Washington State makes 7th - gay marriage

[pepipop]

It is illegal for father/son and mother/daughter to have sex. It is not illegal for two unrelated people to have sex. You are not making a correct comparison.

rossum

It was illegal many years ago, e.g. one such statute in the state of Texas, below and still is in numerous countries around the world. So, the ‘illegality’ of incest will be removed, as the legality was based upon ‘natural and moral laws’, but as these have not been involved to allow SS marriage then they cannot be used in the argument to allow incestuous marriage.

statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Do…
Sec. 21.06. HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT.
(a) A person commits an offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory

This link indicates which countries still hold homosexual behaviour as illegal.

 

[rossum]

It was illegal many years ago, e.g. one such statute in the state of Texas, below. So, the ‘illegality’ of incest will be removed, as the legality was based upon ‘natural and moral laws’, but as they have not been involved in the basis to allow homosexual marriage then they cannot be used to allow incestuous marriage

statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Do…
Sec. 21.06. HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT.
(a) A person commits an offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory

This link indicates which countries still hold homosexual behavoiur as illegal.

I am discussing here and now. Interracial marriage was also illegal in the past in some places. Being Catholic used to be illegal in some places, as did being Protestant in other places. Likewise the legal attitude to divorce has changed over the years. The law changes, so it is pointless dealing with what the law might, or might not be, in future.

rossum

 

[pepipop]

I am discussing here and now. Interracial marriage was also illegal in the past in some places. Being Catholic used to be illegal in some places, as did being Protestant in other places. Likewise the legal attitude to divorce has changed over the years. The law changes, so it is pointless dealing with what the law might, or might not be, in future.

rossum

Precisely, my point. By allowing SS marriage, by ignoring natural law and morals, then incestuous couples will have a very strong legal argument to be allowed to coinhabit and marry. It is to do with the legal processes that can enable SS marraige to be on a par with a marriage between a male and a female. 100yrs ago no-one would have envisaged homosexuality would be legal, let alone ‘marriage’ between two SS individuals - it would be like your own reaction now to incest becoming legal. The more the moral laws of society are deingrated the less grasp and concept of morailty is held, so anything goes.

The racist argument is pure and simply ‘racist’ and nothing else, they were still a male and a female and because one was of a different colour they could not marry. That is ‘pure’ racism and disgusting behaviour, in addition to the fact that black people could not vote, share buses, public restrooms, etc… If, for example, all the ‘racist’ anti-civil acts carried out on blacks in the 50’s, were being imposed on homosexuals then, you can be rest assured, the catholic church would be damning such behaviour and totally on the side of those of SS orientation being persecuted - as that would be refusing people their basic human rights. Marriage is not a basic civil right.

It is the homosexual act that the CC call a sin, as noted throughout the bible, there is absolutely no judgement against any person with SS attraction inclinations.

 

[Inkwell]

I personally have no problem with homosexuality- some of the finest people I know are gay, and they’re easily better people than me without even trying. The loving father-figure of God I know wouldn’t cast someone out because they live their lives with member of the same sex, and whilst I appreciate that the Bible condemns homosexuality in Leviticus 18:22 and some other places, surely the message of Jesus Christ was to love our fellow man? Is it fair to call someone evil because they do something that is against the Bible when we all sin as well? I personally make a point of not judging people and asking God to “save them” because of what they’ve done because I have no right to declare anyone is more in need of saving than I am. I pray for everyone because everyone is a sinner- and homosexuality may be a sin, yes, but surely it is just misguided love?

 

[CatholicBoy1957]

I personally have no problem with homosexuality- some of the finest people I know are gay, and they’re easily better people than me without even trying. The loving father-figure of God I know wouldn’t cast someone out because they live their lives with member of the same sex, and whilst I appreciate that the Bible condemns homosexuality in Leviticus 18:22 and some other places, surely the message of Jesus Christ was to love our fellow man? Is it fair to call someone evil because they do something that is against the Bible when we all sin as well? I personally make a point of not judging people and asking God to “save them” because of what they’ve done because I have no right to declare anyone is more in need of saving than I am. I pray for everyone because everyone is a sinner- and homosexuality may be a sin, yes, but surely it is just misguided love?

You state that God wouldn’t cast out homosexuals. Would He cast out “pedophiles”, including non-homosexual ones? Totalitarian leaders that kill millions? Would God cast out anyone?

The part about “love our fellow man” I like. I love Elton John. I love Gary Glitter. I love Adolf Hitler. And I’ll bet God does too.

 

[scipio337]

After just passing same sex civil unions this summer, the Glorious People’s Republic of Illinois™ is now considering same sex marriage legislation.

wjbc.com/quinn-not-sure-of-his-support-for-gay-marriage/

Hey, I thought it was about “equal protection”?

Got slippery slope?

 

[Inkwell]

You state that God wouldn’t cast out homosexuals. Would He cast out “pedophiles”, including non-homosexual ones? Totalitarian leaders that kill millions? Would God cast out anyone?

The part about “love our fellow man” I like. I love Elton John. I love Gary Glitter. I love Adolf Hitler. And I’ll bet God does too.

I don’t claim to know the mind of our creator- he is, and always has been, beyond our understanding. Yes, Hitler killed millions of people, he was what we understand to be totally and entirely evil. But the point of Christianity is to follow the teachings of Christ, and what are they at their core? Forgiveness and Love. It isn’t my right to forgive Hitler for all he did nor can I claim to love him. But we’re all sinners in the eyes of God. Your remarks about paedophiles are, too, valid- it is an unacceptable thing to do. But such actions come from perverse conditions in the brain or interests of the mind which are truly horrific and often brought on by events during childhood- but it’s still wrong. However, as we all know, the message of Christ was and is to love and forgive. So tell me, my dear brother, what would you rather see; the wicked being punished for all eternity? Or the wicked seeing the error of their ways and becoming good?

 

[Lokabrenna]

Well that’s an interesting response, considering ‘animal behaviour’ is always one of the top arguments used, to indicate that homosexuality, is ‘natural’, because animals have homosexual sex, hence if it happens in nature it must be natural. Well, using that ‘old’ chesnut of an argument, animals also commit incest - so if animals can be used to bolster the basis of homosexuality, for years, as natural, then it must also be used to bolster the case for incest.

The problem with this is that some animals also have incest taboos (inbreeding avoidance). This article has a few of them: ags.kku.ac.th/Monchai1/Teaching/PopGen/Paper/Inbreeding%20Avoidance.pdf (just search 'inbreeding avoidance in animals" on Google if you can’t open it). So you could say that both incest and incest-avoidance are “natural” (in the sense that it occurs in nature), but that humans tend to avoid it due to problems with inbreeding (which has harmful effects on the population).

On the other hand, what is it about homosexual acts that are so inherently harmful? Is there a greater risk of disease? I guess it all depends on the act (and, contrary to popular belief, many heterosexual couples enjoy ‘the back end’) and it is generally accepted that lesbians are low risk for certain STDs, though again, depends on what they do in the bedroom. Then there’s the tired old “gay people will confuse children/turn children gay” argument. Really? I’ve honestly never met a child of gay parents who was confused about his or her sexuality. As for the old “turning children gay” thing, using that logic, EVERY child of a heterosexual couple should be heterosexual. In my case, both my biological and adoptive parents are heterosexual. I should have heterosexuality oozing from every pore!

pauses Um, yeah, not happening…

Also, though it shouldn’t have to be said, I have never been abused in any way, nor do I come from a “broken home”. My parents (who have been together for 38 years and counting) have never shown me anything but love. I’ve seen this assertion that “all gays have been abused in childhood” before, and, seriously, it’s absolutely ridiculous! Just thought I’d throw that out there.

 

[Elizabeth502]

The State of Washington had, in its laws, language describing “marriage” as recognized by the State, as that between one man and one woman. We had words that also precluded marriage between more than one man and one woman, which is polygamy. The one man and one woman, also, had to be “free to marry,” because if one of them were still married to someone else, this would be bigamy. The State of Washington, also, has laws concerning the age the one man and one woman had to be in order to be married. As recently as the 1970s the man needed to be at least 16, the woman needed to be at least 14.

What Gov. Christine Gregoire signed yesterday amends the laws to include two men or two women to legally enter into a State recognized “marriage.”

The next stops on the slippery slope: polygamy, bigamy, bestiality.

Peggy, be very clear that this was strong-armed through by an Out member of the WA legislature who admitted all this on national television last week. This was “personal,” not the Common Good.

 

[rlg94086]

Peggy, be very clear that this was strong-armed through by an Out member of the WA legislature who admitted all this on national television last week. This was “personal,” not the Common Good.

That makes sense. There is no Common Good involved in sanctioning same-sex relationships.

 

[zab]

I personally have no problem with homosexuality- some of the finest people I know are gay, and they’re easily better people than me without even trying. The loving father-figure of God I know wouldn’t cast someone out because they live their lives with member of the same sex, and whilst I appreciate that the Bible condemns homosexuality in Leviticus 18:22 and some other places, surely the message of Jesus Christ was to love our fellow man? Is it fair to call someone evil because they do something that is against the Bible when we all sin as well? I personally make a point of not judging people and asking God to “save them” because of what they’ve done because I have no right to declare anyone is more in need of saving than I am. I pray for everyone because everyone is a sinner- and homosexuality may be a sin, yes, but surely it is just misguided love?

The Catholic Church teaches that it is not a sin to be homosexual. What is sinful is to engage in homosexual acts. It is also sinful for heterosexuals to engage in imoral acts. Yes, we are all called to love one another as God has loved us. A false compassion seeks to justify evil and imoral acts as an expression of love for the person committing the evil acts. But It is commendable that you pray for the salvation of sinners. This is an example of true compassion.

 

[genesius28]

REALLY sad. My biggest issue with the gay marriage issue is that they claim it is for equality when it is actually changing everything for less than 2% of the population.

The government is there to protect the minority from the majority. So it doesn’t matter if it’s less than 2% of the population (which, if you actually read more than one study, seems to be a gross underestimation), a small group of people is still entitled to equal rights under the law. If straight people can have their relationships legally recognized, then so should gay people.

the problem? they hate Catholics and other conservatives…we should respect them, but we’re free game with insults of “ignorance and intolerance” Really? It’s only a very short period of time that they will go banging on a Catholic Church’s door or an orthodox Jewish synagogue demanding their freedom to be married in a church or other place of worship that goes by God’s laws. this ENDS religious freedom AND freedom of speech…It will land a priest in jail or with a fine…they would LOVE that!

No one can make churches/synagogues/mosques/etc. marry a gay couple, if it’s against their religion. Religious rights are protected under law. No one has made the Catholic Church perform marriages for people who have been divorced, and no one will make them marry gay people. And honestly, I’m gay and hope one day to get married, but if anyone tried to force a religious group to marry gay people, I would fight for religious rights. The fact is, gay people could be married anywhere, it wouldn’t have to be a church – marriage equality is purely a civil issue, not a religious one. And why would a gay couple want to be married in a church that hates them anyway?? I certainly wouldn’t…

If I’m against it, I’m a bigot. If they’re against me…they are “free thinkers” Lets say what it really is…to push the gay agenda down everyone’s throats. I don’t think heterosexual issues should be taught in elementary schools let alone mandatory gay history and “Harvey Milk” days. We have a demonstration against abortion or for traditional marriage and we get spit on for being “intolerant bigots” Really in the end, it’s just the pot calling the kettle black.

The definition of bigot is: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance. From everything you’ve said, sorry but that kind of describes you – particularly when you bring up the non-existent “gay agenda.” But at the same time, it also applies to those “free thinkers.” The key is to be loving and tolerant of everyone’s differences… It’s not so easy to do, but it’s something we all need to work on.

Also, I’m tired of people bringing up abortion when they talk about homosexuality. The two have nothing to do with each other.

 

[ivebeenshown]

…So you could say that both incest and incest-avoidance are “natural” (in the sense that it occurs in nature), but that humans tend to avoid it due to problems with inbreeding (which has harmful effects on the population).

On the other hand, what is it about homosexual acts that are so inherently harmful? Is there a greater risk of disease? I guess it all depends on the act (and, contrary to popular belief, many heterosexual couples enjoy ‘the back end’) and it is generally accepted that lesbians are low risk for certain STDs, though again, depends on what they do in the bedroom.

From what I understand, the gay community by and large supports abortion and birth control, so incest shouldn’t really introduce any problems now, should it? After all, the government could mandate that all incestuous pregnancies be aborted.

Then there’s the tired old “gay people will confuse children/turn children gay” argument. Really? I’ve honestly never met a child of gay parents who was confused about his or her sexuality. As for the old “turning children gay” thing, using that logic, EVERY child of a heterosexual couple should be heterosexual. In my case, both my biological and adoptive parents are heterosexual. I should have heterosexuality oozing from every pore!

pauses Um, yeah, not happening…

Also, though it shouldn’t have to be said, I have never been abused in any way, nor do I come from a “broken home”. My parents (who have been together for 38 years and counting) have never shown me anything but love. I’ve seen this assertion that “all gays have been abused in childhood” before, and, seriously, it’s absolutely ridiculous! Just thought I’d throw that out there.

Be honest with yourself: at some point in your life, you **chose **to associate the sexual stimuli (including orgasm) with the same sex – and you’re perfectly capable of choosing to associate them with the opposite sex as well. Just thought I’d throw that out there.

 

[Lokabrenna]

From what I understand, the gay community by and large supports abortion and birth control, so incest shouldn’t really introduce any problems now, should it? After all, the government could mandate that all incestuous pregnancies be aborted.

Even if such a law were passed, how in blazes would you regulate it? Would you take everyone aside and say: “Have you had sex with your [insert close relation here] recently?” What if they lie? Are you going to subject every infant to (expensive) DNA testing?

Be honest with yourself: at some point in your life, you **chose **to associate the sexual stimuli (including orgasm) with the same sex – and you’re perfectly capable of choosing to associate them with the opposite sex as well. Just thought I’d throw that out there.

Be honest with yourself: at some point in your life, you **chose **to associate the sexual stimuli (including orgasm) with the opposite sex – and you’re perfectly capable of choosing to associate them with the same sex as well. Just thought I’d throw that out there.

See how silly that sounds when the scenario is reversed? At what exact moment did you choose to be straight? Using your logic, it should be just as easy for you to choose to be with the same sex. So, have you consciously made a choice to be homosexual? Come on, try it! You can become straight again in a second! After all, all it takes is a choice! Well? What are you waiting for?

Unless, you can’t choose your sexual orientation…

Just putting that out there.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Even if such a law were passed, how in blazes would you regulate it? Would you take everyone aside and say: “Have you had sex with your [insert close relation here] recently?” What if they lie? Are you going to subject every infant to (expensive) DNA testing?

They could mandate that incestuous marriage candidates undergo sterilization procedures.

Be honest with yourself: at some point in your life, you **chose **to associate the sexual stimuli (including orgasm) with the opposite sex – and you’re perfectly capable of choosing to associate them with the same sex as well. Just thought I’d throw that out there.

See how silly that sounds when the scenario is reversed?

It’s not silly at all. I was gay before, and I know that it is because I chose to think of men when I touched myself, and I kept doing it, and became conditioned. Other men might choose to associate women with their sexual stimuli rather than men. I was open to the idea of other men rather than women so I did it.

At what exact moment did you choose to be straight? Using your logic, it should be just as easy for you to choose to be with the same sex. So, have you consciously made a choice to be homosexual? Come on, try it! You can become straight again in a second! After all, all it takes is a choice! Well? What are you waiting for?

Unless, you can’t choose your sexual orientation…

Just putting that out there.

Actually, I chose to be with the opposite sex after a 7-year bout of being gay and I am happily married to a woman.

Also, using what logic? I never said that people can flip a switch and stop being attracted to certain things immediately. A heroin addict can’t just up and decide to not be addicted, either. That’s just not how conditioning works. We can’t choose to just ‘stop liking’ something.

We can choose how to behave and condition ourselves. It’s psychology 101.

 

[Lokabrenna]

They could mandate that incestuous marriage candidates undergo sterilization procedures.

Yes, but again, how the heck would you enforce it?

It’s not silly at all. I was gay before, and I know that it is because I chose to think of men when I touched myself, and I kept doing it, and became conditioned. Other men might choose to associate women with their sexual stimuli rather than men. I was open to the idea of other men rather than women so I did it.

Actually, I chose to be with the opposite sex after a 7-year bout of being gay and I am happily married to a woman.

Ever consider that you might just be bisexual? Plenty of bisexuals are in “traditional” marriages, there’s no need for this “conditioning” nonsense.

Also, using what logic? I never said that people can flip a switch and stop being attracted to certain things immediately. A heroin addict can’t just up and decide to not be addicted, either. That’s just not how conditioning works. We can’t choose to just ‘stop liking’ something.

We can choose how to behave and condition ourselves. It’s psychology 101.

Well, according to this “conditioning” theory of yours (which I think is a load of bull, BTW) I should still be as straight as a pin. I went to Catholic school, fantasized about (male) celebrities like all my friends. For heaven’s sake, I’ve never done ANYTHING with another female, never been kissed, made out, or had sex, and yet, despite my upbringing, I’m still sexually attracted to women.

Sorry, you’re going to need a lot more than Psychology 101. Try the American Psychological Association. Start with this pamphlet on sexual orientation: apa.org/topics/sexuality/orientation.aspx

Even the Church admits that SSA is not sinful. Now, I’m not Catholic, but shouldn’t you actually be listening to Church teachings on this matter?

 

[Publisher]

They could mandate that incestuous marriage candidates undergo sterilization procedures.

I thought sterilization to prevent conception was as much against Catholic teaching as same sex marriage and abc?
.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Publisher:
I’m playing devil’s advocate, guy/gal.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Ever consider that you might just be bisexual? Plenty of bisexuals are in “traditional” marriages, there’s no need for this “conditioning” nonsense.

Bisexuality… what a convenient term.

Well, according to this “conditioning” theory of yours (which I think is a load of bull, BTW) I should still be as straight as a pin. I went to Catholic school, fantasized about (male) celebrities like all my friends. For heaven’s sake, I’ve never done ANYTHING with another female, never been kissed, made out, or had sex, and yet, despite my upbringing, I’m still sexually attracted to women.

Sorry, you’re going to need a lot more than Psychology 101. Try the American Psychological Association. Start with this pamphlet on sexual orientation: apa.org/topics/sexuality/orientation.aspx

From that site:

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."

I do experience a sense of choice.

Classical conditioning sums it up. If there is some other stunning breakthrough, do let me know.

Even the Church admits that SSA is not sinful. Now, I’m not Catholic, but shouldn’t you actually be listening to Church teachings on this matter?

I am listening to the Church. If you look back on our discussion, I never once said having SSA is sinful.

 

[Lokabrenna]

Bisexuality… what a convenient term.

It’s the ‘B’ in ‘LGBT’.

From that site:

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."

I do experience a sense of choice.

Classical conditioning sums it up. If there is some other stunning breakthrough, do let me know.

I don’t, so obviously you’re one of the special ones (or, like I said, maybe you’re bisexual and in denial about it.)

I am listening to the Church. If you look back on our discussion, I never once said having SSA is sinful.

Well, good! Glad we’re on the same page!