Don't we have enough going on in all of our lives, why must we get involved in other peoples? So what if people of the same sex want to get married. As a country we have deeper issues than gay marriage. If we took the energy focused against gay marriage then focused it on more important issues then we might actually get some crap done in this country. (oh, Canada too) How about.... Terrorism Economy Medicare Social Security MY2 Cents PS. I'm not gay... I'm married, two kids and republician
I never said a word about calling it a civil union. I said it would be considered a civil ceremony, just as my sister's and her fiancee's will be. They are still getting married, and that was my point. A civil ceremony doesn't make it any less of a wedding, marriage or whatever you care to call it.
In order to understand this debate, I think it’s important to recognize that the real underlying issue is the belief that homosexuality is wrong and sinful. Within Christian circles, the Bible is cited as the authority on this. Specifically, Leviticus clearly states that homosexuality is wrong, as does Paul in the New Testament writings. The problem with this is that few people follow any of the other edicts found in Leviticus (like the one that says you can’t wear clothing made from different materials). Same thing goes with Paul’s letters. Most Christians today accept women in leadership positions in the Church and disagree with Paul on slavery. Given this fact, let’s just admit that the difference is in the culture. Christianity is inherently more traditional. That is why Christianity is on a bit of delay compared to the rest of society. This is the case, generally, when it comes to equality rights of any kind. The majority of Christians opposed every step forward when it came to rights and progress (slavery, women’s rights, and science). While this is what the majority of Christians were doing, more often than not, it was a Christian leading the way on making positive changes (although such people were usually persecuted). Individuals like this are those who recognize that many of the things to do with Christianity are cultural but that the true message of Christianity is one of grace, compassion and love. Right now I think that Christians feel that they are fighting a loosing battle against a culture that is going down the tubes. Rather than spending all this time and effort reactively pointing out what is wrong with society, Christians should reposition themselves as proactive agents of positive change. Jesus spent his time with the oppressed of society, helping and encouraging them. If we are truly concerned about what is wrong with the world, here is a good place to start changing it.
well would u like to get my openion...i think it will be little hard on u after i have read what u have written...anyways i think that gays should be punished coz they r gays, since that they r on the wrong method of life and they r abusing there instincts...so i think that this kind of people gays and lesbs should be punished harmly even though by execution...
so i should be executed, eh? i'm pretty sure i'd be missed. but then again, i'd no longer have to pay bills. LOL. geez...whatever....
NewComputer- I have one question though, do you accept marriage between homosexuals outside of the church and using the 'title' of marriage? The legal meaning of marriage is between a man and a woman, so call it what you will, it will never in law be a marriage, unless the law is changed. I actually got maried in a civil ceremony, as Tracey my wife was not, at the time a Christian. I do not feel less married for it. Harking back to my gay friends, I do not think they are any less married than I am, I DO think it is wrong that a couple who have shown total commitment to each other, should be financially punished purely because of their sexuality. Thankfully in the Uk with the new civil ceremonies that come into force. Gay couples, can enjoy the same financial position as heterosexual couples. I do have issues with homsexuality. But it it not my position to tell others outside of the church how to live their lives, I can only live by example, and profess my faith and hope others will make a favourable judgement about me. I fail to see how the church can allow gay relationships within the church, especially when it goes against the teachings, and the core of what we believe. But that is another issue. I have no problem with homosexuality outside of the church, that is not my concern, that is the rights of the individuals concerned to live their lives as they see fit. ' I will fight to the death for the right of someone to be wrong'. I do not ram my beliefs down the throat of someone, as I have respect for others. All I ask in return is the same respect. MO1983, I presume that you are just winding us up, and even if you are not then you have the right to say it. I think we walk on dangerous ground though when we tell people how to live their lives, when it does not affect our own lives, and their actions are not breaking any laws. In that case I believe our friend here who spouted human rights is absolutely right. We do not have to abide by the rules of a club of which we are not members. In reply to the person who quoted levicticus, from memory I believe it runs something like 'a man shall not lay with another man as it is an abonimation to the Lord' Nothing about Women there, so does that make female female relationships ok then? We have to be careful quoting scriptures, as they can be taken literally. I totally disagree with making the core beliefs of any religion fit the lifestyle of the world in which we live. Sure anything that fails to understand, the world is in trouble, but it should not compromise beliefs in order to be more attractive. We have to understand, and accept it as something that is happening, but the fact is that anyone who breaks the rules of a club should not be allowed into the club. It is like allowing a vegetrian to eat meat as everyone else is eating it, because they slice theirs extra thin, or only eat chicken, to still be classed as vegetarians. I will fight to the death for the right of my brother to be wrong!
why? and how old are you? that's one of the most ridiculous statements I've heard in the thread so far, I think. I'd be for the poll as well, though.
There we differ (and not too much elsewhere that counts, methinks)... I will fight to the death for the right of my brother to disagree with me unless, of course, his disagreement requires my death, in which case I'll just fight I agree with the religion thing, in the sense that if you adhere to it, then it should be adhered to. The difficulty with using (solely) the teachings of the bible, or any similar approach, to base one's morality on, is that the teachings are not internally consistent (IMO) already severely out of sorts with current society in places, sometimes for better, sometimes worse (again IMO)) My example of Sara marrying Abraham at a very young age was not entirely flippant. Could biblical practice from one of the fathers of the judeo-christian be used to justify what would be largely regarded as paedophilia in modern society?... I suspect such an idea would be anathema to the majority of practising christians. Social context does change. Sometimes for the common good, sometimes not, but hindsight is a wonderful gift. I thank you, OWG, and New Computer, for some thoughtful and tolerant contributions to what has turned out to be a very interesting debate.
Wow... I would have thought that most people would have at least had a little sense to keep their facist views to themselves. <edit> - removed an insult</edit>
These type of thread will only lead to people on the forum not getting along.. lol, I can't see how it really helps the community?
Aye, schlottke, I think you're right. but perhaps if the problem is with the word and definition of "marriage" perhaps gov't ought to do away with all reference to the term marriage and use "civil union" instead? Straight, gay, if it's a civil union then would it matter as much?
Don't you guys think you are going a bit overboard? I hope you all do not brand each other from a thread topic that is being discussed by friends. If some folks want to sing "I left may heart in San Francisco", let them sing their arses off. That don't mean you or I have to go to the party. Just reminded me, I am going to crank up the music box and jam to some Live Hendrix, Led Zeppelin and some Nazereth. Now those are the songs I sing. You guys be good to each other. What do I think of Gay Relationships? The human race could not go on if this is what love was about. It may be what sex is about, but can sex alone sustain the human race if it is woman on woman or man on man? Someone answer that one if you can? I do not think anyone of us here were born as a result of a gay relationship. You decide in your own mind if it is right and was meant to be a good thing as the creator created mankind. Dig that, I am going to jam to some loud music and you guys settle this one. I am over and out of this one That is my statement, you all can argue your arses off, I am done with this subject. Godspeed folks.
Just to add to this, I am going to apply the term 'naturally". Technically, Science and the donation of sperm could aid, but that would not be natural.
Well I congratulate the bulk of the people who contributed to this topic. It was a potentially explosive subject, but has been contributed to well. I really dont think I have anything to add, other than to say that , while not bible bashing, and in reply to the question about conflicting information on right and wrong re paedophillia etc. The bible says that we should submit to the will and laws of God, and also of the country in which we reside. So pretty clear there then Congratulations to almost everyone.
Just thought I'd throw in the fact that the ability to have children by natural means is not a requirement for getting married...
Absolutely, usually these types of threads do not end in a peaceful manner normally. Another testament (hehe) of how great this forum is.
Does anyone know that getting married is nothing more than a dammed legal agreement in the modern world? In ancient days it was not so, then it was two people becoming one through a spiritual law to create a family unit. Family means having a family (children) so that humans can reproduce. Modern theory is simply a legal arrangement and a contract with the government more than the two folks getting married. Where folks get this idea that two folks of the same sex could "get married" is completely false. So Jebby, are you mixing up some kids in a test tube tonight? The question is, can two men make babies without a woman, can you tell me if this is possible Jebby? Also please answer this question, can two women make a baby without the help of a male member of the human race? Can you let us know your solution to this problem? Please do a Google or Yahoo search and let me know when you find the answer, also please post the links. Sorry folks, I lied to you all and said I was done with this thread, can't win em all, can you, yes I said you can't win em all. I do win them all, RIGHT?