anti-gay marriage
- Started
- Last post
- 456 Responses
- ********0
I don't have the time or patience to read all these posts but if it comes down to "god don't like it" than let GOD decide. We, and especially the government, can not determine what anyone's GOD does or does not like. GOD might not like swearing either but the government has no right telling you so- so if that is the argument- let GOD judge.
And don't let the government fool you into believing this is about GOD at all- it's about tax benefits and legal rights. If two people who are supposedly in love and are faithful to each other and work as a union to get by in this aweful world they should be given the same rights as those who do this and are of the opposite sex.
The fact is homosexuality exist- it always has and always will. Not every gay married couple is going to raise children but even if they decide to- a parents worth is based on the love and understanding they give not what sex they are. Children will only suffer by those who are as ignorant as some in this thread... and they will not go away whether it is legal or not. Just like any type of ignorance- if anything maybe the children can learn to learn to have more respect for human nature and feelings.
Putting a constitutional ban of love and union is absurd. It's no different than banning different RACE partners.
If you can get married by a drunk Elvis for 75.00 in Vegas than you can not use the sancity of marriage as an excuse.
Let love rule.
- Brian220
well put puter
- speed_d0
Amen brother
- xaoscontrol0
brian:
I think the problem with that argument is that the creationists are trying to hard to reach evolutionists with the science concept. At the same time, evolutionists don't try that tactic with creationists because they feel that faith is a weak argument.....
I still think it's funny tht people are now saying that the T-REX was probably not a carnivore.
- ********0
right on puter!
- froww0
Love and respect homosexuals and let them live as they will, but why all of a sudden grant them the priveleges of a union that was explicitly designed for a man and a woman!? I suppose it comes down to how you define marriage and I believe it was a covenant created for one man and one woman to experience and enjoy.
Call it what you will.
- ********0
- froww0
xao - revisions like that are rampant throughout the evolutionist community. Which is likely why so many these days are abandoning it as legitimate science.
- xaoscontrol0
I guess I don't get why Union or partnership or whatever term has been used isn't good enough. If it involves the whole legal thing when it comes to life insurance or children (anyone see that episode of ER?), then why not change the laws for that?
- ribit0
Who is abandoning evolution as legitimate science?
- Brian220
I think the problem with that argument is that the creationists are trying to hard to reach evolutionists with the science concept. At the same time, evolutionists don't try that tactic with creationists because they feel that faith is a weak argument.....
Why should scientists waste time arguing with people who've already made up there mind based on 2000 year old myths? No offense but it doesn't seem productive. They're better off treating them like crackpots.I still think it's funny tht people are now saying that the T-REX was probably not a carnivore.
The case for T-Rex being a scavenger is pretty good.
- ********0
The union is designed foremost for the decoration of love and honor... the man and woman part becomes obvious. And realize that the gay community is not asking for a mirror image of the typical christian ceremony but they are asking for the right to be recognized as a couple in union and to respected as such by the eyes of the government they are contribute to.
- fingercore0
Marraige laws can change. Correct me if I'm wrong, but at one point in this country (USA), when a woman married, she became the LEGAL property of the man. This is not the case anymore.
Another argument is that marraige is supposed to lead to a family, but I know a lot of married people who have no children and plan on having no children.
Laws are meant to be ammended.
And like I said a few times, just allowing a civil-union (even if it permits all legal rights as that of a marraige), means that gays are NOT equal with straight people. It's the same as seperate-but-equal. Blacks are equal to whites, just can't use their bathrooms, etc.
- fingercore0
PS. Homosexuality exists within the animal kingdom as well.
- xaoscontrol0
yeah, it is a good case, which still makes me laugh about the idea that T REX wasn't a carnivore....
as for myths.....I ask this...is there any proof that people like Jesus, Moses or even Pontis Pilate did NOT exist? just a question...I've never read of any.
- froww0
And Brian, it's much more reasonable and less "crackpottish" if you will, to embrace an idea that states that cognizant reasoning life sprouted from nothing. Despite 0 evidence, despite the lack of logic that complex design occurs though there is no designer, despite it being in conflict with scientific laws and despite the complete lack of any transitional forms between species?
hmmmm... again, not enough faith for me to buy that.
- Mimio0
How could you prove that something doesn't exist?
- Mimio0
There's some evidence for biblical creationsim somewhere froww?
- xaoscontrol0
fingercore...I think that's usually a case of animals showing dominance over one another
- ribit0
Isnt the suggestion that: TRex was a scavenger but still a carnivore?