gay marriages, UHHHH!! Options

ok, im not opposed to it because:

1. if they're getting married how is that affecting me.
2. When gay ppl "do it", they cant umm..."have it" (i think so newayz), and that'll keep the constantly increasing population of the world down.

thats all i can think of right now, did u know, just like until a couple of months ago i was VERY opposed to gays, it just sickened me, but ive changed my thinking (no i have NOT become gay)

[kevinma03]

let he who is without sin cast the first stone? everybody's a sinner, lets all just accept that and keep on truckin

[*kryogenix*]

let he who is without sin cast the first stone? everybody's a sinner, lets all just accept that and keep on truckin

everyone's a sinner, but some of them don't repent for their sins.

[*kryogenix*]

yay i win

[colorsarenice]

im not opposed to gay marriage because i think they should have the same rights as straight people. if they're in love they might as well should get married. i dont see the big deal with it

[xjjajeengx]

It's also in Romans and 1 Corinthians.

The Bible, however, also condemns women who speak out loud in church (also in Corinthians), and Ephesians glorifies slavery.

Times change.

Also... no one fully knows what the text is implying. Homosexuality back then was a different thing that it is now. It wasn't just a case of men with men, it was more along the lines of promiscuity and rape (ex: Sodom).

The Bible says a lot of things. I don't think you can take things out of context... not with this anyway.

erm... for the condemning women who speak out loud in church and stuff, isnt that in the old testament? so like... you can cross those stuff out... right?

ANYWAYS! so many opinions... but like i said before, we shouldnt care. i mean... arent we busy with our own lives anyways? no point in judging what others should do and not do. its just a matter of being nosy or so. i mean, in the bible, it does say that its not right. but i mean... if they want to sin and marry the same sex, then okay watever. their lives... their ways as long as they no God doesnt want it then watevers. im just like

everyone's a sinner, but some of them don't repent for their sins.

W.Or.D! smartz

[*kryogenix*]

im not opposed to gay marriage because i think they should have the same rights as straight people. if they're in love they might as well should get married. i dont see the big deal with it

so you're saying that incest is ok as long as the two people really love each other?

erm... for the condemning women who speak out loud in church and stuff, isnt that in the old testament? so like... you can cross those stuff out... right?

so you are saying we can cross out the ten commandments? the old testament is there for a reason.

ANYWAYS! so many opinions... but like i said before, we shouldnt care. i mean... arent we busy with our own lives anyways? no point in judging what others should do and not do. its just a matter of being nosy or so. i mean, in the bible, it does say that its not right. but i mean... if they want to sin and marry the same sex, then okay watever. their lives... their ways as long as they no God doesnt want it then watevers. im just like

we shouldn't care... that's terrible. apathy is not the solution. if someone murdered a bunch of people, would you care? or would you ignore it because it's none of your business? would you be concerned that these people might be setting bad examples for children?

[*eunie03*]

everyone's a sinner, but some of them don't repent for their sins.

It's easy to say you repent for all your sins when you can pick and choose what your sins are. To gay people, homosexuality is not a sin. Just like you might believe eating pork isn't a sin. Or whether you believe Jesus is your savior or if you're of the Islamic faith. Which brings us aaaall back to the thing that the United States is definitely NOT under one religion, although Christianity might be the vast majority. In America, as stressed before, there is freedom of religion, and following that, separation between Church and State. Rights, straight or not, are NOT based on the Holy Bible. If it did.... I'm moving. As would millions of non-Chrisitan, perverse, sinful, "disgusting" (as put so eloquently) people out there.

But it's not that way, is it?

Overtime

edit: and to xjjajeengx, what kryogenix said is what I would've said (Great minds, eh?)

[*kryogenix*]

It's easy to say you repent for all your sins when you can pick and choose what your sins are. To gay people, homosexuality is not a sin. Just like you might believe eating pork isn't a sin. Or whether you believe Jesus is your savior or if you're of the Islamic faith. Which brings us aaaall back to the thing that the United States is definitely NOT under one religion, although Christianity might be the vast majority. In America, as stressed before, there is freedom of religion, and following that, separation between Church and State. Rights, straight or not, are NOT based on the Holy Bible. If it did.... I'm moving. As would millions of non-Chrisitan, perverse, sinful, "disgusting" (as put so eloquently) people out there.

But it's not that way, is it?

Overtime

edit: and to xjjajeengx, what kryogenix said is what I would've said (Great minds, eh?)

but they can pass laws that prevent moral atrocities as long as they don't violate the constitution

[*eunie03*]

but they can pass laws that prevent moral atrocities as long as they don't violate the constitution

Moral atrocities according to whom?

edit: Right right, according to Christianity. But that second part of what you said: "As they don't violate the constitution". Everyone has rights protected by the constitution. Everyone. Every flaming gay person and straightest straight person. To make a law restricting something as simple as a proclamation of love seems a bit like refusing rights to me. Discrimination, in a word.

[k00alah]

i can care less again.. it's not doing any harm on me so why hate on them.. they chose to be that way and we have to respect their decision.. yeah im a devoted catholic too and morale does play a factor.. but who cares.. that's life people.. i care more about the COLLEGE TUITIONS that are rising every year in cali..

[xxxlilazngrlxxx]

i dont think its perfectly normal, but im not opposed to it. i think a marriage is between a man and a women. but why not a union between two gay/lesbian people..

i think it is unfair that gay/lesbian couples doesnt get the same rights as a married couple, so the government should should grant unions between gay people.

[*kryogenix*]

i can care less again.. it's not doing any harm on me so why hate on them.. they chose to be that way and we have to respect their decision.. yeah im a devoted catholic too and morale does play a factor.. but who cares.. that's life people.. i care more about the COLLEGE TUITIONS that are rising every year in cali..

i think you're confusing morals for morale (maybe a typo?)

[pyoon]

We must remember that the American society was created under the premise of religious outcasts of England and western European countries. Those people came here to set a basic life, away from the ever so changing society of dawning Europe (booze, prostitution, renaissance, et al). They were straight forward conservatives. Homosexuals used to be burned at the stake and/or stoned to death, now they have the ability to maintain a marriage license (San Francisco has started issuing marriage licenses). I know, the world has revolved quite a bit since the colonization ages, but by doing so, time has buried parts of societie's character while exposing "bad" ones to the extreme. By now you should have recongnized that I'm taking the side of the conservatives, those who have a religious background. This has always been a high debated topic, at least to me, and I can go on for days of how homosexual union is not accepted by God. But that's the least of your concern...[?]

Blah...I'm against it.

Now, please excuse us while I light up a fag. *












* A fag in Britain is a cigarette. I don't smoke but I couldn't resist the joke.

[kevinma03]

What's not acceptable to you is acceptable to other people. Society's values are always changing and resisting the change is pretty pointless. How can you define it as "bad"? "Bad" is a very subjective word that changes based on the mercurial nature of society's morals. At one point interracial marriages were considered "bad". At one point allowing woman to have rights was considered "bad". Had Lincoln been a conservative we would still have slaves. Had there been no liberal MLK we would still have racial segregation. Conservatives see the status quo as such an ideal place that should be maintained when in reality it is false. Looking back to the civil rights movement, do you think life was better then? What if the conservatives had won out then, would that be a better world? The laws that the government impliments should reflect the everchanging values of society and should never shy away from making the big leaps that are necessary to insure equality for men and women.

And you say that homosexual union is not acceptable by God. Well fortunately for the rest of us the US government isn't dictated by what God wants.

[Senorita_Babo]

What's not acceptable to you is acceptable to other people. Society's values are always changing and resisting the change is pretty pointless. How can you define it as "bad"? "Bad" is a very subjective word that changes based on the mercurial nature of society's morals. At one point interracial marriages were considered "bad". At one point allowing woman to have rights was considered "bad". Had Lincoln been a conservative we would still have slaves. Had there been no liberal MLK we would still have racial segregation. Conservatives see the status quo as such an ideal place that should be maintained when in reality it is false. Looking back to the civil rights movement, do you think life was better then? What if the conservatives had won out then, would that be a better world? The laws that the government impliments should reflect the everchanging values of society and should never shy away from making the big leaps that are necessary to insure equality for men and women.

And you say that homosexual union is not acceptable by God. Well fortunately for the rest of us the US government isn't dictated by what God wants.

i totally agree with your statement, people/society is always changing... just keep an open mind, it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's about acceptance.

[pyoon]

Hmmmmm...yis. I never said my point of view was not arguable and yes to a degree resisting change is pointless because change in inevitable. Neither did I direct my point of view of homosexuals to politics. However, unlike people without a strong religious background, I would I to maintain with what I believe in. What do I believe in? Undoubtedly my faith in God and what I'm taught. Yes, that's very "spoon fed" of me to do but my faith is my faith. I always thought that people on the political left didn't care so much about personal practices (homosexuality), and probably don't care much about moral prohibitions and ignore traditional religions, whether they do or do not believe in God. Obviously they must be less concerned about hellfire and brimstone and eternal damnation. Instead of justice given by God, judicial decision is more important. I really don't know what this reply is going to prove here, just that I don't really care to hear an agruement disproving my beliefs...?


What happens to us when we die? In God We Trust. Oh, and God should dictate America, it would be a better place to live. Other than that, this post is as good as beating a dead horse.

[IIO__oII]

gay marrage is TOTALLy wrong.. its a SIN!

[kevinma03]

Ok guys, Establishment Clause, it's in the Constitution. Let's all read about it please. Theres a reason why "One nation under God" was deemed unconstitutional.

[k00alah]

i think you're confusing morals for morale (maybe a typo?)

woops.. yeah typo

[pyoon]

Yes. Good for bringing that up, and quite a valid point I might add. But I hope to go to heaven later. PASSIONS FEB. 25th, GO WATCH IT.

[*kryogenix*]

Had Lincoln been a conservative we would still have slaves.

Lincoln was a republican.

[aj637]

i dont see why they make gay marriages such a big deal i mean obviously they both love each otehr so then why is the government trying to protect us by not legalizing gay marriages only in some states. its kinda stupid! i mean in the old days we were allowed to marry our own brother/sister or fleshen blood and i think thats more gross than gay marriages!

[*kryogenix*]

read the previous posts. then you'll understand why.

[lexion]

I'm not opposed.

[kevinma03]

Lincoln was a republican.

ok big misunderstanding there friend. You might not be aware of the great shift during the FDR administration. Before that all the Republicans were LIBERAL, yeah thats right, the GOP was liberal. FDR, being a democrat (which was conservative before teh shift) initiated the New Deal and a whole bunch of government programs. As a result the other Democrats felt the "democractic party" was too liberal and switched to republicans and teh republicans felt they were more at home with the democrats. There ya go my friend, that's why despite Lincoln being a Republican, he was still liberal.

In '28 the dems ran a catholic which really angered the conservative constituents at the time so they began voting repubilcan. as a result the republicans began to make their platforms more conservative
Durin the civil rights movement the shift was completed witht he hardcore voting of all republican in the south against racial equality