California takes a step backwards!

[Trail-Axe]

Now *I* need a new keyboard. Are you for real? If you haven't noticed, not everyone does it. It's not a fad that's sweeping the nation. Hey, even if it were, we'd still have science and, well, you! to make babies for us!

Last time we checked, the human population on this planet had nearly doubled in the last 30 years. We're not having any trouble procreating. If any thing's going to wipe us off the face of the earth, it's *that* or the stresses that puts upon a society...

I guess the part where I said "IF..." did not enter into your thought process????????
If everyone drove drunk, we would have some major problems, that is why it is not lawful to do so. Any intelligent person can clearly see that. If everyone was homosexual, the human race would not continue.

So homosexuality if it is anything, is a disease to the human race and needs to be treated. If you suffer from the disease of homosexuality, there is an organization that can help you. http://www.exodus-international.org/

 

[in2fords]

"IF" is not a real worry though, we can "IF" all we want but reality will happen no matter what.
I actually think that by making it legal and bringing it out will help to minimize it, the "forbiden attraction" wont exist anymore.

I love how people bring religion into it, there are many examples of priest that have crossed into it in a much worse fashion. If you cant keep it out of the church on such a powerfull level how do you think you'll keep humanity from doing it?

 

[Trail-Axe]

Define sacred? If you feel marriage is sacred, why would you deprive people of it?

Definition of sacred: The state of being holy or sacred.

Marriage is a Biblical union of a man and a woman, that makes marriage sacred. Marriage was invented by God, therefore it is holy. It has never been between a man and another man. That would go against the original intent of its creator.

I guess when one removes the commandments of God, and the teachings of Jesus Christ from society, then anything goes. But Holy and sacred are one in the same my friend.

Keeping marriage between a man and a woman keeps marriage sacred. Allowing homosexuals to marry does not deprive them of anything sacred, it protects the sacredness of the institution of marriage itself.

Its like keeping your cloths clean before you have that job interview. Your clothing remains sacred to you, until it is soiled. To say, "why would you deprive the dirt an opportunity to soil your cloths because you want it to partake of something sacred," is ludicrous!

 

[in2fords]

Kelley, I have a nice new wireless keyboard your more then welcome to, just stop in for lunch sometime to pick it up.

 

[cal]

Definition of sacred: The state of being holy or sacred.

Marriage is a Biblical union of a man and a woman, that makes marriage sacred. Marriage was invented by God, therefore it is holy. It has never been between a man and another man. That would go against the original intent of its creator.

I guess when one removes the commandments of God, and the teachings of Jesus Christ from society, then anything goes. But Holy and sacred are one in the same my friend.

Keeping marriage between a man and a woman keeps marriage sacred. Allowing homosexuals to marry does not deprive them of anything sacred, it protects the sacredness of the institution of marriage itself.

Its like keeping your cloths clean before you have that job interview. Your clothing remains sacred to you, until it is soiled. To say, "why would you deprive the dirt an opportunity to soil your cloths because you want it to partake of something sacred," is ludicrous!

Then why is the first step in getting married, going to a courthouse and filing with the state? Since when does the state give god permission to marry someone?


Fuck it, keep them out of your church if you want - but until you differentiate *all* legally binding unions from marriage, and make marriage an act of the church separate from that the state offers, you can't deny someone legal marriage.

 

[Trail-Axe]

If you cant keep it out of the church on such a powerful level how do you think you'll keep humanity from doing it?

You won't. But just because sin exist, does not mean it should be practiced. If I were to use your argument for the pedophile, then I guess we should allow that too. Or if I were to use it for the thief, then we should allow that as well.

But we don't. It all really comes down to God's commandments. He looked down and saw how miserable we were in our rebellion against Him, and called it sin. He gave us His laws so we could live in peace with Him and with one another. Those of us who keep His laws know His peace, those who do not, mock at it. Religious or not, it is how you live that matters most to God. So if the priest sins, he will be judged a sinner.

 

[Trail-Axe]

Then why is the first step in getting married, going to a courthouse and filing with the state? Since when does the state give god permission to marry someone?

Fuck it, keep them out of your church if you want - but until you differentiate *all* legally binding unions from marriage, and make marriage an act of the church separate from that the state offers, you can't deny someone legal marriage. "Sure can"!.

The first step in getting married is that there needs to be a man, and a woman present. It is not the state that gives God permission to do anything, He needs no such thing. It is God who gives us His permission, and thus He has established how it is to be performed by us. But I think even you are wise enough to see that.

 

[kristuphir]

Righteous.

 

[5-90]

Then why is the first step in getting married, going to a courthouse and filing with the state? Since when does the state give god permission to marry someone?


Fuck it, keep them out of your church if you want - but until you differentiate *all* legally binding unions from marriage, and make marriage an act of the church separate from that the state offers, you can't deny someone legal marriage.

To turn that one around - since when does God give the state permission to marry someone? Last time I checked, He ain't been talkin' to anybody credible...

As far as the population issue, I've been saying for years we're overpopulated. We were "overpopulated" around the time we crossed four and a half billion souls on this rock - what are we up to? Somewhere around seven and a quarter now?

Yet, we keep building housing for these people, we keep wedging people closer and closer together, and we wonder why people are suddenly going bonkers in increasing numbers. It's a proven fact that a human being requires a certain amount of "personal space" - this can extend to couples needing space, families needing space, and probably even clans (read: "extended family groups") requiring a certain amount of space which can be considered "theirs."

There's no way I could live in a walkup in SF, for instance - damn things are too close together. I can barely handle the "suburbs" here in San Jose - just not enough room to insulate you from your neighbours. This has gotten worse with the rise of the Nanny State, and everyone insisting upon being involved in everyone else's lives (which is wrongheaded, foolish, and had damned well better come to a stop soon!)

How much space does a body need? That's variable - but it can be averaged out. There are people who require more space than others (psychologically. Me, for instance - I need room from my neighbours so they can leave me the Hell alone!) and people who need less. However, this is a psychological factor, not a physical one. That's why a lack of space makes people nuts.

Look at the incidence of non-lesional neuroses among incarcerees. That is a setting where you are effectively deprived of all "personal space" that isn't contained within your skull - you can have all of your physical personal effects - and your person! - subjected to a thorough inspection at any time and for any reason. And we wonder why people go a little nuts, and/or start fighting. Fights usually get you sent to isolation, and isolation can sound pretty good after a while...

 

[kristuphir]

I guess the part where I said "IF..." did not enter into your thought process????????
If everyone drove drunk, we would have some major problems, that is why it is not lawful to do so. Any intelligent person can clearly see that. If everyone was homosexual, the human race would not continue.

I did catch the IF. IF only works IF there is a plausible way the event in question could happen. There isn't.

I'm fairly certain that homosexual marriage, if unchecked, will not cause violent loss of life, permanent injury, or major property damage to either those practicing it or those innocent people around them. Going to have to find a better analogy there. I would have to believe that homosexual marriage was likely to cause physical harm to innocent people and emotional strife to their families in order for that analogy to work.

Drunk drivers, well, I'll buy the "disease to the human race" on that one.

So homosexuality if it is anything, is a disease to the human race and needs to be treated. If you suffer from the disease of homosexuality, there is an organization that can help you. http://www.exodus-international.org/

AGAIN with the funny jokes. Did you actually bring Exodus International into a supposedly serious discussion?

Listen, I don't mean to bag on your religion because you certainly have a right to your opinions and to live your life by a stated doctrine, but I'm starting to remind myself that "for every _________, there are a thousand reasonable people who just happen to ____________"...

 

[ZomBrady]

Definition of sacred: The state of being holy or sacred.
Marriage is a Biblical union of a man and a woman, that makes marriage sacred. Marriage was invented by God, therefore it is holy. It has never been between a man and another man. That would go against the original intent of its creator.

Those are wide sweeping statements there. You do realize that the definition of marriage has been different among the world's cultures? Many non-western cultures have established same sex 'marriages'.

I guess when one removes the commandments of God, and the teachings of Jesus Christ from society, then anything goes. But Holy and sacred are one in the same my friend.

This is such BS here. You are saying that 'god' is the root of morality in the world and without him anything goes. I'm sorry but I don't murder people not because some mythical deity tells me not to commit murder. I base my morality in what I believe is good for me, my family and society at large. Don't bother arguing that someone could 'decide' murder is good for society or themselves, the suffering of others is never good for anyone.

Additionally, there are PLENTY of cultures, countries, peoples that were doing just fine without the teaching of jesus. Once western religion and culture was introduced in, things went down the shitter in a hurry.

Keeping marriage between a man and a woman keeps marriage sacred. Allowing homosexuals to marry does not deprive them of anything sacred, it protects the sacredness of the institution of marriage itself.

Protects for whom? Doesn't your god protect his own sacredness from being sullied? Is it really up to you and all of his followers to force me to live in what they consider a righteous way? If so, I hope your god protects me from his followers.

Its like keeping your cloths clean before you have that job interview. Your clothing remains sacred to you, until it is soiled. To say, "why would you deprive the dirt an opportunity to soil your cloths because you want it to partake of something sacred," is ludicrous!

Wow!

So? Do you consider me and my wife 'dirt' simply because we don't believe in zombie jesus? Is that what you're implying? Or does that only pertain to queers?

 

[ZomBrady]

You won't. But just because sin exist, does not mean it should be practiced. If I were to use your argument for the pedophile, then I guess we should allow that too. Or if I were to use it for the thief, then we should allow that as well.

But we don't. It all really comes down to God's commandments. He looked down and saw how miserable we were in our rebellion against Him, and called it sin. He gave us His laws so we could live in peace with Him and with one another. Those of us who keep His laws know His peace, those who do not, mock at it. Religious or not, it is how you live that matters most to God. So if the priest sins, he will be judged a sinner.

No, we don't do those things because they hurt other people, not because some mythical deity tells us not to do them. Fear does not rule my life, compassion and logic are my rules that I live by. It would be a very sick and disturbed human that enjoys hurts fellow human beings. We call those people sociopaths.

 

[Ironmen77]

If this "marriage" is no big deal, why is one group fighting so hard to get to use the term? What is the advantage over civil union? Just wondering.

 

[in2fords]

If God tells me in person to obey his laws then I will, untill then I will live in a real world with real people, act accordingly and expect everyone else to act accordingly.

If someone comes to me and says that a hippie dragon told him to stay stoned for all of life and shows me a book that say's so, I will not take him seriously. I wont tell the rest of the people that they must stay stoned for all of life and show them the book and expect them to take me seriously, then get pissed off at the world for not doing what I think they should be doing. If I beleived in such a thing I would move to a area that everyone beleived in it and be with those people.

My point is that there are many people who beleive many things. Some of the founders of this country beleived in the bible and what it says, they are also the same people who beleived that everyone has a right to beleive what they want and act as such as long as it doesnt hurt others. How can you take one thing they have said and not the other?

How can you beleive that your way of life is the only way of life? do you really think your that important? if so then Gods true lessons are lost on you.

If you want to not be around gays because they disturb you then leave, pack your bags and head somewhere else that thinks they are allowed to judge people for actions that dont affect them.

People who beleive in God are not the only people here in this country and they never were the only people in this country. I love how religious people think they are being shoved in a corner and the country is being taken out of their hands, we all share this country together. As much as you think you are tollerating us to be here we are tollerating you to be here. Your way of life here is not the only way. At school there is allways the "in crowd" that judges people and punishes them for not doing things like them but it allways happens, they take it to far and the other people in the school fight back and show them what it is like. if the non beleivers keep getting pushed around by the beleivers they will fight back. If religious people didnt try to push us around then they would have more rights, we wouldnt need to take actions against you if what you did didnt affect us!

 

[buzzbombxj]

Dont beleive in gay mariage? Dont marry a dude.

Trail axe, what you do if you had a gay son?



This thread is just more drama like the one in the den, got a great new sig out of it though

 

[5-90]

Dont beleive in gay mariage? Dont marry a dude.

Trail axe, what you do if you had a gay son?



This thread is just more drama like the one in the den, got a great new sig out of it though

You're welcome. I suppose I should be flattered - but it didn't seem that "quotable" to me when I wrote it.

Of course, 8mud was probably thinking the same thing when I expropriated my sig from him - although I've had recent experience that proves his point...

 

[8Mud]

I'm a social conservative, for basically two reasons. Modern man is more technologically advanced than his predecessors (and even that's debatable, as modern method is a fairly narrow approach to problem solving), but is basically the same model from 5-15 thousand years ago. Most every kind of social model imaginable has been tried and those that failed are often repeated. Most every generation thinks it has the maturity and ability (in there limitless arrogance) to try failed social models again and again.
Many of the laws laid down in religion are lessons learned. An attempt to help keep future generations from making the same old mistakes in the same old ways.
Society ain't never going to be exactly what is was and is unlikely to evolve into what you expect. Following the road signs, left by your forefathers, can be helpful in keeping it between the guardrails.
Social conservatism 101.

Jealously is the shadow of greed, there is always somebody who wants what the other guy has. What's the old saying, I've got all my chit in one sack (everything I've ever wanted for now), but now I can't carry it.
Unforeseen complications.
An example is the free love movement in the 60-70`s, Anally injected death sentence (AIDS) was bound to happen. Was predicted years before anybody caught on to what was happening, by Jewish scholars (and other religious scholars). I went to some of their seminars as part of my interests in Sociology (early 70`s), almost all of their predictions came to pass, been there done that, it's all in the book. They predicted AIDS, they predicted human sexual behavior would evolve from procreation into recreation. Instead of sex being a bonding force, it turned into casual addictive compulsive behavior in many.
I doubt gay marriage is benign, if it was, it would likely already be accepted and fairly invisible.
Even if you can't accept the metaphysical parts of the Bible, the lessons learned parts of the Bible, the Halakha and the Koran are worth study. And should be factored into the equation before enacting social legislation. I really doubt the basic rules and guidelines where put down in print to fill up empty pages. But are more likely a study in lessons learned, left for future generations.

People keep right on looking for absolutes and keep right on rediscovering there aren't any.

 

[GSequoia]

Homophobia is lame.


This was a good decision for California and the United States in general, this is the logical continuation of the civil rights movement.

There is no non-religious reason to deny homosexuals equal rights and religious based legislation has no place in this country. You and your church are still free to dislike homosexuals and refuse to recognize their marriages.

Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, and whatever else you want to call them are not the answer unless heterosexual marriage is renamed to that as well. This would be called "Separate but equal" and we've tried that before, it didn't work out so well...

Sequoia - I'm not gay but my boyfriend is flaming!!



PS - If I see any more usage of slurs like fag, faggot, queers, etc you're getting spanked, and not in a good way, I may not be around a whole lot lately but I am still a moderator 'round these parts.

 

[in2fords]

Sequoia - I'm not gay but my boyfriend is flaming!!

your only gay if you push back

 

[8Mud]

Homophobia is lame.


This was a good decision for California and the United States in general, this is the logical continuation of the civil rights movement.

There is no non-religious reason to deny homosexuals equal rights and religious based legislation has no place in this country. You and your church are still free to dislike homosexuals and refuse to recognize their marriages.

Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, and whatever else you want to call them are not the answer unless heterosexual marriage is renamed to that as well. This would be called "Separate but equal" and we've tried that before, it didn't work out so well...

Sequoia - I'm not gay but my boyfriend is flaming!!



PS - If I see any more usage of slurs like fag, faggot, queers, etc you're getting spanked, and not in a good way, I may not be around a whole lot lately but I am still a moderator 'round these parts.

Have you ever noticed that civil rights are rarely multi directional. They tend to be unequally enforced initiatives favoring a minority. Often at the expense of the majority.
People seem to take there eye off the ball, our job is to nurture the next generation to maturity. All this self serving bullpucky is just selfishness manifesting itself.
A thought about civil rights, about the same time there where slaves in America much of Europe was under a Feudal system. The Dukes and Princes owned you, if you wanted to immigrate, you used the underground railroad or bought your way out.
If it's ever found to be genetic, I'll eat crow and slink on off into the sunset. But until then I consider my choices to be just as valid as anybody else's and the type of world I want my children to inherit as much my right to mold as anybody else's.

I call myself Captain Ewection, the protector of traditional values.