Why should gay marriage be/not be allowed? (lawyers, abuse, kids)

[Nea1]

Originally Posted by carolinajack

Sure you did Nea1, go back and read your own post! I think you are forgetting what you said and then trying to blame others for posting back to ya. Now that is petty.

Please quote the post I used your name in other than the ones where I am talking directly to you. So I know what you are talking about. I dont care if people post to me thats the point of these forums. but where in a general post to anyone did I add your name in like you did me?

[burdell]

Originally Posted by carolinajack

marriage isnt defined as an intimate relationship, it is a committment both legal and spiritual of one man and one woman, who then have an intimate relationship(sex or otherwise).

I respect your opinion but where is that THE legal definiton?

[spunky1]

Originally Posted by carolinajack

there ya go burdell, thanks. That is exactly what our big difference is. I dont see it as genetic but rather a deviant social behavior(secularly) and sin(in the religious context).

they are harming me when they force(and maybe they dont do it in your community but in mine they are) their immoral behavior on society as a whole.

Spot on. Every one has different temptations in life, for some it's homosexuality. Up until I believe 1970 homosexuality was classified as just that, a deviant behavior.
Homosexuals refuse to admit it is a choice and use the cop-out that they were "born this way." They are in denial and want to use this to get their agenda passed. And it is working. And they are hurting our society by trying to force the acceptance on us.

[Nea1]

Originally Posted by Nea1

You have every right to those beliefs. but how is what they do in their bedroom anyones business? And how does it affect you?

What this one carolinajack? I am talking directly to you in this one.

[Alpha8207]

Originally Posted by burdell

Yes I would, I would be just as vocal in saying it's wrong for a 40 year old man to propose marriage to a 13 year old boy as to a 13 year old girl.

Ok, I'm confused burdell....let me make it clear...I'm not talking about a homosexual relationship...I'm talking about a relationship that is outside of what is socially accepted right now (in my example I'm talking ONLY about a heterosexual relationship).

In the same scenario I mention, I'm telling you I have scientific proof these folks can't help who they are attracted to, have data to back up that both are consensually agreeing and it's something that happens in other societies....

Are you saying 'yes' that if they make those proofs, you'd support their right to marry?

Just to clarify, here's my posts again....

Originally Posted by Alpha8207

2-Now this addresses issues raised by the religious side that I personally haven't ever seen address by the non-religious. To keep it simple, where do you draw the line between what's an innate sexual desire and what's not? And, once that line is drawn, where do you draw the line as to what in a society we must accept? It's come up and I would think the natural progression from here would be polygamy, legal pedophilia (by that I mean the consent ages will begin to legally drop), and a host of other issues that could be argued with "This isn't a choice I made, I can't help how I feel." .....


So, to recap,
a)How's fighting this on the basis of religion different than fighting other issues on the basis of non-religion, and

b)At what point do you say "Ok, born that way or not, we're just not going to accept that as a society." (And obviously where I'm going is why is your line OK, and the line those in opposition to this have drawn isn't OK)

(which by the way no one has responded to a)

and also, this...

Originally Posted by Alpha8207

Let's say this time next year, a coalition of folks gets together and decides they want to make a push for the consent of age to be dropped to 13 year old girls because some girl's 40 year old male neighbor wants to marry her and they have a 'proponderance of evidence' saying that, in fact, 13 year olds do have the capacity to give consent for this. They base that on societies that allow it (Japan, etc from link earlier) and the fact that the 40 year old has always been attracted to 13 year olds and vice versa for the 13 year old. What I'm asking you is would you be so vocal in respecting that person's claims as you are the homosexuals, and, if not, why?

EDIT: TO make this point not so case specific, let's say it's a group of folks that have these feelings. Better suited for this topic.

and again, in case someone hasn't read the whole thread, this is already possible in many countries http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm

[carolinajack]

i didnt say fornication was illegal, where did you get that, i said Immoral. And the government should not get involved, either promoting it or not, because it was a religious act(marriage) before the government got involved.

but it was the government, not the will of the people, who pushed it in Massachusetts.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by carolinajack

there ya go burdell, thanks. That is exactly what our big difference is. I dont see it as genetic but rather a deviant social behavior(secularly) and sin(in the religious context).

.

What do you base that on? Why wouldn't "a deviant behavior" be treatable and why don't you believe that people 'suffering' from a behavior that they are punished villified for don't seek treatment?

[carolinajack]

thank you Nea1, thats what I said, why are you bringing me into a discussion with you, since yesterday you were asking me why I was bringing you into my discussion. If you dont want me talking to you, why are you posting directly to me?

[Nea1]

gay marriage is two consenting adults, is the 13 year old in your example consenting also?

[burdell]

Originally Posted by carolinajack

i didnt say fornication was illegal, where did you get that, i said Immoral. And the government should not get involved, either promoting it or not, because it was a religious act(marriage) before the government got involved.

but it was the government, not the will of the people, who pushed it in Massachusetts.

Nor should they IMO get involved in banning it. And please, spare me the Clinton jokes, but I don't view most politicians as great moral compases. And I'm not real impressed by some alleged religious folks who would brand the entire Episcopal Church as heretical, to me it just majes them baselessly judgemental. And no, I'm not accusing you.