The politicization of homosexualityFollow

Ok Tarv, obviously you don't understand the separation of church and state. Marriage is a concept and ceremony that is wholly owned by religious institutions. The only reason government got involved in regulating marriages was for the legal ramifications involved when two people enter into a contract. In the secular world that's all marriage is, a contract between a husband and wife.

Unfortunately government decided to call these contracts marriages as that was the religious custom. Now we want the government to recognize marriages that have no religious sanction. Why should they be called marriages if they aren't religious? Are you that insecure that if your marriage was called a domestic partnership you would feel inferior to those who are married in a church? If so, do you feel inferior to those who have had 1st Communion, Confirmation or Bar Mitzvah(sp?)?

Your implication that I am somehow arguing from a religious standpoint is quite far off the mark. I am agnostic and belong to no church. I do not believe in a God. I am libertarian leaning in my political views and believe that the Constitution should be followed as written.

The only way to have a system where any two people can be joined legally as what is commonly called a marriage is to totally separate religion and state on the issue. The only way to do that is to change the name for state sponsored partnerships to something other than "marriage". This would allow any two people to become husband and wife while still enjoying all the legal benefits (and tax disadvantages) that married couples do today.

You have yet to respond to any of my questions with your argument in any form of valid fashion. That's ok though, I'll talk to Totem instead. At least he can string more than two sentences together and form complete thoughts.

Tare beat me to it, in replying to Totem's post.

I was going to say that as far as change is concerned, society itself determines just how far we are allowed to change. (Did that make any damn sense? lol) Right now, we may just see gay marriages in our lifetime. Might take a few years, but we all might see it.

As far as going all the way down the "slippery slope", I can't see today's society standing still for incestual marriage or marriage to your cat, no matter how many freaks come out of the woodword to demand it. Maybe one day, but not now.

And by then, we'll all be dead, so who cares?

Hmmm, good answer, Tare. Gimme a bit to cook up a reply.

Totem

You're asking me to prove a negative. I hope you can see the flaw in that.

(ok, I did some work...its overrated, so i'm back while I snack)

It's really simple Tare. God said its an abomination (as I quoted in scripture earlier). therefore, its an abomination. However, in many OTHER parts of the bible (which I also quoted in this same thread), it says we are no to judge one another..only God has the right to judge.

So I think its wrong, but I don't have the right to tell someone else its wrong. On the same token, I'm not going to support any proactive roles that support it either..that would make me almost as guilty. The only difference is that I am not going to go out and spit in peoples face and tell them its wrong...judging someone for being gay makes you just as guilty of sin as being gay in my book.

my gay FRIENDS totally respect my beliefs..primarily because I respect the choice they make to live the lives they do. I do not let my beliefs change the way I think about them as a person. A few even show affection in front of me without it really bothering me. But its because we've gotten to know each other as people and put our differences and conflicting opinions about our lifestyles aside.

Now there ARE certain things we avoid..one is this issue with the marriage. We know its going to do neither side much good to bring it up and cause conflict, and would rather preserve our friendship rather than risk arguement. I try not to cross personal and professional life together, and I see my friendships the same way...I won't drag my friends through some political debate that may offend them as I think they would not drag me into some bible bashing debate as well.

You see..we all may have differing opinions and beliefs, but we CAN co-exist peacefully together. Churches and religions in the world today have become so corrupt that wars are literally waging between them...that makes no sense to me, and I HATE it when someone assumes my beliefs fall into ANY of those categories. The bible doesn't teach this, but religions take the bible and make their own teachings from it...THAT causes the problems.

If you look back to right before the printing press came about, the catholic church at the time had the same problems. They taught what they wanted to teach, and strayed further from the bible. Then when people started getting printed bibles and reading it for themselves, people were like "no way..you haven't been teaching us the bible!" What ended up happening? People were literally crucified for standing up against it. Whats happening today is that the bibles teachings have not only been desensitized, but there are thousands of different bible "reinterpretations" out there. the result is conflicting teachings, each one claiming theirs to be "the right way"...it leads nowhere but to chaos.

Once again..I may not believe homosexuality is right, but I'll leave the judging up to God. It's going to do me no good to hate someone for it..me hating on them is not going to turn them un-gay. I'm just not going to support it. I won't support anything I don't believe it, and I'm sure most people won't either..that doesn't mean I think anything less of the individuals that do, even though sometimes heads do butt and tempers do fly when the issues are brought up between the conflicting parties. I'm human and it happens to me to..I try to minimize it as much as I can though.

Actually yossarian people still believe in slavery and it is still practiced. However slavery is no longer acceptable in Western cultures so the issue is no longer a debatable concern.



And no I am not opposed to slavery in some respects.

However that is another issue and has no relevance on this topic other than the bible and history supports the practice of slavery.

Regarding Empyre and Totem, their arguements are stuck in the proverbial twists and turns of words that liberals (not democrats, there are democrats that do not support gay marriage) will always do when confronting millenia of tradition and that is... if it feels good and no one gets hurt by it what does it matter to you. Remember these are the same people that want to legalize marijuana and other drugs. "Forward thinking" people never look to the past to see the reasons these laws where put in place, they just look at today and think that at the times the laws where created there was no reason for them other than blind obedience to a belief. I challenge any one out here and I may do it myself when I have a chance, to research Roman law before Christianity and determine wether homosexuality was allowed then, or even other ancient civilizations. There must be a valid reason that homosexuals have been banned from marriage for thousands of years and now in the last few decades it has become an acceptible life style where they should be legally allowed to marry.

Homosexuality is wrong wether by man or woman, it is unnatural. The purpose of making gay marriages legal has some valid points, but allowing gay marriages to happen makes a legal claim that homosexuality is "normal". This is not about children, or taxes, this is about being accepted and making gays feel good. Once gay marriages are accepted what is next? Minority status for homosexuals, because we now have a legal status of determining if some one is gay, because they can now be married. ?????

I'll get to the rest later 'cause 5 am comes early and it is now 11:30 pm. Those people that practice homosexuality do not need protection. There are many homosexuals that mix quite well with "normal" society that do not need or ask for special attention or protection. It is a small percentage of the lifestyle that is raising the issue of homosexual marriage. You obviously are not as open minded as you pretend to be if you do not understand the opposing views.

The only thing that I read here is if Totem or someone else makes an arguement that is based on historical facts that they are not valid because that thinking is outdated or because someone does not believe in God so there for the rules that society has been built on, no longer mean anything to todays right to do as we please mentality of social liberals. Do you truly believe that after thousands of years of hatred and non acceptance of homosexuals that either side truly has new arguements? The only thing that has changed much like slavery and womans sufferage is that liberal politicians have found a cause to champion and that they have made promises to bring about change so encouraging the fringe element of the cause to try and force change to quickly. This movement to legitimize the homosexual lifestyle as an acceptable societal norm is at the threshold of either becoming truly "mainstream" or igniting homophobic fears that will create a constitutional ammendment. Either way there will be a backlash to this change, because laws legalizing homosexual marriage will not right all the wrongs of histories non acceptance, much like when slavery was abolished blacks where not all of a sudden accepted as equal. Any change that takes place will take decades before homosexuals are truly accepted as mainstream.

P.S. Don't mistake me for some ultra conservative, right winger, bible thumping, white guy. I am just an average guy with a differing view of the world than you have, and I love a good arguement when I can get into one.

I am not, despite my conservative viewpoint, glued to tradition for the sake of tradition. I do not think that just because something has been done a particular way that it must forever be done in said manner. However-- however --to upend an institution on a whim and forsake the entirety of human history, I think we should not be so hasty.

I recognise that homosexuals can and are loving, caring human beings. They have the same desire for intimacy and companionship as do heterosexuals. They have dreams and wishes of raising a family. I believe that having a prediliction towards homosexuality does not make automatically you a bad prospective parent. In fact, it may indeed make a male more sensitive and gentle-- something many hetero men could use more of when dealing with children.

But none of this blots out, what, for me, constitutes a sin. It is only when we are discussing active practicing homosexuals that I have difficulties with this issue. Non-practicing homosexuals or latent homosexuals (those who feel a pull towards such behavior but resist the temptation) can and should be free and welcome to the bonds and institution of marriage. but it must be to a member of the opposite sex.

Jophiel is right. I was playing a semantical tag-you're-it game by demanding you prove a negative. But in essence that is the very thing you are asking of the heterosexual world: to go ahead and allow for something which the results of are very much in dispute. And based on that and a lifetime of convictions and principles I cannot agree with the stance that there is no evidenciary harm in homosexual unions.

In truth, while I may find the sexual practices vile and repulsive, my heart goes out to them for having to live with something society finds abhorent. It must be impossibly difficult to pretend for years or a lifetime that you are one way, but have deep seated desires which, I suspect, most homosexuals believe in their hearts gives their character fatal flaws.

Yet who of us don't have something about ourselves we don't find or secretly know is despicable? Something we so desperately wish we could change about ourselves, but find it impossible to fix? It is here that I believe our Creator has placed salvation: Despite our faults and flaws He loves us as we are and gives us strength to fight our sinful nature.

I know that most here do not ascribe to this belief. Many would find this appallingly foolish or hopelessly naive. But it is this knowledge and conviction that allows us to fight the human nature we are born with. It is the purpose for which we have been placed on this Earth-- to make a decision about ourselves and our relationship with the Person who made us.

I recognise that no sin is any greater or worse in the eyes of a perfect God. Telling a little white lie is the same as mass murder and vis versa. Homosexuals are no more in need of God's grace than I am, a heterosexual. It's just that my sins are of a different type.

It finally comes down to this. God has ordained that marriage is sacred, regardless of the abuse man heaps upon it. Broken marriages, neglected marriages, serial marriages are all wrong and not what He intended. The institution of marriage is to be a reflection of His love and faithfulness to the Church and us, not the other way around. If it were, He'd have abandoned us and condemned us long ago. And since it is that way, we are obligated to work at making our marriages happy, healthy, and successful.

Heh. I am showing my Calvinist roots. And I've introduced a ton of theological ideas of which I have not explained for those unfamiliar with doctrine. For that I apologise in advance, because I am taking for granted you have an understanding of the arguments which make the foundation for what I am saying.

Who knew I would give a true glimpse into the philosophical and spiritual underpinnings which comprise my life? I certainly didn't, but I recognised that without at least an explanation for my beliefs they were empty words designed to just provoke, not convince.

Totem

Double post, sorry.

Edited, Tue Feb 24 01:35:52 2004 by Totem

Damn you Jophiel, beat me to it.

*Patrician takes out his rubber stamp and declares this thread too full of moronic argument for further comment*

Now excuse me, I am off to a rally with my sheep to demand that sheep get the vote.