Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[deltex1]

YOUR polls. Simple as that

So you were relying upon the polls that you said we can't rely upon?

You are just going further down the rabbit hole.

I'm using your polls against you....you're just too dumb to recognize it

Your just making crap up- and then complaining about when people post actual polls.

You both want to argue that most Americans are against gay marriage, and then reject all evidence which shows that you are just making that crap up.

You spend an awful amount of time on homosexual issues, in fact you remind me of some of the Yahoo Gaystapo crowd, they keep claiming they are straight and married while in reality they are old queens trying to make it appear they have all this "str8" support. Just an observation

I'm using your polls against you....you're just too dumb to recognize it

Your just making crap up- and then complaining about when people post actual polls.

You both want to argue that most Americans are against gay marriage, and then reject all evidence which shows that you are just making that crap up.

You spend an awful amount of time on homosexual issues, in fact you remind me of some of the Yahoo Gaystapo crowd, they keep claiming they are straight and married while in reality they are old queens trying to make it appear they have all this "str8" support. Just an observation

And yet here you are- spending an awful amount of time on homosexual issues. In fact you remind me of some of the homophobic racists who keep claiming that they aren't bigots while in fact they hate blacks, Jews and homosexuals with the same vigor.

Just an observation.

Your constant use of "homophobic" is telling.

And yet here you are- spending an awful amount of time on homosexual issues. In fact you remind me of some of the homophobic racists who keep claiming that they aren't bigots while in fact they hate blacks, Jews and homosexuals with the same vigor.

Just an observation.

Your constant use of 'Gaystapo' is telling.

Look at how many posts there are on this stupid subject...you people can't let it go.

 

[Syriusly]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Men define religious marriage all the time.

However the only thing we are talking about here is civil law.

Religions can do whatever they want.

 

[Syriusly]

So you were relying upon the polls that you said we can't rely upon?

You are just going further down the rabbit hole.

I'm using your polls against you....you're just too dumb to recognize it

Your just making crap up- and then complaining about when people post actual polls.

You both want to argue that most Americans are against gay marriage, and then reject all evidence which shows that you are just making that crap up.

You spend an awful amount of time on homosexual issues, in fact you remind me of some of the Yahoo Gaystapo crowd, they keep claiming they are straight and married while in reality they are old queens trying to make it appear they have all this "str8" support. Just an observation

Your just making crap up- and then complaining about when people post actual polls.

You both want to argue that most Americans are against gay marriage, and then reject all evidence which shows that you are just making that crap up.

You spend an awful amount of time on homosexual issues, in fact you remind me of some of the Yahoo Gaystapo crowd, they keep claiming they are straight and married while in reality they are old queens trying to make it appear they have all this "str8" support. Just an observation

And yet here you are- spending an awful amount of time on homosexual issues. In fact you remind me of some of the homophobic racists who keep claiming that they aren't bigots while in fact they hate blacks, Jews and homosexuals with the same vigor.

Just an observation.

Your constant use of "homophobic" is telling.

And yet here you are- spending an awful amount of time on homosexual issues. In fact you remind me of some of the homophobic racists who keep claiming that they aren't bigots while in fact they hate blacks, Jews and homosexuals with the same vigor.

Just an observation.

Your constant use of 'Gaystapo' is telling.

Look at how many posts there are on this stupid subject...you people can't let it go.

Look at how many posts there are on this stupid subject...you people can't let it go

 

[deltex1]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Men define religious marriage all the time.

However the only thing we are talking about here is civil law.

Religions can do whatever they want.

Check the op again, GERTRUDE.

 

[Silhouette]

Look at how many posts there are on this stupid subject...you people can't let it go

Very good dear, you're catching on...

..people aren't letting "go" of the topic of being forced to abdicate their faith in favor of a deviant sex cult adamant to replace morality with depravity.

Very good...you're finally getting it!

 

[deltex1]

I've had it all along, Mona.

 

[Syriusly]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Men define religious marriage all the time.

However the only thing we are talking about here is civil law.

Religions can do whatever they want.

Check the op again, GERTRUDE.

Check it yourself, Shirley.

However the only thing we are talking about here is civil law.

Religions can do whatever they want

 

[Syriusly]

Look at how many posts there are on this stupid subject...you people can't let it go

a deviant sex cult adamant to replace morality with depravity.

We aren't talking about you this time Silhouette.

 

[Paperman299]

I never said gay marriage should be prohibited because most other cultures oppose it. You claimed that opposing gay marriage is bizarre or unusual, which it isnt. Historically and today, most of the world doesn't approve of the practice. My objection to gay marriage is not based on what other societies think. It is based on the issue that this mental illness, this anti social and destructive behavior should not be promoted by the state. The

It's funny to me that you're more interested in proving your view is normal than that it is right. As it turns out, you're wrong both times. Most of the world? In fact, except for places like Communist China or the Middle East, the views are much more mixed. The Global Divide on Homosexuality Pew Research Center s Global Attitudes Project

And historically, what we now call homosexual behavior saw much more acceptance across the world, in places like Greece, Rome, and the Americas ("Two-Spirit" people).

But don't worry. If this thread has proven anything, it's that once equal marriage is the law of the land, churches will be allowed to hold on to these prejudices and refuse to marry anyone they want. It won't make it right, and the more time goes by the less normal it will be, but they'll have that right.

I think it is right and I articulated why in some part, I view it is a mental illness that is personally and socially destructive and I don't think the government should promote it through offering such relations equal recognition. You claimed my view on gay marriage was bizarre, this was the base of your argument, so I responded to that, by saying my view isn't unusual or bizarre but shared by many individuals across cultures. Your survey doesn't confirm otherwise.As I said in the last post, my view on gay marriage isn't based on what percentage in what country agree or disagree with it, so to claim I am more interested in saying my view is normal is false. You insinuated in some part my view is wrong because it is bizarre. And your contention your insinuation, is wrong on that basis.

Gay Marriage was not practiced in Greece or Rome. So not only is the premise of your argument wrong, Your argument is a logical fallacy as an appeal to authority. Because well, if Rome or Greece did it, they didn't, they must be right.

What a mess of moving the goalposts and strawmen. You didn't say people "share your views," you said your view was basically "universal."

You were wrong.

I said that what we would today describe as homosexual behavior appears very frequently throughout history, not equal marriage.

What you've gotten most wrong, though, was my frickin' point. My characterization of anti-homosexual prejudice as "bizarre" was not the point of my post.

...the bizarre rules of ancient religious texts are in no way sufficient grounds for exceptions from modern laws. And as a spoonful of sugar to help that medicine go down, I would add that there are many rules which have been dropped down through the centuries, and that focusing in on this one in particular is not being Godly but all too human.

They key word there isn't "bizarre," they're "ancient religious texts." And technically, I wasn't just talking about the Bible's anti-homosexual prejudice, I was talking about a lot of its Bronze Age rules which would be crazy to follow today. The reason it's not in American law that adulterers will be stoned, or that we can't eat shellfish, isn't that those things are in the Old Testament instead of the New; it's that something being in the Bible is in no way good cause to make it law. How much less sense it would make, then, that these things should supercede modern law where the two contradict?

You are the only one moving the goal posts and creating strawmen. What does "accept homosexuality" entail? And it is an entirely different question than marriage. So my point stands. Your contention was my view on gay marriage was bizarre and thus wrong, I responded by saying my view on gay marriage is pretty universal outside the secular west, across cultures historically and in modern times. You have yet to prove my view on gay marriage is bizarre, meaning unusual or odd, thus your argument on those grounds is flawed. Not only is the premise flawed, the argument is a logical fallacy as it suggests a view is right based on majority consensus.

I never stated homosexual behavior is a modern manifestation, so I don't understand what exactly you are talking about here. So what exactly is your point here and how does homosexuality in the ancient world relate to gay marriage now? None of the societies you cited allowed gay marriage, so what exactly is your point here?

Just because a code of morality is old or comes from ancient times doesn't make it wrong. You even admit this when you cite Rome and ancient Greece, though incorrectly. But you appeal to ancients. In many way the ancients were wiser than us moderns.

You implied we as Christians were hypocritical and picking and choosing which laws we follow. You claimed we ignore dietary laws, but follow the passages which tell us homosexuality is a sin. Your assertion we are hypocrites is simply incorrect, as we aren't bound by those mosaic laws as Christians. So your basis we are picking or choosing and our opposition to homosexuality is arbitrary is false.

I never said the law should be based on the Bible. I joined the conversation when you were discussing whether there was any clear condemnation of homosexuality in the New Testament and I provided scripture to that end. What I said is that the government shouldn't promote a homosexuality, which is a mental illness, and a personally and socially destructive lifestyle as equal to the union of a man in the wife who come together to have children and build a family.

First, I clearly said ancient religious texts were no basis for legal exceptions because they were ancient religious texts. I even quoted it, people can read that, so I don't know why you think you can straw man me on this point.

Perhaps for the same reason you think you can continue to claim your view is "universal," or near-to, when I have posted a poll clearly refuting this. If you averaged all those scores (including some horrendously morally backwards Middle Eastern nations), you'd probably have something like 60% who are prejudiced against homosexuality, 40% who think it's fine. Hardly universal.

I have really no interest in discussing whether Christians are bound by Old Testament laws, and whether it's a "fair" comparison. Enough of them point to "mosaic" passages to justify their position, and hang the Ten Commandments in their churches (and our courthouses) that I am inclined to believe you are the minority view. I also seem to recall Jesus himself disagreeing with you; however, the Bible is so endlessly open to interpretation that there can be no definitive position.

Regardless, it matters not one whit what the Bible says, in the eyes of the law.

 

[Seawytch]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

 

[deltex1]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

Man is in constant search for Gods truth...it will take billions of years to discover it all. Man didn't decide shit...they discovered a bit of Gods truth.

 

[Paperman299]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

Man is in constant search for Gods truth...it will take billions of years to discover it all. Man didn't decide shit...they discovered a bit of Gods truth.

Discover this truth faster, please.

 

[deltex1]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

Man is in constant search for Gods truth...it will take billions of years to discover it all. Man didn't decide shit...they discovered a bit of Gods truth.

Discover this truth faster, please.

When it is all discovered, God will have fulfilled his goal and the world will end. Man will know what God knows...and will be one with God.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

Man is in constant search for Gods truth...it will take billions of years to discover it all. Man didn't decide shit...they discovered a bit of Gods truth.

Discover this truth faster, please.

When it is all discovered, God will have fulfilled his goal and the world will end. Man will know what God knows...and will be one with God.

I'm very comfortable with you "advicing" Kenz

 

[deltex1]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

Man is in constant search for Gods truth...it will take billions of years to discover it all. Man didn't decide shit...they discovered a bit of Gods truth.

Discover this truth faster, please.

When it is all discovered, God will have fulfilled his goal and the world will end. Man will know what God knows...and will be one with God.

I'm very comfortable with you "advicing" Kenz

I pray a lot over that role....she is a jewel.

 

[Paperman299]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

Man is in constant search for Gods truth...it will take billions of years to discover it all. Man didn't decide shit...they discovered a bit of Gods truth.

Discover this truth faster, please.

When it is all discovered, God will have fulfilled his goal and the world will end. Man will know what God knows...and will be one with God.

Gay people who don't yet have their Constitutionally-guaranteed right to equal treatment under the law right now are much comforted that Christians are working on changing their own opinion.

 

[deltex1]

Man does not define religious marriage...God does. *** man wants everything equal. God wants everything right.

Of course man defines religious marriage. Do you really think God forbade interracial marriage...until he didn't? The anti miscegenationists used the same bible the anti gay bigots do. Man, however, has decided that prohibitions on interracial marriage are passe.

Man is in constant search for Gods truth...it will take billions of years to discover it all. Man didn't decide shit...they discovered a bit of Gods truth.

Discover this truth faster, please.

When it is all discovered, God will have fulfilled his goal and the world will end. Man will know what God knows...and will be one with God.

Gay people who don't yet have their Constitutionally-guaranteed right to equal treatment under the law right now are much comforted that Christians are working on changing their own opinion.

Does that include treatment for aids?

 

[beagle9]

Are religions all separate but equal? Does that concept work?

What? That statement makes no sense.

It wasn't a statement. It was a question....one you evidently can't answer. I'm going to play racquetball...as all good christians do. Pax vobiscum.

The state should recognize their arrangement...their agreement...not their "marriage".

Getting back to

It has to make sense in order to answer it.

Gallup also claims Obama enjoys a 50% approval rating...sorry bu


You have to be intelligent enough to know what is being asked...

Okay, you break it down. What's he asking? Explain his concept of separate but equal.

I suspect he is saying something along the lines why do homosexuals insist on calling it "marriage", why not call it civil unions and enjoy (or suffer) the benefits of marriage? It's part of the "we have to appear normal" thing homosexuals desire and crave and the reality is roughly 50% of the nation doesn't accept it as normal. On the flip side heterosexual marriage is considered normal and accepted by the vast majority.

Really? You got all that out of "Are religions all separate but equal? Does that concept work?"

How? Seriously. How did you get that he was talking about civil unions with the above question?

Now that might be your pet peeve, but I don't see how it relates to the bolded question.

Now, let's address YOUR separate water fountain idea. Civil marriage is what ya'll straight folks set up. If you don't want it called a civil marriage anymore, you're more than welcome to get the name changed...for everyone. The idea that straights get marriage and gays get civil unions is the definition of separate but equal.

We have partnerships. We have relationships. We have families. We believe they should be afforded the exact same rights, benefits and privileges you and your husband enjoy. A majority of Americans actually agree with me, not you and a vast majority of Americans do "accept it as normal". Where have you been Rip Van Winkle?

Gallup also says Obama is at 50% approval, anyone with an ounce of sense knows that isn't correct. Any poll can achieve any desired result

I'm beginning to think that polls may be the most corrupt thing ever invented in this nation, and even crazier than that, these polls are being relied upon so heavily in the nation now but why ? I think it's because people have become way to smart in a bad way anymore you see, and they can manipulate just about anything in order to achieve their desired results now in a poll, and they are using these polls against the majority who may see things way differently than they want them to see them now.

Polls have become a doorway to jump through for those that are in the minority view on some things and/or issues, and they use them in a way to get over on the majority now I think.

Isn't it funny that when you ask people on the street about the issues, that they are shockingly oblivious to what these polls are suggesting as to be somehow the truth in their worlds, and this even as they don't agree with the polls that would suggest otherwise ? I mean the ones you actually speak to in real life, have a sentiment or agreement on the issues that are totally opposite in their views, and this is most of the time from what the poll's are saying, but regardless the poll reader or taker will suggest otherwise that it is the truth, and then use a poll to back them up even if it is bogus on the results.

 

[beagle9]

Gallup also says Obama is at 50% approval, anyone with an ounce of sense knows that isn't correct. Any poll can achieve any desired result

Over a decade ago (2000/2004 time frame, anti-gay General Election ballot initiatives/referendums passed with (IIRC) 23-76% margins of victory.

By 2008/2009, anti-gay General Election ballot initiatives/referendums squeaked by where a change of only about 2.5% would have changed the outcome.

In 2012 there were 4 marriages initiatives/referendums on the General Election ballot and all won by about 2.5%. And in one of those States it was a reversal of an initiative passed just a few years before in 2009.



Anyone with an ounce of sense sees that is actual election results showing a shift in views on same-sex civil marriage.



>>>>

Yeah, and how did those views come about ? Was it by a person's choice without influence by intimidation or having their arms twisted by powerful people who sold out to a few ?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Gallup also says Obama is at 50% approval, anyone with an ounce of sense knows that isn't correct. Any poll can achieve any desired result

Over a decade ago (2000/2004 time frame, anti-gay General Election ballot initiatives/referendums passed with (IIRC) 23-76% margins of victory.

By 2008/2009, anti-gay General Election ballot initiatives/referendums squeaked by where a change of only about 2.5% would have changed the outcome.

In 2012 there were 4 marriages initiatives/referendums on the General Election ballot and all won by about 2.5%. And in one of those States it was a reversal of an initiative passed just a few years before in 2009.



Anyone with an ounce of sense sees that is actual election results showing a shift in views on same-sex civil marriage.



>>>>

Yeah, and how did those views come about ? Was it by a person's choice without influence by intimidation or having their arms twisted by powerful people who sold out to a few ?

I voted against the Virginia anti-same-sex marriage ballot initiative about 10-years ago.

1. It was my own choice.

2. There was no intimidation.

3. There was no arm twisting by powerful people.


>>>>