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.
There is a flip side, why would someone want to be friends with someone who they view as immoral and wicked? I wouldn't be friends with people I consider immoral. Either they are lying or they have very low standards.
As a sin against faith, I see atheism in many ways as being worse than murder. Yet I still have atheist friends. As long as they don't try to convert me - and I do not see them as being an occasion of sin for me - I will befriend them.
If you're against homosexuals marrying, it seems to be the automatic assumption of most proponents of same-sex marriage that you must hate gays. If at least a large minority of them had it their way, voicing opposition to same-sex marriage would probably be criminal hate speech.
However, as somebody from the "other" side, I can categorically say this isn't true.
Most opponents - at least those that are vocal or organized - do NOT hate gays, just as most proponents do not hate straights. They simply believe homosexual acts (not the "orientation" or attraction) are immoral, and should not be enshrined in one of our country's institutions. Notice I did not say homosexuals, or even homosexuality itself - just homosexual acts. However, supporters often equate this disapproval of homosexual acts or the gay lifestyle with the hate of those who practice them. They seem to employ a heuristic (mental shortcut) in which a person is reduced to their acts, or even their sex life. Yet a person's acts and a person are two separate things. One can condemn their son's bank robberies without hating him; one can disapprove of their daughter's conversion from Sikhism to Buddhism without hating her, and the list goes on. So too can one disapprove of the actions of a group in society without hating them.
I have nothing against homosexuals. I have had numerous homosexual friends in the past. It's only their actions that disturb me, and how they try to gain acceptance or even official recognition of their relationships. Atheism does as well, but I have atheist friends too. A person is not only their actions or beliefs.
Homosexual acts?
Do you mean hummers and anal sex? Because guess what, nearly half of all married couples have had anal sex. Far more have had oral sex.
If my neighbor wanted to marry an animal, I would want nothing to do with him, I wouldn't want him near my family, and I certainly wouldn't want to be friends with him. I guess I have a higher standard for friends. I can say with no doubt that I consider all of my friends to be very cool and good wholesome decent people, all of them.
The problem is that many people live what in my moral view are immoral lifestyles. For example, I view divorced-and-remarried people as living in a state of sin. But would I consider Joe, who is on his third "wife", as unfit to be my friend simply because of that? No.
Hell, based on that reasoning straight marriage should be outlawed since the majority of striaght couples actual engage in the same homosexual acts.
The problem is that although straight couples may perform acts resembling those of homosexuals, they can also uniquely perform the proper form of intercourse that is capable of creating new life.
The problem is that many people live what in my moral view are immoral lifestyles. For example, I view divorced-and-remarried people as living in a state of sin. But would I consider Joe, who is on his third "wife", as unfit to be my friend simply because of that? No.
So when are you starting the movement to deny people the right to remarry?
The problem is that many people live what in my moral view are immoral lifestyles. For example, I view divorced-and-remarried people as living in a state of sin. But would I consider Joe, who is on his third "wife", as unfit to be my friend simply because of that? No.
Either you learn to be less judgmental, or you continue to subvert your own principles out of fear of being lonely. Me, I'll associate and talk to people who I don't necessarily view as favorable, but I will never be friends with them or consider them friends.
The fact is that most opponents of same-sex marriage do not see it as an issue of "equality."
Of course not. To see it as an issue of equality would mean to give up their prejudice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvdxer
They believe that marriage exists independent of societal norms, and that it is simply impossible to join two men or two women together in marriage. They have a solid and explicit definition of marriage, and saying that their view fosters inequality is equivalent to claiming that opposition to a man marrying a bag of money or a woman marrying her cow is to support inequality. It is simply impossible; and even if it was recognized by some nation, would not be truly valid. What the government considers to be marriage should reflect what is really marriage, in their view.
So essentially, these people are ignorant of the history of marriage, and ignorant of what it actually means when the government recognizes their marriage.
Sounds like "these people" need to learn that if they want to play their "we don't view your relationship as valid" card, they can do that all they want in their OWN church or home while allowing people their rights between themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvdxer
Same-sex marriage proponents, on the other hand, seem to have a more fluid conception of marriage, as fits their more postmodernist worldview.
The "conception of marriage" IS fluid. This isn't a "postmodernist worldview".... it's called "reality."
Whether viewed in biblical terms (marriage to ones family members, marriage to dozens and dozens of people at once), historical power plays (marriage and betrothal to and between children), cultural (some cultures have had versions of same sex marriage since forever).... marriage is not and has not always been defined as "the union of one man and one woman."
The problem is that many people live what in my moral view are immoral lifestyles. For example, I view divorced-and-remarried people as living in a state of sin. But would I consider Joe, who is on his third "wife", as unfit to be my friend simply because of that? No.
So you're next goal is to make divorce illegal?
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.
