Gay Marriage.


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Gay Marriage.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 20 · Next
Author Message
Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1231488 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 10:34:23 UTC - in response to Message 1230824.

Unlocked. Please keep it civil.
____________

Janice

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,383,741
RAC: 1,965
United States
Message 1231502 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 11:22:46 UTC - in response to Message 1230808.

Ah so it is a Barry vs Willard thing -- but which Willard -- Willard 2012 in his TeaPublican guise, or Willard 2006 in his Massachusetts Republican mask -- a major difference between those two different political animals.

And here I thought that if someone was designed gay, it was a function of intelligent design -- silly me.

Barry's second 4 years are shot due to this issue.

And so is the issue.




Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1231541 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 13:45:37 UTC - in response to Message 1231488.

Unlocked. Please keep it civil.

some want civil some want marriage. Who knew it was so important.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231553 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 14:02:44 UTC

Prove someone is designed gay.

This science is not accepted by all. No such thing as gay gene.

I posted a while back the people are born with a conscience. I was told not all people who work with genes accept that fact.

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,955,958
RAC: 1,529
United States
Message 1231557 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 14:12:54 UTC - in response to Message 1231553.

Prove someone is designed gay.


Who asserted they were?

This science is not accepted by all. No such thing as gay gene.


Your assertion to prove.

I posted a while back the people are born with a conscience. I was told not all people who work with genes accept that fact.


And you believed them? Why? What evidence was provided in support of the claim?
____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Profile Ex
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 2895
Credit: 1,797,699
RAC: 396
United States
Message 1231559 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 14:20:31 UTC - in response to Message 1231553.

Prove someone is designed gay.

This science is not accepted by all. No such thing as gay gene.

I posted a while back the people are born with a conscience. I was told not all people who work with genes accept that fact.

Ok so then, you should have no problem choosing to get into the sack with a man then, right? Cause apparently it's a choice, so what would the problem be?

I assume a gay person pretending to be straight would enjoy life just about the same as you would being with a man instead of a woman, not very much.


____________
-Dave #2

3.2.0-33

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,383,741
RAC: 1,965
United States
Message 1231560 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 14:27:29 UTC - in response to Message 1231553.

ID -- see the problem is that if one posits ID but then defines ID to fulfill one's own belief and opinion then someone else might well define ID to fulfill their own belief and opinion. You of course seem to take the position for ID but also your own brand of ID. Sadly for all of us, that simply isn't the way it works.

Prove someone is designed gay.

This science is not accepted by all. No such thing as gay gene.

I posted a while back the people are born with a conscience. I was told not all people who work with genes accept that fact.

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231690 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 19:54:38 UTC

Bottom line is that people make the life choice. They cannot claim they are being discriminated against.

I don't care what someone does within their home.

A Marriage is a public ceremony is an event of ritual significance, an enactment of law.

We restrict human behaviors everyday of the week all day long. And it is done by consinsous.

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,698
RAC: 7,131
United States
Message 1231692 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 19:59:49 UTC - in response to Message 1231690.

Bottom line is that people make the life choice. They cannot claim they are being discriminated against.

Ah, can't be discriminated against, like when a person makes the life choice to wear a black hoodie and walk through a white neighborhood. I think I am seeing how you define discrimination.

____________

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,955,958
RAC: 1,529
United States
Message 1231729 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 20:52:23 UTC - in response to Message 1231690.

Bottom line is that people make the life choice. They cannot claim they are being discriminated against.

I don't care what someone does within their home.

A Marriage is a public ceremony is an event of ritual significance, an enactment of law.

We restrict human behaviors everyday of the week all day long. And it is done by consinsous.


Did the supporters of anti-miscegeny laws make the same life style choice argument? It would apppear the same rationalization could be used. As has been noted already there is more to marriage than the ceremony

What was the traditional purpose of marriage and how do same-sex marriages subvert this purpose?
____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231742 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 21:13:05 UTC

As I have plainly posted here this is not a question of color or single person sex orgens. This is a question of same sex marriage.

First marriage is of God. Regardless is you believe in the Book of not 6,000 years ago [or so] marriage got it's start. It was a man and a woman. In this Book black people married white people. And brown people married yellow people. Green people married purple people. This is not an issue unless people take the Book out of context.

The law has nothing on the books about same sex marriage in the federal laws called the Constitution. Therefore they cannot claim they are being discriminated against. 38 states say it is not allowed. An admendment can be called for and a law can be made to disallow it. In my own home state of Illinois marriage is not allowed but unions are. If there was a full vote of the people not even that would be allowed.

Marriage is for the sake of the children involved. Im sure your chompin at the bit to tell me all about childless couples who have made the choice not to have children. That is their choice and I'll not force anyone to have children nor will anyone else. But the hoi polloi by vote after vote do not want gay marriage. Bottom line...


Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,698
RAC: 7,131
United States
Message 1231761 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 21:55:47 UTC - in response to Message 1231729.

Bobby,

I think I see the thought process as clear as St. Peter does.

You must judge others so that you can do God's work. God's work is vengeance. He must cast the first stone, because Jesus died for him and therefore he is without sin.

My hypothesis could be wrong, but it appears to fit all observed data.

____________

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1231796 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 0:44:58 UTC - in response to Message 1231742.

I have to agree with ID on one thing. The majority of the people do not want gay marriage. And the majority of people should not gay marry. This does not give to them the right to dictate how others must live.

I do not see how their religious views on it should effect those who have no religious nor moral issues with it. Those who believe the predominant science
that indicates sexual preference is nature and not choice should not be over-ruled by those who believe in some books that were highly edited and bound together in a multitude of fashions over thousands of years.

Indeed, there is biblical information indicating that Jesus had a physical relationship with Peter. There is not actual proof of not, since no DNA tests were done.

We are not a country based on one religion. Nor should we be.


____________

Janice

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231797 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 0:46:06 UTC - in response to Message 1231761.

Bobby,

I think I see the thought process as clear as St. Peter does.

You must judge others so that you can do God's work. God's work is vengeance. He must cast the first stone, because Jesus died for him and therefore he is without sin.

My hypothesis could be wrong, but it appears to fit all observed data.

You are wrong. Im Catholic. And you would be woefully ignorant between Catholic and Protestant views.

You have a problem with the processing of observed data.


Im grateful for the opportunity to correct you. Thank you.

+1

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,383,741
RAC: 1,965
United States
Message 1231799 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 0:49:33 UTC - in response to Message 1231742.

ID -- marriage was for property rights (including woman as property).

The 'hoi palloi' voted for prohibition, then they unvoted it. Times change. This can be unsettling for one so stoked in an absolute, concrete and fixed view of the world.

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231806 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 1:05:18 UTC - in response to Message 1231796.

I have to agree with ID on one thing. The majority of the people do not want gay marriage. And the majority of people should not gay marry. This does not give to them the right to dictate how others must live.

I do not see how their religious views on it should effect those who have no religious nor moral issues with it. Those who believe the predominant science
that indicates sexual preference is nature and not choice should not be over-ruled by those who believe in some books that were highly edited and bound together in a multitude of fashions over thousands of years.

Indeed, there is biblical information indicating that Jesus had a physical relationship with Peter. There is not actual proof of not, since no DNA tests were done.

We are not a country based on one religion. Nor should we be.




??????...biblical information of...physical relationship...??????

Do tell and quote the book fully and to the direct point of the matter at hand. Sources... Theologians.....

In the Greek language there are 4 names for our one word love. I warn you now so we can close this subject just as soon as possible---the word Eros is NOT EVER ONCE USED in the Bible.

Prove you point Ma'am. Or recant your statement.

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1231808 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 1:08:36 UTC - in response to Message 1231806.



??????...biblical information of...physical relationship...??????

Do tell and quote the book fully and to the direct point of the matter at hand. Sources... Theologians.....

In the Greek language there are 4 names for our one word love. I warn you now so we can close this subject just as soon as possible---the word Eros is NOT EVER ONCE USED in the Bible.

Prove you point Ma'am. Or recant your statement.


There are to my knowledge 3, not 4 words in the greek language for love.

And the ancient Greek texts that refer to

"Peter, whom Jesus loved"

Do indeed use the word "Eros".

Thank you for at least understanding why the greek language in such text is important. "Love" in english is a vague term. In greek it is not.
____________

Janice

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231821 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 2:29:18 UTC
Last modified: 14 May 2012, 2:31:57 UTC

Im sorry but you are mistaken, there are 4.

C.S. Lewis, 4 kinds of love, perhaps?

You also are mistaken about the word eros it is not used.

Your saying it does not make a thing called, proof.

Would you like a link to the Bible in Greek and then translated to English?

You would not be, apparently, a Theologian, nor very well informed of the Book.

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1231826 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 2:47:25 UTC - in response to Message 1231821.

Im sorry but you are mistaken, there are 4.

C.S. Lewis, 4 kinds of love, perhaps?

You also are mistaken about the word eros it is not used.

Your saying it does not make a thing called, proof.

Would you like a link to the Bible in Greek and then translated to English?

You would not be, apparently, a Theologian, nor very well informed of the Book.

perhaps 4 in modern greek, but 3 in ancient greek.

Your perported expertise would make you more likely to have access to the original texts. I do not claim to be a scholar, but I have known many.
I have heard them try to explain it away, misdirect from it, but not deny it.


____________

Janice

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231831 - Posted: 14 May 2012, 2:53:36 UTC

Eros is ancient greek.

It is not found in the text. Bottom line.

Please cite your Sources... Theologians.....

Or retract......

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 20 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Gay Marriage.

Copyright © 2014 University of California