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.
Civil unions? Yep, I'd go for that. Although I don't see either side willing to compromise at all. Seems more like an all-or-nothing approach is the only thing that either side will accept.
but civil unions being applied must be applied to straight people and gay people across the board.. We're not talking about keeping straight people as marriage under the law, and extending the new term "civil union" to gays..
That gets shot down in common law, brown vs. board of education where seperate is not equal..
I would support civil unions if straight people's unions under the law were called the same as well.. and their church's did their marriages...
keep the word marriage out of the law for everyone and make it equal across the board.. I have no beef with that...
I understand a couple of versions of what it means. I've taken many bible study courses in churches and colleges. The bible is full of nothing but mischaracterizations, you can twist to whatever you THINK or WANT them to mean. Even Christians can't agree on what the bible means.
There is a single version that doesn't rely on taking a snippet of the verse and ignoring the rest of the paragraph. You can pretend you're representing the verse accurately but it's obvious you're not. But thanks for discrediting yourself further.
When I used the word "complete", I was saying that I believe he's unable to see gays as full human beings with relationships, feelings, and life experiences that matter. He sees them primarily as sexual deviants. If he were to talk with two guys who had similar lives and similar experiences - one gay and one straight - he would discount the experiences of the gay guy simply because he's gay. The straight guy would be taken more seriously.
Perhaps you're the same way. The difference is that you appear to be much more calm and rational about it. You don't bring up AIDS and talk about body parts every time a gay person makes a comment.
God forbid someone not whitewash homosexuality like you wish to.
If you ever conceded anything of merit during your posts then I think many more people would take you seriously and many less would have you on 'ignore'. Just my two cents.
No matter how you bring up pedophilia or Hitler in an argument (regarless of how the analogy is used) you instantly lose credibility.
What do you want me to concede?
I think gays are equal to me. You don't. Is that a concsession?
Then again, I really couldn't care less if I lose credibility with many of these people or with you. They are so over the top it's ridiculous. I'm just here to talk the truth.
Now to the questions, they're serious questions and not an attempt to draw any equivalence as was stated in the questions. The questions merely would establish if the person is a hypocrite or not. If they expect everyone else to draw absolutely no distinctions in people when evaluating worth then the would consider pedophiles equal, Hitler equal, and their mortal enemies, conservative Christians, as equals.
The qustions are ignored because it lays bare their hypocrisy.
I answered that all people have worth. I'll answer those questions I asked as well.
Keep in mind though that being an equal human means you are responsible for your behavior so when you do something wrong or advocate something wrong, their is a consequence for your actions/beliefs.
See how simple that is. The difference is these militant homosexuals want to be considered equal but so quickly demean those who fail to meet their own "moral" tests. It's simple hypocrisy but at least it's entertaining because they often act like drama queens.
See how simple that is. The difference is these militant homosexuals want to be considered equal but so quickly demean those who fail to meet their own "moral" tests. It's simple hypocrisy but at least it's entertaining because they often act like drama queens.
You're the only one here who has referred to me as a "militant homosexual". Calling me an "attention wh*re" and a "preening queen" yesterday didn't do much to increase your credibility either.
but civil unions being applied must be applied to straight people and gay people across the board.. We're not talking about keeping straight people as marriage under the law, and extending the new term "civil union" to gays..
That gets shot down in common law, brown vs. board of education where seperate is not equal..
I would support civil unions if straight people's unions under the law were called the same as well.. and their church's did their marriages...
keep the word marriage out of the law for everyone and make it equal across the board.. I have no beef with that...
Brown vs. Board of Education....that's racial discrimination but I see you point about applying the same thought to sexual orientation discrimination (if that's what you'd call it). Curious what William Renquist writes about that though (the Supreme Court justice that is):
To the argument . . . that a majority may not deprive a minority of its constitutional right, the answer must be made that while this is sound in theory, in the long run it is the majority who will determine what the constitutional rights of the minorities are." Source.
Interesting that even at that level people feel it's the will of the majority to decide the fate of minority groups and what rights they should or shouldn't have. Somehow I see a 4 to 3 vote deciding this in the supreme court...if they decide to address it at all.
There is a single version that doesn't rely on taking a snippet of the verse and ignoring the rest of the paragraph. You can pretend you're representing the verse accurately but it's obvious you're not. But thanks for discrediting yourself further.
JetJockey is absolutely correct here.
That's the major problem with the Bible is the 2000 years of interpretations meant to serve someone's personal interests. Thanks in large part to the Catholic Church for messing it up so bad over the last several hundred years.
God forbid someone not whitewash homosexuality like you wish to.
You talk in circles and are hard to understand. I have no doubt it's intentional so that's why I often refer to you as a troll.
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.
