Homosexual marriage the court does something right

[Shitoryu Dude]

I worship at at the temple of cootchie

So, it all boils down to a poorly and inadequately interpreted case of "my religion says your way is bad". Not that I saw anything in there about needing to take away the basic rights of gays, or even needing to shun them. Seemed that basically they were having more fun than you and somehow that was "punishment".

Still, the whole argument boils down to a case of legislating a religious preference into law. As this is not a theocracy and the constitution specifically prohibits establishing a religion I guess the whole "scripture" side of the debate goes right back into the sewer where it came from.

[Ben Bartlett]

Originally posted by Jerry Johnson

What we should really be looking into is the Jewish laws on the subject of Homosexuality. Xianity laws follow the Jewish laws. The Jewish laws are very interesting on marriage and homosexuals, outside of killing homosexuals. Let's face it, homosexuals in this care are nothing special and are not singled out. All sorts of law breakers face the same punishment of death.

For the most part I'm staying out of this, because I've already said what I have to say, but Christianity does not follow Jewish laws. This, in fact, is a fight Paul and Peter have very early on in the history of the Church, and to make a long story short, Paul wins. Jews who become Christians can, according to Paul, continue to observe Jewish law, but Gentiles who become Christians are not obligated to do the same.

Which is great, because otherwise, I couldn't have my bacon cheeseburgers, with a side of oysters.

[n2shotokai]

Originally posted by Kimpatsu
The Roman Catholic church disagrees with you; they say it refers to ALL sex outside marriage. That's the thing about the Bible; all you Xpain sects think you're the only right one with the One True Message. And what about men enjoying each other?

The Roman Catholic Church says many things that have no scriptural basis! What about men enjoying men? Are you asking my opinion. I have no interest in experimentation and I think it would be a bad choice for me. Definitly wrong for me. If someobne else makes that choice, that is their business. Civil unions would be fine with me for two people of the same sex in a commited relationship. I believe they should be afforded every right and benefit as married people. Do I think they should try to shove their lifestyle down my throat as being acceptable? NO!

The Episcopal church has gone through tremendous upheaval on the issue of gay ordination. The Presbyterian church is gowing through the same issue. These issues will most likely end up dividings these churches in two, which is not necessarily a bad thing. A recent letter to the editor of a religious newspaper comes to mind on this issue. While he found both the pro and con point of view annoying and a waste of time and effort, he realized it would not end. This is because on many issues, the liberals (although small in number) are so loud and annoying that they are given leeway to avoid confrontation. But what was asked for and given never ends up being enough, there is always more and more and the demands are ceaseless. He hit that nail right on the head.

The gay rights activist cannot be happy with a civil union, they have to demand marriage. Why? Why is that not acceptable? It could serve the purpose to reach their objective, but somehow it's just not enough.

[Shitoryu Dude]

Yet you feel that it is OK for your lifestyle to shoved down the throats of everyone else as "acceptable". Interesting.

Mistake #1 - People don't "experiment" with being gay. They either are gay or they aren't. Nobody switches teams or gets enticed to try it out for awhile.

Mistake #2 - Homosexuals aren't trying to shove anything down your throat. They just want their equal protection under the law not screwed with by xtian fanatics

Mistake #3 - Unless that "civil union" encompasses every single right that a marriage does, you are creating 2nd class citizens. If it does all that then it makes no difference what you call it as it is the exact same thing.

Mistake #4 - Due to your rights of association, your religion is not going to be forced to accept anyone as a member that it doesn't want. Nor will your organization be forced to perform wedding services against its will

So, just what is the problem? Aside from bigoted hatred of anyone not a member of your church?

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Jerry Johnson
Tony, I like this line.

"The bottom line is that it is wrong to discriminate against people on the basis of sexual orientation, and so gay marriages must be allowed--with exactly the same rights-- as hetero marriages."

We discriminate in the civic and non-civic arenas against people with Down Syndrome, poverty, and a host of other types of people and behaviors. Civil discrimination against homosexuals, pls. That is a ploy. Religion not wanting homosexuals to use marriage isn't civil discrimination. It is legal. The government provides homosexuals with the same rights as the majority of citizens. Vermont has Civil Unions. It is up to the states, I hope they carefully weight the pros and cons of inacting Civil Unions, or allowing traditional marriage rites.

So you consider gay people to gbe as stupid as those with Down's Syndrome?!
You also clearly think they are "freaks" in the manner of Down's Syndrome victims.
To be consistent, therefore, you must also hate people for being black.
Racism is a crime againt humanity.
So is intolerance for the disabled.
So is homophobia.

[n2shotokai]

Originally posted by Shitoryu Dude
Yet you feel that it is OK for your lifestyle to shoved down the throats of everyone else as "acceptable". Interesting.

Lie #1 - When have I ever tried to do this? Proof please.

Originally posted by Shitoryu Dude
Mistake #1 - People don't "experiment" with being gay. They either are gay or they aren't. Nobody switches teams or gets enticed to try it out for awhile.

Lie #2 - I was talking about myself experimenting. Not someone else. But nice try in twisting truth to fit your agenda.

Originally posted by Shitoryu Dude
Mistake #2 - Homosexuals aren't trying to shove anything down your throat. They just want their equal protection under the law not screwed with by xtian fanatics

Lie #3 - My main point was talking about church liberals. Again, nice try in twisting truth to fit your agenda.

Originally posted by Shitoryu Dude
Mistake #3 - Unless that "civil union" encompasses every single right that a marriage does, you are creating 2nd class citizens. If it does all that then it makes no difference what you call it as it is the exact same thing.

Lie #4 - I specified "every" right and benefit. Now words mean nothing you sissified pansy kung fu practitioner? Way left field!

Originally posted by Shitoryu Dude
Mistake #4 - Due to your rights of association, your religion is not going to be forced to accept anyone as a member that it doesn't want. Nor will your organization be forced to perform wedding services against its will

Lie #5 - Church membership is based upon a statement of faith. Has nothing to do with sexual orientation. There are fringe elements that would like to make this a condition, but they can't seem to find a scriptural argument for making this change.

Originally posted by Shitoryu Dude
So, just what is the problem? Aside from bigoted hatred of anyone not a member of your church?

Lie #6 - One of the two greatest commandments is "love thy neighbor as thyself". Any Christian who does not understand this needs to re-examine themself.

But one of the biggest lies is of omission. Never did answer the question without the nonsense.

Blessings!

[Mekugi]

What about bisexuals?

Originally posted by Shitoryu Dude
Mistake #1 - People don't "experiment" with being gay. They either are gay or they aren't. Nobody switches teams or gets enticed to try it out for awhile.

[Shitoryu Dude]

Door knocking and supporting various legislation that attempts to promote xtianity is shoving your religion down the throats of everyone else. You did admit to spending a couple of years knocking on doors didn't you?

The rest of it was not aimed specifically at you except the last part. You are a hate filled xtian bigot and your posts prove it every day. I do believe that you are basically unaware of it though. I bet you're actually a pretty nice guy in most respects, but your religious training and beliefs have created blind spots on certain issues.

Anyway, I'm bored with repeating myself on this thread. Time to move on.

[Onmitsu]

Posted by Kimpatsu-"There is, however, an irrational one: namely, that you have yet internalised the fact that all people are equal, regardless of gender, skin colour, or sexual orientation."

Tony, You forgot to add that all people are equal regardless of their religeous beliefs .

[Ben Bartlett]

Originally posted by Onmitsu
Tony, You forgot to add that all people are equal regardless of their religeous beliefs .

Or lack thereof, for that matter!

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by n2shotokai
Lie #1 - When have I ever tried to do this? Proof please.

But Steve, you constantly write on this board that we should follow your religion! Harvey isn't lying. You've even put "blessings" at the bottom of your post!

Originally posted by n2shotokai
Lie #2 - I was talking about myself experimenting. Not someone else. But nice try in twisting truth to fit your agenda.

Experimenting with homosexuality? Isn't that a sin?

Originally posted by n2shotokai
Lie #3 - My main point was talking about church liberals. Again, nice try in twisting truth to fit your agenda.

No, he's right. Gays want protection from even the most liberal of churches, which do not see them as equal. Look at the brouhaha in the Anglican church over Canon Jeffrey John.

Originally posted by n2shotokai
Lie #4 - I specified "every" right and benefit. Now words mean nothing you sissified pansy kung fu practitioner? Way left field!

Including the right to gay marriage as equal in every respect to hetero marriage?

Originally posted by n2shotokai
Lie #5 - Church membership is based upon a statement of faith. Has nothing to do with sexual orientation. There are fringe elements that would like to make this a condition, but they can't seem to find a scriptural argument for making this change.

Not all churches believe that membership is based on faith, so Harvey was quite right. Once agin, Steve, you demonstrate that classic Xpian arrogance in thinking that your sect is the One True Faith. But then, so does everybody else...

Originally posted by n2shotokai
Lie #6 - One of the two greatest commandments is "love thy neighbor as thyself". Any Christian who does not understand this needs to re-examine themself.

And here you are doing it again! Luke 14:26 says:

"Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple."

The two great commandments in Xpianity are "Love god" and "hate they neighbour unto proselytisation or death".
Did you not know that?

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Onmitsu
Tony, You forgot to add that all people are equal regardless of their religeous beliefs .

And those who don't have any are...?

[Onmitsu]

Kimpatsu posted-"And those who don't have any are...?"

Still equal. (some more equal than most..nudge, nudge, wink ,wink)

[elder999]

Originally posted by Ben Bartlett
For the most part I'm staying out of this, because I've already said what I have to say, but Christianity does not follow Jewish laws. This, in fact, is a fight Paul and Peter have very early on in the history of the Church, and to make a long story short, Paul wins. Jews who become Christians can, according to Paul, continue to observe Jewish law, but Gentiles who become Christians are not obligated to do the same.

Which is great, because otherwise, I couldn't have my bacon cheeseburgers, with a side of oysters.

Didn't exactly have a fight: Peter, if you believe the story as it was told, resolved his own conflit with a dream, where there was a table with all foods on it and Jesus sitting there, thus "there was no unclean food before the Lord."
Whoo-hoo.

This conflict over table fellowhip continued in the early church up until at least the destruction of Jerusalem.

As far as the whole homosexual issue, I always tell my Christian friends that I follow exactly what jesus said in the Bible about homosexuality.

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Onmitsu
Still equal. (some more equal than most..nudge, nudge, wink ,wink)

Thank you for admitting that I'm more equal than you, Comrade Napoleon...