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 02-01-2007, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,125,235 times
Reputation: 536

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
madicarus, people like you are so,funny.There are Catholics,Lutheran, Evangelical,Mormon,Southern Baptist must I go on. Each one claims to be Christians and each one preaches in their churches in different ways and most do not agree with the others teachings. So yes, you decide which, church you feel does the best interpretation of the Bible and follow that teaching..
Wildberries, exactly, they should follow that teaching and live by it themselves and not push it on others to donít choose to follow those beliefs. You apparently didnít get my central question which was if there is already so much disagreement over interpetation by the various groups, why use those beliefs to legislate others? Cant they just keep those beliefs to rule over themselves and not others?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
I have been answering you and PrettyHat How much time do you think I have too sit here and debate with everyone!! As far as homosexuality I really don't judge people on this even though it does say it very clear in the KJV. I have had friends and a family member being gay so, who am I to judge people on their personal life.
Thatís funny, you say it is very clear in the KJV of the bible on homosexuality. You choose to interpret the homosexual reference literally on itís own, yet all other passages that are brought up you state they need to be interpreted differently than itís literal meaning. Thatís selective interpretation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
Women did not have the rights of today's women but, some of the women were the most faithful and God used them in big ways that is whats important. Readers tend to miss the point with women in the Bible God used them and showed their faithfulness to HIMĒ.
Well where does it state that women should have those rights now? If there is a way to interpret that in the bible that womens rights were progressive, then why cant that be used to describe homosexuals rights also? Or is that where we ďreadĒ into things an apply an interpretation but regarding homosexuals we keep it as the literal interpretation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
I feel most, felt that religion was underlying but, were trying to avoid the conflict and trying to get answers without religion involved. Everyone knows if you bring religion in to this conversation someone would have to point it out were it tells you in THE BIBLE. I think that's were they didn't want it to go.
The emperor has no clothes. No matter how deftly those against it try to argue about morality, itís all based on religion. The reason they donít want to bring the bible into it is because of all itís contradictions and antiquated beliefs are disputed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
Exactly, too many interpretations and maybe, reading so many books hasn't helped you to find a stand. How can you possibly follow so, many peoples words and ideas of God. I just find the preachers and scholars that most interest me and go with it. I really don't try to find anything that would tell me theres no God. I know that God is all good and if someone is to tell me different then, naturally I don't want too listen.
You don't irritate me, I just find it strange when people don't appreciate the Bible's teachings then, it will be the first that they pull for information. With your many books possibly you could have chosen another to quote from.
Actually I have found a stand, one of personal decisions and individual rights that puts the person at the center to make their own decisions regarding their happiness Not some group mentality of pushing others to follow ďourĒ verion or ideas of happiness. Iím not telling you to ďacceptĒ gays marrying, but who are you to deny them that right? If you choose to deny it, then thatís your right, but not a right for you to tell others they canít by creation of laws.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-01-2007, 05:38 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,125,235 times
Reputation: 536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marks View Post
It seems we're getting off into a debate on the Bible, and not on what the original query/statement was. As I stated in my first post, [i][b]"This is yet another attempt from those that struggle to "be accepted" in their sin, .
Actually you just proved the ooint of why we're also debating the bible. You want to deny them the right to marry because they are "sinful", but where did you get the idea of sin or what a sin is? Is there a book that you got the idea from? Oh yes, it's the bible. The bible is germane to the discussion because that's where the foundation for denying their right is.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2007, 05:55 PM
 
Location: Comunistafornia, and working to get out ASAP!
1,959 posts, read 4,644,369 times
Reputation: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by madicarus2000 View Post
Actually you just proved the ooint of why we're also debating the bible. You want to deny them the right to marry because they are "sinful", but where did you get the idea of sin or what a sin is? Is there a book that you got the idea from? Oh yes, it's the bible. The bible is germane to the discussion because that's where the foundation for denying their right is.
What circular reasoning. It's hopeless to even attempt to get through to you people. All y'all want is this perversion to pervade. Pat yourselves on the back for the ruin of our country
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2007, 05:56 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,125,235 times
Reputation: 536
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
I don't know why women didn't write in the Bible but, they did have importance and you need to see the message more then, looking at it as stories. In the OT women didn't have rights but, were used by God and that is the message. With the NT Jesus showed importance of women. He showed compassion for young & old women,widows, foreign women women were at his death He appeared first to a women after resurrection and women was first to be told that HE was alive.
Historical research has shown women had an influence, however men wrote the books that comprised the bible and men chose what books shall comprise the bible. Later it was male church leaders who decided the role of woman based on those verses. Yes, Jesus showed compassion, but many of his followers donít.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
I With being married comes responsibility I guess you have an issue with this. I believe its to say don't stray from your partner, be there for support all that goes with commitment. All radical sides of religion can take it to the distant. Jesus came to change the way.
I have no problem with responsibility, especially for my own actions. However I wont dictate how others should live by placing laws in their way because of my ďbeliefsĒ taken from a book. Jesus changed the way but his radical followers changed it back.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2007, 03:50 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,125,235 times
Reputation: 536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marks View Post
What circular reasoning. It's hopeless to even attempt to get through to you people. All y'all want is this perversion to pervade. Pat yourselves on the back for the ruin of our country
Circular reasoning? It was completely obvious to a 4 year old that all your justifications were biblical based, have you read your replies? Here's a challenge, can you describe why it is bad, without using "sin" or a bible verse? Can you?

That sound you hear is me patting myself on the back for ruining your idea of a nation that should blindly follow your beliefs.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2007, 08:55 PM
 
Location: in my imagination
11,033 posts, read 18,123,207 times
Reputation: 7668
I have not read thru this thread,but I'll give my opinion anyway.

I really don't care what someone does or how they live their life,as long as it doesn't effect me or is in my face.

I was against Bush when he talked about a amendment against gay marriage.Its not that I support gay marriage,its that I dont think its the federal governments business to be involved in such a issue.Leave it to local or state laws to deal with.

The bible says its wrong,I believe its unatural as well,but what someone does in privacy is not my concern.Flaunting it is another matter.I once worked with a gay guy,I got along with him well,wish him well.I would feel uncomfortable seeing him cozy up with his partner like a man and woman would but to each their own.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2007, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
699 posts, read 2,303,916 times
Reputation: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
The bible says its wrong,I believe its unatural as well,but what someone does in privacy is not my concern.Flaunting it is another matter.I once worked with a gay guy,I got along with him well,wish him well.I would feel uncomfortable seeing him cozy up with his partner like a man and woman would but to each their own.
This is similar to saying "I used to work with a black guy and he seemed okay...". What year is this now, 2007? Oh, and I was just wondering...why would you be there when he and his partner are cozied up? Sounds a little menage-a-strange to me...

I can't stand to see people of any gender (m-f, f-f, m-m) slobbering on each other in public. It's very rare to see same sex couples doing anything more than holding hands, but straight couples commonly get very intimate in public. I don't care what they do in private, but I wish they didn't have to flaunt it.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2007, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Comunistafornia, and working to get out ASAP!
1,959 posts, read 4,644,369 times
Reputation: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
I have not read thru this thread,but I'll give my opinion anyway.

I really don't care what someone does or how they live their life,as long as it doesn't effect me or is in my face.

I was against Bush when he talked about a amendment against gay marriage.Its not that I support gay marriage,its that I dont think its the federal governments business to be involved in such a issue.Leave it to local or state laws to deal with.

The bible says its wrong,I believe its unatural as well,but what someone does in privacy is not my concern.Flaunting it is another matter.I once worked with a gay guy,I got along with him well,wish him well.I would feel uncomfortable seeing him cozy up with his partner like a man and woman would but to each their own.

Good well reasoned post. Watch out though those that love the gays on here might tell you not to use the Bible, why? Oh, because it says homosexuality is wrong and they don't like that. Those that are wrong hate to be told so with authority.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2007, 10:36 PM
 
Location: Comunistafornia, and working to get out ASAP!
1,959 posts, read 4,644,369 times
Reputation: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8 View Post
It's very rare to see same sex couples doing anything more than holding hands...
You must not have been to LA, SF or the Bay Area of California lately. One can see this filth in larage and small cities all the time, and that's to bad too.

Quote:
but straight couples commonly get very intimate in public. I don't care what they do in private, but I wish they didn't have to flaunt it.
Flaunt it? do you really think that? What will you say next that dogs and cats should stick to their dog houses and cat carriers?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2007, 11:00 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
699 posts, read 2,303,916 times
Reputation: 288
No, I live in a very gay city and have never seen more than hand holding, but I damn sure see male-female couples with toungues down throats. It's blatantly flaunting their sexuality and it's very common. Oh, and your dog-and-cat comment makes absolutely no sense...

In case you didn't realize it, I was reversing a common arguement used by hateful loud-mouthed straight folks. It works both ways...and your views are quickly becoming the minority. A couple more years and same sex couples WILL have the right to get married. It will happen.
Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top