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.
Marriage - the joining of two different items to create one, new unit.
Union - the joining of two similar items to create one, similar unit.
and this is how it should be for the gays.
Have a civil union, with restricted rights, and let nature take its course.
un·ion/ˈyo͞onyən/
Noun:
The action or fact of joining together or being joined together, esp. in a political context.
A state of harmony or agreement: "they live in perfect union".
Where on earth do you get your definitions from? What dictionary? What year?
I think all who enter into wedlock should be joined together in a union. Then if they want it classified as a marriage, all they need is a representative of ANY religion to bless the union. Everyone gets equal rights and benefits.
Actually, you are wrong. In the New Testament Jesus says he is there to restore the old laws not change them. And most Christians that I know teach and follow the old testament along with the new testament. The least you could do is some actual research.
Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
testimonies don't mean a great deal here, because in most cases, the gay parents are all the kid ever knows, or in some cases they are comparing them to something that was worse.
It's like me saying I'm happy with my new tent in the woods, because the week before I was sleeping in the local bus shelter.
Oh, but the testimony of Dawn Stefanowicz from her book "Out from Under" is a valid testimony? Wouldn't it fall under the same logic you just used?
BAD EXAMPLE!. Technically a tent in the woods probably is better than sleeping in a bus shelter. Have you ever sat in a bus shelter? Do you know what people do in bus shelters? A tent in the woods is less likely to be filled with germs, you have less change of getting mugged or killed for sleeping in someones spot, you have less chance of getting a ticket for "camping" on city/private property. Camping in the woods is legal, camping in a bus shelter is illegal in most cities.
The action or fact of joining together or being joined together, esp. in a political context.
A state of harmony or agreement: "they live in perfect union".
Where on earth do you get your definitions from? What dictionary? What year?
I think all who enter into wedlock should be joined together in a union. Then if they want it classified as a marriage, all they need is a representative of ANY religion to bless the union. Everyone gets equal rights and benefits.
I think gay unions shouldn;t be called marriages, that's a few thousand years old heterosexual tradition. Gay 'marriage' should be called 'fairriage' as marriage or matrimony involves 'mothers', latin 'mater' and there is now way one guy can make another a mother no matter how hard the will both try. Lol
BAD EXAMPLE!. Technically a tent in the woods probably is better than sleeping in a bus shelter. Have you ever sat in a bus shelter? Do you know what people do in bus shelters? A tent in the woods is less likely to be filled with germs, you have less change of getting mugged or killed for sleeping in someones spot, you have less chance of getting a ticket for "camping" on city/private property. Camping in the woods is legal, camping in a bus shelter is illegal in most cities.
but that is my point!
sleeping in a tent in the woods would be a lot better than than in the bus shelter.
but a tent is still far short of a stable, nurturing home, with a mother and father to take care of the children.
yeah but nobody read the book did they? so how could anyone even argue the point.
Some excerpts from the book:
Sounds like her straight mother and especially her gay father were raised by very abusive straight parents.
"What most enthralled me about my grandpa was that he would talk about the Bible and the end times. It might seem strange for a 6 year old to be so engrossed in stories of the Apocalypse...."
"I came to realise later why my mother never learned how to nurture children. My grandmother was a Victorian Christian woman. She often had a frown on her face and a no-nonsense strictness in her voice. But one good thing was she knew how to pray."
"Dad told me that he was physically and sexually abused repeatedly. It happened so often he was wounded beyond all natural repair. Grandfather would physically assault my grandmother and sexually abuse his daughter Bea. Dad told me that he repeatedly heard Bea's screams in the barn where her father and some of Dad's older brothers took turns gang-raping her"
You have rocks in your head if you think this book says anything at all about children raised by gay or lesbian couples as parents.
Her mother was straight and raised by cold authoritarian conservative religious parents and her father was a gay man who had been raised by extremely abusive straight parents. It certainly shows how some straight parents are incredibly abusive though.
We are talking about his work regarding homosexuality specifically...
Read below.
Incredible sources being texts available for centuries, which Boswell translated and interpreted against linquistic tradition but to support his thesis and personal agenda?
We have been studying these languages for centuries and there are still people able to speak Latin today and we have Greeks speaking modern version of ancient Greek. Boswell is not the first person to translate these texts but he made such a basic mistake as disregarding the fact that every Greek and Roman word has a gender. That alone disqualifies your research. That's Boswell.
Unless you have read the book, your arguments are irrelevant.
Quote:
Nobody wrote a book stating there are no olive gardens on Jupiter, either...
We know exactly who could marry in Rome, Roman citizen female, Roman citizen male. We have texts of Roman laws. What else is there to prove ?
Wrong again. Only free Roman men could marry. A Roman women had no rights to choose who to marry. A Free Roman man could marry anyone from:
A free roman women, Given he pays the woman's father.
A Slave of his own. (male or female)
A Slave belonging to another, given he pays the slaves master. (male of female)
Quote:
Your research/ Do you know how much time and resources you would have to commit/ How about learning Latin and ancient Greek for instance... You are funny.
Umm... that's what historians do. You don't need to speak ancient languages to translate ancient texts. However, it does help, this is why most historians are also linguists and learn several languages. How could you have passed any course regarding history if you don't know this?
Quote:
What does Bible have to do with anything here?
This is just more proof that you haven't read Boswell's books and you haven't been paying attention to this thread.
Quote:
Homosexual marriages are against our Western tradition and values. Call them unions, call them farrieges but leave marriage where it belongs; a union of a man and a women in HOLY MATRIMONY, matrimony as under Latin 'mater' - mother as a man is supposed to make a women a mother, have children with her.
You can't make you partner a mother no matter how much you would try LOL
Umm... So then two women could technically have a "marriage". Both of them can get pregnant. And since we all know that some men are unable to produce viable sperm to fertilize an egg, all the women would need to do is go to a sperm bank to have a child.
If you want to continue this history lesson, begin a new thread in the history section. This one is about same sex couples being able to adopt children.
I think gay unions shouldn;t be called marriages, that's a few thousand years old heterosexual tradition. Gay 'marriage' should be called 'fairriage' as marriage or matrimony involves 'mothers', latin 'mater' and there is now way one guy can make another a mother no matter how hard the will both try. Lol
What about lesbians? Can't they be mothers?? So you agree homosexual women can enter a marriage, and your real issue is only with homosexual MEN being married. Makes sense..... or not.
P.S. Slavery was also a tradition for thousands of years (perhaps even longer than marriage), as was legally beating or raping your wife and owning her as property. Should we keep those traditions alive too, or do you pick & choose traditions like you pick & choose Biblical laws?
Who cares about opinion of the chruch? Scientific community never took Boswell revelations seriously. Actually a talented historian, with some commendable work on medieval ages, he was not able to remain objective on subjects close to his personal life. There is no follow up work by other historians. No additional findings to substantiate his claims.
I trust you that Boswell's book is enjoyable, after all it is not a scientific paper. It's a book. Treatise.
Believe what you want, I know you will, but keep in mind that we've been studying ancient Greece and Rome for close to two thousand years, we pretty much know everything there is to know through excavations, artifacts and critical examination off contemporary of texts hence one or two books by a gay historian with an obvious agenda is not going to change anything in mainstream science. Boswell sees homosexual behavior everywhere, pretty much like UFO chasers see alien interventions throughout human history, with totalny disregard for logiczny and facts.
Boswell is Von Daeniken of history, although much more educated and clever, therefore much better in disguising his agenda.
Now, if Davinci or Shakespeare were gay or not... who knows for sure? Anybody can make claim or as in case of Boswell disregard proper translations of ancient texts, but science which includes history, does not really work this way.
It takes plenty of work and examination of many independent sources to make a case for a change in understanding any single event in history. Besides Boswell I don't see anybody following in his footsteps, not much response from the scientific community at all.
Again and again, besides humorous description of two same-sex nuptials involing two Roman emperors know for erratic beahavior and their slaves we don't see any historical accounts of same sex nuptials or marriages in antiquity. No records of same-sex married senators, centurions, generals, tax collevtors. Nothing.
That alone is the reason to treat Boswell's work as a fairy tale (pun not intended). It can't be substantiated by multitude of independent sources.
Don't expect history textbooks to follow Boswell's unsubstantiated theories just because he sold few million copies of is books. Happy reading!
You seem to have a lot of 'opinions' about books you haven't even read.
What's your source? The Catholic Womens Monthly? Wikipedia?
You make these allegations as fact, because you believe them to be so, but of course, it's only opinion.
Your circular attempt at using the logic point is laughable.
Use on of the fallowing in an argument to validate your claims that same-sex partners should not be allowed to adopt children. This argument needs to be supported with unbiased empirical evidence.
None of your arguments can pertain to same-sex marriage being legal or illegal, they can only be about Same-sex couples adopting children and/or that it is tantamount to abuse.
Symbolism - What culture are you using for this symbolism? Historical/cultural empirical evidence is needed to use this.
Unnatural/biological - To be used in must be actual empirical evidence.
Immoral - To use the concept of morality you must provide where your concept of morality comes from.
Biblical - Can't be used unless you can provide proof of it's origin and claims with empirical evidence.
Historical - The bible isn't a source of historical accuracy.
Tradition - In order for this to be used you must first establish an unbroken chain of such tradition, meaning little to no change from a point in history till present time.
Logic - Actual logic must be used.
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.
