Should the state marry gay lovers?

[thewalrus]

Foul! There is nothing in his post that states or implies a fear of homosexuals taking over society. And while your answer does not state the HE actually said it - it can be inferred. Truth be told we may have already had a gay man as president. Society and the country did not fall.

Please do not pass the red herring.

This is an ad hominem attack and does not advance the discussion.

Smiter, your behind in the game, my friend. You have not read his posts. Trust me, you would change your mind.

I’d be happier if it actually WAS an ad hominem but he actually says this stuff.

 

[The_Smiter]

I wasn’t speaking of marriage, per se, but rather numbers within it. I mean, the same goes for any relationship. I don’t think a guy should have 6 girlfriends either.

But society’s understanding of marriage has ALWAYS been one man and one woman. If you want to change that understandingthen fine. But you open the door to many revisions and new understandings, then. How can you change it for some but not for all?

I do not want to come off souncing like some crazy anti-homosexual bigot - but let’s present this:

Two brothers who are both gay want to marry each other? Is that a legitimate case in which to apply incest sicne they can’t reproduce? Why then would we limit their abitlity to get married?

Why couldn’t a man marry his sister?

If you start putting restrictions on what the definitions of marriage are after you change them to get what you want, aren’t you being just as restrictive and anti-rights to others that way you consider society is being toward smae-sex couples now?

 

[Arclight]

…I don’t think a guy should have 6 girlfriends either.

why not???

 

[thewalrus]

But society’s understanding of marriage has ALWAYS been one man and one woman. If you want to change that understandingthen fine. But you open the door to many revisions and new understandings, then. How can you change it for some but not for all?

I do not want to come off souncing like some crazy anti-homosexual bigot - but let’s present this:

Two brothers who are both gay want to marry each other? Is that a legitimate case in which to apply incest sicne they can’t reproduce? Why then would we limit their abitlity to get married?

Why couldn’t a man marry his sister?

If you start putting restrictions on what the definitions of marriage are after you change them to get what you want, aren’t you being just as restrictive and anti-rights to others that way you consider society is being toward smae-sex couples now?

Dude, your analogy does not work. Just because you expand the definition of marriage to include those of the same sex does not mean the floodgates just swing wide open. Can an incestuous marriage occur now? No. Why? Because it’s illegal, dangerous, and profoundly unhealthy. Could an incestuous marriage occur if the law was changed to include same-sex unions? No, because it would be illegal, dangerous, and profoundly unhealthy.

 

[thewalrus]

why not???

lol

 

[Publisher]

If you’re surprised Bennie believes that, you haven’t read enough of his posts. He’s convinced gays will single-handedly destroy civilization as we know it.

When I was young, I was conservative myself and felt homosexuality was a sin, etc. As I got older and wiser and my views changed on the matter, I began to see people differently. I think one of the most compelling arguments for same-sex marriage is that there are so many faithful and loving gay and lesbian couples out there. That alone stands against any argument such as “If you’re gay, you are psychologically diseased.” It disturbs me to even write that.

I totally agree…I once thought gay people were diseased as well…then I met some gay couples who had been together for decades…they changed me…they opened my eyes…I no longer saw them as “gay” but simply as people…and with that insight…my mind changed…for the better I think…what bitterness I had harbored…and it was bitterness…melted away as I stood in the Light.

 

[fix]

No, just the Christian stuff.

I know many faithful tax cheats. I know many polite pornography addicts. I know many kind alcoholics. I know many pleasant fornicators.

None of those civil qualities make me think those actions are good.

Hate the sin, love the sinner. Do not approve of sin.

 

[thewalrus]

I know many faithful tax cheats. I know many polite pornography addicts. I know many kind alcoholics. I know many pleasant fornicators.

None of those civil qualities make me think those actions are good.

Hate the sin, love the sinner. Do not approve of sin.

Right, because cheating, pornography, alcoholism, and fornication are the same as same-sex relationships…not so much. Your example ONLY works if you presuppose homosexuality is a sin. Otherwise, you see a thriving and faithful and happy couple.

With that said, I need some lunch. Back later…

 

[Publisher]

Right, because cheating, pornography, alcoholism, and fornication are the same as same-sex relationships…not so much. Your example ONLY works if you presuppose homosexuality is a sin. Otherwise, you see a thriving and faithful and happy couple.
With that said, I need some lunch. Back later…

Exactly.

 

[fix]

Right, because cheating, pornography, alcoholism, and fornication are the same as same-sex relationships…not so much. Your example ONLY works if you presuppose homosexuality is a sin. Otherwise, you see a thriving and faithful and happy couple.

With that said, I need some lunch. Back later…

I accept that it is a sin because it is a sin. You could say the same thing about anything I listed. Which brings us back to the real issue and that is authority.

 

[Publisher]

I accept that it is a sin because it is a sin. You could say the same thing about anything I listed. Which brings us back to the real issue and that is authority.

“Religious authority” is not what is in question here…equality under the rule of civil law is…

 

[Bennie_P]

Smiter, your behind in the game, my friend. You have not read his posts. Trust me, you would change your mind.

I’d be happier if it actually WAS an ad hominem but he actually says this stuff.

No, in reality I believe liberalism is underminding society, homosexuality is just on minute part of it. You put yourself to high up on a pedestal. Plus you read more into my post then what is there on one hand close your mind to any arguments being presented. It is reflect in your consistent need to insult me and not what I post it seems. Have a good luch.

 

[fix]

“Religious authority” is not what is in question here…equality under the rule of civil law is…

I am all for equality, but that means we are dealing with equal matters. If a man wants to marry his brother are you saying it would be unequal not to allow him?

This issue is not about equality at all as there is nothing reasonable or equal about allowing what is so very contrary to nature.

 

[David_Poem]

How is it impossible?

Dear Teen4Christ,Why worry about Gays being married? God gave us free will.God says when we worship each other,Then we dont worship God.We should love the lord of God with all our mind,hearth,and soul.When we spent all our time on on selfs,We become of the world.And we dont give thanks to what God made.We might take a few mins. here and there 4 God.If we follow God 24/7.If you try it 4 one day you will fine your thread borin,and have a renewal with God

 

[Publisher]

I am all for equality, but that means we are dealing with equal matters. If a man wants to marry his brother are you saying it would be unequal not to allow him?

This issue is not about equality at all as there is nothing reasonable or equal about allowing what is so very contrary to nature.

As I’ve said before…if we wish to deal with incest…we can do so in another thread…allowing same sex marriage does not automatically give license to other behavior…that is a falsehood perpetuated to cloud the issue.

I am for allowing adults the rights of self determination. As long as two adults can make a decision that does not involve coersion or harm to another to form a romantic relationship of their choosing, I have no problem with it.

I am for allowing men and women the choices of self determination that do not break the laws of the land…and if those laws are believed to be unjust…then to change them.

Incestous relationships do damage to the individual and are not acceptable in society. Such relationships are in no way comparable to same sex relationships of consenting adults…you may choose to draw a comparison…but just as you reject the struggle for equality of gay people in comparing it with racial equality…so do I reject the comparison that such relationships are the same…as I do polygamous and bestial relationships.

Those are a whole different set of issues…I will deal with the issue at hand…same sex relationships of two adults who wish to form a romatnic, legal and civic union to secure their rights as other married people.

“Contrary to nature” is your religious belief that I do not share…homosexual relationships are part of the natural world we live in as another sexual orientation…not the “norm” that most others share in…but a natural and benign variation of human sexuality.

 

[pathia]

Do you have a list of those 1000 “rights”, “Privileges” and “resposibilties” (whose responsbilties? the couples or the state?).

Sure

gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf

 

[thewalrus]

No, in reality I believe liberalism is underminding society, homosexuality is just on minute part of it. You put yourself to high up on a pedestal. Plus you read more into my post then what is there on one hand close your mind to any arguments being presented. It is reflect in your consistent need to insult me and not what I post it seems. Have a good luch.

Gee, here I was thinking it was you that was saying that the “gay movement” is the catalyst for the decline of our society, that they are destroying all our constitutional rights, sexually abusing our children, spreading disease, etc. These are my friends you speak about. So don’t ask me to pitch a pity party for you when your ideas defame and disrespect my friends. I have no respect for ideas that are not intended to do anything other than hurt people. I have said nothing of any sort to hurt anyone here. I might playfully jab and joust with you on a forum but there’s a huge difference between that and spreading hateful and destructive ideas. I can respect people who disagree with me on the issues but are able to think through the issues in a responsible and rational fashion (e.g., mulepadre), but I do not respect libel.

And thanks, my lunch was great.

 

[Brendan]

“Religious authority” is not what is in question here…equality under the rule of civil law is…

Correct, and homosexuals have the EXACT SAME rights as anybody else.

That includes the legal privilege (it’s not actually a ‘right’) to enter into a marital contract with a single, unmarried, adult, consenting, human person of the opposite sex .

That is the very definition of legal equality, that it is something that applies equally to every person, gay or straight.

Which marital law does.

 

[pathia]

Correct, and homosexuals have the EXACT SAME rights as anybody else.

That includes the legal privilege (it’s not actually a ‘right’) to enter into a marital contract with a single, unmarried, adult, consenting, human person of the opposite sex .

That is the very definition of legal equality, that it is something that applies equally to every person, gay or straight.

Which marital law does.

I can marry only women in some states, only men in others. Clearly, things are not as easy as folks suspect

 

[thewalrus]

As I’ve said before…if we wish to deal with incest…we can do so in another thread…allowing same sex marriage does not automatically give license to other behavior…that is a falsehood perpetuated to cloud the issue.

I am for allowing adults the rights of self determination. As long as two adults can make a decision that does not involve coersion or harm to another to form a romantic relationship of their choosing, I have no problem with it.

I am for allowing men and women the choices of self determination that do not break the laws of the land…and if those laws are believed to be unjust…then to change them.

Incestous relationships do damage to the individual and are not acceptable in society. Such relationships are in no way comparable to same sex relationships of consenting adults…you may choose to draw a comparison…but just as you reject the struggle for equality of gay people in comparing it with racial equality…so do I reject the comparison that such relationships are the same…as I do polygamous and bestial relationships.

Those are a whole different set of issues…I will deal with the issue at hand…same sex relationships of two adults who wish to form a romatnic, legal and civic union to secure their rights as other married people.

“Contrary to nature” is your religious belief that I do not share…homosexual relationships are part of the natural world we live in as another sexual orientation…not the “norm” that most others share in…but a natural and benign variation of human sexuality.

Absolutely.