What Is the Big Deal With Gay Marriage?

[Reba]

Yep. everyone is entitled to their opinion. They are just not entitled to use it to determine whether certain groups are openly discriminated against. Especially when that group has no impact whatsoever on the opinion holders life.

Who are you to declare what actions impact other people? That's rather presumptuous.

 

[Reba]

Why can't people be named?

If they don't mind other people using their names in a public forum, that's up to them.

Those homosexuals that are directly impacted by these attitudes are people; they are human beings who suffer the consequences. Perhaps if you put a face on that objection, it would be less easy for you to be so quick to judge.

As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about with your holier-than-thou pronouncements.

 

[Reba]

Take James Camping as an example. He is certain the world is going to end sometime in the next few months. He just keeps getting his calculations wrong.

Most Christians have been saying that ever since Camping came on the scene with his first "prophecy." We've never put a date to the end of the world, and we've constantly spoken out against those who do.

 

[dogmom]

but the country was already found...

another issue people dislike seeing the reality of


how does same-sex or same-gender marriage legitimately and SECULAR-ly harm others?

 

[deafskeptic]

Some people are still upset that Martin Luther King has a national holiday.:roll: Can you imagine the uproar from the fringe if we declared a "Harvey Milk Day"? LOL

I can just imagine. I remember my parents reactions when MLK day when it was first reenacted. They were against it on the grounds that it was an excuse to be lazy instead of working hard.

In part of the South, Confederate Heroes' day is sometimes the same day as MLK day.

I don't even want to think of the uproar regarding Harvey Milk if we declared a day in his name.

 

[dogmom]

I never knew of Confederate Heroes Day-

 

[naisho]

but the country was already found...

another issue people dislike seeing the reality of


how does same-sex or same-gender marriage legitimately and SECULAR-ly harm others?

Some Christians may see it as sin spreading around them and don't like it. Some people do something about that or some choose to adapt to it. Some intend to challenge things or fix humanity for the greater good (Christ).

It's like saying that you're living in a regular neighborhood, and then someone who doesn't share the same ideas as you moves in the neighborhood. It may be that you might not be concerned, but for example if you can picture someone could be an ex-convict who believes in killing people in wars for a reason or believe in pro-birth or pro-abortion, or pro PETA or someone who was into animal beastality moving in the neighborhood.

I'm not saying these are the same as gays or homosexuals, just saying they just share an idea that you might not find welcoming. What would ya do about it?

It's a tough question, and I don't think everyone would answer it in the same way...
Just giving you insight to why some Christians may feel differently than others who don't see why.

 

[Sunshine]

Reba, you say your conscience make you vote against legislation which harm others. This include gay people? Or only straight people / people you deem worthy not be harmed?

 

[jillio]

Certain citys/areas are known to be "dry".....no booze allowed. Are you ok with certain citys/areas having a law of "no gay marriage"?
Certain citys have a law against smoking in a public place. Why? Because second hand smoke can kill innocence people.
All states have a D.W.I. law. Why? Booze kills innocence people.
Did the crystal ball back then foresee this problem? That is how stupid people are. Passing a law to cover the wrong of a law, whereas the first law was passed to apples a small section of the population under the heading of "civil rights."
Where is any concern for those who have or will die because of a few. You think this does not affect as all? Those laws, allowing cigs. and booze, don't dictate all our lives? Yes, they do. Ask your Congressperson just how much the innocence people in America are taxed to pay for health care for these individuals and their victims.

Again with the stawman arguments. Just because a city is dry doesn't mean you can't go somewhere else, buy your booze, and bring it back to drink it there.:roll:

Seriously, you need to try to stick to the topic. You have used everything EXCEPT a legal objection to gay marriage or a way in which it will negatively impact you or your life in an attempt to support your bigotry. That is very typical of those who don't have a argument that is logical and understandable, but simply built on an emotional reaction.

 

[jillio]

If they don't mind other people using their names in a public forum, that's up to them.


As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about with your holier-than-thou pronouncements.

Why should anyone be afraid to be known as a homosexual? Oh, wait...some of the opinions on this forum explain that.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

old men will die of heart attack.

No all old men die while having sex. My dad lived to be 75 years and had sex until the end of his life. He had a mistress that was at 40 younger than him.
I hated dad for cheating on my mother!

 

[jillio]

Some Christians may see it as sin spreading around them and don't like it. Some people do something about that or some choose to adapt to it. Some intend to challenge things or fix humanity for the greater good (Christ).

It's like saying that you're living in a regular neighborhood, and then someone who doesn't share the same ideas as you moves in the neighborhood. It may be that you might not be concerned, but for example if you can picture someone could be an ex-convict who believes in killing people in wars for a reason or believe in pro-birth or pro-abortion, or pro PETA or someone who was into animal beastality moving in the neighborhood.

I'm not saying these are the same as gays or homosexuals, just saying they just share an idea that you might not find welcoming. What would ya do about it?

It's a tough question, and I don't think everyone would answer it in the same way...
Just giving you insight to why some Christians may feel differently than others who don't see why.

They are free not to like it. If you don't like it, don't participate in it.

 

[jillio]

So you do vote your conscience (not conscious) in order to promote what you believe to be right. So do I. Your vote also does attempt to impose your particular belief system on others by weight of law. That's what voting on laws is all about. We each vote for the side that supports our beliefs.

My conscience also tells me not to support legislation that will harm others, so that's why I vote against same-sex marriage.

[quote}When you are attempting to determine the legality of something based on your own religious belief then you are indeed, attempting to dictate the behaviors of others based on your particular religious doctrine.

I never said that I use my religious beliefs to determine the legality of something. That's up to the courts to do. I use my religious beliefs to determine how I will vote.


Wow, I guess Hitler's been overused, so now you compare Christians to Jeffs. :roll:

Jeffs is in prison for breaking laws. He's not in prison for voting on laws.


Jesus never accepted any sins. When he forgave the sinners, then he told them to go and sin no more. He didn't say that Christians shouldn't use judgment (discernment) of right and wrong. He warned Christians to apply judgment to their own lives first, and then judge the behaviors (not hearts or spiritual conditions) of others.


The behavior wasn't legal to begin with.

Did you think that same-sex marriage has been legal throughout the USA since the country was founded, and we're just now voting to make it illegal? Where did you find that one?[/QUOTE]

My conscious determines my conscience.

Not everyone follows Jesus. And you certainly won't bring them to Jesus by using His name to marginalize and discriminate against them.

 

[deafskeptic]

I never said that I use my religious beliefs to determine the legality of something. That's up to the courts to do. I use my religious beliefs to determine how I will vote.


Wow, I guess Hitler's been overused, so now you compare Christians to Jeffs. :roll:

Jeffs is in prison for breaking laws. He's not in prison for voting on laws.


Jesus never accepted any sins. When he forgave the sinners, then he told them to go and sin no more. He didn't say that Christians shouldn't use judgment (discernment) of right and wrong. He warned Christians to apply judgment to their own lives first, and then judge the behaviors (not hearts or spiritual conditions) of others.


The behavior wasn't legal to begin with.

Did you think that same-sex marriage has been legal throughout the USA since the country was founded, and we're just now voting to make it illegal? Where did you find that one?

My conscious determines my conscience.

Not everyone follows Jesus. And you certainly won't bring them to Jesus by using His name to marginalize and discriminate against them.

I especially like this line.

 

[Reba]

Fine, go ahead and don't believe in those stories or articles by then.

I didn't say that I didn't believe them--you haven't posted any yet. When you post them, I can read them.

I already searched for a few days and asked homosexual friends of mine. I even asked for their personal stories but they vetoed my request.

I wasn't expecting the private stories of friends but I thought you might be able to find public news stories about such events.

There is nothing I can do. But, are you sure? Have you read the article I provided? It's because the father is homosexual that his kids were taken away...

Yes, I read the links. Which one was that?

This is what you linked:

"Profile
Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda's Thumb. He has written for such publications as The Bard, Skeptic and Reports of the National Center for Science Education, spoken in front of many organizations and conferences, and appeared on nationally syndicated radio shows and on C-SPAN. Ed is also a Fellow with the Center for Independent Media and the host of Declaring Independence, a one hour weekly political talk show on WPRR in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Ed Brayton is a participant in the Center for Independent Media New Journalism Program. However, all of the statements, opinions, policies, and views expressed on this site are solely Ed Brayton's. This web site is not a production of the Center, and the Center does not support or endorse any of the contents on this site.

Liberty Counsel: Take Kids Away From Gay Parents

Posted on: June 23, 2009 9:30 AM, by Ed Brayton

In response to a Georgia case where the state Supreme Court recently ruled that a trial judge could not order a father to keep his children away from his gay friends when visiting, Liberty Counsel goes even further and argues that children should not even be allowed to visit a parent if that parent is gay. Their statement of the facts:

Eric Duane Mongerson and Sandy Kay Ehlers Mongerson were married for 21 years and had four children. The Georgia Supreme Court has ruled in their divorce case that the children cannot be prohibited from visitation with their now-homosexual father.

The ruling would also put the children in contact with their father's homosexual friends. Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel tells OneNewsNow the courts historically have looked to the best interests of children.

And Liberty Counsel's vile reaction:

"In this case the court, in order to somehow perpetuate and further the interest of political correctness, has taken what's in the best interest of the child and turned it on its head," he contends. Barber says there appears to be no consideration for the fact that children are very impressionable and could be harmed from exposure to a homosexual environment. "Obviously it is not in the best interest of a child to be taken by his father and introduced to a group of people who are engaging in abhorrent sexual behaviors, who are modeling abhorrent sexual behaviors and celebration of that [which is] demonstrably dangerous from a medical, spiritual, and emotional standpoint -- modeling those behaviors for the child," Barber adds.

A very clear argument for taking children away from a gay parent. Because that's just what Jesus would do. Bigoted assholes."


According to your link, the court supports the gay father for visitation.

 

[jillio]

I didn't say that I didn't believe them--you haven't posted any yet. When you post them, I can read them.


I wasn't expecting the private stories of friends but I thought you might be able to find public news stories about such events.


Yes, I read the links. Which one was that?

This is what you linked:

"Profile
Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda's Thumb. He has written for such publications as The Bard, Skeptic and Reports of the National Center for Science Education, spoken in front of many organizations and conferences, and appeared on nationally syndicated radio shows and on C-SPAN. Ed is also a Fellow with the Center for Independent Media and the host of Declaring Independence, a one hour weekly political talk show on WPRR in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Ed Brayton is a participant in the Center for Independent Media New Journalism Program. However, all of the statements, opinions, policies, and views expressed on this site are solely Ed Brayton's. This web site is not a production of the Center, and the Center does not support or endorse any of the contents on this site.

Liberty Counsel: Take Kids Away From Gay Parents

Posted on: June 23, 2009 9:30 AM, by Ed Brayton

In response to a Georgia case where the state Supreme Court recently ruled that a trial judge could not order a father to keep his children away from his gay friends when visiting, Liberty Counsel goes even further and argues that children should not even be allowed to visit a parent if that parent is gay. Their statement of the facts:

Eric Duane Mongerson and Sandy Kay Ehlers Mongerson were married for 21 years and had four children. The Georgia Supreme Court has ruled in their divorce case that the children cannot be prohibited from visitation with their now-homosexual father.

The ruling would also put the children in contact with their father's homosexual friends. Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel tells OneNewsNow the courts historically have looked to the best interests of children.

And Liberty Counsel's vile reaction:

"In this case the court, in order to somehow perpetuate and further the interest of political correctness, has taken what's in the best interest of the child and turned it on its head," he contends. Barber says there appears to be no consideration for the fact that children are very impressionable and could be harmed from exposure to a homosexual environment. "Obviously it is not in the best interest of a child to be taken by his father and introduced to a group of people who are engaging in abhorrent sexual behaviors, who are modeling abhorrent sexual behaviors and celebration of that [which is] demonstrably dangerous from a medical, spiritual, and emotional standpoint -- modeling those behaviors for the child," Barber adds.

A very clear argument for taking children away from a gay parent. Because that's just what Jesus would do. Bigoted assholes."


According to your link, the court supports the gay father for visitation.

It had to go all the way to the State Supreme Court. What does that tell you?

 

[naisho]

They are free not to like it. If you don't like it, don't participate in it.

Of course, for sure.
It is a little easier said than done sometimes, try convincing a local congregation pastor to not participate in those topics, leave it alone or stay out of the issue. It's akin to arguing with kokonut to stop posting about Obama.

 

[Sunshine]

Reba, you say your conscience make you vote against legislation which harm others. This include gay people? Or only straight people / people you deem worthy not be harmed?

Reba? Conscience duty not harm include gay people?

I bet gay people tell you not allow marry harm them, just as straight people would say same if their right marry taken away. So how you can, good conscience, vote harm gay people via trampling their civil liberties?

 

[Sunshine]

Also harm gay people when sanctimonious Christians treat as less human.

 

[jillio]

Of course, for sure.
It is a little easier said than done sometimes, try convincing a local congregation pastor to not participate in those topics, leave it alone or stay out of the issue. It's akin to arguing with kokonut to stop posting about Obama.

I guess zealots are zealots no matter what brush you use to paint them.