|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 810
Veteran CEG\'er
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 810 |
Originally posted by JaTo:
Excuse me?
Tear through the Old and New Testament. Paul's sermon to the Church of Corinth (Corinthians I or II; can't remember) discusses (in a totally confusing fashion) same-sex relations and of course Genesis, LONG before the time of Jesus, mentions homosexuals as well, or at least was is interpreted as the act of it.
Nobody is saying that it didn't exist back then, not even the Bible...
Even Greek and Roman culture was familiar with same-sex relations. In Greek times, if you competed in a wrestling event and lost you became the winner's slave for a day. This is way way way BC.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,397
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,397 |
Beat me to it Jato. Homosexuals have been around pretty much as long as there have been people. Homosexuality was quite prominent in the Roman Empire and in many socities long before that, even well before the "coming of christ"
There's also some things in Exodus I believe about homosexual relations.
I don't really agree with homosexuality but I take a "whatever makes you happy stance on it" What really amazes me is how many completely ignorant people try to speak on the subject and cite "facts" that are total garbage that has been fed to them by their parents, friends, church etc without a single shred of research on their own.
Formerly known as Sneaku
I MISS MY BABY!!!
'00 Blk CSVT #1087/2150 built 12/23/99
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 631
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 631 |
Originally posted by contourGL1996:
Originally posted by Fat Mike:
[begin rant]
I saw two of my gay friends break down in tears last night when they found out measure 36 passed, adding discrimination to our state's constitution. Not a single freaking state rejected these measures. I'm sure God is pleased that all his loving followers have worked so hard to keep our families, children and marriages safe from those dirty queers... 
I swear, everytime I see some SUV with a Jesus fish on one side and a "one man, one woman" sticker on the other, I get so damn disgusted. Some middle-aged seacow who has never met a homosexual person in her life thinks it's their Christian duty to prevent "those sick gay people" from trying to have any sort of freedoms or rights. Meanwhile they continue to instruct all their followers about how treating gay people like actual human beings is a sin. It's probably only because gay people can't produce more soldiers for God's army.  And only straight marriages can be pure and holy - even while daddy is banging the secretary, mommy is popping valuum and your daughter keeps getting felt up by the youth leader. But at least queers can't marry now because everyone knows they're the ones with the real problems.
Will people ever f*cking realize that they shouldn't try to decide what people can do in their personal lives, and that they shouldn't worry about it because it doesn't effect them?
[end rant]
Sorry, had to vent. 
I agree 100%
Well put. This is the saddest thread I have ever read at CEG. It truely shows the close mindedness and stupidity of the U.S. right now. It just blows me away. I guess growing up in close proximity to large cities has opened my mind to reality. I will not allow a book to dictate my beliefs or a guy in a robe to tell me whats best for my family. As I will not let either of these control my government.
My question is... is marriage a legal term or religious term?
05 Legacy GT Turbo 5speed
99 SVT GRN/TAN (sold)
06 Ford Explorer EBv8
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,789
I feel Guilty, Oh so guilty
|
|
I feel Guilty, Oh so guilty
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,789 |
Where to begin? I donâ??t have enough time to quote people on both sides so I will just respond in general.
First, as Jato said, a clear definition of civil union and marriage need to be defined. Perhaps marriage should not be used for legal purposes. Right now, itâ??s clear that both sides of the argument (generally speaking) are using different definitions. If you are gay or straight and make a legal commitment to your partner, it is a civil union regardless of whether you are catholic, agnostic, jewish, or democratic. If you are married in a church, you are participating in the sacrament of marriage, in addition to being legally united. Essentially, civil union is for everyone, marriage is what it was intended to be, a spiritual union. As far as the language goes, I canâ??t see how anyone would have a problem with either group saying they are married in laymen type discussions. It would seem silly to think that someone in a civil union would have to classify themselves in the following manner:
Nervous young man with a ring: Emily, blah blah blah, I love you, will you unite with me in a legally binding civil union?
Emily: Huh?
I guess I donâ??t see what harm there is in gay people calling their union a marriage as long as from a legal sense, they, like everyone else will be civil union.
Fat Mike, I donâ??t mean to single someone out, but you mentioned mentioned your gay friends. First, if you had friends that werenâ??t sincere, nice, and generally good people, I wouldnâ??t see why they would be your friends to begin with. To look at this objectively, you have to step back away from the scenario because by mentioning what great people they are, you are allowing the presentation of your opinion to become clouded. How good of people they are is completely irrelevant to the topic. Whenever anyone resorts to the â??I have many black friendsâ?, or â??I have a lot of gay friendsâ?, in my opinion you lost the argument before you even started. Itâ??s almost like responding to an argument with educational qualifications and proceeding to not provide any more data to back your point. Not a personal attack, just something to consider.
Kremit, your argument regarding the slippery slope also has no basis in reality and is completely fear driven. The distinction is extremely simple to make and easily enforced. A civil union cannot involve more than two people because of the economic impact (insurance, social security benefits, legal and custodial battles etc) and laws would remain in place banning incestual marriage because of the medical impact it could have (higher rates of birth defects). Lastly, people wanting to marry cows, cats, chickens, plants, vegetables (no matter how long and hard), or inanimate objects like a favorite cracker (saltine, not some random whitey) would not be allowed to do so because there is no consenting counterpart. I think svtcarboy did a pretty good job despite his obvious biases.
Sandmann, I know your military background has probably allowed you to do some traveling. Having said that, I must question your comments about the American family structure. Were you referring to the family while the country was being structured, or what it is now? From my experience, I do not see the US as having a very family based society, in fact, I have seen quite the opposite. Statistics I have seen seem to show that gay marriages tend to last longer than straight marriages. I know we are not looking at a statistically significant number compared to straight marriages, but what I have seen makes me believe that gay couples can actually be more dedicated to one another and their family than straight couples. Who knows, maybe gay people are more dedicated because of the social unacceptance. Or maybe they know something us straight people have forgotten about what makes a successful relationship.
Sorry that was so long. Probably didn't even make sense but i don't have time to proofread it right now.
"If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit"
-Mitch Hedberg
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 198
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 198 |
Originally posted by JaTo:
Excuse me?
Tear through the Old and New Testament. Paul's sermon to the Church of Corinth (Corinthians I or II; can't remember) discusses (in a totally confusing fashion) same-sex relations and of course Genesis, LONG before the time of Jesus, mentions homosexuals as well, or at least what is interpreted as the act of it.
Nobody is saying that it didn't exist back then, not even the Bible...
Not only is this true ... consider this:
Ancient Greek culture (hundreds of years before Christ), which was, and continues to be, highly influential as one of the foundations of Western culture, featured open and accepted homosexuality. It was considered a "normal" part of their erotic life; and while some scholars believed it was practised only by the wealthy or elite, the common belief now is that it was simply accepted by all.
Isn't it ironic, that the American concept of goverment was founded within the concepts of democracy of a culture that openly accepted homosexuality?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718 |
Originally posted by neelnug:
My question is... is marriage a legal term or religious term?
Both, which has served as one of the major cruxes of the debate.
JaTo
e-Tough Guy
Missouri City, TX
99 Contour SVT
#143/2760
00 Corvette Coupe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,570
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,570 |
In reference to the subject line, thank god.
And tell me its not hypocritical to want to call it "marriage", which is an arrangment that was instituted by god in the bible, and in that SAME bible it clearly condemns homosexuality.
If homos want to be together, thats their thing, but don't start calling it "Marriage", because its not. Plain and simple.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 367
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 367 |
The pitfalls for living in a democracy? The gay community has been trying to circumvent the democratic system for some time now by finding sympathetic judges in weak courts. During this they put out documentation saying that the majority of Americans supported gay marriage. If you are gay wouldn't you want a vote on the issue. That is what we do in America.
You would think the whole country was homosexual based on prime-time TV and what the media has pushed on us. If you are gay and want respect from the nation please donâ??t let the only public persona of homosexuality to be the overly eccentric and effeminate/butch version portrayed on TV. Combine this with a militant drive to force laws on Americans through courts versus letting us vote and of course we have a slanted view of â??these poor people just trying to make itâ?.
Why is it that my views are considered to be bigotry and narrow-mindedness? Does being gay give you some sort of insight to how the world should be run that none of the rest of us seems to get?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 198
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 198 |
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
In reference to the subject line, thank god.
And tell me its not hypocritical to want to call it "marriage", which is an arrangment that was instituted by god in the bible, and in that SAME bible it clearly condemns homosexuality.
If homos want to be together, thats their thing, but don't start calling it "Marriage", because its not. Plain and simple.
Your opinion is noted ... but what isn't subject to your opinion is the origins of the concept of marriage - it was part of the human experience long before the bible.
The bible may define marriage for Christians - but that's a far cry from defining marriage for the rest of the non-Christian world, or for that matter, for the purposes of extending civil rights or privileges.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 682
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 682 |
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
In reference to the subject line, thank god.
And tell me its not hypocritical to want to call it "marriage", which is an arrangment that was instituted by god in the bible, and in that SAME bible it clearly condemns homosexuality.
If homos want to be together, thats their thing, but don't start calling it "Marriage", because its not. Plain and simple.
People have been getting married without God or bible. No one is obligated to look into the bible when defining their marriage. Especially in legal matters. Otherwise you mind as well ban EVERYTHING that the bible condemns. Resulting in the burning of bill of rights.
98.5 Contour SVT
"Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country"
--US President George W Bush
|
|
|
|
|
