Think it will shame the religious zealots?

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Are you that out of touch with the teachings of your religion to understand what Prop 8 did is counter to what those teachings say?

Answer the question.

Your religion teaches tolerance, forgiveness, and acceptance of your fellow man.

Prop 8 and it's supporters are teaching bigotry and hate. Not very Christian is it?

You live in the Untied States of America, presumably as an American citizen, where you are afforded the guarentee of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as are all American citizens.

All of them.

Quote

The phrase "pursuit of happiness" appeared in the 1967 Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-miscegenation statute. Chief Justice Warren wrote:

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

Do you really think that you are better than someone who loves another enough to want a bond that carries the solemn responsibilities of marriage, just because of the sex of the two persons?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[windcatcher 0]

Quote

Who the hell are you to decide what is best for families? Are you saying that there is something wrong with children brought up in a same sex household?

I could ask you the same questions?! Are you saying there's something wrong with children being brought up in a home with a mother and father? I'm pretty sure the research out there is in favor of children growing up in intact households with a mother and father who love them and each other.

Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...

[jakee 1,445]

Quote

Are you saying there's something wrong with children being brought up in a home with a mother and father?

Who is saying that?

What the fuck does it have to do with the topic?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[okalb 104]

Quote

Quote

Who the hell are you to decide what is best for families? Are you saying that there is something wrong with children brought up in a same sex household?

I could ask you the same questions?! Are you saying there's something wrong with children being brought up in a home with a mother and father? I'm pretty sure the research out there is in favor of children growing up in intact households with a mother and father who love them and each other.

I am not the one claiming there is a problem with either scenario. You are the one making the claim that a child growing up in a same sex household has something less than a loving caring home.

What IS important is the child having parents that love and care for them. The sex of the parents has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the love and care given to the child. To claim otherwise displays either ignorance or bigotry.

Because you disagree with the idea of homosexuality doesn't give you the right to try to legislate against it. You are trying to impose your religious views on others. Once again, funny how you choose to obey only those parts of the bible that fit into your narrow views while ignoring the rest.

Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

[windcatcher 0]

Quote

Are you that out of touch with the teachings of your religion to understand what Prop 8 did is counter to what those teachings say?

My faith teaches me to LOVE all people, I do love everybody. Take a parent/child relationship for example. Let's say my child throws a tantrum because I won't give him a candy bar, yet I say no because I'd rather feed him healthy food. Clearly, my child does not like me in that moment, but because I love him, I'm not going to let him do something that would hurt him. ( I realize one does not get hurt eating one lousy candy bar**) My point is, love is deeper than succumbing to a person's wants--love is about serving and giving what somebody needs. Because I agree with Prop 8 does not mean I do not love, as my faith teaches me to.

Yes, Jesus taught us to love others, hang out with people whose lifestyles we disagree with. However, somebody has to take a stand for righteousness. I'm amazed at how you think that because I am anti gay marriage, that I hate gay people! I'm amazed at how you know how to read my heart and mind. What I'm REALLY amazed at though is a lot of the hate coming from those not in favor of Prop 8; You are making assumptions about people who are in favor of it and making them come across at hateful when that is simply not the case at all.

Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...

[windcatcher 0]

Quote

You are the one making the claim that a child growing up in a same sex household has something less than a loving caring home.

I never said anything of that matter concerning love, thankyouverymuch.

Quote

Because you disagree with the idea of homosexuality doesn't give you the right to try to legislate against it. You are trying to impose your religious views on others.

And just because you AGREE with the idea of it, doesn't give you the right to try to legislate for it. Amazing though how that doesn't make sense to you huh? You are doing the EXACT same thing you are accusing me of doing. You are trying to impose your anti-God views on others.

Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Take a parent/child relationship for example. Let's say my child throws a tantrum because I won't give him a candy bar, yet I say no because I'd rather feed him healthy food. Clearly, my child does not like me in that moment, but because I love him, I'm not going to let him do something that would hurt him.

You are too twisted for words.


You propose that a homosexual life is somehow bad for a person? Really? How? Where's your evidence of this?

You propose that you and "your kind" are somehow the moral compass by which others such as homosexuals should be judged?

Fortunately there is a set of rules to this country that prevent "your kind" from making the rules for all the "children".

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

And just because you AGREE with the idea of it, doesn't give you the right to try to legislate for it.

And this shows you just don't understand the issue. Have you read the text of Prop 8?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Because you disagree with the idea of homosexuality doesn't give you the right to try to legislate against it. You are trying to impose your religious views on others.

And just because you AGREE with the idea of it, doesn't give you the right to try to legislate for it.

The legislation you're talking about is Proposition 8. It is legislation banning same-sex marriage. There was no corresponding legislation proposed that would have required same-sex marriage. Thus, only one group here is trying to legislate anything, and it's the group that's trying to deny others the right to enjoy the same rights that they avail themselves of.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[okalb 104]

Quote

And just because you AGREE with the idea of it, doesn't give you the right to try to legislate for it. Amazing though how that doesn't make sense to you huh? You are doing the EXACT same thing you are accusing me of doing. You are trying to impose your anti-God views on others.

I am not trying to legislate anything. I am trying to stop you from taking away people's rights. As far as imposing my anti-god views, I have nothing against god or anyone who believes. As long as they don't try to impose their beliefs on people that don't feel the same way they do.

That by the way is exactly what you are trying to do. Instead of saying something like "I don't agree but you have the right to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't affect me" you are saying "I don't agree and I am going to get my friends together to pass a law to stop you from doing it even though it doesn't affect me in any way"

Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

[Coreece 190]

After reading the following passage, among others, It is clear to me that we christians are to not judge those outside the faith, but rather ourselves.

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

EDIT

1 Corinthians 5:9-13

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I could ask you the same questions?! Are you saying there's something wrong with children being brought up in a home with a mother and father? I'm pretty sure the research out there is in favor of children growing up in intact households with a mother and father who love them and each other.

Please dont forget the appalling amount of cases where the father is "loving" the children a little too much... if you get my drift... but the family certainly has a man and a woman within that sanctity of marriage.

[TheAnvil 0]

And you have twisted windcatcher's words for your own use via your partial quotation - with a personal attack in your prelude.

This is a really stupid issue. I think the greed of the State long ago caused this. What business does the State have in a religious sacrament? Marriage is considered a sacrament by the Catholic church and I believe other churches as well. The State imposed a marriage license for cashola and tax purposes. One might consider that a law affecting an establishment of religion.

If a Church were to consider a couple married, regardless of sex, then what right would the State have to legislate that away? Lawrocket - what do you think?

Because 'marriage' in the eyes of the State uses the same nomenclature as a religious sacrament - the word 'marriage' itself, it strikes a chord with some Christians. I think they should recall that marriage within the bounds of the Church and the State are two separate things. Kind of like sharing a name in a way. John Brown and John Lancaster (fictitious characters just invented by moi) for example - should John Brown care if I say, in obvious reference to John Lancaster, 'John is a dumbfuck coward moron sonofabitch!!!!' or should he realize it's not directed at him and not give a rat's ass?

As it currently stands, I think the State has no business defining words. The energy those folks spent in Prop 8's writing/passage could have been better spent educating idiots about the evils of credit card debt. That would have been somewhat useful to society.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

I'm talking about showing love by what is best for families.

Best says who??? I know plenty of gay couples that have raised children who grow up to do something great with themselves, or graduate first in their class at Harvard or something. The chances of them turning out good or bad is the same whether they had two mommies, daddies, or one of each. Is it best for a family to stay together that has an alcoholic father, a mother who works 24/7, but is one man one woman?? Is that best over a gay couple who are both educated, upper middle class professionals who have time to devote to that child that wasn't getting the proper attention in the one man/woman situation? That is just an example to show how "whats best for families," rest on a lot more than whether its just one man and one woman. (my example doesn't mean that all one man one woman families are like the scenario above, just as the gay couple may not be like the scenario above. They can be interchangable because people are people, and could be proper or inproper for a family no matter what gender, race, creed, or sexual orientation, but rather on a case by case bases if that person should be caring for children or having a family.)

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[BikerBabe 0]

Quote

After reading the following passage, among others, It is clear to me that we christians are to not judge those outside the faith, but rather ourselves.

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

EDIT

1 Corinthians 5:9-13

I prefer this one myself:

"Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'(Matthew 22:37-39)

how can discrimination, prejudice, elimination of rights...HOW can that be considered loving your neighbor as yourself? How would all those prop 8 voters feel if someone wanted to eliminate their right to marry?

Honestly, I'm a christian, but Paul's words that you quoted from Corinthians drives home the point that the bible was written by men, prone to error and contradiction. For doesn't Jesus say in his sermon on the mount: "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you." (Luke 6:37-38) This portion of Paul's letter is pretty contradictory here...

If you must quote 1 Corinthians, quote that amazing and heartfelt description that most of us have heard before...because i think it is particularly relevant here:

Quote

1If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

This issue is about love. love for our fellow man. Love for God. Love for ourselves. And 52% of californians voted to take that away.

I am ashamed and sad.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[Coreece 190]

The passage I quoted is dealing with two issues. Hypocrisy in the church and church discipline. I was trying to drive home the point that it is wrong to condemn those outside the faith, which i think the passage makes very clear.

As far as judging those inside the church, paul is talking about church discipline. Many churches today are unfamiliar or do not practice church discipline. If you understand this doctrine in its context, you would know that it always should be done in a spirit of love...

Church discipline debates can become very heated because many christians don't understand it, fear it, and feel that reproof is somehow hateful.

EDIT

If Pauls words seem harsh, you have to keep in mind that Paul was dealing with some of the most vile and hypocritical christians to ever live. They just didn't get it. If you remember, Paul says that even the pagans don't commits acts such as these, and even the pagans were shocked at their actions. This vile influence was permeating the corinth church and taking down honest christians that were otherwise obedient. Paul was simply saying that it has gone to far and this vile influence has got to go for the sake of the church. It was causing good christians to fall and was not good PR.

These letters are recorded in the Bible to be used as an example. To remind us to not be hypocritical and hatefully judgemental, but also, to not allow liscenciousness to run rampant within the church.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

I'm pretty sure the research out there is in favor of children growing up in intact households with a mother and father who love them and each other.

There sure is. There hasn't been nearly as much opportunity to research two mommies or daddies, though.

In your opinion, would it be more or less favorable for a child to grow up in foster care vs. being raised by a same-sex couple?

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[pirana 0]

Quote

Wow. It is because of LOVE one stands up for what is right. I don't think there should be gay marriages, nor should it be as easy as it is to get a divorce. Marriage was designed by God, the union of one man and one woman.

I disagree strongly on a couple of these points. Maybe your statements are a little too absolute for me.

For me, what is right is based on logic, not an emotion.

Make it harder to get a divorce? Why would you want to force people to stay together?

Marriage is a human invention. Humans were around for a very long time before they invented the institution of marriage.

Occurs to me you have some dogmatic beliefs acting as very strong filters that lead to some highly questionable conclusions - - especially the one about the origins of marriage.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[kallend 1,935]

Quote

As it currently stands, I think the State has no business defining words.

I think special interest groups have no business defining words to suit their agenda.

But the state? Every single law on the books would be unenforcible without an accepted definition of the words contained therein.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,935]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Because you disagree with the idea of homosexuality doesn't give you the right to try to legislate against it. You are trying to impose your religious views on others.

And just because you AGREE with the idea of it, doesn't give you the right to try to legislate for it.

The legislation you're talking about is Proposition 8. It is legislation banning same-sex marriage. There was no corresponding legislation proposed that would have required same-sex marriage. Thus, only one group here is trying to legislate anything, and it's the group that's trying to deny others the right to enjoy the same rights that they avail themselves of.

Blues,
Dave

Two separaate issues here:

1: should the same word describe a formal union between two people of the same sex as is used to describe a formal union between two people of opposite sex? (IMO, no, they are different things and should have distinct labels).

2. Should formal unions between same sex couples have the same civil rights as formal unions between opposite sex couples? (IMO, yes, no doubt about it).

I think Elton John got it right.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,935]

Quote

Quote

The concept of marriage as a word in the English language long predates legalized bigotry in certain US states. The legalized bigotry was just as much a hijack of the language as the current hijack.

The concept of marriage long predates the English language, and previously (and still) includes polygamous relationships that run counter to the Christian interpretation.

Blues,
Dave

I think the discussion here is related to the English word "marriage". I didn't see any non English words for "concepts" mentioned in the proposition.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[livendive 8]

Quote

1: should the same word describe a formal union between two people of the same sex as is used to describe a formal union between two people of opposite sex? (IMO, no, they are different things and should have distinct labels).

In my opinion, yes. Taking two relationships that are identical in rights and responsibilities and saying "the straights may use word x and the gays may not" insults the gay relationship. IMO, the two are not sufficiently different things such that one should have nomenclature privileges withheld from the other.

Quote

2. Should formal unions between same sex couples have the same civil rights as formal unions between opposite sex couples? (IMO, yes, no doubt about it).

On this we agree.

Quote

I think Elton John got it right.

I think Elton John is a good singer and a great entertainer.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The concept of marriage as a word in the English language long predates legalized bigotry in certain US states. The legalized bigotry was just as much a hijack of the language as the current hijack.

The concept of marriage long predates the English language, and previously (and still) includes polygamous relationships that run counter to the Christian interpretation.

Blues,
Dave

I think the discussion here is related to the English word "marriage". I didn't see any non English words for "concepts" mentioned in the proposition.

In cultures where polygamy is allowed, which English word do you use to identify a man's relationship with his second or third or fifteenth wife?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

in cultures where polygamy is allowed, which English word do you use to identify a man's relationship with his second or third or fifteenth wife?

masochism?

glutten for punishment?

good idea at first glance, but then reality hits?

tired?

poor?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 1,935]

Quote

Quote

in cultures where polygamy is allowed, which English word do you use to identify a man's relationship with his second or third or fifteenth wife?

masochism?

glutten for punishment?

good idea at first glance, but then reality hits?

tired?

poor?

Learning disabled is the PC way of putting it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.