already been imprisonment and fines given to people who have voiced their personal feelings toward homosexuality that have not been entirely supportive.
My point? Right now, marriage rights seem like a simple and entirely innocent thing. Because of that, anyone who speaks up against it is going to be automatically labeled a bad guy and seen as intolerant.
Intolerant? No, not really. Just looking ahead. Things often start out as innocent and soon get out of hand. Evolution is one of them. The *THEORY* of evolution is now taught as a fact in schools. Abortion is another. What was once used only in extreme cases is now used as casual contraceptive by many. Regardless of how you feel about any of these issues, it remains a fact that things like this rarely stay small. Abuse of the current political sway toward the glamorization and victimization of the homosexual population will lead not just to fair treatment of homosexuals, but of unfair treatment of heterosexuals.
|
|
|
Post by Awapuhi on Nov 19, 2006 20:59:06 GMT -5
I may hardly agree with anything you say on a political or religious base, but you say you state your opinions so well! They are always thoughtful, well thought out and well rounded. I myself am a liberal *green* democrat and am always progressive and forward in my views. However, instead of belittling the views of others you explain what you think and say how their opinions relate. I see where you're coming from. Honestly, you have truly made me think. I am for gay marriage. I want every homosexual I know to be able to experience a life long love and partnership the same way everyone else does. However, I don't want homosexuals to become a minority and get tax breaks. I don't think anyone should get penalized, patronized or praised based on sex. Transexuals and homosexuals should not be hated or applauded. I believe in equality amongst humanity. Stretching far, I know. I do think children should be educated about homosexuality but not at a very young age. Late middle school seems about right. It was explained to me when I wasin 6th or 5th grade by my mother and my gay uncle. At that time, I couldn't understand why though. Kids should be educated but not at the young and tender age where the lesson leaves confusion in their minds and turmoil in their feelings. I didn't fully understand what sex was for almost a year after my mother told me. Children should not be taught something that leaves such confusion and bewilderment in its wake. It leads kids to draw conclusions, often false ones, about the facts they don't understand. Well, I went off on a tangent there. I just meant to say that wildernesswriter states her opinions thruthfully, politely and eloquently. Karma EDIT: I apply divorce and abortion into the same mentality. Both were once taboo and rarely done. Now, it seems like they are common practice.
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Nov 19, 2006 21:58:40 GMT -5
I <3 WW.
Back on topic, yes, it is true that homosexuals and transexuals are getting too much of a spotlight where there shouldn't be one; No question about it. However, the majority of gays / lesbians are NOT extremely public about their sexuality, and would rather just have the lagality of marriage ties for things like inheritance and such, and have everybody else shut up so they can move on with their lives.
Of course, they aren't the ones demeanding the spotlight, so the majority of gays / lesbians who protest asking for special treatment get all the media coverage. Ho hum. Just make sure you don't take the griping of the minority of gays and attribute it to the majority of them.
Oh, and as an addition, WW; It didn't end at the right to vote for women, or the right to freedom and later the desegregation of schools for blacks, either. We now have Black History Month and affirmative action, and Women's History Month as well as traditions such as "ladies first" and such. So, it's not just the sexual minority that wants to be treated specially for being different, it's everybody else too.
|
|
Grandi
Bato
Prince of All Cosmos
Posts: 603
|
Post by Grandi on Nov 20, 2006 0:45:54 GMT -5
I don't really agree with homosexuality becoming a reson for being called a minority. It seems a bit odd to get extra benifits and special rights because you happen to be attracted to the same gender. (and that would cause a hell of a problem with tax breaks. "Yeah, I get a tax refund for my business because I'm gay." No real way to prove it.) People should be treated equally, however, a lot of people think that equality means getting special rights and priveleges.
But as you all know, I believe marriage is a right that deserves equal treatment.
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 20, 2006 9:07:38 GMT -5
Again, the liberal half of this forum is exaggerating what I said.
I said that 'MARRIAGE BELONGS TO RELIGION', not 'MARRIAGE BELONGS TO CHRISTIANITY.'
STOP EXAGGERATING WHAT I SAY!
And, again, more people said that before this, fundamentalists haven't 'said a peep', and AGAIN, I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY SAID BEFORE ME! I WAS ONLY BORN 16 YEARS AGO!
I will believe what I want to.
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Nov 20, 2006 15:44:55 GMT -5
.... So stop acting like Christian values are religious values? Because there could possibly be a religion that worships a gay god, or something of the like?
EDIT: I'm not saying there is, I'm saying that it's possible. My personal religion is sacrificing various types of food to the almighty Stomach God, to make sure he doesn't growl at me and make my abdomen hurt.
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 20, 2006 16:03:52 GMT -5
.... So stop acting like Christian values are religious values? Because there could possibly be a religion that worships a gay god, or something of the like? EDIT: I'm not saying there is, I'm saying that it's possible. My personal religion is sacrificing various types of food to the almighty Stomach God, to make sure he doesn't growl at me and make my abdomen hurt. No. I don't exaggerate what you say. Quit doing it to me.
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Nov 20, 2006 16:33:53 GMT -5
I'm not exaggerating. You've said that religion denotes gay marriage as bad and sinful; But those are Christian values.
|
|
gambitia
Fiery Ozai
millions have trembled before my pink armor!
Posts: 5,894
|
Post by gambitia on Nov 20, 2006 17:23:35 GMT -5
Already it's mandatory in California and other states that children recieve homosexual promotional material as part of their schooling. I'm not okay with promotional material. Education material I'll all for, but not promotional. Kids--once they are old enough--should be educated about a segment of the population that is starting to break out and will most likely not go way. This helps foster understanding and tolerance, and makes it easier for adolescents who may be questioning their sexuality to come to terms with it. But homosexuality should not be promoted above heterosexual behavior. I'm totally against this, but then I'm totally against any minority getting a tax break. "OMG, you're born different!! Let's give you money!"? That really doesn't make sense to me. Give tax breaks to people who need them, not the rich minority who could care less. Again--against. We have to find the happy medium between lynching homosexuals and lynching those who oppose homosexuals. Perhaps because in the field of science it is the longest-standing, soundest theory for how species develop? Evolution will always be a theory, simpy because it cannot be proven. However, despite the continued scrutiny and criticism from many, evolution has not been disproven. It has changed somewhat from its original form, but nothing yet has been able to challenge its foundation. There is lots of evidence that supports the theory as well, making it all the more plausible. If I may ask, what would you prefer be taught in place of evolution? Intelligent design is an even less credible scientific theory than evolution. Evolution is also not taught until high school (at least in my school district), and by then kids are old enough to decide for themselves what they want to believe. In my school district, evolution also has a heavy disclaimer on it--my class spent an hour and a half listening to "Yes, evolution is still a theory, no, evolution does not oppose your religion, evolution and religion can coexist peacefully, yadda yadda yadda..." Maybe you don't. The Christian group at my school planned an entire day denouncing the evils of homosexuality and gave out a lot of literature that was inappropriate for school and highly offensive to just about everyone. Several years ago, 3 very openly gay students from my school were scheduled to graduate. Some uber-crazy Christian group from Kansas got wind of this, and decided they wanted to drive up to MN to protest these kids graduating. It was 3 gay kids in a class of 800, and these weirdos felt the need to harass them for having the gall to graduate. Those are the Christians we're talking about. Not you, WW. Apologies for the misunderstanding. Even so, marriage hasn't belonged to religion forever. And today everyone regardless of their beliefs gets married. Marriage has essentially fallen out of the religious realm into the social realm.
|
|
force
Sokka
Yes, it's a band.
Posts: 133
|
Post by force on Nov 20, 2006 19:42:59 GMT -5
I said that 'MARRIAGE BELONGS TO RELIGION', not 'MARRIAGE BELONGS TO CHRISTIANITY.' So since I'm atheist, I'm not allowed to be married, is that it? Nice. Well golly gee, why don’t we just start the campaign to outlaw “Godless marriages” right now!? I know it might be difficult to actually think outside the Bible for once and I know it's hard to believe for even a second that your religious views of the world may not be %100 correct, but just do me a favor and try. The state has taken on the concept of marriage and turned it into a social thing. The same can be said for Christmas. If marriages we’re solely religious, than why can non-baptized judges or mayors marry people? You won’t find the answer to that in your Bible; it’s just how the world is. Its how history has played out and there is absolutely no changing it. But homosexuality should not be promoted above heterosexual behavior. Nor should heterosexual behavior be promoted over homosexual behavior.
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 20, 2006 20:35:45 GMT -5
I said that 'MARRIAGE BELONGS TO RELIGION', not 'MARRIAGE BELONGS TO CHRISTIANITY.' So since I'm atheist, I'm not allowed to be married, is that it? Nice. Well golly gee, why don’t we just start the campaign to outlaw “Godless marriages” right now!? You supply the markers, I'll supply the posterboard, smartelic. Don't be sarcastic if you're not sure which way I'll answer. I know it might be difficult to actually think outside the Bible for once Are you implying that I'm a mindless drone? Watch it. and I know it's hard to believe for even a second that your religious views of the world may not be %100 correct, I'm sure you're an expert in such fields? but just do me a favor and try. Go against the Bible because it suits your convenience? Try somebody else pal. The state has taken on the concept of marriage and turned it into a social thing. When did I say I agreed with this? They should never have done this, should never have had the power to do this. I'll fight it however I can. The same can be said for Christmas. If marriages we’re solely religious, than why can non-baptized judges or mayors marry people? Hell if I know. You figure it out. Probably because the State said so (though it shouldn't be able to do so). You won’t find the answer to that in your Bible; it’s just how the world is. Its how history has played out and there is absolutely no changing it. You think so? Think again. History played wrong, and I'm here to right it.
|
|
Wilderness Writer
Wolf Sokka
Zutarian Propaganda Writer
~Weaver of Words~
Posts: 2,802
|
Post by Wilderness Writer on Nov 20, 2006 23:17:39 GMT -5
Aw! Thanks, Awa and Oln! I wuv you guys too! If I may ask, what would you prefer be taught in place of evolution? Intelligent design is an even less credible scientific theory than evolution. Evolution is also not taught until high school (at least in my school district), and by then kids are old enough to decide for themselves what they want to believe. In my school district, evolution also has a heavy disclaimer on it--my class spent an hour and a half listening to "Yes, evolution is still a theory, no, evolution does not oppose your religion, evolution and religion can coexist peacefully, yadda yadda yadda..." Oh no, I don't mean to say that something should replace evolution. My only source of exasperation in this area is that, in most cases, evolution is taught exclusively and as a fact. Your school has a very nice, and rare, way to teach evolution. For most schools, my local one included, it is taught early and, like I said, as a fact. I was homeschooled, and the requirement for my curriculum was to have evolutionary textbook teaching at a very young age. But, since I was homsechooled, I also opted to read some other creation theories, such as intellegent design and the Water Canopy theory, as well as holding my own belief about Biblical creation. This is what I wish for all children, the chance to choose. The wonderful thing about teaching more than one theory is that if you choose to believe in a theory other than mainstream evolution, then good, you've been given the chance to. If you choose to believe in evolution, then it's all the better for you, because you've made a choice and have reasons to believe what you do, it's not just been pushed at you as the only way to think. But I've gotten off topic, sorry.
|
|