Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-02-2014, 03:51 PM
 
1,138 posts, read 1,041,869 times
Reputation: 623

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Having more than one wife is biblical.
Pounding a dude in the ass is not.
Polygamy was only allowed in the times of the ancient Jews and it can only be understood in the correct context of that time (life expectancy was short and many women died during child birth, so having multiple wives made it more possible to have future offspring). It was changed when it was no longer needed, and Jesus said that sleeping with another woman who is not your wife is adultery.

Homosexuality was always forbidden in both the Old and the New Testament. It is listed along with adultery and many other sins. However we are called to love and care for all sinners, including homosexuals. True Christians do not hate gays.

 
Old 03-02-2014, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,933 posts, read 12,893,585 times
Reputation: 7399
Quote:
Originally Posted by photofox View Post
No thanks.
Yes I figured that would be your answer, because this crusade you're on is as much about forcing people to accept homosexuality as much as it is about reaping the legal benefits of marriage, isn't it? If it were only about the benefits, My suggestion would work out perfectly. Both sides are stubborn and unrelenting. I see valid points on both sides of the spectrum. On one hand, gay people are in fact humans and deserve to be treated with the same respect as anyone else. They deserve legal recognition of their union to another, and I have no problem with that. On the other, the definition of marriage has been for thousands of years, the union of one man and one woman. The fight to change that definition is tant-amount to wanting to change the definition of a pen to include wooden cylindrical sticks with led in them.

Just admit it... this isn't only about legal benefits.....
 
Old 03-02-2014, 05:27 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,933 posts, read 12,893,585 times
Reputation: 7399
Quote:
Originally Posted by West Coast Republican View Post
I'm a Conservative Christian and I agree with this entirely. It would end the whole debate and everyone would get what they want. Marriage is religious thing, Government is not, so the two have no business with each other. Sure you don't need to be religious or have a priest marry you, but the concept and word is still based upon religious, social, and family constructs.

One thing that I dislike is how militant gay activists and their supporters have become. They ignorantly call anyone who disagrees with them hatefulwords like bigot and homophobe. Which is wrong because I, and most other people of our position, do not hate or fear them. We love and respect them just like everyone else, we simply disagree with the lifestyle for Religious and obviously Natural reasons. That's not hate, that's just disagreeing, and we have every right to it.
You're use of the term "lifestyle choice" implies that being gay is a choice, which is something anyone of a rational mind would disagree with. I realize the religious right have to frame the argument this way in order to keep their barbaric beliefs valid, because to accept the fact that homosexuals are in fact born gay, would be to accept that "God" made them that way.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 05:53 PM
 
Location: The #1 sunshine state, Arizona.
12,169 posts, read 17,644,605 times
Reputation: 64104
Quote:
Originally Posted by West Coast Republican View Post
Polygamy was only allowed in the times of the ancient Jews and it can only be understood in the correct context of that time (life expectancy was short and many women died during child birth, so having multiple wives made it more possible to have future offspring). It was changed when it was no longer needed, and Jesus said that sleeping with another woman who is not your wife is adultery.

Homosexuality was always forbidden in both the Old and the New Testament. It is listed along with adultery and many other sins. However we are called to love and care for all sinners, including homosexuals. True Christians do not hate gays.
Are the true Christians the same ones causing the high divorce rates in this country? Who is commiting adultry, the true Christians? Oh that's right, everyone sins!

I agree with you on the reasons for polygamy. I think the only reason why The Bible considered homosexuality to be a sin is because it hindered on the major goal of growing the population. Today, not everyone needs to reproduce. I'm all for same sex marriage, and I know it won't hurt my marriage, or any other marriage.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 05:58 PM
 
Location: Montreal, Quebec
15,080 posts, read 14,321,575 times
Reputation: 9789
Quote:
Originally Posted by West Coast Republican View Post
Nonsense. The LDS do not practice polygamy, they ended that years ago. Mormons do no such thing, where did you hear this from? A liberal loon on TV? Huffington Post? LOL!

And no, I'm not a Mormon or LDS member. I'm a Christian and I disagree with the Mormon religion, however I like Mormon people and respect them. These lies about them are just ignorant.
The FLDS Mormons still do.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 06:11 PM
 
13,302 posts, read 7,867,855 times
Reputation: 2144
Multiple wives, multiple organisms - it's God's plan.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 06:34 PM
 
Location: University City, Philadelphia
22,632 posts, read 14,939,765 times
Reputation: 15935
Quote:
Originally Posted by West Coast Republican View Post

The definition of Marriage only applies to a Man and a Woman. It does not apply to two men or two women ...
No it isn't.

Not from the current dictionary definitions (look it up in either Oxford or Merriam-Webster).

Not from a historical point of view.

Not from an anthropological point of view.

Not from an ethnographical point of view.

Not from a sociological point of view.

... and increasingly legal point of view.

But you have a right to your point of view, even though most of us don't agree with it.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 06:41 PM
 
Location: University City, Philadelphia
22,632 posts, read 14,939,765 times
Reputation: 15935
Quote:
Originally Posted by West Coast Republican View Post

Homosexuality was always forbidden in both the Old and the New Testament. It is listed along with adultery and many other sins. However we are called to love and care for all sinners, including homosexuals. True Christians do not hate gays.
Nowhere in the Dhamapada or in the entire Tripitaka is homosexuality or gay marriage forbidden or prohibited. As a Buddhist these are the only religious texts that concern me. I mean no disrespect, but quite frankly I don't give a flying fig about the doctrines or dogmas of other religious beliefs. This is the USA and we have no official or state religion. Period. So please don't try to force your religious customs on me.

True Buddhists not only do not hate gays but honor them with respect and dignity.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 08:01 PM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,005,313 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Here's a gem of an idea..... how about government gets out of the marriage business all together? No gay marriage, no straight marriage.
This idea and the idea put forth earlier about making all of it just a civil contract makes the most sense. But what does ignorant little me know?
I also think there's a larger more far reaching agenda at work, this is not just about same sex marriage.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 08:03 PM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,005,313 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDragonslayer View Post
Great, are you first in line to give up your marriage license and file for a divorce? When I see hordes of straight couples giving up their civil marriage licenses, then I will believe you and everyone else that says they want the government out of marriage. The government is involved in marriage because it CANNOT be left up to the church or religion for they would in turn deny marriage to who ever they want to and base it on race, religion, age and sex. History has shown that over and over, give religion control over marriage and they become tyrants.
You mean like the guys in D.C.?
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:35 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top