The Dean Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 It is clearly stated in the Bible that marriage is a holy sacrament between a man and a woman. This is the basis of why so many people believe it is wrong. Simple enough? And, if you believe in that, you shouldn't get involved in a same-sex relationship (let alone marriage). But, what does your belief in the Bible have to do with the rights of those who don't believe as you do? As I noted earlier, Jews aren't supposed to eat pork, because the Bible tells them not to. Most don't. Are you aware of any Jews who are actively oppose to the eating of pork by non-Jews? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 OK, so segregation and interracial marriage is clearly wrong, even though people can and did find religious justification for both, but homosexuality isn't - got it. I can also point out biblical justification for not touching the skin of a pig (not popular on a football message board), the wearing of syntheic fibers and outlawing crop rotation. Seems pretty subjective to me, though. Not to mention that religious justifications should have nothing to do with laws of society, especially when nobody agrees on whose religion is the right one. In what realm of the religious sector does it say marriage is to be between white and white? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Well there were an awful lot of gay people attending while I was there, but I'm not sure how this is relevent. I suppose not, though..... I heard the Chef teaching the water boarding recipes always acted like a brutal dictator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 In what realm of the religious sector does it say marriage is to be between white and white? The same one that cherry picks obscure passages and quotes to make their point. The difference between you and them? They actually have material they cite! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 In what realm of the religious sector does it say marriage is to be between white and white? http://www.religioustolerance.org/marracbib.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 http://www.religioustolerance.org/marracbib.htm The key here is that those passages are used to condemn interracial relationships. Nowhere is it clear that in fact they are meant to condemn them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 The key here is that those passages are used to condemn interracial relationships. Nowhere is it clear that in fact they are meant to condemn them. WHAT!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 WHAT!? Nowhere in those passages does it explicitly say that only white men and women can have a relationship, or enter in marriage for that matter. Gender in marriage is clearly stated in the Bible (man and woman), race is not, therefore people against interracial relationships use their own interpretation of passages like those to satisfy their own agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 The key here is that those passages are used to condemn interracial relationships. Nowhere is it clear that in fact they are meant to condemn them. Same is true with homosexuality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 Same is true with homosexuality. Disagree. Homosexuality is MUCH more literally denounced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Is it weird at all that this thread is making me kind of want to marry a dude? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Not off base at all. I don't think the Miss USA Pageant was the right forum for the question in the 1st place. Or am I way off-base here? I would agree it is by its very nauture a controversial question where no matter how you answer you will get strong reactions. Issues of personal beliefs should be left out of that forum. What's next asking if stem cell research should be done without concern as to where the cells came from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 That seems like a fair and consistent response from the teabaggers. This is the best thing to happen to her, now she's going to become the poster child for the anti gay marriage crowd, and get plenty of publicity and speaking engagements from it. She was on FoxNews (of course), and said when she was asked the question, she asked God what she should do, and decided to say she was against it. The religious right will eat that up. trebaggers = conservatives? OK...then liberals = "cleveland steamers" Because nothing reminds me of a hot pile of sh-- more than liberals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Nowhere in those passages does it explicitly say that only white men and women can have a relationship, or enter in marriage for that matter. Gender in marriage is clearly stated in the Bible (man and woman), race is not, therefore people against interracial relationships use their own interpretation of passages like those to satisfy their own agenda. Just to be clear: we're talking about a series of 2000 year old documents which--often independent of one another--were translated dozens of times over hundred of years. We're talking about documents that you have been unable/willing to cite thus far, but use as the basis for why one should/shouldn't support a US Law. And you want to make this about semantics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Otis M C Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 This problem is more or less going to be the same story time after time. Bigotry plagues gay marriage just like it does abortion, evolution, yadda yadda yadda. You have radicals on both sides and no middle. And why, for that matter, should there be a middle? I oppose gay marriage, and I love when people try to tell me other wise. Ignorant? It's ignorant to say that everyone is ignorant, butt hell, its true. And who gives two hoots if I don't want gay's marrying? As far as I'm concerned the "survival of the fittest" makes it impossible for them to survive since you cant even reproduce. And the life an adopted kid will go through, since they uh have two mommies and two daddies, will be far less ideal. And don't say that it won't. In this age, you're chastised if you have bad acne for Christ sake. So the Bible and Darwinism both oppose gay marriage. That's enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 CANT ONE HAVE AN OPINION ON AN ISSUE WITHOUT FORCING THAT OPINION ON OTHERS ANYMORE?????!!!!!???? Im against gay marriage, abortion (but think both should be legal..just leave me the !@#$ out of your sh--), like the Mets and think Tony Ellsworth is half a douche for !@#$ing over my friend when he broke his frame. What the !@#$ does any of that have to do with YOU people? Jesus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Disagree. Homosexuality is MUCH more literally denounced. First of all, the Bible was written a very long time ago, by many different people, in languages that are quite different than ours. Of course, the language difference is compounded by the time difference, which makes any direct translation extraordinarily complex and problematic. Add to that the political influences that went into deciding what writings to include in "The Bible" and which to exclude, and it is apparent to any thinking person that the Bible as we know it, is an interpretation...and a flawed on at that. Because of that, using the Bible to make specific points often results in disagreements. For example, here is an example of some different interpretations of some of the major Biblical passages which are used to denounce homosexuality: http://www.religioustolerance.org/homglance.htm This discusses the minor passages: http://www.religioustolerance.org/homglance1.htm But, that really isn't part of my argument. If you truly believe that homosexuality is wrong, based upon the Bible, or your religion, then I would understand you not getting involved in a same-sex relationship. Of course, if you aren't gay, it doesn't really matter all that much. Not everyone believes in the Bible, or has religious beliefs that prohibit same-sex relationships...and some of them are gay. What is it about your beliefs (which are appropriate for you) that make you feel as though you have a right to prohibit the beliefs and behavior of others...particularly when that behavior has no impact on your beliefs or behavior? BTW, many people think the Bible is pretty clear about prohibiting the eating of pork (among other foods). Would you be OK with those who believe that prohibiting the rest of us from eating pork? After all, the Bible says it is wrong. I will leave you with this, which is as instructive as it is amusing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHaVUjjH3EI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 So the Bible and Darwinism both oppose gay marriage. That's enough for me. How does Darwinism oppose gay marriage? Gay people have always been around, all throughout human history. Obviously, every single gay person ever born was the product of sex between a male and female. Your point is ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 This problem is more or less going to be the same story time after time. Bigotry plagues gay marriage just like it does abortion, evolution, yadda yadda yadda. You have radicals on both sides and no middle. And why, for that matter, should there be a middle? I oppose gay marriage, and I love when people try to tell me other wise. Ignorant? It's ignorant to say that everyone is ignorant, butt hell, its true. And who gives two hoots if I don't want gay's marrying? As far as I'm concerned the "survival of the fittest" makes it impossible for them to survive since you cant even reproduce. And the life an adopted kid will go through, since they uh have two mommies and two daddies, will be far less ideal. And don't say that it won't. In this age, you're chastised if you have bad acne for Christ sake. So the Bible and Darwinism both oppose gay marriage. That's enough for me. Do you have a problem with infertile couples getting married? Older people who can no longer produce children...should they be banned from getting married, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 How does Darwinism oppose gay marriage? Gay people have always been around, all throughout human history. Obviously, every single gay person ever born was the product of sex between a male and female. Your point is ludicrous. WHY DO YOU CARE WHAT HIS OPINION IS SO MUCH???!!!????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts