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.
Translation: God is a loving God but he is also a non-loving God. Got it.
Quote:
See Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6, Leviticus 18:22. God does NOT view homosexual "love", which is really nothing but but beastly lust, in the same way as the love he sanctioned between one man, one woman, for life. Just because you believe it and it makes it feel good for you doesn't make it true according to the Scripture.
That is a big book of opinion and is irrelevant in our civil law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
God does not condemn divorce of a spouse that adulterates.
Though I am using the Bible to clarify this. If you do not use the Bible, then by what means do you establish God's will? Is there some other document to which you hold to and is it written by man or God? I am interested to know is all.
And why is religion even being brought into this discussion? It's immaterial.
Like I said on the 1st or 2nd page. If all you have as a valid argument is your religion, then when it comes to the law, you have NO argument at all.
And please don't try the "tradition" one, because that's a fallacy. Marriage has evolved and changed over and over in our history. There's not much at all "constant" about it!
While “one man, one woman” has become the clarion call of gay-marriage opponents, Coontz observes that the most “traditional” form of marriage adhered more closely to the rule “one man, as many women as he can afford.” Many Native American groups cared about diversity of gender in marriage rather than diversity of biological sex: A couple had to comprise one person doing “man’s work” and one person doing “woman’s work,” regardless of sex.
Gee, I have quite a bit of NA ancestry. As do many in this country, who are not purely NA. Why can't we use the same "tradition" argument in support of gay marriage? After all, my GF kills the bugs, does the car maintenance, and the tool box is most certainly HERS in our house... whereas I'm the one who understands how to do laundry without ruining things, I make the kids' birthday cakes, and I bake the cookies...
Well... I read all of the posts, and this is what I have gotten from this thread:
- Your beliefs ae inferrior to mine... so you should not be able to live as feely as I can.
- I support passing restrictive laws so that you cannot live as you wish... but please don't do it to me.
- Although I don't hate gays... I don't want them to be equal to me or happy
- The 1950s were a great time for America, socially
- Even though you don't believe the same as me... you must do only what I allow you to.
- America should support laws dictated by an invisible man
Well... I read all of the posts, and this is what I have gotten from this thread:
- Your beliefs ae inferrior to mine... so you should not be able to live as feely as I can.
- I support passing restrictive laws so that you cannot live as you wish... but please don't do it to me.
- Although I don't hate gays... I don't want them to be equal to me or happy
- The 1950s were a great time for America, socially
- Even though you don't believe the same as me... you must do only what I allow you to.
- America should support laws dictated by an invisible man
I think that about summarizes it.
That's pretty much it. No matter what the context of the argument regarding gay and lesbian rights, the same anti-gay arguments invariably infiltrate it. They have no substance, no meaning, and no relevance outside the person's respective beliefs and have nothing to do with the legal questions at hand.
One of the most heart-breaking stories I've heard in a while. Gays are not trying to ruin marriage, they are trying to live their lives with dignity, and protect their loved ones. This is just sad for 2008. ::: Lost For Words :::
How do you know this? Because they said so and wrote a book? This is what Gradco2004 meant (as I see it).
It helps if you read all of what I said. If you seek only what your desires are, you will only see what you want. I explained why as best I could. I answered this very question, yet you missed it because you were looking for something other than what I said.
It wasn't a contest to it. Merely a clarification as to the person I was discussing with. Then you probably already knew that, didn't you? Or maybe you were too busy skimming looking for your own interpretations that you missed the whole picture of those responses. /shrug
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.
YAWN........................
