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.
Why should I give a rat's patoot who anybody else marries? None of my business. There was a guy in Japan who married his blow-up doll. More power to him if he's happy.
And yet divorce and infidelity don't seem to be a defiance of their God's will to these same "Christians"? Strange how people pick and choose what they believe in.
It's not always pick and choose. In the practice it can be viewed as following what you understand and waffling around what you don't because there is no such thing as a perfect Christian. The practice is like the medical profession- a striving towards perfection. To be fair there you'd have to acknowledge that when someone is trying to be in compliance with 2 sets of rules there's bound to be conflicts for them daily. In that light you'll see the reasoning behind Catholic priests taking a vow of chastity vs other pastors permitted to marry. You'll see the Amish & Ultra orthodox Jewish people as very wise to separate themselves from general culture- in their interpretation of the righteousness expected of them it's not possible to participate in main stream America without becoming hypocrites. America is generous enough to afford space for their existence despite their own aversion to the grander tapestry of freedom.
In the case of catholics the vatican 2 counsel implemented sweeping changes in interpretation that made divorce officially practicable, which was already happening among protestants. When violence and abandonment were a common theme I believe the church came to see itself as aiding and abetting crimes enforcing a contract, but if you'll notice divorce to this very day has stigma attached to it culturally even among those who aren't religious. The entire subject of human sexuality has had a very juvenile interpretation among christian leaders/ followers alike for longer than I can recall. I saw a glimmer of hope in teachings of Pope John Paul but that died with him. The clergymen beneath him did not follow his lead while he was alive, but instead buried their heads like ostrich & chose to follow the tradition of repression that makes a ripe environment for child molesters. The Pope apologized for their behavior but it was their own unwillingness to follow him responsible. Can we call that pick and choose when they insist the Pope is infallible yet fail to follow?
So, realistically Zimbo, what's the likelihood gays could effectively communicate to heteros what it is to be gay if we're culturally too squeamish and uncomfortable about our own sexuality? There are two extremes-- abject repression and licentious abuse of sexuality (porn prostitution whatnot). Neither are correct, healthy (micro individuals or macro socially) or in accordance with God's will. Both represent a cartoon version of sexuality respectively-- think monte python sex ed (there are 3 biblical women- the virgin, mother, or prostitute, nothing else, not even an evolution of stages) or the hack theme of porn as star rooster servicing hypersexualized hens.
I strongly suggest everyone ask themselves what has all this juvenile nonsense got to do with human beings or accept this arrested development permanently. If snap on can't manage to sell it's tools without a near naked woman splayed across the hood of a car they aren't in the tool business. I find it no small coincidence that the worst homophobes on CD often have the most bizarre concepts of manhood, womanhood, and interpersonal relationships. Sex is violence to many of them. Food for thought.
The choices are incomplete. I say NO to gay marriage. It is really that simple. Look at the 30 states that have actually had it on the ballot. Gay marriage was voted NO 100% of the time. If you want to llok at some serious stats, then thats all you need. Ignoring that would be like ignoring the elephant in the room.
The choices are incomplete. I say NO to gay marriage. It is really that simple. Look at the 30 states that have actually had it on the ballot. Gay marriage was voted NO 100% of the time. If you want to llok at some serious stats, then thats all you need. Ignoring that would be like ignoring the elephant in the room.
With all due respect, I believe that is what we refer to as the "tyranny of the majority".
The choices are incomplete. I say NO to gay marriage. It is really that simple. Look at the 30 states that have actually had it on the ballot. Gay marriage was voted NO 100% of the time. If you want to llok at some serious stats, then thats all you need. Ignoring that would be like ignoring the elephant in the room.
With that logic, the south would still have whites only water fountains
and elderly African American grandmothers who traveled by road would still be having to go the woods instead of being able to use a restroom.
With that logic, the south would still have whites only water fountains
and elderly African American grandmothers who traveled by road would still be having to go the woods instead of being able to use a restroom.
You present a question about gay marriage, but then you object when someone has a differing opinion. My "logic" is that marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman. I'm sorry if gay people don't like that. I'd like to have the speed limit at 100mph, but I don't make the laws.
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.
