I Wear Pants;1080330 wrote:Oh poor you, you're annoyed by gay people wanting to get married.

I Wear Pants;1080344 wrote:Because marriage is not an exclusively religious idea.

OSH;1080333 wrote:Nice job actually being able to carry on a decent conversation.

I didn't say that all homosexuals don't have faith. I can see how that may be implied though. That is not what I meant. Not at all.

But...I will venture a guess to say that most homosexuals do not have a belief in God. I could be wrong. Just a guess. Most of the arguments FOR homosexual marriage do not revolve around a connection to a higher power. Most of the time, the "religion" side is completely left out of the discussion.

Skyhook79;1080125 wrote:I didn't say it did. I was disputing the "people are born Gay" theory.

justincredible;1080154 wrote:You saying that in some cases homosexuality does affect others disputes that people are born gay? That doesn't make any sense. At all.

I Wear Pants;1080344 wrote:Because marriage is not an exclusively religious idea.

OSH;1080348 wrote:You look at it that way...others can easily say, "Oh poor you, you're annoyed that gay people cannot get married."

It can go both ways.

It has nothing to do with them wanting to get married. It's about the whole "hey, it is the hot topic to talk about so...we will plaster it all over every website, newspaper, magazine, television show, television commercial, radio, radio commercial, etc." That's what I've always said. The whole "bandwagon" trend of jumping on the hot topic of the year. My undergrad school did this...annoyed me to no end. One year it was the genocide in Darfur -- tragic, no doubt...but it quickly faded. Another year it was sex trafficking. Another year it was something else...

It was just a "fad" and people jumped on it. I do think that there is a lot of "homosexual fad" in the youth communities today. But still, it does get rather annoying to hear everything get labeled by sexual preference, sexual identity, etc. For example: a crime can be a crime, regardless of sexual preference, sexual identity, race, creed, etc. it doesn't need to be labeled anything else.

Mooney44Cards;1080335 wrote:Why couldn't the blacks just shut up and be happy in their separate but equal facilities? Those ****ing whiners! Man how annoying was it back in the 60s where I couldn't turn on my tv or transistor radio without hearing about the civil rights movement! God that was obnoxious! Marching around doesn't give anyone more civil rights nor does sitting on a seat in a bus!

This is how you sound.

I Wear Pants;1080344 wrote:Because marriage is not an exclusively religious idea.

isadore;1080211 wrote:then you can continue living a lie

Fab1b;1080355 wrote:Really?? Look I am not religious but I wouldn't say that I am willing to bet most homosexuals don't have a belief in god, wow. Why because they are gay? You don't think homesexuality was around in biblical times, when the man they call Jesus was around there was no homosexuality? It was just a group of people that got together out of now where and said we like the same sex and we will call it gay? Religion doesn't play into the gay debate? Religion is the reason why gays can't get married!!!!!

Mooney44Cards;1080363 wrote:Except on the one hand you have a group of people who are treated differently/lesser-than than the rest of society. And then there's you who is boo hooing over having to hear about something more than you'd like. So you end up coming off as a whiney little baby who is crying because he's inconvenienced every once in awhile by a news story, while they're actually, you know, fighting to gain rights.

OSH;1080369 wrote:There is a difference though. There is absolutely no difference in white people and "colored" people (couldn't find a better term and I wanted to include other races that weren't necessarily black). There is absolutely no difference in a white person and a "colored" person beside the skin color. "Colored" people were being denied service simply because of the color of their skin...it wasn't equal. There's really nothing that is actually "separate but equal."

Who were the ones who started abolishing slavery and making things "equal" for all peoples? Christians. They saw the inequality in it. William Wilberforce was one of those guys who started it (in England, before the States -- I believe). Whereas, if marriage is blessed by God...there are a lot of people who believe the sanctity should be kept as uniting man with woman.

Which leads me to...



Which is true...but marriage has always been used for man and a woman, for various reasons. Maybe it was to get sexual access. Maybe it was for paternal rights (basically assurance of being a dad of his kids). Other times, it was used to ensure the kids would receive the inheritance.

Whatever it was...it seems like it dealt with passing things from parents to children OR passing from husband to wife. Only in the recent years do we have stuff like spouse benefits with health insurance, etc.

OSH;1080389 wrote:It was just a guess...that was all.

I know that homosexuality was around. But the homosexuality in Biblical times was always talked about regarding the "act." Only recently has there been talk/research about homosexuality being more than that, i.e., mental, born with, etc. Whenever homosexuality is mentioned in the Bible, it's specifically talking about the act. It was a perversion because it is "natural" for a man to be with a woman and vice versa.

There are many reasons why people may be against gay marriage. One could be like Julia Gillard, a Prime Minister of Australia, who is an atheist and lives with her significant other (a man). She believes that marriage is specifically for a man and a woman. But she even says that there are other ways that homosexuals could be "equal." I am sure there are many others just like her.



You nailed it! You know exactly how I am. Good job.

That's three straight posts you've failed to carry on a nice conversation. Until you can do that, I don't need to converse with you.

I Wear Pants;1080390 wrote:I really don't think you want to make a case for the egalitarian nature of Christians (or any religion really) based upon past history. You'll likely find at least as much where they were on the wrong side of the equality and understanding equation.

Mooney44Cards;1080388 wrote:Right it was the Christians who abolished slavery and gave blacks equal rights. And the racist bigots and slave owners were? What religion?

Christianity does not have a monopoly on good deeds and compassion. One of our founding documents states "We hold these truths to be SELF EVIDENT; that all men are created equal". That means that this is a simple human fact. Not a Christian belief but a self evident fact. Meaning any human being with any sense of reason should understand.

And if you're going to thump your chest about how Christians are so great how about you explain how christian churches are systematically trying to oppress an entire segment of society. That's not very Christ like. It amazes me how little Christians ever act like Christ.

Fab1b;1080404 wrote:So it was only an act back then but now there is love, and feelings, and born with it, etc....but not back then? They didn't have the means to study it or understand it back then however do you think a gay man in Jesus's time is any different than a gay man today? They were both born gay!

OSH;1080406 wrote:I simply said that Christians were the ones who started the movement of abolishing slavery. That is all. It was a "religion" that started it.

I could/would say the same about Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. if I knew a few of the things that were outlawed, abolished, or righted because of them. They may have been on the wrong side, like you said...but that comes a lot with lack of education (knowledge) and/or culture at the time.

OSH;1080412 wrote:It was about the act. It was a perversion. That's what it is referenced in the Bible. You are right, there were no studies on it. There was not much "understanding" of it.

But...yes, I do believe that gay men in Biblical times was different than now. I really do. And the whole "born gay" debate could go on and on. To me, that's where most of everything starts. Are there some that are born gay? I cannot say. But I can say that there are people who are "homosexual" who choose to be that way. I've met them. I've talked to them about it. It happens that way too. Which side (born v. choice) is the majority? I cannot say or nor will I guess.

Skyhook79;1080410 wrote:Please point out how Christian Churches oppress a segment of society and while you are at it have you ever checked out the plank in your own eye or do you just pass judgement on others?

Skyhook79;1080410 wrote:Please point out how Christian Churches oppress a segment of society and while you are at it have you ever checked out the plank in your own eye or do you just pass judgement on others?

dwccrew;1080416 wrote:It was not because of christian beliefs that slavery was abolished. The people that lead the movement to abolish slavery just happened to be christian, however, I don't think it was based on their faith. If that was the case then you could say christians tried to exterminate jews in WW2.

Fab1b;1080424 wrote:Ok even going by your thoughts, could biblical time gays be born with it, or have chosen to be gay just like in today's world? I don't get the difference other than probably the clothes they wore.

OSH;1080439 wrote:What? It surely was their Christian views that helped abolish slavery.

Ever seen Amazing Grace? It is the story of William Wilberforce. It's basically pure fact of how that went on. Wilberforce fought for the importance of religion, morality, and education.

I don't even need to address the WW2 stuff...that's pure silliness.

Fab1b;1080424 wrote:Ok even going by your thoughts, could biblical time gays be born with it, or have chosen to be gay just like in today's world? I don't get the difference other than probably the clothes they wore.