Massachusetts to allow gay marriage

“about religion.......i find it best not to discuss around friends. I have serious veiwpoints about my disbelief in Christ. To the point, I am going to convert to the Jewish faith. I feel so at home there.”

“Deut 22:30 "A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt."”

“: "What is with all this Bible stuff?" - Wolfeyes

Just responding to a previous question about slavery and the Bible! That's "what"! :^D

: "No one follows the Bible! Don't you know that yet?"

Are you calling the most popular "faith" on the planet, with beeeellions of followers of the Bible, "nobodies"? What do you mean, "no one follows the Bible!"? Ha ha! Oh man, the Bible was, is, and will continue to be the most popular and influential book in the history of civilization! No one follows it any more? Okey dokey artichokey.”

“: "everyone has their own viewpoint
"about religion.......i find it best not to discuss around friends. I have serious veiwpoints about my disbelief in Christ. To the point, I am going to convert to the Jewish faith. I feel so at home there."
Mamabeargrr
12:28:07 PM
11/19/03

WELL THANKS A LOT! Since you're discussing YOUR religion right here, right now, after saying it's best not to discuss religion around friends, I GUESS THAT MEANS WE AREN'T YOUR FRIENDS? Ha ha! :^D”

“Hey Phaeddy and all other gay right supporters

,,,do any of you have those 'rainbow' stickers on your car?,, Hang a Pride flags from your front porch??,, been to any marches lately?,,frequent gay establishments???

You know to show support,, since you are so passionate about gay rights,,,how far do you take expressing yourself other flaming this issue here.

or are you all just closet supporters? Just curious.”

“Hi Phaedrus! I am a conservative Christian and I take the Bible as the literal Word of God. I am in a distinct minority in taking this stance. Since I am a minority with these literal views, care to stand up for me? (tappin' foot... I'm waaaaaiiiittttiiinnnggg...)


if someone says you cannot marry or have some other right that the rest of us have, simply on the grounds that you are of the wrong faith, you're goddam right I'll be standing up for you.”

“": "What is with all this Bible stuff?" - Wolfeyes

Just responding to a previous question about slavery and the Bible! That's "what"! :^D

: "No one follows the Bible! Don't you know that yet?"

Are you calling the most popular "faith" on the planet, with beeeellions of followers of the Bible, "nobodies"? What do you mean, "no one follows the Bible!"? Ha ha! Oh man, the Bible was, is, and will continue to be the most popular and influential book in the history of civilization! No one follows it any more? Okey dokey artichokey."
Buck

For someone who seems to be so with it on the uptake of everything, including photography and all, you sure don't get sarcasm. I was not implying that the Bible was a bad thing. Just simply stating that it can be very diffi"CULT" for someone to walk the walk when there are so many different "interpretations" flying at them along their walk. It can get confusing and quite frankly, very tiring to the point where no one really gives a #&%!$ anyway.”

“: "Good Gawd, you must be a young earther then."

Well, this is obviously another off-topic side-track (where are you libs when you're own folks go off track, eh? ha ha!), but to quickly answer your question, when it comes to origins, the Bible is not specific on dates or eons, as the ancient Hebrew language allowed for various interpretations depending on context. A day could mean 24 hours or it could mean a 1,000 years or it could mean an "age" with unspecified amounts of time. No one was there with a video camera (dang, where's those cameras when you need 'em?) so it's speculation and to me, not very clear. It even allows for theistic evolution, as many adhere to that doctrine. To me the process is not vital or God would've made it much clearer on the "how". But that's just me.”

“Good grief!! I saw this thread yesterday and figured, well,it's strange to me but....so what!, good for them, yadda, yadda....

I've come back to find this thread has simply exploded. As usual it's the same collection of nattering nabobs of knowledge talking past each other....

Live and let live folks.... they aren't hurting you.”

“Give me just about any subject, and I can find you qualified scientists on both sides. I'm not sure what this has to do with this particular discussion, but you've brought it up twice now, Phaedrus.
Buck
12:24:13 PM
11/19/03


1. I didn't bring it up originally. Gojo did by claiming that there is science indicating that homosexuals are bad for child development. there is none.

2. You can find the flaws in scientific study if you pay attention, think critically, and try to come at a problem with little in the way of preconcieved results.”

“"Deut 22:30 "A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt.""

Ah OK! That’s Deut 23:1 in the Hebrew. I LOL at that one then I saw the very next verse and spewed my coke through my nose while grabbing my crouch!

“2. [A man] with injured testicles or whose member is cut, may not enter the assembly of the Lord.”

And they say the bible doesn’t apply to all facets of life! Bawhaha!”

“This is ridiculous. This will be the continuing downfall of American society. There has to be a line drawn and this is opening Pandora’s box. The worst is yet to come. I thought marijuana would be legal before this started happening. Pretty soon groups of people will be able to get married and maybe you could marry yourself in the near future. What a crock!”

“Letting homosexuals have the same rights in marriage and child-rearing as heterosexuals is the right thing to do.”

“"I was not implying that the Bible was a bad thing. Just simply stating that it can be very diffi"CULT" for someone to walk the walk when there are so many different "interpretations" flying at them along their walk."

Gotcha chicky! Now I see what you ment. 8)”

“Hi Wolfeyes! Sorry for missing your sarcasm, sometimes you need to hit me over the head twice before I get something! :^D It's all good. As for the varying interpretations, to me it seems very clear we are to take the Bible literally (as we read anything else with our eyes) unless it's obviously allegorical or a parable. The Bible itself warned that there are those who will change, alter, and mystify the Bible to have their ears tickled. As for me, I just take it at face value, in light of the various times and cultures and messages it is conveying. There's lots of stuff I don't understand, but the basic underlying message is so simple that it's almost foolish, which throws off the intellectuals.”

“"And they say the bible doesn’t apply to all facets of life! Bawhaha!"

Nigal:

I was just thinking the same thing and started a Bible backpacking tips thread.”

“: "2. You can find the flaws in scientific study if you pay attention, think critically, and try to come at a problem with little in the way of preconcieved results."
Phaedrus
12:41:12 PM
11/19/03

Yes, Phaedrus, but the point you seem to be missing is that qualified scientists are both finding flaws in EACH OTHERS "science"! You say "you" can find the flaws if you look hard enough, but BOTH SIDES of QUALIFIED scientists are looking at each others and finding flaws. Who's right? I argue the one who is right is the one that matches your worldview or your personal take on it, even though the opposite can be said about you by the others.”

“Pretty soon the high school football players will have pink uniforms!”

“Two men jackhammering each other's rectum is not something we need a government sanctioned ceremony for."
bacpac
07:32:01 AM
11/19/03

"BTW - Homosexuality is NOT concidered a sexual diviance, so nana-nana, boo-boo, as they say.

-lappiss

We may have to agree to disagree on this one.”

“ I argue the one who is right is the one that matches your worldview or your personal take on it, even though the opposite can be said about you by the others."
Buck
12:47:54 PM
11/19/03


Thus my statement about preconceived outcome.

Go ahead and give some science that backs up your assertion that gay marriage is bad for society or children, if you can.”

“Oh, and Buck, if you look at which group of scientists is getting paid by whom, you can generally get an idea of who might be biased in their premises.”

“"Hey Phaeddy and all other gay right supporters....."

sorry, I didn't relize that question was open to others. My credituals (sp?)

I live in a city that has one of the largest gay populations in the Metro Detroit area, let alone the state of Michigan. We have one councilman who is gay and I have voted for him both times. Our town holds a "Pride Fest" every year and is quite colorful.

I was married by a gay priest.

I have two gay uncles, one on both sides of the family.

I work in theater (that alone should qualify!!)

I can watch Queer Eye, Will/Grace and the likes and laugh at the jokes, without feeling creepie.

I have friends who happen to be gay.


Now can my point be taken seriously? LOL!”

“bp - that's fine. That points been delt with anyhoo.”

“No.”

“Now I see why so many of you like this site! TheBackPacker has a lot of meaning to you.”

“Ah, I missed briar's question. I have a number of gay and lesbian friends, some of whom are in committed relationships, and some who are not.

When this becomes an issue in California, I will do what I can to make sure that I support the side of civil liberties, as I have in the past.”

“: "so when it's said "The Faher, Son and the Wholly Goast(sprit).", where's the chick?" - iraqtis

Where's the "chick"? First of all, many women may find your use of the word "chick" offensive, but that's okay. Secondly, if you read the Bible you would understand that God is "spirit", not male or female. God created us in the very image of God, BOTH male and female. If God's image is both male and female, how can God be a male? God is spirit. All creation reflects the nature of God, from beautiful wildflowers and butterflies to powerful lions and grizzlies and lightning and thunder. They all represent aspects of God, both as a gentle, loving God, and a God of unspeakable power and justice. Smile at wildflowers or tremble with thunder, they are all aspects of the Creator. Remember, in heaven there will be no male and female nor marrying. The lion will lay down with the lamb. It will be a whole different order. These aren't my words, so if you wanna rip into 'em, go ahead, 'tis okay with me!”

“D@mn!!!”

“"Now I see why so many of you like this site! TheBackPacker has a lot of meaning to you."

UpUrs

Your name is my response.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------”

“You must take it pretty hard from the backside Wolfeyes.”

“Wolfie, I've got that troll on ignore. if you wouldn't mind too much, please don't repost his crap, okay?”

“Whatever phagrus! Your name says it all in this thread.”

“Oh geez, not THIS again......!?!!

Buck, go live in yer own privite Idaho, pal. I grow tired of this blabber. Keep up the fight, YOUR people need you.....”

“Gosh, I'm still trying to mustard up the time to play ketchup here.

: "True, but we can morally draw a line where combinations are harmful, i.e. for incestuous or blood relatives, children below a particular age, those that can't make the decision (including animals) etc.
Now, two consenting same sex adults are NOT causing harm to themselves or anyone else. Thus, it should be legal."
Mutt
10:06:46 AM
11/19/03

Mutt, we've already come to the conclusion that "reproduction" is not necessary for marriage. Gays can't "reproduce", so it's not the defining issue, which is cool. So, you bringing up the "incest blood problem" is moot. Can't two incestual lovers have the right to get married and NOT have children? Why draw the moral line with just gay couples? Give this right of marriage TO ALL consenting adults, shant we? And why limit marriage to 2 people? Is that YOUR morality at play here? We need to be open and understanding and give rights to ALL consenting adults who want to commit their lives together, regardless of relation or number. Incestual couples do not need to reproduce and have offspring, so for the love of all that is good and right and honorable, let them marry! Don't let the moral constraints of the majority affect the minority!”

“Bluntly, Buck, if you want incestuous marriage, write your congressman. Petition for it, and we'll deal with it when the time comes.”

“: "There is tremendous evidence that there are a lot of people who can only find sexual satisfaction and romantic/emotional fulfillment in homosexual relationships. There is no evidence for a class of people who only find satisfaction and fulfillment in incestuous relationships."
pedxing
10:10:25 AM
11/19/03

pedxing? What? Do we need "scientfic approval" now for consenting adults to fall in love and get married? Huh? There is evidence that says incestual lovers aren't really in love and shouldn't have the rights of others? Wow, that's pretty narrow-minded of you, quite limiting. Do you hate incestual lovers? What is it that you have against them? They can't legally get married because you need evidence they are really in love and have a fulfilling relationship? I'm quite surprised here. I'm shocked. I guess some folks just aren't very open-minded and understanding. It's okay for YOU to get married, and it's okay for gays to get married, but what, we'll end the social "morality" THERE? Your constraints on the rights of other consenting adults to marry who may differ from "your" convenient worldview is cumbersome and filled with bigotry.”

“The circular logic doesn't make any sense, but that is how they live their lives.

Going in circles.”

“: " have steadfastly refused to debate the incest part of the christian argument. It's ridiculous, and not work addressing." - Phaedrus

Hi Phaedrus. I know why you refuse to answer the question, because you are a logical person and the answer you give would be obviously illogical unless you supported ALL types of marriage between consenting adults. Period.

Let me ask it this way. Forget the concept of "gay marriage". Let's talk about "marriage". Marriage is relevant to this discussion, eh? Yep. Marriage is now defined as the union between a man and a woman. There is pressure now to "redefine" marriage. Let me ask you this "relevant" question... what do YOU think the new definition of marriage should be? What is allowed and what shouldn't be allowed? Can you answer that? Again, here's the question:

Phaedrus, now that there is pressure on marriage to be redifined, what do YOU think the new definition of marriage should include and not include?

Folks, will Phaedrus answer the very simple and relevant question at hand? (drum roll....)”

“Meanwhile, in the Real World....”

“: "I guess I'm on Buck's ignore list
"... and evryone else's. (pout, pout, sniff)"
Limpy
08:10:45 AM
11/19/03

Hi Limpy®! You're not on my ignore list! I'm having a tough time keeping up around here, so if I missed something from you, I apologize! Can you direct me to your question? I can't seem to find what I missed, sorry!”

“I really care less if you like to play hide the weasel. When I have to start paying for it then I have a problem!”

“: "Bluntly, Buck, if you want incestuous marriage, write your congressman. Petition for it, and we'll deal with it when the time comes."
Phaedrus
01:10:47 PM
11/19/03

I'm not advocating the rights of incestual people to marry, nor the rights of gays to marry. Are you suggesting restricting the rights of some consenting adults to marry? You continue to fail to answer this one.”

“Why draw the moral line with just gay couples?

Because that is the issue of the day. Perhaps marriage should be extended to other groups such as you mentioned. But Phaedrus is correct - when those issues come up, we can decide on them based on the merits of the issue.”

“Dang, Buck. Your logical conclusion re incestual relationships is sound. They can't refute it. You've won, already! Enough! Let that issue go! You are sounding like a broken record. Cheese and crackers!


Interesting to note that you weren't really paying attention, just shooting from hip the last two days. Have you been reading as fast as you claim to type. Maybe you should slow down abit and consider what others are offering.

(I've enjoyed your posts here, though I don't agree with all.)”

“Someone earlier suggested that there was a trend to allow gay marriages (citing the Supreme Court ruling on sodomy laws). But in fact the opposite is happening. States are banning recognizing same-sex marriage through both propositions and senate bills. The people do not want same-sex marriage, and they are voting overwhelmingly to protect the honor of traditional marriage. Yes, even in California, the land of S.F., Proposition 22 banning recognition of same-sex marriages won by huge margin. I did a quick search and instantly came up with many states, I got bored and stopped. Here's a few. The trend is NOT towards recognizing gay marriages, it's the opposite.

Florida

Missouri

California

Nevada

ABC News Poll”

“: ""Dang, Buck. Your logical conclusion re incestual relationships is sound. They can't refute it. You've won, already! Enough! Let that issue go! You are sounding like a broken record. Cheese and crackers!


Hey Limpy®! I'm just trying to get Phaedrus, with his great logical mind, to answer a simple question! Sorry to be repetitive! :^D”

“Buck, we don't care about your home life.”

“Phaedrus, now that there is pressure on marriage to be redifined, what do YOU think the new definition of marriage should include and not include?


I think the legal definition of marriage should be expanded to include same sex couples.

I've answered this question dozens of times.”

“: "Because that is the issue of the day. Perhaps marriage should be extended to other groups such as you mentioned. But Phaedrus is correct - when those issues come up, we can decide on them based on the merits of the issue." - Mutt

We shall wait until the "merits" of the issue arise? I think the "merits" are already here. The "merit" is that marriage can mean anything to anyone, the old definition is being challenged. You betcha it's already here. I'd rather draw the line in the sand here than keeping having to draw lines to every group who wants to challenge the previous definition of marriage. The Buck stops here.”

“: I think the legal definition of marriage should be expanded to include same sex couples. - Phaedrus

If the definiton should stop there in your opinion, boy, you sure are a bigot. You are very narrow-minded to those who may disagree with you and want to expand the definition of marriage to ALL consenting adults. But that's okay, I still love ya, man!

Now that we have concluded we are all bigots in our way, imposing our own beliefs and personal morals to constrain others, NEXT SUBJECT PLEASE! I think we're all bored of this.”