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.
Civil union, marriage whatever. I don't think most gays care about the name. It's the basic rights - health, financial, beneficiary, etc - that they are being denied that's important.
The problem though with your definition of marriage is that again politics and religion have become intertwined. So now you're calling marriage a "covenant before God" and it's also a legally binding contract. I'm sorry, but that's a serious problem.
The name, or term, is the entire point. You even stated:
Quote:
Another argument used for the disapproval of gay marriage is the fact that it's a sacred, Christian sanction, and by allowing gays marriage rights this would be compromised. Fair enough.
What makes a marriage a covenant before God is the covenant made by the two people involved. This has nothing to do with the government. If you change the definition of marriage in include same sex marriage, the government has taken the term marriage (Christian sanction, as you stated) and made it impossible for a Bible-believing Christian to participate in it. To accept gay marriage would be a covenant for two people. It's not just Christians who would be affected by this. LDS and Muslims (and probably ten other religions I don't know of) couldn't be legally married in good conscience.
So, the name is EVERYTHING. Call it a civil union and give the benefits that homosexuals seek. Do we at least all agree on this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sous777
And there inlies the problem. You see nothing wrong with an American using THEIR belief system as a way to make decisions on morality. This is exactly the problem! A Christian may find it immoral (this word is tossed around far too often as far as I'm concerned) to be gay. They may use this judgement of "morality" to attempt to pass laws which limit or deny rights to groups they find "immoral".
Everyone uses their belief system as a way to make decisions on morality. Don't you? Didn't you say that you're atheist? Maybe you could explain this further for me. As a Christian, I can't expect non-believers to live by Christian principles. How could I? It seems like you're shifting to an issue with Christians believing homosexuality is a sin. If this is true, I guess all I can say is that we can't change the Bible to fit what's socially accepted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sous777
It's called separation of church and state, a concept that as all but been lost. Since when are someone's personal religious convictions a sound reason to deny someone else equal rights?
Well, I did an enormous amount of research on separation of church and state in college. My conclusion was that this was a personal opinion that is completely exploited in a way that takes the term from the original intent of the author. This is not a decree. That said, I differ from some Christians in that I would prefer that government be separated from the church. Why? For one thing, I don't think the government should have a hand in how the church functions. Another reason is that I don't feel the government should adopt one religion and use it as a way to control people like what was done in England's history and what's being done today in the Muslim world.
What you're really arguing here is that no one who uses their own belief system as a way to determine their stance on political issues should be allowed to participate in government. If you're not saying this, you'll need to clarify this further. If you are saying this, I don't understand how we could have a democracy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sous777
If you went to Iraq and they said they found Americans immoral, and denied you equal rights, yet still expected you to pay taxes, would that be okay?
If they said, because you are American, you cannot have these rights, because we find you immoral. Yet, we have have no problem letting jailed Iraqi murderers, child abusers, and rapists marry because they're Iraqi!
Somehow, I don't think that kind of logic would go over to well with you. This is no different. They afterall, would be using their "belief system" as a way to make decisions about morality and politics.
You completely lost me here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sous777
And you'd be the first to object if someone gay were participating within the government and started rallying for equal gay rights. The first thing you'd most likely say is, "those gays, always pushing their lifestyle down our throats". Yet you see nothing wrong with this same behavior from Christians.
First, please don't tell me what I would do as a fact. Remember in your OP you stated you brought up these issues to gain understanding. Let's not attack each other. I wouldn't say something like "those gays" at any time.
Next, what area would homosexuals rally for equal rights in? A homosexual has the same right as I do to marry under the current law. One man and one woman can marry. Period. The issue to me isn't homosexual or not homosexual. The issue is the definition of marriage. Why would a homosexual want to approach marriage and change the definition? Why wouldn't they think about the other people involved? Why does this need to be approached in such a narcissistic manner? Why not realize that the majority of America has a deep seeded issue with changing the definition of marriage, whether it be for religious, personal, traditional, or moral reasons, and just rally for civil unions or civil partnerships, as pladecalvo calls it.
Beyond this issue, I honestly don't understand what else homosexuals would rally for. The right to join the military? That's all I can think of.
As far as I'm concerned the threat to society imposed by pedophiles, murderers, rapists, etc is far greater than gays ever will be. Why not such passionate opinions on THESE "sins"?
I appreciate you taking the time to anseer. But still, I do not understand your logic. Just because you personally think something is immoral does not give you the right to pass laws which limit these "immorals" rights.
That's what this keeps coming back to.
Ok, honestly I will have to say that I am rather disappointed
I spent A LOT of time on your response to your OP...and this is all the response that I get? I was really expecting more from you
Just a quick question for the Christians...will you accept ANY scientific evidence? I'm talking from the likes of established archaeologists that find evidence of Earth's true age (closer to 4.5 billion years), organizations like the APA who say homosexuality is not a choice.....the many, many scientists who agree on evolution, etc .
Or are all these professionals wrong and the bible right?
Only God knows how old the earth is, I for one have no idea. There are also many scientist that dont agree on evolution, Im not a scientist so I dont know about that one either. Im sure not gonna get into a debat with you on homosexuality, we are all free to have our own opinions. I choose to believe the Bible over what men say, granted men who make these studies are extremely intelligient people, however, I believe that God made man and we will never understand his ways.
So in the face of bone and fossil evidence that have been there for millions and millions of years you still choose to believe the Earth is 6,000 years old?
Nearly 95% of scientists agree today believe in the theory of evolution. Yes, theory of evolution...but with all theories there is evidence to back it up. Lots of it.
You won't find many scientists today that believe in the fantasy of creation. Yes, the fantasy of creation...because with all fantasies there is no evidence to back it up.
When I was in an Adventist high school, I posed the question since its pretty clear that dinosaurs really exist...why aren't they mentioned in the bible, if you believe the bible then they didn't exist before hand...
Can you really deny they exist since they are always digging up bones from them? Not far from where I lived they were always finding fociles from that period and even footprints in stone from dinosaurs...
...Another time when my bible teacher was apoplectec...luckily my Father thought it was a riot when I did this, he was all for questioning things even though he was a trained minister...
One time when I was questioning him about why do we think so much of the ten commandments when all around these commandments are other things we are told to do that we completely ignore...my bible teacher told me that even the devil can use the bible for his own devices...talk about a nice sidestep.
So in the face of bone and fossil evidence that have been there for millions and millions of years you still choose to believe the Earth is 6,000 years old?
Nearly 95% of scientists agree today believe in the theory of evolution. Yes, theory of evolution...but with all theories there is evidence to back it up. Lots of it.
You won't find many scientists today that believe in the fantasy of creation. Yes, the fantasy of creation...because with all fantasies there is no evidence to back it up.
Im not told how old the earth is in the Bible, and if it does state it somewhere in there, I havent saw it, nor really worried about it too much. I believe dinosaurs existed, do I know where, or how, or the mechanics of it? no I dont. Maybe the earth is millions and millions of years ol, all I know is the Bible says God created it, and thats proof enough for me.
Last edited by arguy1973; 05-21-2007 at 03:19 PM..
Reason: miss spelling
So in the face of bone and fossil evidence that have been there for millions and millions of years you still choose to believe the Earth is 6,000 years old?
Nearly 95% of scientists agree today believe in the theory of evolution. Yes, theory of evolution...but with all theories there is evidence to back it up. Lots of it.
You won't find many scientists today that believe in the fantasy of creation. Yes, the fantasy of creation...because with all fantasies there is no evidence to back it up.
no one has said the earth is 6000 years old what was said is it took God 6000 years to create it but no one ever claimed he finished it last week
Im not told how old the earth is in the Bible, and if it does state it somewhere in there, I havent saw it, nor really worried about it too much. I believe dinosaurs existed, do I know where, or how, or the mechanics of it? no I dont. Maybe the earth is millions and millions of years ol, all I know is the Bible says God created it, and thats proof enough for me.
well maybe that is where the mistranslation of the word created comes into play
the meaning of the word is also Organized
maybe the earth was already here a dead planet maybe thats why there is that layer of no man's land between dinosaurs and mammals hhhhmmmmm interesting
his Idea of Creation maybe didn't include the rock itself just everything else that went into it
just thinking
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.
