Massachusetts to allow gay marriage

“Could be a Christian thing:

Same-sex marriage has been documented in many societies that were not subject to Christian influence. In North American, among the Native American societies, it has taken the form of two-spirit-type relationships, in which some members of the tribe elect to take on female gender with all its responsibilites. They are prized as wives by the other men in the tribe, who enter into formal marriages with these two-spirit men.

In China, especially in the southern province of Fujian where male love was especially cultivated, men would marry youths in elaborate ceremonies. The marriages would last a number of years, at the end of which the elder partner would help the younger find a (female) wife and settle down to raise a family.

In Africa, among the Azande of the Congo, men would marry youths for whom they had to pay a bride-price to the father. These marriages likewise were understood to be of a temporary nature.

Finally, in Europe during Hellenic times, the relationships between Greek men and youths who had come of age were analogous to marriage in several aspects. The age of the youth was similar to the age at which women married (the mid-teens), and the relationship could only be undertaken with the consent of the father. This consent, just as in the case of a daughter's marriage, was contingent on the suitor's social standing. The relationship, just like a marriage, consisted of very specific social and religious responsibilities, and also had an erotic component.


Same-sex marriage around the world
Same-sex marriages currently are legally performed only in the Netherlands and Belgium. For the time being, the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia have also legalized same-sex marriage. Recently, the term "same-sex marriage" has been displacing "gay marriage", the term being perceived as less value-laden for the union of two partners of the same sex and also being more inclusive of bisexuals.


Legal recognition of same-sex marriage
In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, there has been a growing movement in a number of countries to regard marriage as a right which should be extended to gay and lesbian couples. Legal recognition of a marital union opens up a wide range of entitlements, including social security, taxation, inheritance and other benefits unavailable to couples unmarried in the eyes of the law. Restricting legal recognition to heterosexual unions excludes same-sex couples from gaining legal access to these benefits. (While opposite-sex unmarried couples without other legal impediments have the option of marrying in law and so gaining access to these rights, that option is unavailable to same-sex couples.) Lack of legal recognition also makes it more difficult for same-sex couples to adopt children.


Opponents of same-sex marriage
Some opponents object to same-sex marriage on religious grounds, arguing that extending marriage to homosexual couples undercuts the conventional meaning of marriage in various traditions, and does not fulfill any procreational role. In countries with monogamous marriages only, some opponents also claim that allowing same-sex marriage will re-open the door to the legalization of polyamorous marriage, or other forms they find objectionable. They also feel that same-sex couples should not be allowed to have or adopt children, and that same-sex marriage would make those adoptions easier; they hold that same-sex households are not an adequate environment for children to be raised in. Others simply do not recognize any pressing need for same-sex marriages.

Some libertarians object to same-sex civil marriages because they are opposed to any form of state-sanctioned marriage, including opposite-sex unions

from fact-index.com”

“So on one had, when Icall you on it, you don't believe in right and wrong, and on the other, you believe in absolute right and wrong.

Okay, Ha Ha, you can have your two beliefs at the same time, if you want! Ha Ha, I guess I'm just a person who believes things like that make us hypocritces, but what do I know? You could be right, but then you don't believe in right, so okay. I guess we'll just have to agree that I'm a little more right than you ha ha!

Oh yeah, boobs!”

“Sort of like the supreme court "made law" when it banned segregation? That was rather unpopular at the time.

If my public education history classes aren't failing me, or my memory, segregation was only unpopular in regions of the south, but not nationally. I could be wrong though, and if I am, I blame my teacher.

Why do many libs defend the courts when they support their agenda, and cry foul when they don't? Some still think the Supreme Court appointed Bush... wassup widdat?”

“on one hand, that is.”

“If my public education history classes aren't failing me, or my memory, segregation was only unpopular in regions of the south, but not nationally. I could be wrong though, and if I am, I blame my teacher.

Why do many libs defend the courts when they support their agenda, and cry foul when they don't? Some still think the Supreme Court appointed Bush... wassup widdat?"
Buck
02:57:52 PM
05/18/04


I was referring to the ruling being unpopular. The other stuff is not something that I've argued. Take it up with those "libs".”

“"Sort of like the supreme court "made law" when it banned segregation? That was rather unpopular at the time."

It was unpopular... but it was a correct decision according to the Constitution. BTW, just because a court (even the Supremes) makes any decision, it does NOT mean that decision is in line with the Constitution...”

“Phaed, I know what to be right and wrong from my worldview. I will fight for my worldview in the public arena, as we all do. Your worldview is different from mine. I won't call you wrong in a discussion, even though it is not consistent with my worldview. How can I say you're wrong when you're being true to your worldview? If you don't like apples, I can't say you're stupid and wrong in a discussion about apples because in reality apples taste really good. They really really do. Even if you don't think so, I know otherwise.

I guess I have respect for various worldviews even in disagreement, and even as I hold dear my own worldview and do my best to preserve in culturally in our country.”

“Soooo, this one isn't, then? But the other one was? What are your grounds for saying so?”

“"I think communism is about as liberal as it gets."
Buck

There is nothing liberal about communism.
When a communist state loosens its grip on things it is liberalization, a move to the middle.
Its the same with a fascist state, such as Spain was.
When things become less rigid and controlled, it is also known as liberalization, a move to the middle.

Here in the U.S. we have been moving to the right with more restrictions and more government and more government secrecy, like a communist/fascist state.

The right and the left are more parallel than polar opposites.

The farther things go in either direction, the less liberal/moderate/progressive.”

“Buck, I'm all for you having your worldview where it doesn't impact someone else's rights.”

“"Buck, I'm all for you having your worldview where it doesn't impact someone else's rights."

Phead, all worldviews impact the others. I guess you're upset with the worldview of the vast majority of countries on this planet. I guess you're upset with the worldview with the majority of Americans and the vast majority of our politicians, both Repub and Dem. How dare they subject their worldview on you.”

“Yeah, buck, I do fight injustice where I can. It's part of my worldview. It's good to see that you're more comfprtable with inequality, though. It makes it easier for you. Ha Ha.”

“Gay marriage is going to make a LOT of lawyers very very rich when two victim feminist lesbians divorce.”

“"Constitutional rights are for the courts to decide, not the majority."

Me

I was just trying to put the concept of "tyranny of the majority" into a simple sentence.

It was this concept that got public schools de-segregated.

It is popular, among opponents of gay marriage, to say that in Mass the court "made law", but they did not.
That is more spin from the pundits.”

“I wonder how small a group (or even one?) must we avoid impacting as a society? I also wonder if anyone honestly thinks that this is possible without anarchy?

I suspect I already know your answer...”

“When a communist state loosens its grip on things it is liberalization, a move to the middle.

MarkO, hypethetical here... so what you're saying is that if liberals ran this country and made it a socialist country with strong government policies controlling much of our society, and allowed gays and anyone else to marry, and outlawed guns, legalized drugs, legalized prostitution throughout the land, provided a liberal national healthcare, taxed individuals at 80%, etc., and this became "established", this would then become "status quo" and considered conservative, and the vast majority of people liked this system, and if conservatives tried to rally to "change" this established government, the conservatives would actually be liberals because they want "change"?

Communism = very very liberal.
Population control = very very liberal.
Most everything about China, morally and economically speaking is very liberal.
Just because China is resistant to change, even if the policies are extremely liberal, does not make China a conservative country, IMHO. It just makes it a very liberal "staunch" country.”

“Gay marriage is going to make a LOT of lawyers very very rich when two victim feminist lesbians divorce.

HA HA HA HA HA!!! Oh man, that's the funniest line I've read here in a long time! YAAAAA!!!”

“I gotta go to lunch for a while and then do some work afterwards, if I missed a response I'm not purposely overlooking it or in personal mental turmoil trying to desperately think of a response. Sorry. :^D”

“"It is popular, among opponents of gay marriage, to say that in Mass the court "made law", but they did not. That is more spin from the pundits."

Actually, the People, through their representatives, made Law. The Massachusetts court ruled that Law invalid... in effect making their own illegal law, clearly inconsistant with the Law the People made. Then the Executive Branch failed the reject the illegal law the court made. However, the People are working to restore their Law in such a way that a few judges cannot invalidate. No spin here...”

“I'm going to lunch with Buck...”

“Gee - I really have a great comment here, but I'll keep it to myself. I would hate to be seen as a "hate monger". That would just be too much for me to handle.



Whatnever.......”

“Buck is good at twisting crap. Population control is liberal? Is it just me or is that twisting of reality?”

“OK Buck –

You mentioned your girlfriend. I don’t expect you to post on a public website that you’ve fornicated with her. I know the Bible’s teachings on that. But your own words already convict you. (“I'm still thinking about my girlfriends boobs.”) I’m assuming that you were lusting about them.

Matthew 5:28 tells us “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.”

Matthew 5:32 tells us that it is sinful to marry an adulterer (assuming, like you say, that the sexes are basically equal in God’s eyes).

So… if you truly follow the whole Bible and aren’t selective like us heathens, shouldn’t you lobby Congress to outlaw marriage for Buck? After all, you don’t want our government sanctioning sinful behavior, do you?”

“Bush on 'activist judges':


"Fifty years ago today, nine judges announced that they had looked at the Constitution and saw no justification for the segregation and humiliation of an entire race... Here on the corner of 15th and Monroe, and in schools like it across America, that was a day of justice, and it was a long time coming," the president said.”

“Violin, I really like my girlfriend's boobs. I'm attracted to them. Does that mean I'm filled with lust and I selfishly gratify myself sexually with her? No. For some unknown reason, and she could by lying, but she says she's physically attracted to me too. Does that make her an adulterer? Hardly. Maybe she secretly commits mental adultery with Johnny Depp (THAT GUY PISSES ME OFF, I'M GONNA KICK HIS BUTT), but I don't think she does with me. We "love" each other and find each other attractive. That's not adultery. Have I ever lusted after a woman? Guilty as charged. Am I a sinner in lots of areas of my life? Guilty as charged. Am I proud of that? Nope. Am I forgiven when I ask? YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! Thank you Lord!”

“Now Q, come on. I’ll be the first to admit to being a hateful little dikk at time but at least I can admit when I am…

“And were did I say that, bassturd?"
laqtis
04:58:54 PM
05/17/04

“Alrighty, azzhole. Put me on the spot, here's where I expose you for the dumb phuck that you are.”

“You see, Buck Phuck,”

“it's been going on way before your stupid, phuckin` Christian (no offense to others, just to Buck) beliefs took over the world.”

“Hell, that kind of inbreding is the only answer for why you are ever here.

I hope you mom enjoyed it."
laqtis
06:13:13 PM
05/17/04


“You are so full of bullchit, there are not words to discribe it. You have no idea what got us here to begin with. You, "sir", are a true blued, bullchit artist.

thump, thump, thumpie, thump, thump, Buck Phuck's on his way......


Hyprocrite."
laqtis
06:17:13 PM
05/17/04


"DAMN, Buck Phuck!
laqtis
06:39:09 PM
05/17/04


"I really don't give a chit about yer bullcrap verses.



What say you phucking dolt!?!"
laqtis
07:01:08 PM
05/17/04


“No, oh dense one. You are making this too easy.”
laqtis
07:05:44 PM
05/17/04


"You sister banger.

You have no retort.

The only reason why you float this question, and not address this, is because you harbor a fancy to convet thy Mother's ass.

Quite testing the waters and plunge the sword."
laqtis
07:07:57 PM
05/17/04

Can you honestly say that this is not hate mongering? If you’re going to say hateful things then say them and stand by them. Don’t say them and backpeddle. Face it bro, Buck has played you like a fiddle. :P”

“Why does it sound sorta odd saying I went to lunch with dickhead?”

“Buck, some of these folks would say that's a redundant sentence. Man, stop throwing softballs.”

“I wonder how many days will go by before there's another huge long thread that comes down to religion? I haven't even been on this forum that long and it seems to keep coming up over and over, huge long threads, and the same exact things are said over and over and over. Next time we get in this discussion we should just provide links to all the other threads or cut and paste the same exact rehashed responses. It would at least save us some typing time.”

“I've enjoyed watching the discussion. I think Nigal nailed it when he said most folks are accusing Buck of hate mongering and then they're being hateful. Don't hate the playa, hate the game.”

“Nigal, Nigal, Nigal......
It's only hate speech if it comes from a Repub.
Just ask any lefty.”

“"I wonder how many days will go by before there's another huge long thread that comes down to religion? I haven't even been on this forum that long and it seems to keep coming up over and over, huge long threads, and the same exact things are said over and over and over."

LOL! Buck this might tell ya something. If I'm not mistaken you are the one always bring religion into it. Think about it...

:P”

“I wonder why it might always come down to something with religion for Buck?

Me, too...

That's funny, I don't feel odd saying I went to lunch with Buck... LMHO!”

“Did you go stag?”

“Hi Nigal! I just looked back on this thread from when I jumped back into it yesterday. I didn't use religion in the discussion at all until much later after it appeared the religion-despisers kept harping on it. Go back to yesterday when Mutt started this latest discussion with:

"Gay marriage is legal today in Mass. :-)
Hope all you christofascists are hating it."

Mutt
02:16:59 PM
05/17/04

Just for kicks and giggles (I'm bored at work) I looked to see when I actually used the word "religion" or "God". I didn't even bring it up, it wasn't the basis of my points, despite all these things said over multiple posts before I even MENTIONED religion, check it out:

---------------

Maybe all the evangelists will be forced to move en mass to Idaho, and keep a constant force of bunkered troops on the border to Nevada."

"Buck's a pervert! I want a group marriage! Do Mormons still do that? Maybe I'll convert..."

"Yeah, so the evangelists will have to have troops on the border of Utah as well."

Geez, what's the Catholic church to do under this?"

"If the catholic Church could get their head out of their ass…

Get enlightened, your "God" has failed you. You are a disgrace to other good Christians out there. Just another "born again, Bible thumper". Your a dime a dozen.

Hey, while were at it, Buck, lets' just round up everyone that isn't Christian and white and we could have ourselves one of those fantasic Cross Burning parties,

Great now the world's gonna end! LOL! The gay population is so small that this won't even make a ripple. It's only big because the fundies make it so.

Yes. What next? We will be a country without laws or morals in 20 years tops. The world will invade us if God doesn't smite us first!

Don't get me wrong, SMW, I'll argue til you're blue in the face, but God has too many clever turns of phrase."

As long as we are changing God's word to suit "the evolution of the people", let's change the folks at the Garden of Eden to Adam & "Eric"...


Seems I stayed out of the religious fray for a long time! I AM VINDICATED! I'M FREE! FREEEEEEEEEEDOM! This feels good. I'm phoning home.”

“Phaedrus, :o)”

“

According to Gallop, not only are most Americans against gay marriage, most even support a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.”

“Hey Buck - Does your church marry people who have previously divorced? Doesn't Christ call that adultery? Do you ask previously married members to abstain from sex and go to counseling to overcome their attraction for someone new? No? Are you saying one sin is worse than another is? Is that in accordance with scripture?

Ha-ha! Wooo! That’s OK if you don’t mind burning in hell I guess. Whoop, whoop!”

“ROFL!”

“Violin, divorce isn't necessarily a sin. The Bible says if someone commits adultery, the other spouse has a right to divorce. If one spouse abandons the other they also have a right to divorce. It could also be argued Biblically that physical abuse would be grounds for divorce. Divorce isn't necessarily a sin.

Is one sin worse than another? As I read the Bible, yes. If a pedophile lusts after a child, that's horrible, but if a pedophile rapes and kills and mutilates a child, that's even worse. If someone is pissed off and thinks about hitting someone in anger, that's bad; if someone gets pissed off and kills 42 people at McDonald's, that's worse. All unforgiven sin leads to separation from God, but I think there are degrees of such sin. Some good theologians would disagree with me on this issue though.”

“Mk.10:11
"Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery."

Lk.16:18
"Whosoever putteth away his wife and marrieth another, committeth adultery." Mt.5:32
"Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery."

Mt.19:9
"Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery." 1

Cor.7:15
"But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases." Dt.24:1-2
"When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife."”

“Buck, you shouldn't be protesting Gay marriage... you should be KILLING THEM ALL!

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. -- Lev.20:13”

“And then came along Jesus with a new commandment...

-- But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." – John 8:7 --

You see, Phaedrus, if you take the entire Bible in context, and the entire message as a whole, the Old Testament Law was to condemn mankind and show their sin, to show there was no way to live up to God's law, that we are sinful and inadequate. This was to point to the future redemption of Christ, where we now live under "grace" and not the "law". Although we are still inadequate and cannot be perfect, Christ forgives us when we do fail and makes us perfect before God. It's not flip-flopping, it's an unfolding story of love and redemption. Christ gave us a "new" commandment that we love one another as He loved us.

As Augustine put it: "The New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed, and the Old Testament is in the New Testament revealed."”

“I think that cartoon has it all wrong. It is Osama Bin Laden and radical Muslim militants who are saying DEATH TO THE PAGANS. Falwell and Robertson (guys that don't even represent your average Christian guy anyway) are not saying "death" to the pagans, but "salvation" to the pagans. Big difference.”

“But Buck - the equating of divorce with adultery is in the New Testament. You never answered my question about whether or not your church approves of divorced people remarrying. How about you?”

“Isn't the whole "homosexuality is an abomination" thing from the old testament?”

“Heck, if jesus were alive today, he'd be starring on Queer eye for the Messiah Guy.”

“Buck, That's perfect!

Get ready for a bunch more...”

“Yes and no Phaedrus. In 1 Corinthians, Paul says that both homosexuals and adulterers won't go to heaven. That's why I keep pressing the adultery question.

Answer please Buck.”