Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If humanity i.e. society wants homosexual marriage so badly then why don’t we have it? Perhaps we don’t have it because humanity really doesn’t want it. At least not as badly as you do.
Progress takes time. And much of the western world does have it. Why did it take 200 years for blacks to be able to marry who they wanted? Obviously people didn't really want it.
So, you're okay with society dictating the terms of marriage as long you agree with the terms? Gotcha.
I don't think it's saying that the genders aren't equal, but I do think it says that the genders are different. Please let us all agree that a man is different from a woman. Hopefully, this discussion hasn't disintegrated to the point where we can't even agree on that.
And again, your example STILL does nothing to challenge the fact that marriage is a bond between a woman/man.
The treatment of the woman, doesn't change the core foundation of marriage.
The race of the man/woman doesn't change the core foundation of marriage.
The number of husbands/wives doesn't change the core foundation of marriage.
Not even the AGE of the couple changes the core foundation of the marriage.
The gender of man/man, woman/woman, DOES change the core foundation.
Bottom line.
In what way does same sex marriage change "the core foundation" of marriage? Unless one thinks marriage is only about having children, the "core foundation" remains the same - a relationship between the spouses that encourages cooperation in life decisions.
Genesis is not literal. And even most Jews believe in equality for gays, and Genesis is our book, not yours.
That verse is also not exclusive. It was targeted at the majority audience. For example, it doesn't mention intersex individuals. Who are they allowed to marry since they have both male and female genitals?
Gays were not even discovered until the 19th Century A.D. Of course Genesis isn't going to list every exception to the majority. It would be incomprehensibly long. I will also remind you God condoned and even encouraged polygamy in Genesis. How can on one hand, the Bible say it's one man and one man, and on the other, make it one man and multiple women, including relatives (incest)?
I'm guessing you still don't understand why your beliefs are flawed and inconsistent.
What do you mean Genesis is not literal? What other interpretation do you have of Adam and Eve's union?
I'm not arguing equality, so your point about Jews wanting equality is moot. I'm a Christian and I agree with equality also.
No, Genesis does not have to include all instances of marriage, but can you tell me anywhere in the bible where marriage was discussed and it referenced same-sex unions?
You say that gays were not "discovered" until 19th century AD. 1 Timothy 1:9-11 says this:
We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
It would seem that homosexuality has been around way before your claim.
And your argument about God and polygamy STILL does nothing to change the core foundation and definition of marriage.
Most unfortunate that you keep asking questions of those whom you disagree with and continue to get answers that you don’t like and really don’t want to hear anyway. This is why many don’t bother responding or even participating in these discussions. You haven’t changed anyone’s mind or opinion one bit in addition to making reasoned dialogue impossible.
What do you mean Genesis is not literal? What other interpretation do you have of Adam and Eve's union?
I'm not arguing equality, so your point about Jews wanting equality is moot. I'm a Christian and I agree with equality also.
No, Genesis does not have to include all instances of marriage, but can you tell me anywhere in the bible where marriage was discussed and it referenced same-sex unions?
You say that gays were not "discovered" until 19th century AD. 1 Timothy 1:9-11 says this:
We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
It would seem that homosexuality has been around way before your claim.
And your argument about God and polygamy STILL does nothing to change the core foundation and definition of marriage.
Why all the religious talk? This is not a discussion about marriage within religion, it's a talk about a legal entity - a contract within the law called a civil marriage.
How about this - if it's just about the rights, would you be okay - would it insult you - if, within the law, the term civil marriage was reserved for white couples but that any couple with a black person (or 2 black people) would be legally called a civil union? If the rights were the same, that wouldn't be an issue with you right?
I hesitate to answer the question, because I'm thinking you won't believe me. But here goes: No, I don't have a problem with the distinction. As long as I had full access to my rights, I couldn't care less. AND, as long as other races/ethnicities had this same distinction (asians, indians, etc). Otherwise, it indeed would be a restriction. But if each race had their own label for "marriage" who cares...I want my rights, by any means necessary.
As I've stated before, separate but equal didn't fail because we were separate. It failed because we weren't equal.
But you keep harping on the idea that LEGALLY, they should be "civil unionized" rather than married. My question is WHY. Why should Tom & Ted or Ann and Anita be restricted legally to civil union when Tom & Ann or Ted and Anita can get a marriage license? I really would like to see your explanation of that.
I've stated my reasons many times (hint: it deals with redefinition of marriage). Please go back and reread my posts. My answer has not changed (nor will it), so you should have no difficulty finding what you need.
Progress takes time. And much of the western world does have it. Why did it take 200 years for blacks to be able to marry who they wanted? Obviously people didn't really want it.
Which part of the world do you want to be associated with?
It didn't take 200 years. I would venture to guess that blacks didn't even want to marry whites up until the time of our emancipation. Except perhaps for the slavemaster/slave fetish folks.
Throughout our nations history marriage has been between a man and a woman, but over time society has become more tolerant and accepting of same-sex marriage which is currently legal in 6 states. Do you consider this progress or a step back away from our traditional values and for what reason?
I don't believe in that, but I don't think it's right to mis-treat a person like that! It's NOT MAN MISSION TO JUDGE! ONLY SELF! But it seems hard for a lot people to grasp!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
