serious gay marriage question

“both, actually.”

“buck, your slippery slope argument was defeated a long time ago. each issue must be argued based on its merits.

Naw, it wasn't defeated, Crash Bang, you just don't care for the obvious logic of it. You are saying, "it's okay to be gay and marry, but NO WAY can you be bisexual and marry each sex at the same time, we need to discriminate when I THINK it's okay." That's wrong, Crash Bang, it's hypocrital and wrong. We shouldn't say, "your lifestyle is okay, and yours isn't" if we are to throw away traditional standards. You can't counter that argument. You always say, "let's look at the merit of each as they come". That's hogwash. EVERYONE should be merited the same merits if we throw away traditions. There is no reason a bisexual shouldn't be able to marry one of each if we are to use your argument. But you choose to discriminate and draw lines as you see fit, or you say others must force the issue to make their basic rights acceptable. We should apply universal rights to all if we simply redefine right and wrong when it comes to marriage.”

“C'mon Yolanda, what's Fonzie like?”

“The laws of man ARENT the laws of God. Never were, never will be.

birch, I respectfully disagree. God gave us both spirtual and earthly laws to govern us. The Bible is guidelines for both. And after judgement day, God's governmental laws WILL rule for all eternity.

Re kiddie porn etc...those kids are minors without a choice in the matter. You are comparing apples and space shuttles.

??? Kiddie porn? Who mentioned kiddie porn as minors without a choice? birch, I mentioned "images"... pedophilia images, virtual kiddie porn, not real life children. How does it affect anyone if a pedophile wishes to "create" virtual child porn images which literally affect no human child? I'm not talking about pedophilia with humans, I'm talking virtual images. Of cours it's sick and wrong.

If a Church or Christian order were condoning this or anything contrary to Gods will, I would speak up because its the Churches job not mans government to represent the will of Chrsit.

But Shirley you must agree we don't allow ourselves, as Christians, to vote on moral matters of the state? Abortion, gay marriage, crime, we all, in my opinion, obliged to vote as God would convict us. We are the salt of the Earth, we are to preserve what's good and right and honorable to God, even through laws.
last edited: 12/18/05 7:35:30 PM”

“I look at who Jesus hung out with in the Bible, it wasnt the self-proclaimed judges of his time. It was the prostitutes, tax men, and losers. Jesus was and still is for losers.”

Of course, but Jesus didn't hang around them so he could screw prostitutes and shoot meth and smoke crack and steal. No, he hung around them to TURN THEM FROM THEIR SIN! I say Jesus is for winners and losers, we're all in the same condition.”

“All the greats were screw ups. Moses married a non jew. David made a booty call on Bethsheba and she became his baby's momma. There were no perfect people in the bible.”

Of course, that's why Christ came, because He was perfect and we are not and He was the only one able to atone for our sins. Heck, David was a man after God's own heart and slept with a man's wife and had him killed. No one's saying anyone is perfect, but that doesn't mean we don't try to adhere to God's standards, even as we fail.”

“I thought it was the Beatles that was more popular than Jesus

The Beatles said, "All you need is love", and then they broke up.”

““C'mon Yolanda, what's Fonzie like?”

Cool!”

“Fonzie liked girls. Fonzie should not be in a homo thread.”

“there is no obvious logic in your slippery slope.

"You are saying, "it's okay to be gay and marry, but NO WAY can you be bisexual and marry each sex at the same time, we need to discriminate when I THINK it's okay."

that is such complete horsesht. that is not at all what i am saying. you are completely mis-characterizing my argument. i never said i have the final answer to all issues.

your slippery slope is crap. and im tired of it. fck traditions. some traditions are wrong. slavery was a tradition. subjugation of women was a tradition. so screw doing things just because of tradition.

either something is right or something is wrong. saying homo-ness is ok OPENS THE DOOR TO DISCUSSION of other things, and in that way your slippery slope works, but it doesnt automatically make all those other things right.

i cant believe we're still discussing this point”

“I think we should discuss levitical law.”

“your slippery slope is crap.

No, your "it's okay what I personally think is okay but nothing else" is totally crap.

Crash Bang, you asked a "serious" question earlier, I took the time to define it from the perspective of a literal Bible-believing Christian, then you go and get all spastic. I should've known better not to bother with your questions, even under the guise of so-called 'sincerity'.”

“The laws of man ARENT the laws of God. Never were, never will be.

birch, I respectfully disagree. God gave us both spirtual and earthly laws to govern us. The Bible is guidelines for both. And after judgement day, God's governmental laws WILL rule for all eternity.

my point still stands.MANS laws arent Gods laws and never will be. Gods law always is wether mans law reflects it or not. And yes after judgement day God will rule, until then its up to man to f this place up with his laws.”

“Buck, I apologize if I am coming across as argumenative. Thats isnt my intention at all.”

“your slippery slope is crap. and im tired of it. fck traditions. some traditions are wrong. slavery was a tradition. subjugation of women was a tradition. so screw doing things just because of tradition.

Your use of examples here is crap. None of these belong in this discussion because GOD created ALL HUMANS EQUAL (slavery is the result of sinful man wanting to dominate others), and God created MALE AND FEMALE equal, so women's rights issues have nothing to do with God-ordained tradition. It is man who wanted to dominate women in a sinful way. We are speaking of Biblical, God-ordained laws, not the "traditions of men". Man did not create marriage, the union of a man and a woman was from the very first, in the Garden. There were no slaves and there were no women's rights abuses. That all came later through sin.”

“birch, I didn't take you as argumentative. I'm just Photoshopping wedding photos right now and posting here in between sharpenings and croppings, ha ha!

We are probably saying the same thing. It's semantics. Of course man doesn't make laws for God to abide by, but man makes laws (and should) that parallel what God would want for us. By man's laws, I meant man's laws reflecting God's laws. We have many "man's laws" right now that reflect God's laws. I don't think God currently wants laws that force "Christianity", it is by free-will that we decide to abide by God or not. But that said, I don't think God would want us to legalize and promote and accept and ordain by law what He considers "sin". That is why I vote against abortion, and against gay marriage, and to vote for politicians who have morals (is that any oxymoron? ha ha!).”

“"it's okay what I personally think is okay but nothing else"

again, mischaracterization. something is not right or wrong because I say it is right or wrong, but because it IS right or wrong, regardless of my, your, or pope john paul the II's opinion. why dont you get that?”

“birch - why levitical law? You up for a good stonin' or something.

Buck - Who's Shirley? Proceed with as many Airplane! jokes as you'd like.”

“and just for the record, i really dont give a rats ass if i come across as argumentative. im arguing. i tend to argue on here alot. i guess that makes me argumentative.

at least s-rge's argument makes sense, as long as you agree with his original premise (that the bible is the inerrant word of god, which i dont agree with). slippery slope is a logical fallacy. youre gonna have to try a new angle

for all i know fairyness is immoral. i have yet to hear a convincing argument that it is.”

“LOL dayhiker!

CB, if fairyness is a crime then go ahead and convict me!”

“again, mischaracterization. something is not right or wrong because I say it is right or wrong, but because it IS right or wrong, regardless of my, your, or pope john paul the II's opinion. why dont you get that?”

I don't get it because YOU are saying something is right and something is wrong. That's why.”

“well, its 935pm here. That means it time to go to bed with my dog and sister. See ya.”

“at least s-rge's argument makes sense, as long as you agree with his original premise (that the bible is the inerrant word of god, which i dont agree with). slippery slope is a logical fallacy. youre gonna have to try a new angle

I have NO idea why you think that basic Constitutional rights for all, not just some, is considered a slippery slope? That's YOUR morality. If you say "gay marriage" is okay, but perhaps not the others, then you are a bigot, narrowly redefining marriage to fit your views. You have to draw the line somewhere, but you're too much of a wussy to do it. At least I have a reason much bigger than mine to draw the line at only a man and a woman. Anywhere YOU draw the line makes you a bigot simply because you are.

You originally asked why God thought homosexuality was a sin. I gave you a reason. Like it or not, that's the reason. If God didn't narrowly define what sexual purity was, then all the so-called slippery-slope reasons I gave you would all be fine and dandy just the same.”

“Nite nite, birch!”

“"That's not my job." - birch

I disagree.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2017:3&version=31;

(ps - I'm still catching up to your posts, so sorry if you covered that already.)
last edited: 12/18/05 9:02:43 PM”

“Ok, that probably came across as totally out of context.

Here is what that is in response to:

“"We should draw attention to all sinful acts equally"

Thats not my job.”
birch
6:48:57 PM
12/18/05

My response to that, that it's not our job to draw attention to sinful acts:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2017:3&version=31;

If you obey God, it certainly is your job.
last edited: 12/18/05 9:15:45 PM”

“Here's the context:

Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come. It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. So watch yourselves.
"If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, 'I repent,' forgive him."”

“Let me make it clearer for the Crashster.

If God said, "you can only eat apples, all other fruit is bad". Then you say, "well, oranges should be okay too. I don't know about bananas and mangos and peaches and pears, but why would God only say apples are okay? That's silly, apples AND oranges are okay".

Then I say, "well, if you allow apples AND oranges, just 'because', then why exclude bananas and mangos and peaches and pears?"

Then you say, "that's a slippery slope, we're not talking about those, we're only talking about allowing oranges".

I'm like... "oooOOookay, what do you have against peaches and pears and bananas, if you don't care what God says about only allowing the eating of apples?".

That's not a slippery slope, Crash Bang. If you don't like the definition of what God wants, then it is then up to man, you, and what right does man (you) have to exclude others? If God says apples, then it's apples. Period. That's good enough for some of us. If you say oranges too, then it is you who must decide when to be a friggin' bigot and exlude bananas and pears and peaches and mangos. The only thing slippery about that is the banana peel you're stepping on.”

“Homosexuality was enough to send one to a Concentration camp.”

“Saying you were a Jew and believed in God was enough to send one to a Concentration camp.”

“So a homo, a hebe, a catholic, and a homo-hebe are standing before the Pearly Gates. Just coming from a gassing party at Dachau.

Who gets into heaven?”

“None of them. Heaven is only for Protestants. Duh.”

“http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=JOHN%2014:6&version=31;

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt%207:13-14,21-23&version=31;
last edited: 12/18/05 10:27:55 PM”

“LOL Buck. Thanks!”

“i dont believe the bible is the literal word of god. if i did, we wouldnt be having this conversation. homosexuality is like any other issue. either its right, or its wrong, based on ethical principles. if you look at it from the pov of a non-believer, youll understand

for the record, i dont believe homosexuality is immoral. maybe it is, but i dont believe it is. in theory, i dont have a problem with bigamy, altho i doubt it could ever really work in practice. i defineitely have a problem with beastiality and pedophilia.

just because im ok with one issue doesnt mean im going to be ok with all issues. and maybe im on the wrong side of the argument on some issues. thats something we would hash out in a different argument”

“The only difference is one group is easier to label as "that gay couple." - dayhiker

LOL, If you can find any homo's who are a couple. Couple of queers maybe. LOL”

“when deciding my opinion on a topic, its this simple: are anyones rights violated? does anyone get hurt? with the emphasis on the first question.

demonstrate to me that a same-sex relationship between two consenting adults hurts anyone or violates someones rights any differently that a hetero relationship and ill believe you”

“there are lots of gay couples, bacpac. maybe not in frogbump, arkansas, but they exist. if i was gay in arkansas i wouldnt come out, either”

“i dont believe the bible is the literal word of god. if i did, we wouldnt be having this conversation. homosexuality is like any other issue. either its right, or its wrong, based on ethical principles. if you look at it from the pov of a non-believer, youll understand

for the record, i dont believe homosexuality is immoral. maybe it is, but i dont believe it is. in theory, i dont have a problem with bigamy, altho i doubt it could ever really work in practice. i defineitely have a problem with beastiality and pedophilia.

just because im ok with one issue doesnt mean im going to be ok with all issues. and maybe im on the wrong side of the argument on some issues. thats something we would hash out in a different argument

when deciding my opinion on a topic, its this simple: are anyones rights violated? does anyone get hurt? with the emphasis on the first question.

demonstrate to me [something that is to my standards] that a same-sex relationship between two consenting adults hurts anyone or violates someones rights any differently that a hetero relationship and ill believe you - crash bang

_______________________________________________


have ye not known that the unrighteous the reign of God shall not inherit? be not led astray; neither whoremongers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor sodomites, - God, [link]

______________________________________________

My point crash is that you are asking what God wants and why, but you are actually more concerned what you want, and why.

To understand Christianity (for those that truly want to understand it) - you have to look at things from a God-centered point of view.

That is what Christianity is all about.

It's difficult to do, I admit. That's why we need Jesus. We, by our very nature, all want to look at things from a self-centered view. Go back to the fall of mankind and Adam's sin to see that we want to be the one's making the decisions.

It's only when you understand that it's all about God, and not us, that you can appreciate and realize God's message.

That's why nobody can convert you to Christianity. It has to be done by you. It's all about your relationship with Christ and your understanding of His nature as it compares to your own.”

“demonstrate to me that a same-sex relationship between two consenting adults hurts anyone or violates someones rights any differently that a hetero relationship and ill believe you”
Crash Bang
5:33:39 AM
12/19/05

I already did. They poison public parks.”

“You gotta stop hangin' in their park, bacpac.”

“Having gotten all caught up since last night I care even less. LOL!”

““Having gotten all caught up since last night I care even less. LOL!”
Nigal
9:13:56 AM
12/19/05
ignore this user

It's kind of like watching a dog chase it's own tail. It's fun to watch at first, but gets old real fast.”

“Some conversations are not meant for entertainment.

Dr. Phil is on later. Maybe that will keep your interest.”

“"It's kind of like watching a dog chase it's own tail. It's fun to watch at first, but gets old real fast.”

Well what's not fun about "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..." "...is too. Is not..."”

“Whether or not homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of Christianity isn’t the issue. Church and State are separate in our democracy. It’s hypocritical and unjust for our democracy to protect its citizens from discrimination based on sexual orientation and then turn around and deny these same citizens basic privileges because of their sexual orientation.”

“well said JS”

“Whether or not homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of Christianity isn’t the issue. Church and State are separate in our democracy. It’s hypocritical and unjust for our democracy to protect its citizens from discrimination based on sexual orientation and then turn around and deny these same citizens basic privileges because of their sexual orientation.

Oh, but it is the issue.

Church and State are separate in our democracy.

They are not. 'State' is determined by citizens, a great amount of which are Christians. Your premise is incorrect.”

“What is hypocritical is not allowing laws to be created based upon the religious beliefs of it's citizens, while saying you want a democracy.
last edited: 12/19/05 9:08:17 AM”

“Nigal - agreed. I read this to get different opinions on the topic. It's one I have mixed feelings about. I should know better than to come here for actual civil discussion.”