Minn passes gay marriage

[bodecea]

You're full of shit. Those are direct quotes from the Bible and their meaning is unmistakable. God isn't telling anyone to go KILL fags, he's saying that homos will not be given every lasting life. YOU get YOUR facts straight. God most certainly does think homosexuality is an abomination, and you better get that straight before you get lumped in for lying.

Go peddle your propaganda somewhere else.

God isn't telling anyone to kill gay people? Really?

"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

Put to death means killed. It says nothing about everlasting life. God says that homosexuals should be put to death for their 'sins'.

Admit it, and support your God!

007 is more and more like his muslim brethren every day.

 

[bodecea]

Hey, people voted on it. They are free to use their votes however they please. You lay all of these traps, and I sidestep each and every one of them.

If Liberals are opposed to religion, do they have the right to demand it be banned because their beliefs contradict it? See how that works, Noomi?

People on your side of the aisle have a lot of work before you label others as oppressive.

If someone is opposed to religion, you can't demand it be banned because everyone has the right to believe as they wish - what you can't do is force your beliefs on others, which is exactly what you wish to do!

Wrong again, marriage has been defined as the holy union between a man and a woman in the eyes of God almost since the beginning of recorded time. Now it is YOU and the HOMOS that want to REDEFINE IT, and FORCE it on those who want it to remain as it is.

Next?

So, civil marriage by those who do not believe in your god isn't really marriage. Lots of unmarried people out there who think they are married. You should go around and set them straight.

 

[Seawytch]

You know what's going to do in gay men? If they ever "cure" HIV or get a vaccine for it, and gay men go back to not using condoms even worse than they currently do (record HIV infenctions going on right now in the MSM community), if something worse comes along that kills much quicker, it will turn up first in the gay community again. Actually I should say WHEN and not IF. Becuase it absolutely will happen.

Sorry buddy, but the "next big thing" in STDs is already here...and it's mostly hitting the STR8s.

Antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea discovered; are 'superbug' chlamydia, syphilis strains next?

 

[bodecea]

It's depressing to live in a society that's disintegrating just the way Rome did. Ultimately something will come along to replace what we destroyed. That's about the only light in this very dark tunnel. The normalization of perversion and depravity never lasts for long.

You mean the Rome that started disintegrating when the emperor forced everyone to become Christian.....

 

[Seawytch]

Total, complete nonsense. Religious people have the right to effect legislation. There is no doubt of this. Why do liberals continually tout this mistruth?

You do not get to base the laws of OUR country on YOUR religion. You don't get to base who gets equal protection based on what YOUR bible says.

Sure, some might try...

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix. (Trail Judge Loving v Virginia)

But they FAIL.

Yes, as a matter of fact, people can and do make laws based on their religion. Religous tests are against the law for both voting and holding office. You can't tell people what to base laws on, you dolt. You can't stop religious people from running for office and voting their conscience.

Just get off it. You're misinformed and way off base.

You do realize that the abolitionist movement was religion-based, don't you? You do know that John Brown believed he was an instrument of God for freeing the slaves, right?

Your ignorance is abysmal.

Of course you can be inspired by god, but we aren't basing our laws on your bible. Sorry, this is fact. Yes, our laws are a moral code and based on moral codes, but they are not based on any ONE religion and just because your religion says gays can't be married, is not a justification for denying legal civil marriage that would stand up in a court of law.

 

[novasteve]

Gays are already getting record amounts of anal, throat and mouth cancers due to HPV. ANd only an idiot thinks gardisil will prevent remotely all of that.

 

[bodecea]

Gays are already getting record amounts of anal, throat and mouth cancers due to HPV. ANd only an idiot thinks gardisil will prevent remotely all of that.

Link, if you please.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Gays are already getting record amounts of anal, throat and mouth cancers due to HPV. ANd only an idiot thinks gardisil will prevent remotely all of that.

Link, if you please.

i have not heard of that

 

[novasteve]

Gay men should be screened for HPV-related cancers - Washington Blade - America's Leading Gay News Source : Washington Blade ? America's Leading Gay News Source

The Next Gay Plague: Anal Cancer | Lavender Magazine

Oped HPV Infection Is a Gay Men Health Crisis | Advocate.com

(HPV is a gay men’s health issue. Anal cancer affects about two in 100,000 people in the U.S., but the rate of anal cancer among gay and bisexual men is as much as 44 times higher.)

HPV and Cancer » The National LGBT Cancer Network

 

[Katzndogz]

It's depressing to live in a society that's disintegrating just the way Rome did. Ultimately something will come along to replace what we destroyed. That's about the only light in this very dark tunnel. The normalization of perversion and depravity never lasts for long.

LOL...and the "fall of Rome" analogies are my favorite. Wasn't "they gheys" fault ya'll...

Of course it wasn't the gays fault. After all, gays lived quite successfully forever. It is the acceptance of deviancy as normal. Many forms of deviancy not just being gay. It was the acceptance of marital destruction. The encouragement of sexual promiscuity and substance abuse in celebrating getting and being drunk. And, of course Rome did have one other contributor, the lead in the water pipes that drove people insane. We don't have lead in the water pipes, but a good substitute is the widespread use and acceptance of drugs.

The normalization of homosexuality isn't a cause. It's a symptom of something much sicker.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

You do not get to base the laws of OUR country on YOUR religion. You don't get to base who gets equal protection based on what YOUR bible says.

Sure, some might try...

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix. (Trail Judge Loving v Virginia)

But they FAIL.

Yes, as a matter of fact, people can and do make laws based on their religion. Religous tests are against the law for both voting and holding office. You can't tell people what to base laws on, you dolt. You can't stop religious people from running for office and voting their conscience.

Just get off it. You're misinformed and way off base.

You do realize that the abolitionist movement was religion-based, don't you? You do know that John Brown believed he was an instrument of God for freeing the slaves, right?

Your ignorance is abysmal.

Of course you can be inspired by god, but we aren't basing our laws on your bible. Sorry, this is fact. Yes, our laws are a moral code and based on moral codes, but they are not based on any ONE religion and just because your religion says gays can't be married, is not a justification for denying legal civil marriage that would stand up in a court of law.

It most assuredly is a justification. Don't pretend it is not. Oh, and stop this YOUR religion bullshit. It accomplishes nothing but making you look like an anti-religious nutcase.

Laws are based on the moral codes of the community, as you managed, probably by accident, to point out.

There is no more right for gays to marry than for cousins to marry or for polygamy.

If you offered your argument to the writers of the 14th Amendment they'd roll on the floor laughing.

If you want to present the case for gay marriage to the electorate, you have the right to do so. You do not have the right to stop people voting and making law based on their own moral code. You can't exclude them. You cannot overturn the laws because you don't like them and have a penchant for misinterpreting the 14th Amendment.

 

[bodecea]

Gay men should be screened for HPV-related cancers - Washington Blade - America's Leading Gay News Source : Washington Blade ? America's Leading Gay News Source

The Next Gay Plague: Anal Cancer | Lavender Magazine

Oped HPV Infection Is a Gay Men Health Crisis | Advocate.com

(HPV is a gay men’s health issue. Anal cancer affects about two in 100,000 people in the U.S., but the rate of anal cancer among gay and bisexual men is as much as 44 times higher.)

HPV and Cancer » The National LGBT Cancer Network

Thank you...I will read up on them.

 

[novasteve]

Gay men should be screened for HPV-related cancers - Washington Blade - America's Leading Gay News Source : Washington Blade ? America's Leading Gay News Source

The Next Gay Plague: Anal Cancer | Lavender Magazine

Oped HPV Infection Is a Gay Men Health Crisis | Advocate.com

(HPV is a gay men’s health issue. Anal cancer affects about two in 100,000 people in the U.S., but the rate of anal cancer among gay and bisexual men is as much as 44 times higher.)

HPV and Cancer » The National LGBT Cancer Network

Thank you...I will read up on them.

You do that. They are all pretty much repeitive. Some have more statistics than others do. not even the maker of gardisil promises that it can prevent remotely all of these cancers, but I am afraid it will create a false sense of security and lead to more cancers.

 

[jon_berzerk]

It's depressing to live in a society that's disintegrating just the way Rome did. Ultimately something will come along to replace what we destroyed. That's about the only light in this very dark tunnel. The normalization of perversion and depravity never lasts for long.

You mean the Rome that started disintegrating when the emperor forced everyone to become Christian.....

in ancient Rome homosexuality was very one sided

the dominatio (free male) which possessed liberty had the say over the all the infamia


which included slaves prostitutes and entertainers and children over the age of 12

 

[novasteve]

There was some dude in my roman civilization class my friends and I called cinaedus

 

[jon_berzerk]

there was some dude in my roman civilization class my friends and i called cinaedus

--lol

 

[PaulS1950]

Homosexuality is common among mammals the world over. Even members of the great apes practice sexual interactions of the same gender. From small mammals like mice and rats to wild horses and chimps. Mankind has been practicing homosexual acts as far back as 4000BCE. The problem is that it was not called homosexuality, it was called sex. It was common for the head of the houshold to keep young males slaves to serve his sexual desires when the women of the household were "unclean" or unavailable due to their period or pregnancy. In the Jewish texts it was written that a man shall not lay with a man while he lays with a woman because it was considered sinful to have a jewish child who's house could not be determined. The house is taken from the father and if two men have the same woman and a child is born then it is an abomination in the eyes of God. In the translation to the Old English the word "as" was substituted for "while" (similar to "you should not drink as you drive", "blondes should not chew gum as they walk", or "smoking as others are eating is considered rude") The common meaning was changed but those churches that used the Vulgate version of the Bible used the original meaning. There was still a sacrement of marriage in the Holy Roman Church and some of its derivitives for same gender marriage up until the 1800s.
Not all churches are against same gender marriage and in most places in the US judges and majistrates can also perform marriages. No law can be passed to compel any religious faith to perform an act that is against their doctrine so it is not a religious matter.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, as a matter of fact, people can and do make laws based on their religion. Religous tests are against the law for both voting and holding office. You can't tell people what to base laws on, you dolt. You can't stop religious people from running for office and voting their conscience.

Just get off it. You're misinformed and way off base.

You do realize that the abolitionist movement was religion-based, don't you? You do know that John Brown believed he was an instrument of God for freeing the slaves, right?

Your ignorance is abysmal.

Of course you can be inspired by god, but we aren't basing our laws on your bible. Sorry, this is fact. Yes, our laws are a moral code and based on moral codes, but they are not based on any ONE religion and just because your religion says gays can't be married, is not a justification for denying legal civil marriage that would stand up in a court of law.

It most assuredly is a justification. Don't pretend it is not. Oh, and stop this YOUR religion bullshit. It accomplishes nothing but making you look like an anti-religious nutcase.

I don't have to pretend anything. Trying to deny legal, civil marriage based on your religious text will not stand up in any court of law.

Saying "your" religion does not necessarily equate to being anti-religious. Did it ever occur to you that I simply do not ascribe to your beliefs and instead have my own? My own religious text? Would it be better if I said "your interpretation of the bible"?

Laws are based on the moral codes of the community, as you managed, probably by accident, to point out.

That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that you cannot base your laws on a single religious belief or text. Are there any religions that don't have moral prohibitions on most of the "codes" we put into law? Murder, thievery, rape, etc?

What you simply cannot do is say "gays can't be married 'cause the bible tells me so".

There is no more right for gays to marry than for cousins to marry or for polygamy.

There is a fundamental right to marry. This has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. In order to deny that fundamental right to a group of people you demonstrate a societal harm if those marriages were to occur. You can't.

Cousins already can marry in some states. Some even allow as close as 1st cousins to marry if they can demonstrate an inability to procreate.

A civil marriage contract is designed to make clear the legal rights and responsibilities of two people in a partnership. Who makes medical decisions in a polygamous marriage? Polygamy would do the opposite of what civil marriage is intended to do, codify the rights and responsibilities of two consenting adults in a committed relationship.

If you offered your argument to the writers of the 14th Amendment they'd roll on the floor laughing.

They would have laughed at blacks using the same water fountain too. You do know that societies progress, right?

If you want to present the case for gay marriage to the electorate, you have the right to do so. You do not have the right to stop people voting and making law based on their own moral code. You can't exclude them. You cannot overturn the laws because you don't like them and have a penchant for misinterpreting the 14th Amendment.

Why, yes we can. We can challenge them in court...then they go the SCOTUS. Why? Because minority rights should not be subject to majority votes. That's an easy one.

 

[Katzndogz]

It's depressing to live in a society that's disintegrating just the way Rome did. Ultimately something will come along to replace what we destroyed. That's about the only light in this very dark tunnel. The normalization of perversion and depravity never lasts for long.

You mean the Rome that started disintegrating when the emperor forced everyone to become Christian.....

You are almost right. Christianity did indeed start overrunning the sick and diseased Roman empire. But Emperors didn't start forcing anyone to become Christian until much later. Emperor Constantine didn't even impose Christianity, he merely made Christianity the equal of the Roman Religion. You might say that if Rome had not become corrupt, there would never have been a rise of Christianity at all. First the people had to lose their faith in their own religion. Then Christianity could grow.

Today it could be described as the rise of Islam after people lose their faith in Christianity. We all know how gay friendly Islam is.

 

[kiwiman127]

As an interesting sidebar to the OP.

Minnesota gay marriage deal has roots in gun debate
Minnesota gay marriage deal has roots in gun debate | StarTribune.com

It seems that the Democrats in Minnesota's legislature forfeited strict gun control legislation for gay marriage.
Now, I know everybody who is against gay marriage on this thread are also pro-gun. Hey folks, you didn't lose everything, you actually gained something! So what's more important to you, guns rights or no gay marriages?