Horyo
RP Admin
All your bending are belong to us.
Posts: 2,572
|
Post by Horyo on Nov 21, 2006 19:05:19 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. I understood your point already. There are many religions, some probably even supporting homosexuality. So if religion allows marrige, and a religion suports marrige of gays. What say you?
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 21, 2006 22:35:21 GMT -5
Then it's fine. It's not like we can stop a backyard cult (or an excusatory religion being created for the purpose of homosexual marriage) from saying that they've 'married' a couple. We really can't.
However, nobody with a right mind would take such an occurance seriously. So it isn't a huge problem.
|
|
Zink
Ty Lee
"Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:8
Posts: 4,279
|
Post by Zink on Nov 21, 2006 23:02:15 GMT -5
Then it's fine. It's not like we can stop a backyard cult (or an excusatory religion being created for the purpose of homosexual marriage) from saying that they've 'married' a couple. We really can't. However, nobody with a right mind would take such an occurance seriously. So it isn't a huge problem. Sooo... not meaning to exaggarate what you say, in all sincerity, but you don't feel anyone would take any religious form of gay marriage seriously? Let me rephrase that: The Church (all churches) and State are seperate. So, you feel that the government should not license marriage at all, and it should be a strictly religous affair, since, in your opinion, marriage belongs to religion? (The way I debate, it's all about understanding what the other debaters believe, so there's no confusion, and THEN arguing my point.)
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 21, 2006 23:04:13 GMT -5
Thank you for making certain of what I believe BEFORE yelling at me for it. Most people just yell at me before doing so. ;D
Yes to all of the above.
|
|
Zink
Ty Lee
"Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:8
Posts: 4,279
|
Post by Zink on Nov 21, 2006 23:12:17 GMT -5
^ Thanks, but it only works really well in forum debate, where you can't see and interrupt people for verification, XD.
Okay, so if the government should not license marriage, how do we deal with the legal implications of living together, sharing income and taxes, changing names and the like? Should there be a government certifiacate or registration that pays no heed to gender and deals soley with the money and name side?
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 21, 2006 23:22:23 GMT -5
^ Thanks, but it only works really well in forum debate, where you can't see and interrupt people for verification, XD. Okay, so if the government should not license marriage, how do we deal with the legal implications of living together, sharing income and taxes, changing names and the like? Should there be a government certifiacate or registration that pays no heed to gender and deals soley with the money and name side? That's where people get 'legal unions'. People can get either legal unions, or they can get married, or they can get both. EVERYBODY can get legal unions, which takes care of gays and atheists. Religious believers get married by their religion. The legal union takes care of the name changing and rights and such.
|
|
Zink
Ty Lee
"Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:8
Posts: 4,279
|
Post by Zink on Nov 21, 2006 23:26:07 GMT -5
Okay, well, that's your solution. Complete seperation of the government and religion.
And by my definiton, that's the point of debate. Finding a synergy. (Of course, it's different for evolution and stuff, but hey, if it works, it works...)
Does legal union give you today's rights of marriage? As in, seeing your spouse in the hospital, 7 year common-law marriage, etc., the stuff gay couples want?
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 21, 2006 23:29:13 GMT -5
Okay, well, that's your solution. Complete seperation of the government and religion. And by my definiton, that's the point of debate. Finding a synergy. (Of course, it's different for evolution and stuff, but hey, if it works, it works...) Does legal union give you today's rights of marriage? As in, seeing your spouse in the hospital, 7 year common-law marriage, etc., the stuff gay couples want? Why shouldn't it? Those things are under government jurisdiction aren't they? Go for it. Just so long as it isn't 'marriage', they can do whatever they want.
|
|
Zink
Ty Lee
"Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:8
Posts: 4,279
|
Post by Zink on Nov 21, 2006 23:32:55 GMT -5
At this point, I'd argue, but I pretty much agree with Gandalan.
Mwuhahaha. My evil debate model/system of define-->understand-->argue-->synergize is working... Igor, throw the switch!
<That Zink chick is a total nutjob... The term "marriage" itself is holy to Christianty, and each religion has it's own seperate name for the union of two souls, Gandalan?
|
|
Gandalan
Casual Zuko
Wavemaster
Posts: 979
|
Post by Gandalan on Nov 21, 2006 23:53:08 GMT -5
At this point, I'd argue, but I pretty much agree with Gandalan. One in a million chance that was gonna happen. ;D Mwuhahaha. My evil debate model/system of define-->understand-->argue-->synergize is working... Igor, throw the switch! <That Zink chick is a total nutjob... The term "marriage" itself is holy to Christianty, and each religion has it's own seperate name for the union of two souls, Gandalan? I think so yes.
|
|
|
Post by demonofthewest on Nov 22, 2006 0:42:12 GMT -5
You know, some sects of Buddhism, such as Theradava, support gay marriage. It depends on the area, of course. While the Buddha was against "sexual misconduct" he never really explained what that was, so Buddhists generally interpreted it as rape, molestation, sex with minors, etc. Many Buddhists, particularly western ones, don't view homsexuality as sexual misconduct.
The Dalai Lama feels a little differently. He believes that homosexuality in itself isn't wrong, but having anal or oral sex is wrong(for both orientations), which means any sort of sex gays have would be sinful. However, he admits that this is from his Buddhist standpoint, and from "society's" view, homosexual relations can actually be "harmless".
So if a Buddhist agrees to marry two gays, then how is religion being attacked? You can't claim that it's some new thing that just sprouted to support gays, Buddhism predates Christianity. Also, there is(or at least, was) a Christian denomination that supported gay marriage, I remember reading it in the newspaper about a year ago. I'm going to go see if I can find the denomination.
EDIT: Found it. It's the United Church of Christ, which currently holds 1.2 million members. You can look them up on Google or Wikipedia if you want.
|
|
gambitia
Fiery Ozai
millions have trembled before my pink armor!
Posts: 5,894
|
Post by gambitia on Nov 22, 2006 0:55:26 GMT -5
The Dalai Lama feels a little differently. He believes that homosexuality in itself isn't wrong, but having anal or oral sex is wrong(for both orientations), which means any sort of sex gays have would be sinful. However, he admits that this is from his Buddhist standpoint, and from "society's" view, homosexual relations can actually be "harmless". Gays can have sex without it being oral. Or so the fanfics tell me. I would assume that Unitarian Universalists would be okay with it too, because they're okay with everything. Seriously, my mom took me to one of their churches. It's a bunch of pagans, Jews, Muslims, Christians, agnostics, and rock-worshippers getting together and exchanging ideas. I don't think many people would consider them Christian, but technically they're a Christian organization.
|
|
|
Post by demonofthewest on Nov 22, 2006 1:27:19 GMT -5
Indeed they can. That's why I also mentioned anal. There's also "manual" which the Dalai Lama also disapproves of. And there are, of course, many other creative ways(anyone watch Family Guy on Sunday?) but since this is supposedly a kid friendly thread we should probably not get into that.
|
|
gambitia
Fiery Ozai
millions have trembled before my pink armor!
Posts: 5,894
|
Post by gambitia on Nov 22, 2006 1:38:35 GMT -5
Indeed they can. That's why I also mentioned anal. There's also "manual" which the Dalai Lama also disapproves of. And there are, of course, many other creative ways(anyone watch Family Guy on Sunday?) but since this is supposedly a kid friendly thread we should probably not get into that. Whoops, missed that part. Nevermind.
|
|
force
Sokka
Yes, it's a band.
Posts: 133
|
Post by force on Nov 22, 2006 2:20:12 GMT -5
Thank you for making certain of what I believe BEFORE yelling at me for it. Most people just yell at me before doing so. ;D HAR.HAR.HAR. U REWRY GOTZ ME DER!! 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. So you’re saying that I, an atheist, should not be allowed to marry another atheist because it offends God? Tell ya what, just cut right to chase. I'll stand here, you go outside, get some stones, and go nuts. I'm sorry, but this train of thought seriously makes me fear for the future of society. I'm sure you're an expert in such fields? Oh, I'm perfectly willing to accept I may not be right. I personally believe God doesn't exist, but I'm wont say it's a fact he doesn't exist. I also except evolution is a theory and could be wrong. The difference is I don’t have a book telling me what I should and shouldn't believe, I think for myself and so thusly my opinions can be changed. When you've got a book telling you what to, your opinions cant change otherwise you'd anger the book God. Go against the Bible because it suits your convenience? Try somebody else pal. And this is why you’re impossible to debate. Because you refuse to even for a second pull that Bible ever so slightly out of your mouth. 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. Fight for what? To give marriage back to the church? When did it leave? Marriage is a word. A word. Since when does God care that much about vocabulary? If the government renamed its social contract from "marriage" to "civil unions" God would be fine with it? That makes absolutely no sense once so ever.
|
|