Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
obviously you never read the talmud before because it explicit bans giving a marriage contract between 2 men.
Even giving you the benefit of the doubt that that is true, and I don't know whether or not it is, it is completely irrelevant. We do not govern our country based on what is or is not in the talmud.
Even giving you the benefit of the doubt that that is true, and I don't know whether or not it is, it is completely irrelevant. We do not govern our country based on what is or is not in the talmud.
did I say to ban it based on that piece of the talmud.
All I did was disprove the lie that I was responding to.
I have studied The Dhammapada and in fact the entire Tripitaka and there is no mention - for or against - same sex marriage.
You have studied the entire Tripitaka? Surely you only mean the books that have been translated. Otherwise you are quite a scholar indeed.
There are statements in Buddhist scripture, such as it is, and there is a lot of it, that favor and disfavor homosexuality. However, Buddhists take a different view of their scripture than do so many Christians. They are seen as the worthy works of wise men, not gods.
The monk who engages in homosexual sex is generally asked to leave, but so is the monk who engages in heterosexual sex. Monks are not supposed to be having sex.
The Noble Eightfold Path contains "Right Conduct," which, as a sort-of subheading contains the admonition to refrain from sexual misconduct. There have been commentaries that say this includes homosexuality, but most leave it at the various forms of rape and marital infidelity.
Sex is not so much an issue in Buddhism. It is seen as one of the human desires that leads to unhappiness if one does not detach oneself, and as a considerable distraction for those seeking Enlightenment, but this is just sex in general, not any particular type of sex.
I think the Apostle Paul got Christianity off on the wrong foot with his preoccupation with sex, especially with his misogyny. You don't see that in Buddhist history, and few Asian countries have criminal statues dealing explicitly with homosexual acts (in fact I can't think of any in the Buddhist areas).
.
did I say to ban it based on that piece of the talmud.
That's pretty much been your premise in every thread on the topic that you've participated in. There is no logical, secular reason for denying access to marriage for homosexuals, so you revert back to your religious points.
That's pretty much been your premise in every thread on the topic that you've participated in. There is no logical, secular reason for denying access to marriage for homosexuals, so you revert back to your religious points.
wrong the premise I stated is that it will lead lower birth rates, less true marriages, more STDs etc.
you just don't know how to follow an argument. The reason I bring up the Talmud so much is because people try to use Judaism and Jewish history to justify their opinions in which case I'm required to point out your lies.
wrong the premise I stated is that it will lead lower birth rates, less true marriages, more STDs etc.
That's preposterous. For any of the above to be true, you must be assuming that heterosexuals are going to convert to being homosexual if SSM is legalized, and even if that WERE true, which is redonkulous, it would likely lead to a decrease in STD rates because of the fact that, statistically anyway, most marriages are monogamous.
Rest assured, heterosexuals will not be turning gay just because gay marriage becomes legal. It doesn't work that way.
Quote:
The reason I bring up the Talmud so much is because people try to use Judaism and Jewish history to justify their opinions in which case I'm required to point out your lies.
I don't know the first thing about the talmud, except that I don't want it being used as the basis for civil law in this country. Anything I have to say about it other than that, would be true only out of sheer luck.
That's pretty much been your premise in every thread on the topic that you've participated in. There is no logical, secular reason for denying access to marriage for homosexuals, so you revert back to your religious points.
The irony is, the Talmud specifically states a man who engages in sexual intercourse with a boy under 9, cannot be blamed for molesting/raping the child.
The Talmud is a ridiculously complicated, often archaic commentary on the Torah. Hardly something we should be discussing our legal system to be based on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
