Homosexuality: Right or Wrong?

[Wizz]

It's ok to have an Opinion but when that opinion is taken to the extremes, then I don't like those who do not support us. Especially the Church, I remember going to a friends 15( a party in our Culture) and when they were done blessing her I went to go to the car to get ready for the Party. But on the car was a little Pamphlet wich said:

 

"Jesus HATES: Fornicators, etc. Homosexuals, Bisexuals, GAYS"

 

Gays, wow they have their own section even though they belong in Homosexuals. Also the term "Jesus HATES" I found Ironic, I though it was Jesus Christ who spread the Idea of loving everything, including your enemies.

 

Then I had a conversation with a Woman on the street who is Voting for Prop 8 because she wants to Maintain the Sanctity of Marriages. Then I just retorted that if she really wants to maintain the Sanctity of Marriages that we should also remove Divorces, she then Excalimed that I should not "question my elders or God" and that I should keep quite because I'm a "Dirt Brown Mexican who will never vote because I'm not a Citizen". -.-

[jackattack]

Yes on 8! I'm with the Tongans on this one. And only partially because I'm scared of them. I just get a terrifying feeling whenever I hear Gavin Newsom say "whether you like it or not" in between affairs and providing alcohol to minors.

 

 

 

:ohnoes:

[Cup Lion]

The Church teaches that it isn't a sin to be homosexual, but it is to outwardly display it. Jesus definitely did not hate homosexuals. The pamphlet is wrong.

 

 

 

I like people of all orientations the same. When they starts getting weird with me is when I start to worry.

[Kati10999]

Personally I dont care what people do as long as they arent flashing it in my face.

 

 

 

But I myself am not very religious, so obviously I would say let them get married.

 

I guess the only way we can make everyone happy is to let them be together but keep it out of the church and give them the same benefits.

[Howlin0001]

But I myself am not very religious, so obviously I would say let them get married.

 

You don't have to be religious to be against homosexuality.

[The Dark Lord]

I have to laugh about the people who blurt out all this "sanctitiy of 'traditional' marriage" BS. What is "traditional" marriage? A man and many wives? Arranged marriages? Oh and if they're maintaining the "sanctity" of marriage, shouldn't they try to ban divorces, too? Kind of ironic, isn't it?

 

 

 

Oh and Prop 8 did pass, unfortunately. Let's just hope that Prop 8 gets overturned, just as some human rights advocates are trying to do as we speak. Oh well. At least Matthew Shepard Act (I think it's still alive. I don't remember Bush vetoing it.) will pass now that we have Obama and an even greater Democratic House and Senate majority. And if the Conservative Supreme Court judges retire as they plan to, perhaps some liberal Judges as well.

[RichieMcD]

I always laugh when I see a fundamentalist Christian going on about "Jesus hates gays, bisexuals" etc because If I recall correctly although it says homosexuality is bad it never once was said by Jesus but also Jesus often proclaimed to love all people even you enemy. When you're proclaiming your hate for something under the mask of religion it usually helps to know what you're talking about and not contradict basic facts / common knowledge.

 

 

 

The icing on the cake though is when you outsmart them, prove them wrong and they answer with "do not question the word of our lord", can't answer for yourself eh?

[Hernet0]

I have no issue with it as long as they don't bug me personaly. They are going to have to answer to God (or whatever your religion takes for an omnipotant force). I am discusted by them but I don't hate them because that is also against my religion.

[RSBDavid]

AS long as there is a lack of PDA ,I dont give a flying crap.

[RichieMcD]

I have no issue with it as long as they don't bug me personaly. They are going to have to answer to God (or whatever your religion takes for an omnipotant force). I am discusted by them but I don't hate them because that is also against my religion.

 

 

 

Disgusted for feeling one of the most basic human emotions Love? Explain to me without using religion as an argument what is so disgusting or evil about it simply because the masses aren't homosexual and it's a minority.

[Zierro]

Disgusted for feeling one of the most basic human emotions Love? Explain to me without using religion as an argument what is so disgusting or evil about it simply because the masses aren't homosexual and it's a minority.

 

 

 

I don't see what's wrong with being "disgusted" by it. Another basic thing about humans is that we're all ethnocentric.

[RichieMcD]

Disgusted for feeling one of the most basic human emotions Love? Explain to me without using religion as an argument what is so disgusting or evil about it simply because the masses aren't homosexual and it's a minority.

 

 

 

I don't see what's wrong with being "disgusted" by it. Another basic thing about humans is that we're all ethnocentric.

 

I can easily understand how it is a sexual turn off, I'm straight and wouldn't feel comfortable with 2 homosexual men kissing in front of me, I wouldn't find it disgusting but I also wouldn't find it something that brightens up my day.

 

 

 

But I find the attitude "it's disgusting, evil and should be banned" etc simply because it's a minority thing immature and close minded. I obviously understand people not being attracted to it or liking showing of homosexual affection, but being disgusted by it is like saying "no, such and such shouldn't be allowed together".

[Zierro]

I agree with you there. It's totally unreasonable to ban something like that. I was just saying having the opinion that it's disgusting is completely normal.

[Sly_Wizard]

:

 

 

 

I have to laugh about the people who blurt out all this "sanctitiy of 'traditional' marriage" BS. What is "traditional" marriage?

 

 

 

"A formal union of a man and a woman by which they become husband and wife."

 

 

 

Traditional does not mean historical. The sooner people realize the difference between the two, the better.

 

 

 

A man and many wives?

 

 

 

Nope.

 

 

 

Arranged marriages?

 

 

 

So long as it's between one man and one woman, yes.

 

 

 

Oh and if they're maintaining the "sanctity" of marriage, shouldn't they try to ban divorces, too? Kind of ironic, isn't it?

 

 

 

Nope. Why would you try to ban divorce? That doesn't make marriage less sacred.

 

 

 

Oh and Prop 8 did pass, unfortunately. Let's just hope that Prop 8 gets overturned, just as some human rights advocates are trying to do as we speak.

 

 

 

I'd like to see how they're going to do that, unless California's Supreme Court wants to set a prcendent and rule a constitutional amendment unconstitutional.

 

 

 

Edit: I don't think it would be a precedent, but it would cause a major uproar.

 

 

 

And if the Conservative Supreme Court judges retire as they plan to, perhaps some liberal Judges as well.

 

 

 

What would that do? SCOTUS has already ruled that gay-marriage is not a Constitutional (Nation) issue and is an issue left up to the states as each state has a vested interest in who they give marriage licenses to.

[jackattack]

 

Oh and Prop 8 did pass, unfortunately. Let's just hope that Prop 8 gets overturned, just as some human rights advocates are trying to do as we speak. Oh well. At least Matthew Shepard Act (I think it's still alive. I don't remember Bush vetoing it.) will pass now that we have Obama and an even greater Democratic House and Senate majority. And if the Conservative Supreme Court judges retire as they plan to, perhaps some liberal Judges as well.

 

 

 

Well we all know "as goes California, so goes the Nation" I sure hope that works both ways because "it's gonna happen, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!"

[Zierro]

Nope. Why would you try to ban divorce? That doesn't make marriage less sacred.

 

 

 

And homosexual marriage does?

[Sly_Wizard]

Nope. Why would you try to ban divorce? That doesn't make marriage less sacred.

 

 

 

And homosexual marriage does?

 

 

 

Following the definition of a traditional marriage given on the last page, yes.

[Zierro]

If a few people don't follow the traditional guidelines, how does that effect the sacredness of heterosexual marriages? It's like saying metal (in general) isn't cool anymore because of hair metal. Gay marriage doesn't make straight marriage any less sacred.

[sithlord_man]

If someone want to marry the same sex, they should; but then you have the guy in the corner going "OH MY GOD! He's marrying the same gender he is! I must tell the government and make a law against it!" This is when people should mind there own business and not care about someone getting married to the same-sex as them. Also the government shouldn't be involved like it is right now in California and the other states.

[llcoolguy972]

Oh and Prop 8 did pass, unfortunately. Let's just hope that Prop 8 gets overturned, just as some human rights advocates are trying to do as we speak.

 

 

 

I'd like to see how they're going to do that, unless California's Supreme Court wants to set a prcendent and rule a constitutional amendment unconstitutional.

 

 

 

Edit: I don't think it would be a precedent, but it would cause a major uproar.

 

The court doesn't have to overrule it. There can be another amendment. Ever hear of the 18 and 21 Amendment to the US Constitution? Prohibition and the repeal of it.

 

 

 

Nope. Why would you try to ban divorce? That doesn't make marriage less sacred.

 

 

 

And homosexual marriage does?

 

 

 

Following the definition of a traditional marriage given on the last page, yes.

 

So a drunken marriage between a man and a woman in Vegas that doesn't last 3 days is more sacred than one between two men/women who have been together for a few years, are truly in love, and can't imagine spending their lives with anyone else? I would say the latter is the definition of a 'sacred' marriage.

[Sly_Wizard]

If a few people don't follow the traditional guidelines, how does that effect the sacredness of heterosexual marriages? It's like saying metal (in general) isn't cool anymore because of hair metal. Gay marriage doesn't make straight marriage any less sacred.

 

 

 

I thought my my last post on the last page was pretty clear. I also like how you've tried to shift the focus from "marriage" to just "heterosexual marriage", which is a distinction proponents of traditional marriages don't make. Pretty sly of you ;)

 

 

 

If someone want to marry the same sex, they should; but then you have the guy in the corner going "OH MY GOD! He's marrying the same gender he is! I must tell the government and make a law against it!" This is when people should mind there own business and not care about someone getting married to the same-sex as them. Also the government shouldn't be involved like it is right now in California and the other states.

 

 

 

Ummm... They don't stay out of it because state governments issue marriage licenses? For that reason alone they have a vested interest in who gets married and who doesn't (So sayeth SCOTUS, which is why each state is allowed to regulate same-sex marriages as it sees fit).

 

 

 

The court doesn't have to overrule it. There can be another amendment. Ever hear of the 18 and 21 Amendment to the US Constitution? Prohibition and the repeal of it.

 

 

 

You must have missed the fact that opponents of Amendment 8 are trying to challenge it IN COURT even though it's already passed and the courts can't override a constitutional amendment nor can they write a new one, as that's not what courts do.

 

 

 

So a drunken marriage between a man and a woman in Vegas that doesn't last 3 days is more sacred than one between two men/women who have been together for a few years, are truly in love, and can't imagine spending their lives with anyone else? I would say the latter is the definition of a 'sacred' marriage.

 

 

 

I'm just gonna' copy and paste the most pertinent part of my response in what you quoted:

 

 

 

"Following the definition of a traditional marriage given on the last page, yes."

[llcoolguy972]

The court doesn't have to overrule it. There can be another amendment. Ever hear of the 18 and 21 Amendment to the US Constitution? Prohibition and the repeal of it.

 

 

 

You must have missed the fact that opponents of Amendment 8 are trying to challenge it IN COURT even though it's already passed and the courts can't override a constitutional amendment nor can they write a new one, as that's not what courts do.

 

I haven't started following the challenges, but they may be challenging the amendment with the US Constitution.

 

 

 

So a drunken marriage between a man and a woman in Vegas that doesn't last 3 days is more sacred than one between two men/women who have been together for a few years, are truly in love, and can't imagine spending their lives with anyone else? I would say the latter is the definition of a 'sacred' marriage.

 

 

 

I'm just gonna' copy and paste the most pertinent part of my response in what you quoted:

 

 

 

"Following the definition of a traditional marriage given on the last page, yes."

 

The 'definition' on the previous page is yours. I can define a traditional marriage as one between a cow and a chicken, but that doesn't mean it's true.

[Faux]

I'm alright with guys [bleep]ing other guys. But marriage? Get the [bleep] out of here.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Nope. Why would you try to ban divorce? That doesn't make marriage less sacred.

 

 

 

And homosexual marriage does?

 

 

 

Following the definition of a traditional marriage given on the last page, yes.

 

OK, we'll follow the definition of a traditional marriage. When I get married, which will now be a requirement for decent social recognition, I expect my washing done folded in my wooden drawer, and my food cooked when I get home. I expect my wife to care of the kids, sweep up around the house, grow the crops while I go out and work. In her spare time, I expect her to socialise with other women and tell them how great I am, and how I deserve greater recognition. Any question of her getting a career or seeing another man at all is a complete no-no; her place is in the house with me, breeding, and sowing my torn up clothes together again.

 

 

 

Seriously, please just grow up.

[Sly_Wizard]

I haven't started following the challenges, but they may be challenging the amendment with the US Constitution.

 

 

 

That'll fail. There's nothing in the U.S. constitution which guarantees the right to marriage. If you think there is, then find it.

 

 

 

If you're gonna' quote the 14th Amendment I'm gonna' laugh at you, because under that marriage would be classified in the vein as states issuing driver's licenses to a select group of people. But go ahead and show me how you figure :P

 

 

 

The 'definition' on the previous page is yours. I can define a traditional marriage as one between a cow and a chicken, but that doesn't mean it's true.

 

 

 

You're not being serious, are you? If you live in the U.S., then you should know what's meant by the term "traditional marriage" since it's almost always accompanied by the phrase "One man and one woman".

 

 

 

OK, we'll follow the definition of a traditional marriage. When I get married, which will now be a requirement for decent social recognition, I expect my washing done folded in my wooden drawer, and my food cooked when I get home. I expect my wife to care of the kids, sweep up around the house, grow the crops while I go out and work. In her spare time, I expect her to socialise with other women and tell them how great I am, and how I deserve greater recognition. Any question of her getting a career or seeing another man at all is a complete no-no; her place is in the house with me, breeding, and sowing my torn up clothes together again.

 

 

 

Seriously, please just grow up.

 

 

 

I wonder why I bother writing stuff out 'cuz I, apparently, only do it for my benefit. There was this post-- On the last page, mind you-- Where I said something along the lines of "Traditional marriage =/= Historical marriage". You, though, obviously missed it.

 

 

 

:wall: