Homosexuality: Right or Wrong?

[jackattack]

Opposing gay marriage=/= Hate

[Ginger_Warrior]

Opposing gay marriage=/= Hate

 

So?

 

 

 

Why is it you think we should only challenge inequality when hatred is involved?

 

 

 

I couldn't care less whether Christians hate gays or not - the fact is the Church denies them the right to get married, and despite many being otherwise devout Christians, they are shunned simply for their sexuality.

 

 

 

This, whatever way you look at it, is inequality, and in the glorious land of freedom should not be happening.

 

 

 

I respect the Church's right to hold its own opinions. It is not right that we force morals onto others. However, when you are denying rights to gays that would be open to heterosexuals, that's crossing the line. That actually becomes discrimination.

[jackattack]

Opposing gay marriage=/= Hate

 

So?

 

 

 

Why is it you think we should only challenge inequality when hatred is involved?

 

 

 

I couldn't care less whether Christians hate gays or not - the fact is the Church denies them the right to get married, and despite many being otherwise devout Christians, they are shunned simply for their sexuality.

 

 

 

This, whatever way you look at it, is inequality, and in the glorious land of freedom should not be happening.

 

 

 

I respect the Church's right to hold its own opinions. It is not right that we force morals onto others. However, when you are denying rights to gays that would be open to heterosexuals, that's crossing the line. That actually becomes discrimination.

 

 

 

 

 

Wait so we should force the church to let gays get married even thought you respect it's right to hold it's own opinions?

[Koo]

There's nothing wrong with being Gay or Lesbian. There's something wrong with the people who think otherwise.

 

 

 

You only have 1 life, live it the way you bluddy well want!

 

 

 

(I'm not Gay, just making a point)

[magekillr]

Until the Church starts paying their entry fee, they should have no voice in any political decisions being made. Actually, scratch that, they never should.

 

 

 

Marriage is not the "church's" decision, it is the state's. We are talking about state bans here.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Wait so we should force the church to let gays get married even thought you respect it's right to hold it's own opinions?

 

I respect your right to an opinion. However, you turning round to gays and saying, "Not welcome" is forcing your opinions onto them. It's their Church, their God just as much as it yours. Being gay makes no difference to their faith.

 

 

 

Give me one secular reason for gay marriages not being allowed inside a Church. And I mean secular.

[jackattack]

Wait so we should force the church to let gays get married even thought you respect it's right to hold it's own opinions?

 

I respect your right to an opinion. However, you turning round to gays and saying, "Not welcome" is forcing your opinions onto them. It's their Church, their God just as much as it yours. Being gay makes no difference to their faith.

 

 

 

Give me one secular reason for gay marriages not being allowed inside a Church. And I mean secular.

 

 

 

 

 

No, forming an angry mob and breaking up a commitment ceremony would be forcing my views on them. What your saying is if someone comes into my house and starts doing meth I should let them because if I didn't I would be forcing my views on them. In a Church gay marriage would be going against what the sacrament of marriage inherently is.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Wait so we should force the church to let gays get married even thought you respect it's right to hold it's own opinions?

 

I respect your right to an opinion. However, you turning round to gays and saying, "Not welcome" is forcing your opinions onto them. It's their Church, their God just as much as it yours. Being gay makes no difference to their faith.

 

 

 

Give me one secular reason for gay marriages not being allowed inside a Church. And I mean secular.

 

 

 

 

 

No, forming an angry mob and breaking up a commitment ceremony would be forcing my views on them. What your saying is if someone comes into my house and starts doing meth I should let them because if I didn't I would be forcing my views on them. In a Church gay marriage would be going against what the sacrament of marriage inherently is.

 

Awful comparison.

 

 

 

A) That would be trespass (Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you don't open your house to fellow believers, do you?)

 

B) There's no legal rights to be gained through taking meth, as there is with marriage.

 

 

 

I'll repeat my question, which you failed to answer instead giving an irrelevant comparison; give me one secular reason why gay marriage should not be allowed? "Because it's my religion" just doesn't cut it as an argument in the modern world, sorry.

[warri0r45]

Until the Church starts paying their entry fee, they should have no voice in any political decisions being made. Actually, scratch that, they never should.

 

 

 

Marriage is not the "church's" decision, it is the state's. We are talking about state bans here.

 

 

 

Well said. This goes right to the heart of the issue of gay marriage and immediately bypasses all of the irrelevant distractions. The limits for people getting married are legislated by the state and I think it's about time for equality between people of different sexual orientations.

[jackattack]

 

Awful comparison.

 

 

 

A) That would be trespass (Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you don't open your house to fellow believers, do you?)

 

B) There's no legal rights to be gained through taking meth, as there is with marriage.

 

 

 

I'll repeat my question, which you failed to answer instead giving an irrelevant comparison; give me one secular reason why gay marriage should not be allowed? "Because it's my religion" just doesn't cut it as an argument in the modern world, sorry.

 

 

 

 

 

I still can't believe what your saying. It's one thing to say that the government should sanction gay marriages, but to force the Church to marry gays? Thats a whole other level. Should we force the Church to operate an abortion clinic as well?

[Ginger_Warrior]

 

Awful comparison.

 

 

 

A) That would be trespass (Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you don't open your house to fellow believers, do you?)

 

B) There's no legal rights to be gained through taking meth, as there is with marriage.

 

 

 

I'll repeat my question, which you failed to answer instead giving an irrelevant comparison; give me one secular reason why gay marriage should not be allowed? "Because it's my religion" just doesn't cut it as an argument in the modern world, sorry.

 

 

 

 

 

I still can't believe what your saying. It's one thing to say that the government should sanction gay marriages, but to force the Church to marry gays? Thats a whole other level. Should we force the Church to operate an abortion clinic as well?

 

No, because doctors surgeries are used for abortions.

 

 

 

You are one of the few institutions in the world which grant recognised marriage status. Thus, you can effectively control who receives that status, and effectively force inequality based on your own convictions.

 

 

 

This is wrong in a society that promotes equal opportunity.

 

 

 

I do not see how your beliefs allow you to promote inequality in the face of the law.

[user1991]

Jackattack, answer Ginger's question.

 

 

 

One secular reason why gays should not be allowed to marry?

 

 

 

If you're going to be anti-gay atleast admit that its because of your religious beliefs instead of trying to bs your way out of it ..

[mmmcannibalism]

to say churches should have to marry gay couples is completely ridiculous. Gay couples should be allowed to get married through the state just like everyone else, but saying churches should be required to marry them is saying that freedom of religion means you have freedom to be controlled. Even couples that get married in churches still have to get a liscense for the marriage to be recognized so the actual ceremony has no "official" value. If there is a religion/church that will marry gay couples then I would say good for them.

 

 

 

Also to say churches would have to perfrom gay marriages against their morals is like saying that everyone has to smoke marijuana because some people think it should be allowed. Before you say that isn't a relevant example realize that gay marriage and marijuana are not allowed/illegal(in most areas);therefore, they are close enough to be compared

[user1991]

Also to say churches would have to perfrom gay marriages against their morals is like saying that everyone has to smoke marijuana because some people think it should be allowed. Before you say that isn't a relevant example realize that gay marriage and marijuana are not allowed/illegal(in most areas);therefore, they are close enough to be compared

 

 

 

Possibly the worst analogy I have ever, ever heard. I mean.. cmon. Are you actually being serious?

[magekillr]

The church pays no taxes...it should have no leverage about what it can/cannot do while existing in the USA. Even if they did, they still should not be allowed to openly discriminate. However, they are already not paying their entry fee, they should have no voice in the matter. Other private businesses pay taxes on their property to make their own discrimination (like country clubs barring women from certain areas), but they do not.

 

 

 

edit: wow that was poorly worded, but w/e...you get the gist.

[mmmcannibalism]

thetruenoob--yes im serious both are issues of what people have the right to do even though others feel such things should be/remain illegal

 

 

 

The church pays no taxes...it should have no leverage about what it can/cannot do while existing in the USA. Even if they did, they still should not be allowed to openly discriminate. However, they are already not paying their entry fee, they should have no voice in the matter. Other private businesses pay taxes on their property to make their own discrimination (like country clubs barring women from certain areas), but they do not.

 

 

 

Do I need to explain the concept of freedom of religion?

 

 

 

Also churches are tax exempt because almost all of a churches money comes from what most people would consider donations(collections in church, church festivals, stuff like that). To tax churches would mean people would be donating money to the state. Please explain to me also why someone would want to get married in a church that is being forced to marry them? Unless they want to do it just out of spite in which case they are just getting married to make the church mad, killing the whole purpose of allowing the marriage.

 

 

 

Before you start saying im being judgemental actually think about that for a second. If a church openly opposes gays or at least wont marry them why would a gay couple want to be married there when they would get the same legal rights from a marriage at the local court house?

[jackattack]

Jackattack, answer Ginger's question.

 

 

 

One secular reason why gays should not be allowed to marry?

 

 

 

If you're going to be anti-gay atleast admit that its because of your religious beliefs instead of trying to bs your way out of it ..

 

 

 

It is my religious beliefs. Why do I need a secular reason to be against gays getting married in my Church?

[Roberthree]

I hate black people because it's my religion. I'm KKKristian.

[jackattack]

I hate black people because it's my religion. I'm KKKristian.

 

 

 

Sweet dude

[Ginger_Warrior]

Jackattack, answer Ginger's question.

 

 

 

One secular reason why gays should not be allowed to marry?

 

 

 

If you're going to be anti-gay atleast admit that its because of your religious beliefs instead of trying to bs your way out of it ..

 

 

 

It is my religious beliefs. Why do I need a secular reason to be against gays getting married in my Church?

 

Because for those of us who are not religious, and have to put with an established Church which doesn't pay any tax, when we see that you own the keys to legalised marital status, we feel you should offer that service to everyone or no one. In other words, accept that gays have no moral or ethical reason to be denied marriage, and marry them, or else lose that exclusivity altogether, and instead of civil partnerships, we'll just grant secular marriages to homosexuals. Like it or not, that's the fork in the road coming for you.

 

 

 

I can just about accept the church not allowing gay priests or women - but when you're dealing with the public, that changes completely.

 

 

 

See, what I'm reading is this. You've said you don't mind gays. I doubt that. You've whined about how gays 'antagonise' you purposefully while you're in town simply for being gay (you mentioned they just about take their shirt off... oh that's so teasing -.-), and now you're saying gays aren't welcome inside your Church (and tried dressing it up by saying gays don't want to be there anyway. Quite clearly the fact we are even having this debate shows they do).

 

 

 

Will you please stop spinning your stance about homosexuality in a way that sounds remotely tolerant, and just admit that you don't like gays? I've far more respect for a man who just says what he means, rather than one who tries to dress up his opinion in a fancy, sophisticated way.

[thrash-boy]

haven't read the whole thing, 45 pages would take all day.

 

in my personal opinion: yes, its wrong

 

in the opinion from my head that is actually calculated and thought out: no, its not wrong, as long as it doesn't impact people who don't want to take that path

[Zierro]

When it comes to sociality, it's wrong. When it comes to morality, it's fine. I think that's the easiest way to describe it.

[sibmaster]

When it comes to sociality, it's wrong. When it comes to morality, it's fine. I think that's the easiest way to describe it.

 

 

 

Do you mean socially and morally? or am i just think what you said arent words?

 

and explain how it is socially wrong?

[mmmcannibalism]

Because for those of us who are not religious, and have to put with an established Church which doesn't pay any tax, when we see that you own the keys to legalised marital status, we feel you should offer that service to everyone or no one. In other words, accept that gays have no moral or ethical reason to be denied marriage, and marry them, or else lose that exclusivity altogether, and instead of civil partnerships, we'll just grant secular marriages to homosexuals. Like it or not, that's the fork in the road coming for you

 

 

 

You realize that a marriage is only legal with a marriage liscense? The church ceremony is just that, a ceremony. Its pretty clear you dont actually care about anyones rights, since you are saying religion should be controlled and have its beliefs chosen. If you want to say that a religious institution doesnt have the right to its own beliefs then I say you arent allowed to speak your mind without being incarcerated, that the government should have complete control of everyones thoughts, and everyone should be required to become the same religion. Thats what your encouraging, saying that freedom of religion means nothing as the government should be controlling the churches. Sounds like you are encouraging communism which is exactly what America is not.

 

 

 

and where do you get off saying you are "putting up with a church that doesnt pay tax" does the church come use its tax exempt money to protest at your house or something because thats the only way i think they could be bothering you.

[feedmetotheforest]

Because for those of us who are not religious, and have to put with an established Church which doesn't pay any tax, when we see that you own the keys to legalised marital status, we feel you should offer that service to everyone or no one. In other words, accept that gays have no moral or ethical reason to be denied marriage, and marry them, or else lose that exclusivity altogether, and instead of civil partnerships, we'll just grant secular marriages to homosexuals. Like it or not, that's the fork in the road coming for you

 

 

 

You realize that a marriage is only legal with a marriage liscense? The church ceremony is just that, a ceremony. Its pretty clear you dont actually care about anyones rights, since you are saying religion should be controlled and have its beliefs chosen. If you want to say that a religious institution doesnt have the right to its own beliefs then I say you arent allowed to speak your mind without being incarcerated, that the government should have complete control of everyones thoughts, and everyone should be required to become the same religion. Thats what your encouraging, saying that freedom of religion means nothing as the government should be controlling the churches. Sounds like you are encouraging communism which is exactly what America is not.

 

 

 

and where do you get off saying you are "putting up with a church that doesnt pay tax" does the church come use its tax exempt money to protest at your house or something because thats the only way i think they could be bothering you.

 

 

 

 

 

forcing people to do something one way or another never works history has shown us this time and time again, so forcing the churches to marry people in my opinion is not the right way to go, instead the focus should be put on individuals being allowed to marry through the state, and I mean "marriage" not what happened in Connecticut, Vermont, New Jersey, and New Hampshire who have created legal unions that carry the same rights, but stopping short of giving them the actual title of marriage. While I know this is just a name, it is something I believe every person should be entitled to.

 

 

 

Though I do not feel the church should be forced to marry couples in the church, I really hope they lose their slave mentality and realize they are shunning some of their own believers... I have said much more on the subject in a previous post so this is all I will say for now