gay marriages (no, this is not a troll topic)

[dancingqueen]

It may come as a suprise to some, and I have discussed this with many people and am looking for thoughts and opinions by others.

I am against gay marriages.
reason:
To my understanding "Marriage" is a christian/Catholic term created in the Bible. The Bible defines a marriage as a man and a woman coming together under God.
I am not a Christian nor a Catholic, and in every forum or tax sheet (ect...) you are either "Married", Divorced" or "Single"
There is also a "Civil union" but does not carry the same bennifits as a "Marriage"
I think there should be a form of union that is not religious in nature but carries the same financial, provincial and federal benifits as a "Marriage does.
Thoughts on this please? I intend on bringing this to the attention of the goverment and would like to make sure I have covered all the areas.
Thanks /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[Maryms]

This is my take on your proposed petition to the Government:

So basically in your way of thinking anyone two guys or girls living together can claim a Common-Law status whether they are or are not Gay or [censored].

You really think the government will allow people to Cheat the Gov Tax system?

I do NOT believe in Gay marriages or believe in any Civil Union that represents two individuals of the same sex.

[MagicFingers]

I believe in gay marriages. Marital unions between two people who love each other. Regardless of sex. As far as I am aware or atleast I was under the impression two men or two women could live together as a couple just as a man and woman can and could reap the same financial, provincial and federal benefits as a married couple. I guess if you are a traditionalist and you view marriage as a completely religious issue then I guess I wouldn't argue with you on this. being that I don't see marriage a completely religious ceremony...That two people can be married but not necessarily for the benefit of god but just benefit themselves then I don't have an issue. I believe in lovign yourself and others. So long as you have good intentions and love in your heart it doesn't really matter if it is between two men or two women. After all if you believe in God then really these people have only God to answer to in the end. I would sooner see two men or two women married who love each other and raise a family in a positive environment then a man and woman who are negative abusive and always fighting. I'm common law with my spouse and I get all benefits that a married couple get. And should we separate we would still have to go through the same process as a married couple...I would know as I was married and had a divorce. (not fun)

[Muse]

I firmly believe that gay couples should be allowed to obtain the same marriage certificates/licences/etc as straight couples can under the eyes of the government. No special clauses or different benefits/penalties.

Religiously speaking, it's more complicated. I don't believe that it should be forced on religious groups. For example, the Catholic church believes homosexuality goes against God and the bible, and so I don't feel they should be forced to allow gay marriage ceremonies.

But on the other hand, would that be descrimination? If a certain church of a certain denomination refused to marry an inter-racial couple, would that fly? Or is that somehow different?

[MagicFingers]

Muse I agree with you on this as well.

[Larimar]

Definitely time government gets with the times ...we no cavemen anymore....


I don't really follow the mainstream idea that the bible says anything about homosexuality being a sin....

I would have no problem with preists or holy men being able to choose whether they want to perform a marriage or not.
At least then it will be an option, and not all are against gay marriage.





http://www.extremelysmart.com/insight/accurate/homosexuality.php

[MaO3]

I think that gay couples should have the same rights as hetro couples.
Why shouldn't two people regardless of the sex who are in a longterm committed relationship have the same rights?
Why shouldn't a gay man or woman have the right to be supported by thier spouses pension if they have spent thier lives together.
Why does it have to come back to religion?
As far as I'm concerned gay men/women should have the right to marry, whether in a religious or civil ceremony

[MagicFingers]

Applauds MaO3

[KDawg]

I agree with pretty much everything you said DQ.

If gays want to be united and receive the same financial benefits as married couples, that's OK with me. Just don't call it marriage.

[MagicFingers]

Why not call it marriage...? what do you care if they call it marriage? Does it affect you in anyway? Does it affect you financially or economically? You don't have to live with it. If they live as a married couple and reap the benefits of a married couple then they are married in my eyes and I personally will give them the title of married couple if that is what they want.

[KDawg]

Because marriage is defined as the union of a man and a woman, as ordained by God. Words have meaning and the word marriage doesn't apply to any other union.

[ProfessorZed]

DQ, marriage predates Xianity. Anyone who tells you the church invented marriage is full of it. In point of fact, we don't know exactly when marriage came to be, because it predates recorded history. I'll grant you that it evolved into a largely religious mode of social control, but so did everything else that survived the middle ages.

To suggest that same-sex couples shouldn't have access to marriage because many religious denominations are anti-gay is no more rational than to say that women should all boycott marriage because of its history as a property transfer from father to husband. Regardless of what marriage may have been in the past, it's up to us, living today, to define what it is for us, today. As for me, whenever I marry a same-sex couple, I can't help but feel like I'm helping the world move forward.

[The Berean]

"To my understanding "Marriage" is a christian/Catholic term created in the Bible. The Bible defines a marriage as a man and a woman coming together under God."

Chapter and verse??

"As for me, whenever I marry a same-sex couple, I can't help but feel like I'm helping the world move forward."

And evolution move backwards. Oh well.

[MagicFingers]

Thank you ProfessorZed...two female friends of mine got married 3 years ago and since now have a beautiful baby girl. They are married and there aren't a man and woman more deserving of such a union as these two women. Who cares if it is two men or two women God also tells us to love, accept all and let him judge lest ye be judged. Well sounds like to me there are a whole lot of people on these boards that like to pick adn choose what teachings they follow. How hypocritical are they?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ProfessorZed</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DQ, marriage predates Xianity. Anyone who tells you the church invented marriage is full of it. In point of fact, we don't know exactly when marriage came to be, because it predates recorded history. I'll grant you that it evolved into a largely religious mode of social control, but so did everything else that survived the middle ages.

To suggest that same-sex couples shouldn't have access to marriage because many religious denominations are anti-gay is no more rational than to say that women should all boycott marriage because of its history as a property transfer from father to husband. Regardless of what marriage may have been in the past, it's up to us, living today, to define what it is for us, today. As for me, whenever I marry a same-sex couple, I can't help but feel like I'm helping the world move forward. </div></div>

Professor Zed is entitled to her opinion, of course. But is she assuming that marriage predates God? She is certainly right that it predates Christianity. But the Christian concept of marriage existed long before Christ walked the earth. It started in he Garden of Eden. If she can find evidence of marriage that predates creation, I'd love to see it.

I am also convinced that ProfessorZed is sincere when she believes that every gay marriage that she solemnizes is an improvement on the world.

I think, like DQ, many gays don't want marriage, not only because they would be adopting an institution that was already deemed outmoded and unnecessary by the 60's free love crowd, but because there is something more important to them than the limitations that are placed upon them in marriage.

[ProfessorZed]

As much as debating the topic might be an interesting exercise, Aydeloof, it'd be tough to do so without agreement on the basic premise of Biblical truth. I have a great deal of respect for the Bible and the religions it governs, but it's not a holy book for me. The Garden of Eden just isn't part of my worldview (see my related tongue-in-cheek "Holy Binoculars" comment in the Golden Compass thread).

For the record, I also think every hetero marriage I solemnize is a step in the right direction. Call me sentimental, but I place a high value on commitment and family (I'm reasonably sure we agree on that, at least). In a disposable world, I find it deeply touching when any two people choose to take on not just the privileges, but the obligations that come with binding themselves to one another, legally and socially. Yep, I've gotten a tiny bit misty at weddings from time to time.

[Kyle Cardoza]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But the Christian concept of marriage existed long before Christ walked the earth. It started in he Garden of Eden. If she can find evidence of marriage that predates creation, I'd love to see it.</div></div>

The problem with that is that you must first prove that The Garden is more than an allegorical story meant to establish the Jewish relationship with YHVH. The difference between believing in a literalist interpretation of Torah and believing that Marriage predates the existence of Judaism by many, many centuries is that the former is based on nothing more substantial than blind faith, and the latter is solidly founded in historical fact.

Faith has zero place in whether or not gay marriage should be legal. Law must be based on the greatest good for the greatest number; making gay marriage legal in no way harms any religion, and helps provide equal rights for all.

Now, before you accuse me of anything, note that I also think that any church, of any religion, should be able to opick and choose to whom it will give services, using whatever criteria they like. If the Baptists, for picked-at-random example, want to forbid gays from entering their churches, that's their right. Sure, I think that it's stupid, and that anyone who thinks that gays deserve fewer rights than straights is a blithering idiot unworthy of my respect, but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.

[1337]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Muse</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I firmly believe that gay couples should be allowed to obtain the same marriage certificates/licences/etc as straight couples can under the eyes of the government. No special clauses or different benefits/penalties.

Religiously speaking, it's more complicated. I don't believe that it should be forced on religious groups. For example, the Catholic church believes homosexuality goes against God and the bible, and so I don't feel they should be forced to allow gay marriage ceremonies.

But on the other hand, would that be descrimination? If a certain church of a certain denomination refused to marry an inter-racial couple, would that fly? Or is that somehow different?</div></div>

I agree, but a church has a set of rules and regulations to follow that are supposedly set in BY GOD. Only god can switch or change these rules. If the bible says MAN AND WOMEN, it should only be man and women!

It should not be discrimination for the catholic church to ban gay marriages.

Legally, they should be able to get together, you don't need a religious ceremony to get married!

[Lance]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BY GOD </div></div>

WHo's he? Never met him.

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: T-pot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Muse</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I firmly believe that gay couples should be allowed to obtain the same marriage certificates/licences/etc as straight couples can under the eyes of the government. No special clauses or different benefits/penalties.

Religiously speaking, it's more complicated. I don't believe that it should be forced on religious groups. For example, the Catholic church believes homosexuality goes against God and the bible, and so I don't feel they should be forced to allow gay marriage ceremonies.

But on the other hand, would that be descrimination? If a certain church of a certain denomination refused to marry an inter-racial couple, would that fly? Or is that somehow different?</div></div>

I agree, but a church has a set of rules and regulations to follow that are supposedly set in BY GOD. Only god can switch or change these rules. If the bible says MAN AND WOMEN, it should only be man and women!

It should not be discrimination for the catholic church to ban gay marriages.

Legally, they should be able to get together, you don't need a religious ceremony to get married! </div></div>

I have no issues with what you said. However I have an issue when the church tries to dictate to the government what is acceptable and what isn't. Hate to break it to the church but not everyone is Catholic, and not everyone is Christian....if gay couples should like to get married then who is the church to stop them if it isn't in their "organization" as you will.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ProfessorZed</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The Garden of Eden just isn't part of my worldview (see my related tongue-in-cheek "Holy Binoculars" comment in the Golden Compass thread).
</div></div>

Yes, of course I realized long ago that we do not share the same worldview. As far as arguments on the gay marriage issue is concerned.. I think it has all been said before. I try hard not to enter those discussions anymore..

[Larimar]

"I have no issues with what you said. However I have an issue when the church tries to dictate to the government what is acceptable and what isn't. Hate to break it to the church but not everyone is Catholic, and not everyone is Christian....if gay couples should like to get married then who is the church to stop them if it isn't in their "organization" as you will. "


True , Marriage is not just a Christian definition- lots of religions get married too and it existed way before Christianity or the roots of Christianity-Judaism
It was a way that women became property-but by golly we just keep evolving and changing and ADAPTING to our times.

"times" is important

loving the same sex is not a crime, it doesn't hurt anyone, and it should be there choice not our choice whether or not they join in union. It should NOT be taken off the table for a God and a hell that not all people believe in. Freedom is something we should pride ourselves with-but we are a far cry from it yet.




http://ehistory.osu.edu/world/articles/ArticleView.cfm?AID=58

[LIKETOWIN]

I agree with u 100 percent I wish people would just mind their own business and worry about whats happening in their own lives for once.

[Return of Too Many Daves]

Marriage is nolonger a Christian of religious term, or institution, just like Christmas has little to do with religion anymore.

Bottom line everyone should have equal rights, and if you believe marriage or even common-law should entitle you to special benefits then it has to be the same for everyone.

[Soundbear]

Is there ANY religion that condones gay marriage, other than those created in the last century or so, or created for the sole reason to counter Christianity???

[Return of Too Many Daves]

Yeah that's why they do it to p!ss the Christians off.

[Larimar]

"Yeah that's why they do it to p!ss the Christians off. "
lmao.

Yeah i don't get that statement either....


anywho, the point people are trying to make, is that Marriage predates Christianity- it predates ALL religion!!!
Homosexual relationships were very common and accepted in Ancient Greece...I really have no other way of putting this, other than we need to stop placing our own moral and religious views on people-This isn't crime and this isn't injustice-This is argueing about what "god" wants- and not all people follow this. Welcome to THIS century! People should hav ethe right to choose-Worry about your OWN afterlife and your OWN sins-don't tell people they can't do something if they want too..What if things were switched around a bit?
What if Sikhism was the dominant religion here-and the government BANNED you from eating Meat products and eggs and you were not allowed to drink wine or beer anymore. It's strictly a sin and God forbids it-so everyone, no matter what your religion or culture HAVE to abide by this. Sikh's just don't want to serve you meat, nobody makes it b.c it's a sin.
Is it a crime to eat meat? is it really something that should be stopped for everyone? or just for the people who believe it's wrong? How would you feel if your right to choose your own morals was taken away? (I say You in a general sense...everyone)....so what makes it okay to stop gay marriage?
is it just okay b.c it's within your own belief system and doesnt affect you?


They should have benifits too
Will people try to scam? sure they will-but that's why the government progresses in ways to make sure this doesnt happen, they now have procautions, but even straight couples scam too! there's no unwritten rule that says straight ppl can't scam ppl.

anyways, just my take.

[dancingqueen]

Well, I have learned quite a bit from these opinions, I was not aware that "Marriage" pre-dated Christianity, It was just something I was lead to belive so I do not have any chapters or verses proving the Bible says "Marriage is a Christian term"


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NuGcAt-SiSyRc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is my take on your proposed petition to the Government:

So basically in your way of thinking anyone two guys or girls living together can claim a Common-Law status whether they are or are not Gay or [censored].

You really think the government will allow people to Cheat the Gov Tax system?

I do NOT believe in Gay marriages or believe in any Civil Union that represents two individuals of the same sex.
</div></div>
like when a Straight man and a straight woman live together but have no interest in being married? Does that not create the same problem?

[Soundbear]

"..anywho, the point people are trying to make, is that Marriage predates Christianity- it predates ALL religion!!!"

OK, we can accept that.

"Homosexual relationships were very common and accepted in Ancient Greece."

But I doubt you'd be able to show this was a marriage.

[Larimar]

If you truly are interested in finding same sex unions /marriages (semantics when it comes to the Past) Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, by John Boswell may be interesting-Predating that, you can probably google it, I imagine it was not unheard of. Same sex love was so common in those times that it just is something we can't dismiss. This is history, we don't live there and so I feel we need to stop throwing religious views in peoples faces-Christian straight couples don't deserve benifits more so than others. Homosexuals should be protected too.



It's all semantics to me, let them have the same rights-They do not have to be wed under a church that does not accept them-but they should be allowed to call it a marriage, they should be allowed to have the same protection and security that the marriages bring. Whether a church participates or not is up to them-Nobody wants to take away their rights either. At least, i don't.
I just believe that a little more progress needs to be made. I don't see how that's not fair, it wont disrupt the lives of anyone else.
I don't believe in eating meat-I think it's wrong and disgusting-doesn't mean it bothers me when other people think it's alright and I don't care if other ppl eat it..it won't affect My soul what they do (I choose not to work at the fast food industry and I just choose not to serve ppl meat-I don't stop everyone though)..again, what gives Christians the right to force this marriage definition on the rest of the world? (rhetorical question).

Just my Humble opinion, I don't want to offend anyone and for that reason I'll back out now b4 this topic gets touchy.

ciao~

"is that Marriage predates Christianity- it predates ALL religion!!!"

Well, not exactly.

If God predates humanity, and if God created us with gender specific anatomy, and if God gave ADam and Eve any kind of instructions, then religion predates maariage.

And God did give us a command to obey. He said, "Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth."

A homosexual marriage cannot do that.

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DreamSpirit</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I have no issues with what you said. However I have an issue when the church tries to dictate to the government what is acceptable and what isn't. Hate to break it to the church but not everyone is Catholic, and not everyone is Christian....if gay couples should like to get married then who is the church to stop them if it isn't in their "organization" as you will. "


True , Marriage is not just a Christian definition- lots of religions get married too and it existed way before Christianity or the roots of Christianity-Judaism
It was a way that women became property-but by golly we just keep evolving and changing and ADAPTING to our times.

"times" is important

loving the same sex is not a crime, it doesn't hurt anyone, and it should be there choice not our choice whether or not they join in union. It should NOT be taken off the table for a God and a hell that not all people believe in. Freedom is something we should pride ourselves with-but we are a far cry from it yet.




http://ehistory.osu.edu/world/articles/ArticleView.cfm?AID=58 </div></div>

Thank you Dream I agree with you as well /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[Larimar]

Ayde-you are speaking only as a Christian, not everyone is a creationist (like, adam and eve is not a belief everyone takes neither is the Christian God's laws)I love that you have a belief in God, I do too-but that's no reason to impose those beliefs onto a definition that affects the way people survive in society. let people have their right to choose. Nobody is taking your rights away to choose. It wouldn't have to be a religious ceremony under a church, but it would be called marriage-it could be their own ceremony and it would hav ethe same benifits. Priests can/should decide whether they want to participate or not, there are many who don't mind and whom have a different perspective on things than the average Christian does-That's their choice...Either way, it would be their choice, if they chose not too-then that church won't be available.


They should have the right to call it marriage though regardless of who performs it.-Christianity should not have the right to define marriage for all ppl-ONLY for their own religion. Marriage should apply to all person's seeking it with the intention of being united with the person they love forever-and they should be protected and get benifits the same as all marriages.
Definition should not stop with religious terms- we need more than that now. I hope this clears up any confusion about my beliefs on this- It's only my own thoughts, and I'm not forcing anyone to agree-I just don't understand how Christians think it's alright to base the world on their own views, doesn't seem fair in a society where freedom is so important.


It's easier to leave if ppl stop quoting me haha. sorry. anyways, i don't find this unfair to give both their rights(churches right to deny, and ppls right to find a place to marry-under church or not depending on the ppls choice). It takes nothing away from the Church.




I guess if yahs havn't noticed i'm saying the word marriage...is only a word..just give these ppl the protection and benifits.


had a long day, no sleep-time for a sleep LOL.
ciao again

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DreamSpirit</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Yeah that's why they do it to p!ss the Christians off. "
lmao.

Yeah i don't get that statement either....


anywho, the point people are trying to make, is that Marriage predates Christianity- it predates ALL religion!!!
Homosexual relationships were very common and accepted in Ancient Greece...I really have no other way of putting this, other than we need to stop placing our own moral and religious views on people-This isn't crime and this isn't injustice-This is argueing about what "god" wants- and not all people follow this. Welcome to THIS century! People should hav ethe right to choose-Worry about your OWN afterlife and your OWN sins-don't tell people they can't do something if they want too..What if things were switched around a bit?
What if Sikhism was the dominant religion here-and the government BANNED you from eating Meat products and eggs and you were not allowed to drink wine or beer anymore. It's strictly a sin and God forbids it-so everyone, no matter what your religion or culture HAVE to abide by this. Sikh's just don't want to serve you meat, nobody makes it b.c it's a sin.
Is it a crime to eat meat? is it really something that should be stopped for everyone? or just for the people who believe it's wrong? How would you feel if your right to choose your own morals was taken away? (I say You in a general sense...everyone)....so what makes it okay to stop gay marriage?
is it just okay b.c it's within your own belief system and doesnt affect you?


They should have benifits too
Will people try to scam? sure they will-but that's why the government progresses in ways to make sure this doesnt happen, they now have procautions, but even straight couples scam too! there's no unwritten rule that says straight ppl can't scam ppl.

anyways, just my take. </div></div>

Not to hyjack this thread but talking about scamming the system...Shouldn't we be more concerned about the straight couples scamming the welfare system, living together but telling the system they don't to get more money. LOL There are scammers in all walks of life...we need to get used to it. besides I highly doubt people are going to pretend to be gay. I have nothing against homosexuality for the record...but being that there are sooo many negative connotations associated with being gay don't you think that people would try to pick something a little less visual to use to scam. Heck those who are gay have a hard enough time being comfortable about being open why would someone pretend to be something that others have a hard time with.

[Soundbear]

"...besides I highly doubt people are going to pretend to be gay.."

If a couple of guys could get welfare benefits by saying that they are gay, how long will it be till straights "fake" it.

Just curious as to how you would have them PROVE they were a gay couple!! /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif Only takes 9 months for heteros to prove it!!!

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"...besides I highly doubt people are going to pretend to be gay.."

If a couple of guys could get welfare benefits by saying that they are gay, how long will it be till straights "fake" it.

Just curious as to how you would have them PROVE they were a gay couple!! /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif Only takes 9 months for heteros to prove it!!! </div></div>

if he is not sterile, or she is able to carry a child... or if they can get knocked up on the first try... Besides, there is something sickening about bringing a child into this world as proof of one's sexuality... and if I wanted to, I could knock some chick up... But I would deffinatly be "faking" my straightnes.... Sorry Barry, but your logic is flawed here.

[Soundbear]

"If they say it's not the money, it's the principle, ... it's the money"

I believe that one of the reasons for the fight for gay marriage is monetary benefits. That being the case, I believe we will indeed see guys pretending to be gay for that reason.

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"If they say it's not the money, it's the principle, ... it's the money"

I believe that one of the reasons for the fight for gay marriage is monetary benefits. That being the case, I believe we will indeed see guys pretending to be gay for that reason. </div></div>

So really the only reason hetero's get married is for monetary reasons... not because they love each other and dedicate themselves to being with each other..but because they get some sort of financial gain. This comment of yours is sickening. Sorry but my two good friends both female had a beautiful wedding because they LOVE each other and they wanted to take part in the next step of their lives that any other heterosexual couple would partake in and that is to have their love witnessed by their friends and family and share their union with a wedding. They are happily married with a 1 year old baby girl...and yep two women had a baby, they got married for the reason to pro create and raise a family. There were NO financial reasons behind there wanting to get married.

[mokitapupita]

hahahahaahah I believe marriage can be for monetary benefits. However, if you really love someone, whether it be male or female, that is that person's choice, nothing is right or wrong. Because if things were meant to be a "certain way" in life, then life would be pre-determined and all. A person's sexual orietation is like their hair colour, or even their religion for that matter... it doesn't matter! so quit the bashing and all ok??

[mokitapupita]

religion is there to make you believe and brainwash you that THIS is the prope r way to do things. Now I was rasied catholic,but i do not attend church whatsoever, but i have my own beliefs, the belief in doing whats right, common sense and all,following the commandments, but i just dont kae it that step further, im not a religious fanatic. Now, everyone has as much right bible or not to get married cause not everyone first of all believes in bible. But me stating that I am a catholic, Yes, i should be against gay marriages too, but in reality, i dont want to isolate myself like that so no i am not a true catholic i know that. Notice its just the fanatics and old fashioned people that dont want to accept this. This in no way affects YOUR life so it shouldnt really matter. Like i said before, its no different then hair colour or choice of religion or whatever, and besides if someone is born like that thats who they are, its not a matter of choice now is it?

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MagicFingers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"If they say it's not the money, it's the principle, ... it's the money"

I believe that one of the reasons for the fight for gay marriage is monetary benefits. That being the case, I believe we will indeed see guys pretending to be gay for that reason. </div></div>

So really the only reason hetero's get married is for monetary reasons... not because they love each other and dedicate themselves to being with each other..but because they get some sort of financial gain. ...... </div></div>

Read more carefully. I said one. If it has no bearing on a particular case, terrific.

[mokitapupita]

people used to get married cause of boredom, financil gain yes. Was it ever for love? Nowdays you can get way more with 2 incomes hitched then as a single guy yes, society basically caters more to the married couple cause of their contributions they could make to the population? i dont know..

[Boondock]

Your all getting too complicated into things it shouldn't be allowed for 1 reason and 1 reason alone...It's [censored] gross! How 2 men can do that to each other and still walk with they're heads held high is beyond me. I'm undecided on women cause the things they do isn't as sick...they don't have as many options.

[mokitapupita]

uhhhhh if you look at it that way, then 2 women are just as bad. although i have to admit it does turn me on. Anyways, they are people like everyone else and really nice people if you get to know one.

[Boondock]

wtf do you know what dudes do to eachother?

[Kyle Cardoza]

As a matter of fact, I do, sunny Jim. Best man at my wedding? Gay as your uncle's feathered hat band, and I love the man to death. With your stated opinions, you show yourself to be a bigot and a homophobe. Take off.

[ProfessorZed]

And today's ignorant wanker has come out to play! ****ay!

Boondock, you're entitled to your uninformed bigotry. Fortunately, society isn't paying any attention to it. The fact that we have to listen to it is distasteful, but at least you're only polluting a small thread on a small forum in a small town.

EDIT:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kyle J Cardoza</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As a matter of fact, I do, sunny Jim. Best man at my wedding? Gay as your uncle's feathered hat band, and I love the man to death. With your stated opinions, you show yourself to be a bigot and a homophobe. Take off. </div></div>

Damn you! I wanted to tell off the dumbass first!

[Boondock]

Because I think one man sticking his you know what in another mans poop hole is sick I'm a dumbass? WTF is wrong with you or this world for that matter.

[Kyle Cardoza]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Boondock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because I think one man sticking his you know what in another mans poop hole is sick I'm a dumbass?</div></div>

Yes, you understand exactly.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WTF is wrong with you or this world for that matter.</div></div>

What's wrong? A lot. What's right is that society is evolving. You, on the other hand, are still hiding from the Sun in your filthy little cave.

[ProfessorZed]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Boondock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because I think one man sticking his you know what in another mans poop hole is sick I'm a dumbass? WTF is wrong with you or this world for that matter. </div></div>

No, I think you're a dumbass because you advocate basing the law on your personal "ick" threshold. You can be grossed out by anything you want, and no dissenting opinion of mine can or should force you to change your mind. Do you see the difference?

[Striker]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Boondock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because I think one man sticking his you know what in another mans poop hole is sick I'm a dumbass? WTF is wrong with you or this world for that matter. </div></div>

Welcome to the new way of thinking.If you don't accept new ideas be it what you believe or not then there must be something wrong with you.Every supporter will have an argument as to why there's something wrong with you.

10 years from now we'll have people wanting to marry relatives and not so distant ones.Once again if you don't believe in this then there's something wrong on your end and not theirs.

You must keep changing to meet everyones needs regardless of what you believe or you become labeled, when indeed, I believe the labeling should fall back to those who alter society to suit their own needs.

[Kyle Cardoza]

He doesn't get labeled because he won't change. He gets labeled because he spews his bile all over areas that don't concern him. Don't like gay sex? Don't have any. Don't like gay marriage? Don't marry a dude.

Your problem seems to be that you think in terms of Law being based on or subject to morality, specifically, your morality, one based on nothing more substantial than the delusional rantings of primitive tribes of our distant ancestors. My morality, on the other hand, is based on the facts of reality; those being, put into terms you're capable of grasping, that every person is an end unto himself; that, therefore, our highest moral purpose is our own rational happiness; that, therefore, what one person or group of people chooses to do in the pursuit of that happiness, so long as it does not directly interfere with that of any other person, is not subject to moral criticism.

Gays marrying does not in any way take anything from straights, therefore, they should and must be allowed to do so. Therefore, you and your morality are wrong.

[Striker]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kyle J Cardoza</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Therefore, you and your morality are wrong. </div></div>

Thanks for making my point..........

[mokitapupita]

This comment of yours is sickening.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kyle J Cardoza</div><div class="ubbcode-body">He doesn't get labeled because he won't change. He gets labeled because he spews his bile all over areas that don't concern him. Don't like gay sex? Don't have any. Don't like gay marriage? Don't marry a dude.

Your problem seems to be that you think in terms of Law being based on or subject to morality, specifically, your morality, one based on nothing more substantial than the delusional rantings of primitive tribes of our distant ancestors. My morality, on the other hand, is based on the facts of reality; those being, put into terms you're capable of grasping, that every person is an end unto himself; that, therefore, our highest moral purpose is our own rational happiness; that, therefore, what one person or group of people chooses to do in the pursuit of that happiness, so long as it does not directly interfere with that of any other person, is not subject to moral criticism.

Gays marrying does not in any way take anything from straights, therefore, they should and must be allowed to do so. Therefore, you and your morality are wrong. </div></div>

I don't see him expressing a morality.

He was expressing, as Prof Zed so eloquently put, his personal ick factor.

If I say that eating a can of worms nauseates me, I am not expressing any moral value.

But of course one cannot build a moral case based on the ick factor. All of us at one time when we were little boys and girls probably had a major ick moment when we first learned how babies are made.

Odd thing though. I see more villification poured out on someone who expresses that personal ick factor than he ever expressed in his post. All you 'enlightened' or 'evolved' people sure can dish it out.. much more than the one you so passionately flame.. how do we know this isn't devolution?

Why do you call this evolution? The Greeks were far more 'advanced' than we are in this area.

[Boondock]

I wasn't trying to insult anybody I'm was just expressing my opinion which is that it's not wrong morally to me just entirely gross and that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

It Does make me wonder tho if men sleeping with men is evolution then what's the next step in our advancement? Sympathy and understanding for people who sleep with animals? or pedophiles who sleep with children? because we feel "what goes on in the bedroom is they're own business?"

I understand that there is a difference and that paragraph wasn't entirely fair as animals and children can't make these decisions on they're own but you have to understand what I'm saying...one extreme to another will eventually be accepted or we will all be served by lawsuits.

I absolutely wish no harm on people who practice this man on man grossness but I'm absolutely sick with the media portraying it like it's a great thing and the gov is actually willing to accept it as law. The 2 pieces DO NOT fit together naturally and that's proof enough to me that this is some fetish and not a way of life It should not be widely accepted out in the open anymore so then a man who says he enjoys being pooped on like some Germans I've heard of.

I have a gay friend and he's quiet about what he does and we all still love him because he doesn't throw it in our faces ,once a friend always a friend but please don't make this kind of thing law and throw it on Tv all the time. Its not a way of life it's a glamourized fetish which to me is completely sick in my honest opinion.

[Larimar]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Boondock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wasn't trying to insult anybody I'm was just expressing my opinion which is that it's not wrong morally to me just entirely gross and that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

It Does make me wonder tho if men sleeping with men is evolution then what's the next step in our advancement? Sympathy and understanding for people who sleep with animals? or pedophiles who sleep with children? because we feel "what goes on in the bedroom is they're own business?"

I understand that there is a difference and that paragraph wasn't entirely fair as animals and children can't make these decisions on they're own but you have to understand what I'm saying...one extreme to another will eventually be accepted or we will all be served by lawsuits.

I absolutely wish no harm on people who practice this man on man grossness but I'm absolutely sick with the media portraying it like it's a great thing and the gov is actually willing to accept it as law. The 2 pieces DO NOT fit together naturally and that's proof enough to me that this is some fetish and not a way of life It should not be widely accepted out in the open anymore so then a man who says he enjoys being pooped on like some Germans I've heard of.

I have a gay friend and he's quiet about what he does and we all still love him because he doesn't throw it in our faces ,once a friend always a friend but please don't make this kind of thing law and throw it on Tv all the time. Its not a way of life it's a glamourized fetish which to me is completely sick in my honest opinion. </div></div>

I respect your right to feel the way you do, and I don't expect any changes to occur within that- You have an aversion to it- that's great for you since you are straight!
It shouldn't really bother yah what other men or women do behind closed doors.
Heck there are some straight couples who make me ill at what they tell me they do -and gag..and wanna puke...
Everyone thinks something is gross...but I don't really care as long as it's not me doing it.
You are right, it is a far leap to talk about animals and kids- we won't evolve to adapt in those directions because there is a difference between consenting and rape. We will always have that dividing line-unless another weird psycho hitler shows up maybe?
but really, it's not a fair arguement and they aren't even related topics. However, if you want total honesty- there are cultures wo don't think it is weird to fall in love with their goats...(Just sayin-the one i'm reffering to just let's it go until the man is of age and then marries them off to a women..but they don't condone marriage to a goat-I forget this cultures name)

I seriously doubt our societies will ever head in that direction(ppl thinking its okay and normal to love a goat that way or a child!), b.c of our laws on rape that some cultures do not have.


There's no reason not to make it law that they can marry- it just means they wont be doing what you call grossness- out of wedlock..it's not going to stop the behaviour from occuring(you do realize they'll do it with or without the laws help?). If it becomes a law it will stop being all over in the news and on tv-It's only there b.c they are fighting supression and it's a hot topic..if it were accepted it would leave your eyes.

It seems your concern lies in hearing about it-and it would seem logical that it becoming law would be more benificial for you-so you can stop hearing about it...

do you really think ppl have parades for ppl who arent supressed?

so since law or no law-they will be doing that stuff...
and since supression gives them a reason to stand out- you are probably going at this the wrong way maybe.

just an idea..


better to say " get them their rights! and everyone shut up!"

but that's just a diff perspective.

"I seriously doubt our societies will ever head in that direction(ppl thinking its okay and normal to love a goat that way or a child!), b.c of our laws on rape that some cultures do not have."

But someone called this evolution.

And the Greco Roman society did allow for pederasty for some time.
It is entirely plausible that within 50 years, man-boy relations will once again be legalized.

[Striker]

[quote=AydeloofIt is entirely plausible that within 50 years, man-boy relations will once again be legalized.

[/quote]

It would appear to some that sodomization is the gage used for forward thinking,therefore to evolve one must accept or participate.Any other decision would "keep us in the caves"


I hope we're both wrong on this one Aydeloof

[Nihilistic Heathen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: East</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=AydeloofIt is entirely plausible that within 50 years, man-boy relations will once again be legalized.

</div></div>

It would appear to some that sodomization is the gage used for forward thinking,therefore to evolve one must accept or participate.Any other decision would "keep us in the caves"


I hope we're both wrong on this one Aydeloof
[/quote]

I don't see what sodomization has to do with same gay marriage. Do lesbians sodomize each other?

[Striker]

[quote=Nihilistic Heathen Do lesbians sodomize each other? [/quote]

If you can't answer that then I'm afraid you might be over your head.

[Nihilistic Heathen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: East</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Nihilistic Heathen Do lesbians sodomize each other? </div></div>

If you can't answer that then I'm afraid you might be over your head. [/quote]

Well, for arguments sake, I was just curious as to what definition of sodomy you were referring to. I didn't expect a cowardly answer, perhaps you're over your head.

[Striker]

Well, you seem well versed on sodomy.Perhaps you can shed some light on a topic that I would gladly exit.

I'm not comfortable discussing sodomy with someone who is.

[Nihilistic Heathen]

Well I'm sorry for bringing up the topic of sodomy. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif I would also like to apologise for getting involved in something over my head.

Although you said, "It would appear to some that sodomization is the gage used for forward thinking,therefore to evolve one must accept or participate.". I would like to point out the only people using using sodomy as a gauge are those that are apposed to gay marriage. When I asked if lesbians practice sodomy it was to get further clarification as to how you defined sodomy. Is it just anal sex, or is it any sexual act other then coitus between a man women?

[MagicFingers]

My thought is that there are many couples (men and women) who participate in and enjoy anal sex, but its not deemed as disgusting and I wonder those who say anal sex between two men is gross are they also saying anal sex between a man and a woman is gross. Is the gross factor simply that it is two men or is it the anal sex in general?

[Kyle Cardoza]

I would venture a guess that they're your typical social conservative; if you challenge their outmoded thinking, you must be the bad guy, 'cause the Bible is always right.

[The Berean]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nihilistic Heathen</div><div class="ubbcode-body">..... Do lesbians sodomize each other? </div></div>

According to dictionary.com, they might.

[ProfessorZed]

The definitions of sodomy change to meet the convenience of the speaker, unfortunately. The most accepted definition I've found is any sex which doesn't combine one pen!s with one v@gina (characters substituted because the censorship on this board is ridiculous). In any case, as MagicFingers so rightly notes, sodomy isn't restricted to two men. In fact, I doubt very much that there are many sexually active adults who haven't committed at least one act of sodomy in their lives.

Care to try again?

[The Berean]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kyle J Cardoza</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would venture a guess that they're your typical social conservative; if you challenge their outmoded thinking, you must be the bad guy, 'cause the Bible is always right. </div></div>

Hebrews 13:4 "The marriage bed is undefiled..."

Seems to me that whatever a married man and woman do together is OK

I suppose thats why some gays want to use the word marriage.

[Kyle Cardoza]

You're operating under the flawed, nay, entirely false assumption that Biblical scripture has any hold whatever on the concepts of marriage and morality. Let me assure you, it does not. Marriage and morality both pre-date the current crop of mystic cults that have a stranglehold on people's minds.

You want to know why gays want to marry? I'll tell you; it's not exactly a Big Secret of the Gay Agenda: They love each other, and they want to build a marriage as a monument to that love. If you think for one friggin' second that the love a gay couple shares is any less real or valid than hetero love, then I'm afraid that you, sparky, are ignorant.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Boondock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wasn't trying to insult anybody I'm was just expressing my opinion which is that it's not wrong morally to me just entirely gross and that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

It Does make me wonder tho if men sleeping with men is evolution then what's the next step in our advancement? Sympathy and understanding for people who sleep with animals? or pedophiles who sleep with children? because we feel "what goes on in the bedroom is they're own business?"

I understand that there is a difference and that paragraph wasn't entirely fair as animals and children can't make these decisions on they're own but you have to understand what I'm saying...one extreme to another will eventually be accepted or we will all be served by lawsuits.

I absolutely wish no harm on people who practice this man on man grossness but I'm absolutely sick with the media portraying it like it's a great thing and the gov is actually willing to accept it as law. The 2 pieces DO NOT fit together naturally and that's proof enough to me that this is some fetish and not a way of life It should not be widely accepted out in the open anymore so then a man who says he enjoys being pooped on like some Germans I've heard of.

I have a gay friend and he's quiet about what he does and we all still love him because he doesn't throw it in our faces ,once a friend always a friend but please don't make this kind of thing law and throw it on Tv all the time. Its not a way of life it's a glamourized fetish which to me is completely sick in my honest opinion. </div></div>


wow.... I'm going to pick this apart to clarify a few things here
you have said a number of things that can be viewed as offensive to many gay people, It's a good thing I do not get offended easily and will simply tack it off as ignorance.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I wasn't trying to insult anybody I'm was just expressing my opinion which is that it's not wrong morally to me just entirely gross and that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
</div></div>

when you said it was gross you where not just giving an opinion, but judging that gay marriages should not be aloud because they are "icky" You are entitled to your opinion, but to base it off of that is just plain childish... I think pen!s in v@gina action is gross, by your logic I am justified in saying I don't think straight Unions should be aloud because it's icky...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It Does make me wonder tho if men sleeping with men is evolution then what's the next step in our advancement? Sympathy and understanding for people who sleep with animals? or pedophiles who sleep with children? </div></div>

This is quite possibly the most offensive thing you have said, and it even gets under my skin when people use this oh so common form of "logical thinking" (I use the word very loosly)
WTF does a man sleeping with a man or a woman sleeping with a woman have to do with sex with animals and Pedophillia. Pedophiles are actually more likely to be straight men as opposed to gay men or gay women.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I absolutely wish no harm on people who practice this man on man grossness but I'm absolutely sick with the media portraying it like it's a great thing and the gov is actually willing to accept it as law. </div></div>

The media does not exactly focus on the actual sexual act, it is more of a focus on the rights that ought to be given to gay people. kinda like when Blacks where acepted as human beings, it is a great thing because fellow humans are being recognized as fellow humans... do you think this is a bad thing?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The 2 pieces DO NOT fit together naturally and that's proof enough to me that this is some fetish and not a way of life </div></div>

how can you say the two pieces do not fit together? just because it does not create a life??? Every man actually has an "A" spot in their [censored]. when this spot is stimulated it is sexualy arousing simmilar to the "G" spot on a woman. So, if this was not meant to be, why would "God" put a pleasure stimuli in such an unusual place? and trust me, it is not merely a fetish... I have been with men and I have been with women, and it is simply a matter of atraction. I am not attracted to v@ginas, tits or the womanly shape of her body but I am attracted to pen!ses pecs and the manly form of a man's body.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> It should not be widely accepted out in the open anymore so then a man who says he enjoys being pooped on like some Germans I've heard of.
</div></div>
/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif this just speaks so loudly of your biaist nature... I think it's fairly obvious what I mean here...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I have a gay friend and he's quiet about what he does and we all still love him because he doesn't throw it in our faces </div></div>

I also hate it when people use this line as if to say "see I am not biaist I have a gay friend" news flash for you sunshine, not all gay people act the same way just like not all straight people act the same. Maybe your friend is not proud to be who he is or because he has friends like you all his life finds it an embarassment... What ever the reasons, he has his reasons and I have mine, do not insinuate that all people of a particular orientation, racial group ect... should act a certain way because you want them too. It's kinda sad that you say you still love him because he doesen't throw it in your faces... I can only imagine hat kind of a friend you must be....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> please don't make this kind of thing law and throw it on Tv all the time. Its not a way of life it's a glamourized fetish which to me is completely sick in my honest opinion.</div></div>

so because you think it's icky same sex couples should not be able to fall in love and enjoy the same financial gain as a straight couple does? This is based, furthermore, on the fact that you think it's just a fetish, and it's icky???
I think it is sad that you can vote... who did you vote for? the guy with the most colorful shirt? or the guy that had the best smelling soap?

[The Berean]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kyle J Cardoza</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're operating under the flawed, nay, entirely false assumption that Biblical scripture has any hold whatever on the concepts of marriage and morality. Let me assure you, it does not. Marriage and morality both pre-date the current crop of mystic cults that have a stranglehold on people's minds.

You want to know why gays want to marry? I'll tell you; it's not exactly a Big Secret of the Gay Agenda: They love each other, and they want to build a marriage as a monument to that love. If you think for one friggin' second that the love a gay couple shares is any less real or valid than hetero love, then I'm afraid that you, sparky, are ignorant. </div></div>

A hold on marriage or morality??? Of course it doesn't. One of the REASONS it doesn't is that marriage was UNDERSTOOD by the ancients to be between a man and a woman. A gay "marriage" does no good whatsoever for the community as a whole, only for the two involved.

As to gay love, I do indeed believe that the love is the same as between two heteros. Unfortunately because it IS two men, commitment is NOT likely to be as great.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unfortunately because it IS two men, commitment is NOT likely to be as great. </div></div>

please elaborate on what you mean by this statement....

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ConKat</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kyle J Cardoza</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're operating under the flawed, nay, entirely false assumption that Biblical scripture has any hold whatever on the concepts of marriage and morality. Let me assure you, it does not. Marriage and morality both pre-date the current crop of mystic cults that have a stranglehold on people's minds.

You want to know why gays want to marry? I'll tell you; it's not exactly a Big Secret of the Gay Agenda: They love each other, and they want to build a marriage as a monument to that love. If you think for one friggin' second that the love a gay couple shares is any less real or valid than hetero love, then I'm afraid that you, sparky, are ignorant. </div></div>

A hold on marriage or morality??? Of course it doesn't. One of the REASONS it doesn't is that marriage was UNDERSTOOD by the ancients to be between a man and a woman. A gay "marriage" does no good whatsoever for the community as a whole, only for the two involved.

As to gay love, I do indeed believe that the love is the same as between two heteros. Unfortunately because it IS two men, commitment is NOT likely to be as great. </div></div>

The commitment is NOt likely to be as great? OMFG this truely shows how uneducated and biased youa re.. Where is your documentation to support this thought? Where did you learn that the commitment is not as great. Actually a homosexual who gets married is far likely to stay together then the heterosexual. Homosexuals are more likely to be monogamous then heterosexuals. It is a myth that homosexuals sleep around. It is also a myth that homosexuality is based on sex. There is far less emphasis on sex in the homosexuality world then there is for heterosexuals. Just as some people have said they don't want homosexual acts thrown in their faces. I am heterosexual and I really don't like heterosexual acts thrown in my face. I see men and women kissing holding hands touching each other in public. For the record I have no issues with the innocent kiss or holding hands when it comes down to fondling, groping, making out that is disgusting in public. Even those who I know are homosexual those homosexual friends would never dream of doing that in public even if it was accepted just because it does not respect others around them. Its not the homosexuality that is the issue its the issue that certain acts should be reserved for the privacy between two people not displayed in public forums and this holds true for both hetero and homosexual couples.

I can not believe you basically stated that homosexuals have less commitment then heterosexuals. do a little research before you speak and write.

[MagicFingers]

Myths and the answers.... My answers are from takign several courses on Homosexuality my experiences working with people who are homosexual and research I have conducted. They are not personal opinions but facts that I have learned along my journey. Which I KNOW to be true.

1) Pedophiles

Homosexual pedophiles are considered a perversion of the normal homosexual man in the same way that heterosexual pedophiles are also a perversion. Heterosexual men are twice as likely to sexually abuse children as homosexual men are. There is solid evidence that over 92% of child abuse cases, including same gender sexual abuse, are perpetrated by heterosexuals.

2) Gay, lesbians, and bisexual people cannot and do not want long-term relationships.

he stereotype is of the lonely gay man or woman drifting from one sexual liaison to another, never satisfied and never committed.

Studies have shown that between 40-60% of gay men are in steady relationships. These figures are probably higher because men in long term relationships tend to be older and less likely to go to bars, where these statistics were recorded.

Between 45-80% of lesbians are in steady relationships. In most studies, the proportion of lesbians in an on-going relationship was close to 75%.

It is hard to judge how long these partnerships last given the lack of marriage records. The few studies on older lesbians and gay men have shown that relationships lasting longer than 20 years are common.

In general, a pattern of continuity and stability was seen in all the relationships.

3) Gay men can not be monogamous.

A study of gay male couples indicated that only 20% of relationships were sexually open. Many of the other couples followed a wide variety of patterns -- as diverse as a similar survey of heterosexual couples indicated (Blasband & Peplau, 1985).

4)Gay relationships are abnormal and dysfunctional

Studies have shown that, when homosexual and heterosexual couples are compared, they do not differ regarding levels of love and satisfaction.

There are no differences comparing the quality of the relationship and strength of the commitment between homosexual and heterosexual couples (Duff & Rusbult, 1986).

In summary, homosexual partnerships appear no more vulnerable (or more immune) to problems and dissatisfaction than their heterosexual counterparts.

4) HOmosexuals transmit diseases

Homosexuals are more likely to know about and be motivated to use safe sex practices. Globally AIDS is predominantly a disease of heterosexuals.

5)Homosexuality endangers the human species

Homosexuals can breed and raise children. As with heterosexual couples who cannot themselves have children they may use surrogate parents, artificial insemination, or adopt. Even if homosexuals choose not to be directly responsible for the raising of their own children they can help others raise children or perform tasks that those who are responsible for the raising of families find it difficult to make time for.

6)Homosexuality is against God

Since homosexuality is a matter of identity rather than choice God must have created homosexuals as well as heterosexuals. By this logic homophobia is against God.

These are just some of the more common misbeliefs and myths.

[The Berean]

[quote=dancingqueen] <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unfortunately because it IS two men, commitment is NOT likely to be as great. </div></div>

please elaborate on what you mean by this statement....
[/quote}]

I believe that men in general are less concerned about security, and are more commonly the cause of breakups in heterosexual marriages. Therefore, two men are less likely to remain in a commited relationship.

Conversly, I would expect lesbians to break up LESS.

One last thing. Because of the general opposition to homosexual relationships amoung the general population, it is possible that homosexual couples would be MORE likely to stay together, for support.

This might skew the statistics somewhat.

[MagicFingers]

I am not saying it is right or wrong...but what is your basis to the belief that men are less concerned about security be heterosexual or homosexual and are the cause of breakups in heterosexual marriages. People are individual and unique you can not base all men as the same or all women. Our experiences in life make up our personalities and our identities...Therefor how I react to a situation is different then the way Sue might react which is also the same about Joe and Sam regardless of sexual orientation.

[The Berean]

The basis of my belief that women are more concerned about security than men??? Common knowledge.

People certainly are different. Im speaking in general.

[Kyle Cardoza]

Opposition in the general population? Maybe in the States, but here in civilization, we're sitting in a country that legalized gay marriage, then held a vote on whether to re-open the issue. If there's so much opposition, why was it made legal, and why is it still legal?

You perceptions are not in line with reality.

Oh, and if you think homosexuality isn't "natural", then explain how it keeps being observed in animals other than Homo Sapiens. It's been observed directly in species as varied as bonobos and frigging penguins.

[The Berean]

Observd in what way?? Sex between the creatures???

Isnnt that counterproductive? Any anmal that doesnt breed ends its contibution to the gene pool. That indicates an aberration to me.

Re vote on gay marriage. I must have missed the referenndum.

[Kyle Cardoza]

Sex, yes. Dogs, birds, lizards, monkeys, all engage in homosexual sex. Female chimps have been observed engaging on oral-genital sex for hours on end.

Oh, and it was a parliamentary vote both times, on the gay marriage thing.

[MagicFingers]

Didn't say that the animals participated in exclusively in homosexual behaviour but that they did participate in it.

Female macaques may enhance their social position through homosexual intimacy which in turn influences breeding success. Parish says, "Taking something that's nonreproductive, like mounting another female—if it leads to control of a resource or acquisition of a resource or a good alliance partner, that could directly impact your reproductive success."

The bonobo, an African ape closely related to humans, has an even bigger sexual appetite. Studies suggest 75 percent of bonobo sex is nonreproductive and that nearly all bonobos are bisexual. Frans de Waal, author of Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape, calls the species a "make love, not war" primate. He believes bonobos use sex to resolve conflicts between individuals.

Other animals appear to go through a homosexual phase before they become fully mature. For instance, male dolphin calves often form temporary sexual partnerships, which scientists believe help to establish lifelong bonds. Such sexual behavior has been documented only relatively recently. Zoologists have been accused of skirting round the subject for fear of stepping into a political minefield.

So how far can we go in using animals to help us understand human homosexuality? Robin Dunbar is a professor of evolutionary psychology at the University of Liverpool, England. "The bottom line is that anything that happens in other primates, and particularly other apes, is likely to have strong evolutionary continuity with what happens in humans," he said.

Dunbar says the bonobo's use of homosexual activity for social bonding is a possible example, adding, "One of the main arguments for human homosexual behavior is that it helps bond male groups together, particularly where a group of individuals are dependent on each other, as they might be in hunting or warfare."

For instance, the Spartans, in ancient Greece, encouraged homosexuality among their elite troops. "They had the not unreasonable belief that individuals would stick by and make all efforts to rescue other individuals if they had a lover relationship," Dunbar added.

[The Berean]

Sorry, a vote in Parliament is not quite the same thing. Political expedience is not the same as a democratic vote.

Re "homosexual" sex. Is sex between two members of the same gender necessarily indictive of sexual orientation?? No it's not. This is noticed in prisons. Those who engage in homosexual activities IN prison do not necessarily continue outside.

[MagicFingers]

I don't think anyone here has said or tried to link homosexual behaviour to sexual orientation. In fact I think most people have tried to say that homosexual behaviour and homosexual identity are very different. I think most people have tried to say that being homosexual isn't about sex. It is about who you feel connected with. I think it is those "STRAIGHT" people who put too much emphasis on sex and who is having sex with who. The church is trying to convince society to define marriage based on who has sex with who...when it should be who you are connected with on a deep emotional and psychological level not only a physical level.

The reason this thread turned into sexual activity with who is because people with closed minds who are trapped inside the box can't open their eyes or the lids to the box to see that homosexuality isn't about the sex but about the emotional connectedness two people have....That is what seperates us from the animals... animals including humans practice homosexual behaviour that we know.... us humans differ because some of us have a connectedness that animals may not have but have yet to be proven.

[mokitapupita]

RIGHT ON! people always seem to connect it with sex, theres been many times that I see people and look at them and say not for anything but how in the world would they love each other sexually? no offense or anything, so it must be something more to it, and emotional connection or whatever. People are too stuck in the old mentality about the sex part, closed minded people that is, which alot of people still are.

[mokitapupita]

problem with people is they are too subjective.

[mokitapupita]

like does everyone NEED to be the way YOU want them to be?

[LIKETOWIN]

for well said . I agree smoking and drinking are sins do you see them complain about that.

[LIKETOWIN]

no they cant but they can adopt from people that dont want children or the ones that abuse children andgod also said no sins every one on this earth has sinned Im sure plenty, so quit bashing the homo sexuals and worry about your own life. I have children and they are respectful children and one is gay would I disown her not on my life. may be u will have gay children will you disown your children.

[mokitapupita]

The reason this thread turned into sexual activity with who is because people with closed minds who are trapped inside the box can't open their eyes or the lids to the box to see that homosexuality isn't about the sex but about the emotional connectedness two people have....That is what seperates us from the animals... animals including humans practice homosexual behaviour that we know.... us humans differ because some of us have a connectedness that animals may not have but have yet to be proven.



COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT ANY BETTER

[LIKETOWIN]

couldnt of said it better my self good for you with you 100 percent.

[mokitapupita]

subjective people with comments like is just sickening

[mokitapupita]

why is everrything about sex all the time? as far as im concerned, its just a big hype blown WAY out of proportion cause what happens once its all gone? its just a matter of being stuck in the moment.

[mokitapupita]

thats why i believe this is more then sex. its a long term thing, relationship,love and connection, an invisible connection which hasen't found me yet lol

[Soundbear]

I don't suppose that you would conside the fact that the DEFINING point of a gay relationship IS the sex??? If two guys live together and DON"T have sex, what kind of relationship IS it??

I grew up with a guy who, because of abuse by his mother, could not have an emotional attachment to a woman. I don't think a guy like that would be capable of raising a child with a balanced view of the opposite sex.

Suppose adoption agencies insisted on psychological testing of ALL people to see if they were capable of raising a child to have equal respect for either sex.

It really seems to me that would be difficult in a home where only one sex is represented.

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mokitapupita</div><div class="ubbcode-body">why is everrything about sex all the time? as far as im concerned, its just a big hype blown WAY out of proportion cause what happens once its all gone? its just a matter of being stuck in the moment. </div></div>

Why is everything about sex all the time?

Hmmm.

Seems to me a lack of respect for the influence sex has on a relationship (hetero I'm talking here). Our society /culture wants us to think that an emotional attachment can be broken easily, and that sex has no effect on our relationships.

Just musing.

[mokitapupita]

who needs to have children?

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I grew up with a guy who, because of abuse by his mother, could not have an emotional attachment to a woman. I don't think a guy like that would be capable of raising a child with a balanced view of the opposite sex.

Suppose adoption agencies insisted on psychological testing of ALL people to see if they were capable of raising a child to have equal respect for either sex.

It really seems to me that would be difficult in a home where only one sex is represented.

</div></div>

so, you grew up with a guy that has some psycological issues that need to be addressed... This is the major roadblock in being able to to teach their children to have mutual respect for men and woman... But as far as the right for a gay couple to adopt children thi logic is flawed, as in a marriage where both people are white, it would be equaly difficult to teach respect of other races when there are only white people involved....
As I am sure you will agree with me Barry that respect over gender diffrences is just as importainat as racial differences in properly raising a child

[MagicFingers]

Sorry .... I know several homosexual couples who have children both adopted and biological and all of there children are living in a perfectly balanced house, loving caring compassionate who teach their children about tolerance of others. You don't need a mother and a father to teach children these values.What of the homes where there is a mother and father present and it is an abusive home. The children witnessing the father abusing the mother physically and mentally/emotionally. This is far worse then a child growing up in a home with two mothers or two fathers who respect and lvoe each other. Sorry my good friends just had a biological daughter. Of course the baby is just one of theirs but in order for each person to play a part they took the egg from one a sperm donor from a male and implanted the fertilized in in the other. So one donated the egg the other carried the baby. Their next child the other will donate the egg. This way they each get to carry a child and they each get to donate an egg and they are both connected in some way. I think this is completely cool and respect everything they have gone through.

[MagicFingers]

Homosexual Parenting Myths

Myth: The only acceptable home for a child is one with a mother and father who are married to each other.

Fact: Children without homes do not have the option of choosing between a married mother and father or some other type of parent(s). These children have neither a mother nor a father, married or unmarried. There simply are not enough married mothers and fathers who are interested in adoption and foster care. Last year only 20,000 of the 100,000 foster children in need of adoption were adopted, including children adopted by single people as well as married couples.

Myth: Children need a mother and a father to have proper male and female role models.

Fact: Children without homes have neither a mother nor a father as role models. And children get their role models from many places besides their parents. These include grandparents, aunts and uncles, teachers, friends, and neighbors. I

Myth: Gays and lesbians don't have stable relationships and don't know how to be good parents.

Fact: Like other adults in this country, the majority of lesbians and gay men are in stable committed relationships. Of course some of these relationships have problems, as do some heterosexual relationships. T All of the evidence shows that lesbians and gay men can and do make good parents. The American Psychological Association, in a recent report reviewing the research, observed that "not a single study has found children of gay or [censored] parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents," and concluded that "home environments provided by gay and [censored] parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psychosocial growth."

Myth: Children raised by gay or [censored] parents are more likely to grow up gay themselves.

Fact: All of the available evidence demonstrates that the sexual orientation of parents has no impact on the sexual orientation of their children and that children of [censored] and gay parents are no more likely than any other child to grow up to be gay. There is some evidence that children of gays and lesbians are more tolerant of diversity, but this is certainly not a disadvantage. Of course, some children of lesbians and gay men will grow up to be gay, as will some children of heterosexual parents. These children will have the added advantage of being raised by parents who are supportive and accepting in a world that can sometimes be hostile.

Myth: Children who are raised by [censored] or gay parents will be subjected to harassment and will be rejected by their peers.

Fact: Children make fun of other children for all kinds of reasons: for being too short or too tall, for being too thin or too fat, for being of a different race or religion or speaking a different language. Children show remarkable resiliency, especially if they are provided with a stable and loving home environment.

Myth: Lesbians and gay men are more likely to molest children.

Fact: There is no connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. All of the legitimate scientific evidence shows that. Sexual orientation, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is an adult sexual attraction to others. Pedophilia, on the other hand, is an adult sexual attraction to children. Ninety percent of child abuse is committed by heterosexual men. In one study of 269 cases of child sexual abuse, only two offenders were gay or [censored]. Of the cases studied involving molestation of a boy by a man, 74 percent of the men were or had been in a heterosexual relationship with the boy's mother or another female relative. The study concluded that "a child's risk of being molested by his or her relative's heterosexual partner is over 100 times greater than by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual, [censored], or bisexual."

Myth: Children raised by lesbians and gay men will be brought up in an "immoral" environment.

Fact: There are all kinds of disagreements in this country about what is moral and what is immoral. Some people may think raising children without religion is immoral. Some people think drinking and gambling are immoral. What we can probably all agree on is that it is immoral to leave children without homes when there are qualified parents waiting to raise them. And that is what many gays and lesbians can do.

There is no evidence to suggest that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents.
Home environments with [censored] and gay parents are as likely to successfully support a child's development as those with heterosexual parents.
Good parenting is not influenced by sexual orientation. Rather, it is influenced most profoundly by a parent's ability to create a loving and nurturing home -- an ability that does not depend on whether a parent is gay or straight.
There is no evidence to suggest that the children of [censored] and gay parents are less intelligent, suffer from more problems, are less popular, or have lower self-esteem than children of heterosexual parents.
The children of [censored] and gay parents grow up as happy, healthy and well-adjusted as the children of heterosexual parents.

[bluekrissyspikes]

if two people are in love and happy together then i say, all the power to them!! who cares what's in their pants? it not about what's in the pants, it's about what's in the heart....although what's in the pants is important too...lol... seriously, who are we to tell other people who they should and shouldn't be with...none of our buisness...

[mokitapupita]

exactly! i find comments like that sickening.

[Return of Too Many Daves]

I'm beginning to think (based on this thread) that the conservative judaeo-christian view of marriage and love, is that they are all about sex and little else.

I just quickly perused the thread to confirm my suspicions. The thread was started by DQ. And for the most part it did not turn into a religious flame-fest. Most of it was carried on respectfully.

But it still comes to down to dumb comments like "SO QUIT BASHING GAYS you homophobe.." (at least from the more coherent posts.)

OR "you conservative Christians are repressed neanderthals. Welcome to the 21st century. Be enlightened like the rest of us.."

It confirmed my suspicions that you people are preaching to your own choir. It's amazing. You're talking to yourselves! You have this need to slap each other on the back and say, "We are right... aren't we?" The more you guys post, the more evidence you show that you are trying hard to convince yourselves you're on the right road. Otherwise, why all the self-justification? There's been hardly any condemning posts in here..

You can turn your own consciences off by continuing down the enlightened road you are on. You can plug your ears to the voice of God and shout "I can't hear you" til you're blue in the face. But you have absolutely no control over the conscience of another. Freedom of conscience is a wonderful thing.

And so is the freedom to believe in a Creator who made us for a purpose and will one day call for the curtain on this stage play called human history.

Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
WS

[Return of Too Many Daves]

I'm not sure whether you are upset or not, your tone says yes, and yes but the quote implies you do not. Macbeth's line implies that what ever will be will be it is beyond our contol and so why fight against it, it is a quote of indifference.

yes

[mokitapupita]

so.. what you're saying is Is that life is a pre-determined play?

Let me say this about that.

[MagicFingers]

The point is that not everyone is catholic, not everyone is christian, some don't believe in anything, regardless no one religion should force people to believe and live the way they do...What you believe to be sacred and "christian" may not be what others believe therefore we should not expect to hold everyone to your standards of morals and beliefs. Because one person does not believe the same as you does not make them wrong or any less of a person. Everyone deserves respect and dignity.

[Return of Too Many Daves]

That's woolly headed liberalism in the extreme. Just because people have different beliefs doesn't mean they should all be treated equally. Some people believe Elvis is alive, some people believe they hear voices in their head telling them to kill, should we repect these beliefs?

The point is, that my beliefs are correct, and the rest of you, well... you're all wrong!

[MagicFingers]

A little off topic but not totally...I once asked this question.

Why are there so many religions anyway? Wouldn't it be easier if everybody just had the same one?

I believe there is only one God...Doesn't mean I have to do or believe the exact same stories as everyone else. It is all in how we relate. Which is what I was told. This was a response I got and ever since then this is what I believe and I hold in my heart.

"There's so many different people, so they all need a different way of relating to God. And that's what religions are-- different ways to share the same truth."

But how we relate doesn't mean that anyone is more right then the other. I respect all religions and even those who may not believe in a God or my God. So long as I am the best person I can be I don't care what others do in their private lives or what or who they believe in.

[MagicFingers]

The point is every person is a person first and should be respected as a person regardless of their behaviour. Over the years I have learned to separate the person from the behaviour...Just because I respect the person as a human doesn't mean I accept and tolerate their behaviour. That being said when their behaviour does not impact me or other people directly then I have a greater tolerance. IE people who are homosexual, what they do and who they love does not impact me. So long as they are not hurting anyone then what do I care who they love? Someone who kills another person is still a person first and I respect them as a human, but do not respect their behaviours and actions. They need to be punished yes...I know it sounds difficult and it is..it has taken many years for me to separate the behaviour from the person.

for the record I have had some very not nice things happen to me at the hands of other people. I have learned to accept what they did to me is wrong, it was bad and they needed to be punished for what they did to me. But I have also learned that they are still humans and deserve respect as such. That's just me and some may not think this way and may think I don't make sense but I guess this is why I can now work with the population I work with. I don't see criminals I see people who make poor decisions for whatever reason but I still treat them with dignity and respect.

[MagicFingers]

And no I am not an extreme liberal.. I have some very extreme conservative views. I don't believe in labeling people. That's the worst thing we can do to anyone.

See what I mean? NO one is arguing, and magic fingers talks to himself.

And look at the nonsense: he/she says:
"no one religion should force people to believe and live the way they do.."

Was that EVER the question?

No. But you guys keep erecting this idiotic strawman, and then feel so big when you tear it down. Good job.

Then MF says:
"Because one person does not believe the same as you does not make them wrong or any less of a person. Everyone deserves respect and dignity."

But what if they are wrong? Then they would be wrong, right?

And respect and dignity? Well, sorry, bud, you don't respect everyone equally, do you? And does anyone DESERVE dignity? Or is dignity something that is conferred graciously? Grace and DESERVE are not the same thing.

And, what does it mean to be a person? Help me understand that before you tell me that no one should be treated like less of a person.

You see, you're importing all kinds of religious ideas, and yet you cut the branch off that you're sitting on.

[Return of Too Many Daves]

You're right Aydeloof, as I pointed out earlier we shouldn't respect everyones beliefs equally, and to that end....

All you religious lot, you're a right lot of nutters you are.

There much better, now I'm off to squeeze my Christmas presents under the tree.

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Then MF says:
"Because one person does not believe the same as you does not make them wrong or any less of a person. Everyone deserves respect and dignity."

But what if they are wrong? Then they would be wrong, right?

And respect and dignity? Well, sorry, bud, you don't respect everyone equally, do you? And does anyone DESERVE dignity? Or is dignity something that is conferred graciously? Grace and DESERVE are not the same thing.

And, what does it mean to be a person? Help me understand that before you tell me that no one should be treated like less of a person.

You see, you're importing all kinds of religious ideas, and yet you cut the branch off that you're sitting on.


</div></div>

First of all I am NOT BUD..... Budette maybe but not bud...Regardless referring to me as either one of them is derogatory for the purpose of this board my name is magicfingers bud devalues me and you seem to be using it in a derogatory way.

Secondly I am not using any religious background for my way of thinking. My reasoning is that we are all HUMAN we are all born of flesh and we all for that reason deserve the same basic fundamentals of life....we all deserve to be respected as a person and given the same dignity as ANY other HUMAN. As humans we are all equals. Some of us make more mistakes then others some of us choose to take different paths. Whether wrong or right moral ethically legally every one still deserves the same baic respect and dignity as a human. Again not repeating what I have said earlier. Respect and dignity can not and should not be confused with condoning acts in which people are hurt emotionally and or physically but that they still deserve the same basic principles of life. Never said that the person who is wrong would be any less wrong so your point in asking that question or making that comment is neither here nor there. And I never said we respect everyone equally I said everyone deserves the same basic principle of respect as a human. Do I respect a murderer? YES as a person not the action, and as a person they still need to be given the same dignity as anyone else .....do I condone their behaviour NO is what they did wrong yes...however in order for me to work with these people I have to distinquish the difference between person and behaviour...what they did was wrong and bad, because to think otherwise is to believe that people are born good or bad and I don't believe that. The circumstances in someone's life has led them down the path they are on. Be it good bad or evil, our experiences make us and develop us into who we become. The dignity I afford others is because I truley believe that everyone has that basic right to dignity, not because I am better then they are and they are lucky enough for me to grace them with my respect and dignity sorry might be the way you work not the way I work.

How a person is constructed and shaped is based on three views. If the person contains all three then I believe they deserve my respect and dignity, based on the simple premise they are human.I have yet to meet someone who is not deemed a person.

The Biologist's view
The Psychologist's view
The Sociologist's view

Biologist: is regarded as a construct of physical function, as everything is encoded in DNA.. (Which every human being has)

Psychologist: how a person's mind works. It acknowledges a person's perception, memory, language, thinking process etc. It extends the view of the biological determinism by regarding a person as having mental skills and emotions, generated in the brain, thus forming a human being's consciousness and the ability to attribute meaning to life. (whether good bad or "evil" all humans have some consciousness some form of thinking process, feel emotions or physical pain.. NO human is absent of these features.)

Sociologist: to observe how the individual is embedded into society and try to understand to what degree social circumstances condition the behavior of a person. All Humans have individual life experiences that develop them into the person they become. No one can deny they are who they are because of their life experiences. Some experience impact us more deeply then others and some people are affected more deeply then others. Its what makes us unique. NO person is absent of this fact. This is what I believe makes us a person.

And I never cut any branch off that I was sitting on. I just respect everyones right to believe what they need to no religion will ever lead me to believe I am better then someone else and if MY religion tries to teach me that I will gladly walk away. NO one is better then anyone else. I walked away from the Roman Catholic Church not because I don't believe in God but because I don't believe in what the church teaches. I believe in what God teaches I believe in the bible but I do not blindly let people lead me. It a wondrous thing free will. I except god into my heart and I know I do the right things. FOr that God loves me that I also know to be true. No one will ever convince me differently. Its amazing how my best friend is Muslim believes in Allah I respect her and her religion....and we often discuss each others religion and some day I will stand up in her wedding in her church beside her because I respect her that much.

[Return of Too Many Daves]

I had no idea bud was gender specific. You learn something new on this board every day.

[mokitapupita]

whos bud?

OK, MF, you said:
"My reasoning is that we are all HUMAN we are all born of flesh and we all for that reason deserve the same basic fundamentals of life....we all deserve to be respected as a person and given the same dignity as ANY other HUMAN."

Why?
What makes humanity special?
You said you believe in God.

Does the person who doesn't believe in God wrong?

[mokitapupita]

EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO WORK AND BE TREATED EQUALLY THERE TOO.

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK, MF, you said:
"My reasoning is that we are all HUMAN we are all born of flesh and we all for that reason deserve the same basic fundamentals of life....we all deserve to be respected as a person and given the same dignity as ANY other HUMAN."

Why?
What makes humanity special?
You said you believe in God.

Does the person who doesn't believe in God wrong?
</div></div>

Nope I don't believe that the person who does not believe in God is wrong....Thats the wonderful thing of a belief, it is based on your belief your faith in something. I am not more right then the non believer is wrong. Just because I believe one way does not mean I am right, it is a belief I choose to have and I respect the rights of those who do not believe. Why does this seem so strange to you.

[mokitapupita]

I find the comments people make sickening.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MagicFingers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK, MF, you said:
"My reasoning is that we are all HUMAN we are all born of flesh and we all for that reason deserve the same basic fundamentals of life....we all deserve to be respected as a person and given the same dignity as ANY other HUMAN."

Why?
What makes humanity special?
You said you believe in God.

Does the person who doesn't believe in God wrong?
</div></div>

Nope I don't believe that the person who does not believe in God is wrong....Thats the wonderful thing of a belief, it is based on your belief your faith in something. I am not more right then the non believer is wrong. Just because I believe one way does not mean I am right, it is a belief I choose to have and I respect the rights of those who do not believe. Why does this seem so strange to you. </div></div>

So if I understand you correctly, you have faith in your faith, not faith in God. Isn't that sort of like being in love with love instead of your lover? I ahve seen that happen a few times.

Yes, I also believe that people who don't believe the way I do have basic human rights. That isn't the question. Never was.

Just follow the logic here.

You are saying that it is WRONG to say that a person is wrong about his faith, right?

Aren't you contradicting yourself? Why are you arguing with me? You should be okay with my position, according to your own words.

If you say you believe in God and you believe in the Bible, what do you do with all those verses that state quite clearly that living a certain way of life leads to destruction? Are not those individuals on a 'wrong' path?

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mokitapupita</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I find the comments people make sickening. </div></div>

We heard you the first time. Yer starting to sound silly!!!

[lynys]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: T-pot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Muse</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I firmly believe that gay couples should be allowed to obtain the same marriage certificates/licences/etc as straight couples can under the eyes of the government. No special clauses or different benefits/penalties.

Religiously speaking, it's more complicated. I don't believe that it should be forced on religious groups. For example, the Catholic church believes homosexuality goes against God and the bible, and so I don't feel they should be forced to allow gay marriage ceremonies.

But on the other hand, would that be descrimination? If a certain church of a certain denomination refused to marry an inter-racial couple, would that fly? Or is that somehow different?</div></div>

I agree, but a church has a set of rules and regulations to follow that are supposedly set in BY GOD. Only god can switch or change these rules. If the bible says MAN AND WOMEN, it should only be man and women!

It should not be discrimination for the catholic church to ban gay marriages.

Legally, they should be able to get together, you don't need a religious ceremony to get married! </div></div>

Keep in mind, just because the Bible says God said it, doesn't mean it is FACT.

The Bible was written by how many men, how many years ago? Interpretations and understandings of languages have changed.

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lynys</div><div class="ubbcode-body">....The Bible was written by how many men, how many years ago? Interpretations and understandings of languages have changed. </div></div>

OK, tell us. What has changed? In what way?? Written by who? When??

Maybe you could start a new thread on it.

[MagicFingers]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MagicFingers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK, MF, you said:
"My reasoning is that we are all HUMAN we are all born of flesh and we all for that reason deserve the same basic fundamentals of life....we all deserve to be respected as a person and given the same dignity as ANY other HUMAN."

Why?
What makes humanity special?
You said you believe in God.

Does the person who doesn't believe in God wrong?
</div></div>

Nope I don't believe that the person who does not believe in God is wrong....Thats the wonderful thing of a belief, it is based on your belief your faith in something. I am not more right then the non believer is wrong. Just because I believe one way does not mean I am right, it is a belief I choose to have and I respect the rights of those who do not believe. Why does this seem so strange to you. </div></div>

So if I understand you correctly, you have faith in your faith, not faith in God. Isn't that sort of like being in love with love instead of your lover? I ahve seen that happen a few times.

Yes, I also believe that people who don't believe the way I do have basic human rights. That isn't the question. Never was.

Just follow the logic here.

You are saying that it is WRONG to say that a person is wrong about his faith, right?

Aren't you contradicting yourself? Why are you arguing with me? You should be okay with my position, according to your own words.

If you say you believe in God and you believe in the Bible, what do you do with all those verses that state quite clearly that living a certain way of life leads to destruction? Are not those individuals on a 'wrong' path?
</div></div>

Never said I wasn't ok with your position on things. Just don't think it is appropriate or fare to judge others for not thinking the same as you. I didn't say we have to agree with everyone I said respect everyone. Have I disrespected you for not thinking the way I do? NO .... Do I think your less of a person for not thinking the way I do ? NO .... Am I judging you for thinking differently than me? NO ..... It's none of my business what you believe, nor is it my concern. Just as it is none of my business or concern if a person is homosexual and wants to be married. It doesn't affect me at all so what do I care....? I don't . If I am living my life that leads to destruction then it is only my destruction not anyone elses. I don't think that I am living that life. I have love and forgiveness in my heart, I don't judge others and I help anyone I can with almost anything. I volunteer and help the needy and I put others before myself. Not saying I don't make mistakes, I'm not perfect but I live a good life helping people. I do more then most church goers. There are a lot of people who can preach from the bible but don't practice what they preach and then there are others like me who live a good honorable life not feeling the need to preach to others. NOpe not saying anyone is on a wrong path. WHo are we to dictate what is the right and wrong path? if they don't believe in your god and your teachings then how can they be on the wrong path. Thats like saying Hindus, Muslims, Wiccans are going to hell because they don't believe in your God. Sorry but I know many people from those religious based groups and many of which are better people then many catholics I know. Sorry I don't believe for a second that they would be going to hell.

[KDawg]

Sounds to me like you don't believe in anything.

Magic Fingers, what is my position? What are you arguing about?

You are struggling, because in your mind, you don't want to use words like right and wrong, but you use words like, "it isn't appropriate" or "it's not fair." Although you are using 'mush language" those are judgments that you are making, and that's okay with me. You do live in the real world, and that is real world language.

We should discuss, once again (if the words of Christ are significant in your worldview) what Jesus meant when he said, Judge not.. lest you be judged.."

[mokitapupita]

if our God was so nice, He would allow gays and people to be the way they are.

psst. He does. He forces no one to change.

[MaO3]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MagicFingers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MagicFingers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK, MF, you said:
"My reasoning is that we are all HUMAN we are all born of flesh and we all for that reason deserve the same basic fundamentals of life....we all deserve to be respected as a person and given the same dignity as ANY other HUMAN."

Why?
What makes humanity special?
You said you believe in God.

Does the person who doesn't believe in God wrong?
</div></div>

Nope I don't believe that the person who does not believe in God is wrong....Thats the wonderful thing of a belief, it is based on your belief your faith in something. I am not more right then the non believer is wrong. Just because I believe one way does not mean I am right, it is a belief I choose to have and I respect the rights of those who do not believe. Why does this seem so strange to you. </div></div>

So if I understand you correctly, you have faith in your faith, not faith in God. Isn't that sort of like being in love with love instead of your lover? I ahve seen that happen a few times.

Yes, I also believe that people who don't believe the way I do have basic human rights. That isn't the question. Never was.

Just follow the logic here.

You are saying that it is WRONG to say that a person is wrong about his faith, right?

Aren't you contradicting yourself? Why are you arguing with me? You should be okay with my position, according to your own words.

If you say you believe in God and you believe in the Bible, what do you do with all those verses that state quite clearly that living a certain way of life leads to destruction? Are not those individuals on a 'wrong' path?
</div></div>

Never said I wasn't ok with your position on things. Just don't think it is appropriate or fare to judge others for not thinking the same as you. I didn't say we have to agree with everyone I said respect everyone. Have I disrespected you for not thinking the way I do? NO .... Do I think your less of a person for not thinking the way I do ? NO .... Am I judging you for thinking differently than me? NO ..... It's none of my business what you believe, nor is it my concern. Just as it is none of my business or concern if a person is homosexual and wants to be married. It doesn't affect me at all so what do I care....? I don't . If I am living my life that leads to destruction then it is only my destruction not anyone elses. I don't think that I am living that life. I have love and forgiveness in my heart, I don't judge others and I help anyone I can with almost anything. I volunteer and help the needy and I put others before myself. Not saying I don't make mistakes, I'm not perfect but I live a good life helping people. I do more then most church goers. There are a lot of people who can preach from the bible but don't practice what they preach and then there are others like me who live a good honorable life not feeling the need to preach to others. NOpe not saying anyone is on a wrong path. WHo are we to dictate what is the right and wrong path? if they don't believe in your god and your teachings then how can they be on the wrong path. Thats like saying Hindus, Muslims, Wiccans are going to hell because they don't believe in your God. Sorry but I know many people from those religious based groups and many of which are better people then many catholics I know. Sorry I don't believe for a second that they would be going to hell. </div></div>

I totally understand what your saying Magic, and agree 100%.

[mokitapupita]

so then what you're saying is people choose to be like that?

[mokitapupita]

what if God does want us to be a certain way, catholic and all and follow the commandments and if someone is gay, will ben nailed and punished in the afterlife, in spirit form. Does this make any sense to you at all, cause if it is then life is pre-determined already then, that theres boundaries we need to stay in almost like, do you believe in destiny or not? the humane way toi look at it is to live and let die, let people be and thats it, stop judging for people to be the way you are. Now, this might go well on earth, but after what does it hold?

[starterwiz]

The thing is: everyone is right.
Just because with your limited senses as a human, you can't percieve that opposing truths can both hold true doesn't change the fact.

Right and wrong are debatable.
Good and Evil also.
But when you strip away all the shades of grey, there is ether black or white. And they are both half of the same whole.

If people are loving and kind...well, love is all there is.

[MagicFingers]

Thanks starter..agree with you on that as well.

[mokitapupita]

true true. then the possibilities are endless.

[mokitapupita]

have fun on earth, be punished later.

[starterwiz]

See?
Fun = Punishment

[mokitapupita]

have fun on earth, be punished later is a religious way of looking at it though

[Soundbear]

Your religion?? Not mine.

Actually, I've noticed over the years that the happiest people posting here, those who seem to enjoy life and have the most fun are in fact the Christians.

I suppose one aspect of that is the belief that God is in control and all will be worked out as our omniscient, all powerful and infinitely loving God wills.

I can live with that!!! /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[Return of Too Many Daves]

Hey I'm happy and godless!

[ProfessorZed]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Return of Too Many Daves</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey I'm happy and godless! </div></div>

That's ok, I've got your share! *grins*

[Return of Too Many Daves]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ProfessorZed</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Return of Too Many Daves</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey I'm happy and godless! </div></div>

That's ok, I've got your share! *grins* </div></div>

No charge (as it's Christmas)!

[mokitapupita]

i believe that there is a Creator but everything that we do on earth, good or bad, is our choice.

[mokitapupita]

chances are these people then also believe in destiny too.

[Return of Too Many Daves]

I find the comments people make sickening.

[Geoff7983]

haha....

[mokitapupita]

YOU GOT THAT RIGHT

We agree on something.

[mokitapupita]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WTF is wrong with you or this world for that matter.</div></div>

What's wrong? A lot. What's right is that society is evolving. You, on the other hand, are still hiding from the Sun in your filthy little cave. [/quote]



ya think evolution and progress is really that good?

[mokitapupita]

I find the comments people make sickening.

quit spamming.

[mokitapupita]

hey! we agreed on something before.

[mokitapupita]

like does it really matter if one is gay or straight? i mean its just a word. if someone chemically connects with someone, it shouldnt matter who, even in other peoples eyes who like to gossip and talk. i mean its a bunch of BS you are what you are, nothing is wrong and besides the job could be done in a matter of seconds and what happens after that? nothing its done. such a simple thing.

[mokitapupita]

like OOOHHHH am i gay now cause i [censored] alot? omg i think im too way too fast and ahead of myself.

Now you're trolling. Can't sleep, eh?

[mokitapupita]

I find the comments people make sickening.

[dancingqueen]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mokitapupita</div><div class="ubbcode-body">like does it really matter if one is gay or straight? i mean its just a word. if someone chemically connects with someone, it shouldnt matter who, even in other peoples eyes who like to gossip and talk. i mean its a bunch of BS you are what you are, nothing is wrong and besides the job could be done in a matter of seconds and what happens after that? nothing its done. such a simple thing. </div></div>

mokitapupita, this thread was not about wether being gay is acceptable or not, people have their own belifes about that. This thread was more about the term "Marriage" and how it is intergrated into society this day and age. I learned quite a bit about it in the begining of this thread. I have no interest in my thread becoming a debate about wether being gay is right or wrong, we have beaten that horse 6 feet into the ground again and again and again If you want to start your own thread about it be my guest. I had tried to make it clear in the title that I do not want this to be a trolling topic. So I respectfully ask to please keep this thread on topic.
Thanks /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[mokitapupita]

LOL SOHRRRY

[mokitapupita]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dancingqueen</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mokitapupita</div><div class="ubbcode-body">like does it really matter if one is gay or straight? i mean its just a word. if someone chemically connects with someone, it shouldnt matter who, even in other peoples eyes who like to gossip and talk. i mean its a bunch of BS you are what you are, nothing is wrong and besides the job could be done in a matter of seconds and what happens after that? nothing its done. such a simple thing. </div></div>

mokitapupita, this thread was not about wether being gay is acceptable or not, people have their own belifes about that. This thread was more about the term "Marriage" and how it is intergrated into society this day and age. I learned quite a bit about it in the begining of this thread. I have no interest in my thread becoming a debate about wether being gay is right or wrong, we have beaten that horse 6 feet into the ground again and again and again If you want to start your own thread about it be my guest. I had tried to make it clear in the title that I do not want this to be a trolling topic. So I respectfully ask to please keep this thread on topic.
Thanks /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>


theres no need for marriage, either way

[Soundbear]

There's no need for a lot of things in life.

But somethings work pretty well to keep society and the people in it living well, sucessfully and happily.

[mokitapupita]

why is everything always about image?

[Strategio]

So what about family members? If I live with my brother should I become common law with him and collect the benefits of a married couple? How about my mother? My Father? My cousin? Maybe my dog?

If we can just redefine marriage because our culture has changed, then why not everything else too? I ought to be able to be married to my son, father, mother, or sister, etc. Even my dog. If I was living with my dog I would be married to him would I not? Then we ought to get all the benefits of a married couple. If there is no standard originating from something other than popular culture, anything becomes fair opinion.

"I would like to introduce you to my civil partner, Mr. Iguana. No we don't like the term husband or wife. It is so... old fashioned."

[Return of Too Many Daves]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mahershalalhashbaz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So what about family members? If I live with my brother should I become common law with him and collect the benefits of a married couple? How about my mother? My Father? My cousin? Maybe my dog? </div></div>

Only if you are bumping uglies with them.

[bluekrissyspikes]

marriage should be about two people(consenting adults) joining their lives together forever out of love. there is no reason to define it further, imo, because it should be up to you who you choose to share you life with... i also have my own personal theory that the recent increase in same sex couples is mother nature's way of controlling overpopulation..but that's just me

[bluekrissyspikes]

also, laws over the history of time have always changed to reflect the current views of society..it is what makes society fair and just..it is good that outdated laws and definitions be changed to fit the ever changing views of the people...and i would agree that 'bumping uglies' exclusively is usually the defining factor in separating a relationship from a roomy.

[Soundbear]

If you are refering to history, I hope you will also realize that civilizations usually fell shortly after sexual mores of all kinds went out the window.

[bluekrissyspikes]

haven't looked into that...maybe i will when i get a chance

[riggs]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bluekrissyspikes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">also, laws over the history of time have always changed to reflect the current views of society.. </div></div>

That all depends if you believe the current views of society are altered to please the majority or the minority.I believe the latter is the current trend threfore the current views are being altered to please the minority creating more problems than they're solving.

[Strategio]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you are refering to history, I hope you will also realize that civilizations usually fell shortly after sexual mores of all kinds went out the window. </div></div>

Completely accurate.

[Strategio]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bluekrissyspikes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">marriage should be about two people(consenting adults) joining their lives together forever out of love. there is no reason to define it further, imo, because it should be up to you who you choose to share you life with... i also have my own personal theory that the recent increase in same sex couples is mother nature's way of controlling overpopulation..but that's just me </div></div>

I disagree that marriage does not need to be defined further. Marriage must be defined for the millions of dollars of impact on tax money. Sorry, not millions, but rather, billions.
And that's what it really is all about.