Homosexual marriage - do you agree?

[Sephith]

I think that if one person loves another person, that it would be alright for them to get married , I mean it is there life and they can do anything they want with it, So i reallly think that its their lives and they should be able to live it, Im not homosexual or anything but i think that if someone loves some else that much they should be able to live it the way they want to. But thats just what i think.

 

[The Phantarch]

What I fail to understand is why they are persecuted still. I mean times have moved on from heavy racism and sexism but still it's an age of heavy homophobia. I mean, come on, if you wish to incite hatred, do it somewhere else!

 

[Demaian]

I am born into a Catholic family. However much I believe in some aspects of the Bible and a supernatural being, I do not let the Bible be the commander and dictator of my actions and my own otherwise perhaps contradicting beliefs.

I pretty much agree with same sex marriages so long as they both really love each other and want to be bound by the rules of marriage. Sometimes being gay cannot be helped. Chances are if the pregnant mother was overly stressed during her pregnancy, the child will now have a much greater chance of being born homosexual.

These people didn't suddenly turn gay overnight because they didn't WANT to be gay. It's just the way they are. If you believe in a God, I suppose your God should've thought about creating homosexuals with his divine hands without thinking of the consequences: their possible marriages. Or at least making the Bible more clear or revising it for the second millennium.

 

[Ironman]

well if two homosexual people want to show their love for each other i think they should be able to do it just like straight people can, coz its not really a marrage its called something like a civil partnership or summit and its only fair if homosexual people wana get married then they can and quite frankly it doesn't really matter because at the end of the day its their decision.

 

[FiNaL_fAnTaSy_RoX]

I think gay marriage is sick and wrong. I mean gay people are freaks. I am a Christian and God said that gay marriage is wrong and so i think that too. Plus its just sick. They shouldnt legallize it anywhere. God made adam and eve, not adam and steve. God didnt make a man to fall in love with another man, same with a woman. He made man and woman to get married and become one and have a family. You cant have a family if you are gay unless you adopt but still gay marriage is sick.

 

[Erythritol]

I think gay marriage is sick and wrong. I mean gay people are freaks. I am a Christian and God said that gay marriage is wrong and so i think that too. Plus its just sick. They shouldnt legallize it anywhere. God made adam and eve, not adam and steve. God didnt make a man to fall in love with another man, same with a woman. He made man and woman to get married and become one and have a family. You cant have a family if you are gay unless you adopt but still gay marriage is sick.

*Sigh*

Okay, so you hate gay marriage. Here's a thought: DON'T HAVE ONE. I personally hate tuna fish. Does that mean I go around telling people that they can't buy tuna fish? No, I simply don't buy tuna fish at the supermarket.

As for the God argument: when you get an interview with God, please share with the rest of us. We're all very curious to talk to this "God" fellow, because thus far He's been, well, rather unreachable. And the Bible? It's a great work of literature, I will give it that. But you need to understand it was written by MEN. The Old Testament was written/composed between the 12th and 2nd century BC. The New Testament was written/composed between 45 and 140 AD. The Bible was NOT composed by God. I don't understand why people would choose to let men from that long ago dictate how they live their lives, especially to such specifics. Also, the Bible is such a mish-mash of already existing traditions. The Adam and Eve story is, I believe, of Pagan origins. The great flood is borrowed from the Epic of Gilgamesh. Being punished by God for looking back at Sodom and Gomorrah? Doesn't that sound REALLY familiar to the Orpheus story? So basically, you're basing your entire moral system on a book that was last revised sometime around 140 AD by random men. Revelation was written by John of Patmos...and that guy was some crazy Greek who hung around in a cave and did, judging by his writings, some hard drugs. .....But I digress.

I thought that Christianity was all about loving each other and acceptance. If Christians hate gays...doesn't that make them hypocrites? Preach one thing and do another?

And do not use your religious reasons to say why it should be illegal. There is separation of church and state for a reason.

At this point, I would like to point out something: gay marriage is about more than "oh it's so cute, we want to have a wedding and be married because we're in love." There are SERIOUS legal benefits to marriage that are not covered by civil unions. This includes tax benefits (I'm not completely sure if this is covered by civil unions), inheritance rights, visitation rights (if the spouse is in the prison or the hospital), assumption of spouse’s pension, child custody, and insurance breaks....just to name a FEW things. What the federal (and state) government(s) are doing is really very discriminatory. If they REFUSE to allow gays to marry in churches because it could destroy the "sanctity" of marriage, they need to offer the SAME benefits for gay couples by way of civil unions. What is going on is complete discrimination. It's sort of sickening.

 

[Hayate]

*Sigh*

Okay, so you hate gay marriage. Here's a thought: DON'T HAVE ONE. I personally hate tuna fish. Does that mean I go around telling people that they can't buy tuna fish? No, I simply don't buy tuna fish at the supermarket.

As for the God argument: when you get an interview with God, please share with the rest of us. We're all very curious to talk to this "God" fellow, because thus far He's been, well, rather unreachable. And the Bible? It's a great work of literature, I will give it that. But you need to understand it was written by MEN. The Old Testament was written/composed between the 12th and 2nd century BC. The New Testament was written/composed between 45 and 140 AD. The Bible was NOT composed by God. I don't understand why people would choose to let men from that long ago dictate how they live their lives, especially to such specifics. Also, the Bible is such a mish-mash of already existing traditions. The Adam and Eve story is, I believe, of Pagan origins. The great flood is borrowed from the Epic of Gilgamesh. Being punished by God for looking back at Sodom and Gomorrah? Doesn't that sound REALLY familiar to the Orpheus story? So basically, you're basing your entire moral system on a book that was last revised sometime around 140 AD by random men. Revelation was written by John of Patmos...and that guy was some crazy Greek who hung around in a cave and did, judging by his writings, some hard drugs. .....But I digress.

I thought that Christianity was all about loving each other and acceptance. If Christians hate gays...doesn't that make them hypocrites? Preach one thing and do another?

And do not use your religious reasons to say why it should be illegal. There is separation of church and state for a reason.

At this point, I would like to point out something: gay marriage is about more than "oh it's so cute, we want to have a wedding and be married because we're in love." There are SERIOUS legal benefits to marriage that are not covered by civil unions. This includes tax benefits (I'm not completely sure if this is covered by civil unions), inheritance rights, visitation rights (if the spouse is in the prison or the hospital), assumption of spouse’s pension, child custody, and insurance breaks....just to name a FEW things. What the federal (and state) government(s) are doing is really very discriminatory. If they REFUSE to allow gays to marry in churches because it could destroy the "sanctity" of marriage, they need to offer the SAME benefits for gay couples by way of civil unions. What is going on is complete discrimination. It's sort of sickening.

That has to be the best debates/arguements i've seen in sometime. It's pretty well thought out. haha.

I give you the thumbs up, I agree with Riku, you've really won the thread. rofl.

I'm agree with you 100%.

 

[Fify Four]

*Sigh*

Okay, so you hate gay marriage. Here's a thought: DON'T HAVE ONE. I personally hate tuna fish. Does that mean I go around telling people that they can't buy tuna fish? No, I simply don't buy tuna fish at the supermarket.

As for the God argument: when you get an interview with God, please share with the rest of us. We're all very curious to talk to this "God" fellow, because thus far He's been, well, rather unreachable. And the Bible? It's a great work of literature, I will give it that. But you need to understand it was written by MEN. The Old Testament was written/composed between the 12th and 2nd century BC. The New Testament was written/composed between 45 and 140 AD. The Bible was NOT composed by God. I don't understand why people would choose to let men from that long ago dictate how they live their lives, especially to such specifics. Also, the Bible is such a mish-mash of already existing traditions. The Adam and Eve story is, I believe, of Pagan origins. The great flood is borrowed from the Epic of Gilgamesh. Being punished by God for looking back at Sodom and Gomorrah? Doesn't that sound REALLY familiar to the Orpheus story? So basically, you're basing your entire moral system on a book that was last revised sometime around 140 AD by random men. Revelation was written by John of Patmos...and that guy was some crazy Greek who hung around in a cave and did, judging by his writings, some hard drugs. .....But I digress.

I thought that Christianity was all about loving each other and acceptance. If Christians hate gays...doesn't that make them hypocrites? Preach one thing and do another?

And do not use your religious reasons to say why it should be illegal. There is separation of church and state for a reason.

At this point, I would like to point out something: gay marriage is about more than "oh it's so cute, we want to have a wedding and be married because we're in love." There are SERIOUS legal benefits to marriage that are not covered by civil unions. This includes tax benefits (I'm not completely sure if this is covered by civil unions), inheritance rights, visitation rights (if the spouse is in the prison or the hospital), assumption of spouse’s pension, child custody, and insurance breaks....just to name a FEW things. What the federal (and state) government(s) are doing is really very discriminatory. If they REFUSE to allow gays to marry in churches because it could destroy the "sanctity" of marriage, they need to offer the SAME benefits for gay couples by way of civil unions. What is going on is complete discrimination. It's sort of sickening.

Want to talk with God?.....try opening the cover of his Book, every once in a while. As all scriptures are the inspired words of God. In fact God...has quite a bit to say on the topic of homosexuality.......Faithful Christians should oppose homosexuality in all forms (Romans1:26-27).

As far as sex in any form being a right, it is not, it is a choice. The broadest "justification" for homosexual marriage is the "civil rights" justification. This the idea, just as you have espoused via your "opinion", that when we deny homosexuals the right to marry we are being unfairly prejudiced and discriminatory. Many say: "They are people too, aren't they? Don't they have the same 'rights' as heterosexuals? Shouldn't they have 'equality' with heterosexuals? Why shouldn't homosexuals have the same civil rights as heterosexuals? We need to recognize something about sexuality, namely, that sexuality is not a fundamental human right, no human has the "right" to have indiscriminate sex with another human. One may live one's whole life without ever having sexual intercourse and survive well. One does not need to have sex in order to live. It's not like eating food, or drinking water, or having shelter and clothing...or a right of equality in seeking life supporting employment. It's not even equivalent with the color of a persons skin. When it boils down, sex is a human "choice" that we can live without; other things are not. And if it can be lived without, then its not a fundamental human right....its a fundamental human choice of practice.

Additionally, our society recognizes that no human has the right to have indiscriminate sex with another human. We have laws that prohibit certain types of sexual activity, such as sex with minors, the mentally handicapped, and the unwilling. There is nothing inherently unfair about the prohibition of sexual activity. In fact, it is the right thing to do. Indiscriminate sex is not a "right" and as long as its not a right, then we have the obligation to appropriately discriminate when it comes to such matters. In fact the only "defining" difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals is the act of sex and how it is practiced....in relation to human rights....just what human rights are homosexuals being deprived of? How are they considered as inferior to others in our society? They are not, all have the basic human rights to life and liberty...and the pursuit of happiness is pragmatic at best....as some want to engage in criminal actions to be happy.....being happy is a pragmatic choice of individuality and some of those choices bear the weight that society wishes not to carry...not actually a blanket right. 54

 

[Scarlet]

Want to talk with God?.....try opening the cover of his Book, every once in a while. As all scriptures are the inspired words of God. In fact God...has quite a bit to say on the topic of homosexuality.......Faithful Christians should oppose homosexuality in all forms (Romans1:26-27).

As far as sex in any form being a right, it is not, it is a choice. The broadest "justification" for homosexual marriage is the "civil rights" justification. This the idea, just as you have espoused via your "opinion", that when we deny homosexuals the right to marry we are being unfairly prejudiced and discriminatory. Many say: "They are people too, aren't they? Don't they have the same 'rights' as heterosexuals? Shouldn't they have 'equality' with heterosexuals? Why shouldn't homosexuals have the same civil rights as heterosexuals? We need to recognize something about sexuality, namely, that sexuality is not a fundamental human right, no human has the "right" to have indiscriminate sex with another human. One may live one's whole life without ever having sexual intercourse and survive well. One does not need to have sex in order to live. It's not like eating food, or drinking water, or having shelter and clothing...or a right of equality in seeking life supporting employment. It's not even equivalent with the color of a persons skin. When it boils down, sex is a human "choice" that we can live without; other things are not. And if it can be lived without, then its not a fundamental human right....its a fundamental human choice of practice.

First off, the Bible was not written by god. It was written by a group of men. God didn't personally write the book and threw on the earth and said: "HERE IS MY BOOK, ENJOY!" It's just a work of literature. That is all.

Erythritol has read pieces of the Bible by the way.

Sexuality is not just human right by the way. Yes you do need sex to live. Sex is NOT a choice, it's a drive that everyone has. Men go insane if they don't have any sexually activity in their life. You wonder why catholic boys have wet dreams? Males needs to cycle sperm often. They're always producing sperm.

 

[Erythritol]

Want to talk with God?.....try opening the cover of his Book, every once in a while. As all scriptures are the inspired words of God. In fact God...has quite a bit to say on the topic of homosexuality.......Faithful Christians should oppose homosexuality in all forms (Romans1:26-27).

As far as sex in any form being a right, it is not, it is a choice. The broadest "justification" for homosexual marriage is the "civil rights" justification. This the idea, just as you have espoused via your "opinion", that when we deny homosexuals the right to marry we are being unfairly prejudiced and discriminatory. Many say: "They are people too, aren't they? Don't they have the same 'rights' as heterosexuals? Shouldn't they have 'equality' with heterosexuals? Why shouldn't homosexuals have the same civil rights as heterosexuals? We need to recognize something about sexuality, namely, that sexuality is not a fundamental human right, no human has the "right" to have indiscriminate sex with another human. One may live one's whole life without ever having sexual intercourse and survive well. One does not need to have sex in order to live. It's not like eating food, or drinking water, or having shelter and clothing...or a right of equality in seeking life supporting employment. It's not even equivalent with the color of a persons skin. When it boils down, sex is a human "choice" that we can live without; other things are not. And if it can be lived without, then its not a fundamental human right....its a fundamental human choice of practice.

Additionally, our society recognizes that no human has the right to have indiscriminate sex with another human. We have laws that prohibit certain types of sexual activity, such as sex with minors, the mentally handicapped, and the unwilling. There is nothing inherently unfair about the prohibition of sexual activity. In fact, it is the right thing to do. Indiscriminate sex is not a "right" and as long as its not a right, then we have the obligation to appropriately discriminate when it comes to such matters. In fact the only "defining" difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals is the act of sex and how it is practiced....in relation to human rights....just what human rights are homosexuals being deprived of? How are they considered as inferior to others in our society? They are not, all have the basic human rights to life and liberty...and the pursuit of happiness is pragmatic at best....as some want to engage in criminal actions to be happy.....being happy is a pragmatic choice of individuality and some of those choices bear the weight that society wishes not to carry...not actually a blanket right. 54

Wow, you totally win the award for most irrelevant response ever. I didn't say anything about sex. At all. My post was about marriage. In the legal sense. Legal rights have nothing to do with human sexuality....so, uh, yeah....

First off, I have read the Bible. Second off, get off your little ethnocentric high horse. Who is to say your religion is the right one? Why should we judge an entire group of people by your standards?

Hm, interesting, the Bible says a lot of things. The Bible condones polygamy, condemns masturbation, and, if I'm remembering correctly, condemns the consumption of seafood. Gee, I can see our society is really following the Bible very strictly. If you wanna play the "THE BIBLE SAYS!!!" game, don't fucking pick and choose what you want to follow. You wanna go by what the Bible says? THEN FOLLOW ALL OF IT. Otherwise, you're just a big hypocritical ass!

Mkay, there's something called federal law. See, marriage isn't just a religious ceremony anymore. It is a legal contract. By denying an ENTIRE group of people access to this legal contract and its benefits, the federal government is being DISCRIMINATORY.

 

[Kibbies]

I do not see the discrimination in this, but I do understand where you are coming from and understand your position.

Everyone, heterosexual and homosexual, has the same restrictions: we cannot marry whomever we want. We all have the equal right to marry someone of the opposite sex and the equal restriction of not being able to marry someone of the same sex. Nobody can marry anyone of their choosing by law. That is why it is prohibited to marry your sibling, your kid, another married person, or whomever else that you are not allowed to marry. Everyone has the same restriction.

What gay marriage is arguing is that they want to marry a person that they want to marry. I live in Kansas, but I may not be involved in the politics here. If I were really interested and cared more about the politics in say... Arizona, then I would argue that I want to go vote there instead because I prefer voting in Arizona than in Kansas. However, I cannot vote wherever I want just because I want to vote there. There are restrictions on voting.

These restrictions may seem unfair, but they are equal. Everyone is subject to the same restrictions no matter what their orientation is, and allowing gay marriage as an exception to the restriction would be unequal and unfair to the rest of the suppressed groups. Allowing that would open the door for everyone else: brother-sister, father-daughter, old guy-little girl, man-horse (I think this one has happened somewhere).

Ultimately, the decision is with the state government, not the federal. Each state chooses their position on gay marriage just like they do all other powers that are not given to US Congress. As a conservative on many issues, I do not like to give the federal government much say in anything, and would be against a federal amendment for or against gay marriage. This is the type of thing that each state should be able to decide upon rather than having Congress decide our morality on the issue.

 

[QuickSilverD]

First off, the Bible was not written by god. It was written by a group of men. God didn't personally write the book and threw on the earth and said: "HERE IS MY BOOK, ENJOY!" It's just a work of literature. That is all.

he didn’t said written by God he said inspired by God, there is a diference.

Sexuality is not just human right by the way. Yes you do need sex to live. Sex is NOT a choice, it's a drive that everyone has. Men go insane if they don't have any sexually activity in their life. You wonder why catholic boys have wet dreams? Males needs to cycle sperm often. They're always producing sperm.

Are you a sex addict? One doesn’t need sex to life, maybe you are referring to “Reproduction is necessary for the continuation of the species”?

I guess it is a hard concept to understand for someone like you, but celibacy is indeed possible, many men and women through history have life their life in celibacy



And just because one is catholic or because one has decided to life in chastity doesn’t mean that all sexual desires suddenly disappear, they sure are part of us, of our instinct of survival and keeping the species going, through the act of reproduction (an act that homosexuality attempts against)

 

[Scarlet]

he didn’t said written by God he said inspired by God, there is a diference.

Want to talk with God?.....try opening the cover of his Book, every once in a while. As all scriptures are the inspired words of God. In fact God...has quite a bit to say on the topic of homosexuality.......Faithful Christians should oppose homosexuality in all forms

The way he said it meant it was written by God himself by the way.

Are you a sex addict? One doesn’t need sex to life, maybe you are referring to “Reproduction is necessary for the continuation of the species”?

I guess it is a hard concept to understand for someone like you, but celibacy is indeed possible, many men and women through history have life their life in celibacy

And just because one is catholic or because one has decided to life in chastity doesn’t mean that all sexual desires suddenly disappear, they sure are part of us, of our instinct of survival and keeping the species going, through the act of reproduction (an act that homosexuality attempts against)

Excuse me? No, that was rather rude of you assume that. And, no most people have a sex drive. As I said before, males have to cycle out their sperm in order to continue to reproduce semen.

 

[Erythritol]

he didn’t said written by God he said inspired by God, there is a diference.


Are you a sex addict? One doesn’t need sex to life, maybe you are referring to “Reproduction is necessary for the continuation of the species”?

I guess it is a hard concept to understand for someone like you, but celibacy is indeed possible, many men and women through history have life their life in celibacy



And just because one is catholic or because one has decided to life in chastity doesn’t mean that all sexual desires suddenly disappear, they sure are part of us, of our instinct of survival and keeping the species going, through the act of reproduction (an act that homosexuality attempts against)

Oh, it was inspired by God. That's a very nice idea, but let's be a little less naive. Everyone has their own agenda. The men who wrote the Bible were no different. There were certain points that they wanted to make, whether it was inspired by God or not. I just think it's amazing that people would blindly follow the ideals of men who lived over a millenium ago.

And...um...maybe you should take a biology class. Sex is a part of human nature, whether you want to admit it or not. You must be quite naive to not realize this. You talk about homosexuality going against human nature? HAHAHAHA! Don't make me laugh. If a large percentage of people are homosexual, how can it be against human nature? If you are saying that homosexuality is against human nature, you are denying the fact that homosexuals are human. And you wouldn't be doing that now, would you?

If anything is against human nature, it is celibacy. Denying perfectly normal feelings, instinctive feelings of sexuality, is perverting human nature. It's true that you can't have sex with anyone indiscriminately, but to quash sexual feelings entirely is sick. You speak of people choosing celibacy...people like who? Like the repressed priests who molested/raped the little boys? (which was not an isolated incident). Repression of natural sexual feelings just leads to psychological issues.

Oh um, in case you didn't get the memo: look into the Song of Solomon in the Bible. It's all about....*gasps*.....SEX! I don't know why, but Christianity (and specifically Catholicism) came along and completely ruined sex. Sex was an accepted part of life until Christianity came along, slapped everyone on the wrists for something perfectly natural, and said, "NO! BAD! LOVE JESUS!" But hey, if you don't wanna think for yourself, and just believe some arbitrary piece of text that was written two millennia ago, that's cool too.

 

[QuickSilverD]

And...um...maybe you should take a biology class. Sex is a part of human nature, whether you want to admit it or not. You must be quite naive to not realize this.

I don’t know if you were reading too fast or if I type it wrong but, I never said that sexuality was not part of human nature, I just said that it is actually possible to live a life without ever having any sex

You talk about homosexuality going against human nature? HAHAHAHA! Don't make me laugh. If a large percentage of people are homosexual, how can it be against human nature?

You seem like a very mature person [/SARCASM]

OK so you say that because it happens, then it is perfectly natural, right? According to this random page about 3-10% of people are gay [by the way notice the drastic increase in the last decade?]

So according to your logic everything above 5% or even let’s say 10% is normal and ergo OK, so..

[link] In 48 surveys from around the world, up to 69 percent of women reported being physically or sexually assaulted by an intimate male partner at some point in their lives and as many as 20 percent of women were sexually abused as children, it said.

uhmp it seems that the natural thing to do it beat women up, nice… also …

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_rate

Wow look 6% murder rate in the US, is also natural to kill other people.

I could also find other example of why high rate doesn’t equal natural or right but is already late for me (12:00am)

If you are saying that homosexuality is against human nature, you are denying the fact that homosexuals are human. And you wouldn't be doing that now, would you?

when anyone says that Y is against the nature of X doesn’t mean that X can’t do Y, just that is not common or not beneficial for X to do Y

If anything is against human nature, it is celibacy. Denying perfectly normal feelings, instinctive feelings of sexuality, is perverting human nature. It's true that you can't have sex with anyone indiscriminately, but to quash sexual feelings entirely is sick. You speak of people choosing celibacy...people like who? Like the repressed priests who molested/raped the little boys? (which was not an isolated incident). Repression of natural sexual feelings just leads to psychological issues.

You probably think that every single Priest in the whole damn world is a pedophile, don’t you? I bet you think that no one has ever died a virgin

Oh um, in case you didn't get the memo: look into the Song of Solomon in the Bible. It's all about....*gasps*.....SEX! I don't know why, but Christianity (and specifically Catholicism) came along and completely ruined sex. Sex was an accepted part of life until Christianity came along, slapped everyone on the wrists for something perfectly natural, and said, "NO! BAD! LOVE JESUS!" But hey, if you don't wanna think for yourself, and just believe some arbitrary piece of text that was written two millennia ago, that's cool too.

I haven’t read everything in the Bible but I do understand the position of the Catholic Church regarding sex.

So in a nutshell …

*Sex is for reproduction, catholic people believe that they should reproduce as much as they can.

*Being sex main purpose to keep the species going, is not wonder why any act of sex between two who are not of opposite gender are in conflict with the religion.

[FONT=&quot]*Marriage is the institution created for family and society, and Sex is only allowed inside marriage[/FONT]

 

[celtic_silver]

You probably think that every single Priest in the whole damn world is a pedophile, don’t you? I bet you think that no one has ever died a virgin

Nope. Just a large percentage of them...

But with the whole Christianity thing, Christianity might be against homosexuality in some ways, but Christians are also supposed to be tolerant and caring about others. I'm Christian myself, and straight too, but I know that tolerance is indeed a virtue. Regardless of whether someone is homosexual or not, I believe they should have every right to get married to someone they love.

For whoever used the example of relatives or animal/human marriages, there's good reason they're not followed. This is due to animals not being able to do anything about it. They can't say no.
And relatives not being allowed to marry is due to the consequences of if they were to have children. The kiddies would have a weaker set of genetic materials within them.

Homosexual marriage cannot hurt anyone I believe. Sex if it were involved cannot produce offspring anyway, and even if the couple adopted or something, that doesn't mean the child would be homosexual or anything. Granted some do believe that a male and a female parent is best for a child, but crawling around the net, most just seems to be personal opinion based purely on people thinking that due to males and females being different, they will nurture the child in different ways or something. It's far from reliable information...

Whether or not a person sees homosexuality as wrong, (I do, but it's the acts themselves and not the people), I think the laws should allow homosexuality to go ahead. Things like adultery and the like are unchallenged by the law, why does homosexual marriage get such a hard time?

 

[SapphireStar]

QuickSilverD, please remove those links in your signature please.
And fair enough, debate people, but keep it civil or infractions are being given.

 

[QuickSilverD]

Nope. Just a large percentage of them...

That post was addressed to Erythritol but I’ll reply to your post anyway.

But with the whole Christianity thing, Christianity might be against homosexuality in some ways, but Christians are also supposed to be tolerant and caring about others. I'm Christian myself, and straight too, but I know that tolerance is indeed a virtue. Regardless of whether someone is homosexual or not, I believe they should have every right to get married to someone they love.

Homosexual marriage cannot hurt anyone I believe. Sex if it were involved cannot produce offspring anyway, and even if the couple adopted or something, that doesn't mean the child would be homosexual or anything. Granted some do believe that a male and a female parent is best for a child, but crawling around the net, most just seems to be personal opinion based purely on people thinking that due to males and females being different, they will nurture the child in different ways or something. It's far from reliable information...

You just said that you are a Christian and so I’m writing this now basing this post in the way our religion handles sin (I’m a Christian Catholic myself).

It is true that a good Christian must be tolerant; a good Christian doesn’t reject someone just because they’re gay, just the same way that a good Christian is supposed to love and pray for everyone including sinners (actually principally for sinners) then again that doesn’t stop homosexuality from being a sin.

We don’t define “Sin” as something that will hurt someone or something that is politically incorrect. We define sin as “Not following God’s will”. But since God is the good guy, his will is in the best interest of humanity, and especially the human moral. You should know that many laws are based on a principle of moral which was based on a religious moral; some things that are illegal don’t necessarily hurt anyone, but are almost always considered immoral.

--
Take for example Female prostitution, with is illegal in many places in the world, if I’m not mistaken it is illegal in most countries and states. I remember watching on a TV show (Pen & Teller) a program about how prostitution wasn’t a bad thing at all. How in places where prostitution was legal a woman could earn her living using her body in a way that would not attempt against her physical and/or mental health. The show focused on a legal House of prostitution where the sexual workers, had not only health care, didn’t get beaten (there was security), don’t do drugs etc, etc. I don’t want to get in detail so I hope you get the point (maybe you can find the episode online or something)

And yet for most prostitution is still some deplorable and that should be illegal, even when if it were legal no one would get hurt. In fact the state would benefic because legal hookers would pay taxes. [I’m not defending prostitution by the way just using it to illustrate my example]
--

Going back with the Christianity thing I assume most Christians will find homosexuality to be immoral and in many cases repulsive. Why? Mainly because is a sin. And why is it a sin? Because God create a man and a woman not a man and another man, it clearly wasn’t God’s will to have a man with another man or a woman with another woman, it was his will that there was a man and a woman, and that these two would be live together as if they were one.

DISCLAIMER TO EVERYONE ELSE WHO IS NOT CELTIC SILVER:
THIS is just the religion argument you have probably hear like five thousand times already, if you have argue it before there is no need to reply to this particular post.

Whether or not a person sees homosexuality as wrong, (I do, but it's the acts themselves and not the people), I think the laws should allow homosexuality to go ahead. Things like adultery and the like are unchallenged by the law, why does homosexual marriage get such a hard time?

You should know that adultery is not ignored by the law, just because you won’t get any jail time for cheating on your wife doesn’t mean that the law doesn’t care. For example in a divorce case if one of the two people involve committed adultery, he or she will get the worse deal at the time of good repartition and probably children custody.

QuickSilverD, please remove those links in your signature please.
And fair enough, debate people, but keep it civil or infractions are being given.

Thanks for reminding me, I had long forgot about those

 

[Lirael]

I don't see a problem with it personally. They're normal people, and they have just as much right to marry the person they love. I think the problem is, we're all made to believe it's naturally wrong. We've been brought up in a society which views homosexuals as outsiders, but if we were only taught more about them we'd probably learn to accept them as normal.

What is normal anyway? What is natural?

I think it's terrible how people who butcher animals in an un-natural way argue against homosexuality, stating it's un-natural. Humankind isn't natural. Why put someone to the side simply because they prefer their own sex over the other?

It's simply because their brains are programmed differently. It's not their fault, nor their choice. Religious leaders might say that it's not right in the eyes of God. Why then did God program them in this way?! God is said to love everyone equally, so why would he program people with brains telling them to do something that wasn't natural? Why would God make it so people felt it natural to do something if it was wrong?

 

[Erythritol]

It's simply because their brains are programmed differently. It's not their fault, nor their choice. Religious leaders might say that it's not right in the eyes of God. Why then did God program them in this way?! God is said to love everyone equally, so why would he program people with brains telling them to do something that wasn't natural? Why would God make it so people felt it natural to do something if it was wrong?

THANK YOU. This is exactly what I was trying to say!

Anyway, to QuickSilverD:

No, I don't think every priest molests little boys. I know of wonderful priests who are not child molesters. But the whole molestation scandal was relatively widespread; it was not just one isolated incident. And yes, I know people have died virgins. I think you have a naive/idealistic view of virginity and sexuality, however.

And actually, I am quite a mature person. I just tend to dislike people who are homophobic and look down on others from their little religious pedestals. And please, do not argue that you are not homophobic. As far as I am concerned, if you find homosexuality "sick" and describe it as a "sin," you are homophobic.

A large percentage of the population is homosexual; more than 3-10 percent. It is impossible to measure something like that because it is still not a socially accepted lifestyle in large parts of the world (including the United States, sadly). As for the "dramatic increase" in the last few years: that is because homosexuality is becoming more and more socially acceptable. There have always been homosexuals, but they have had to hide themselves for fear of persecution.

You say that there is violence in the world? Wow, really? That's because violence is, sadly, a part of human nature as well. The difference is that violence harms others, while (homo)sexuality does not. The only reason that there is not a higher rate of violence is that we have removed ourselves from a state of nature, and thus must follow the rules of society.

As far as I am concerned, the Catholic Church is an arbitrary foundation. If people wish to follow the Catholic faith, that is their own business. I have no problem if someone is Catholic or Christian. However, when they begin to judge others according to their ethnocentric beliefs, that is wrong. The Catholic Church is NOT a federal institution and thus has no sway in governmental affairs. Thus, to use a religious argument to legislatively deny homosexuals the right to marry is wrong. In America, marriage is no longer just a religious ceremony. Marriage is a LEGAL contract. This contract gives spouses numerous benefits (that I have listed in a previous post). Because homosexuals are not allowed to marry (with the exception of one state), they are legally denied these benefits. That is legally discriminatory.

Okay, as for the Catholic Church's beliefs....they're clinging to an era that is gone. It is not the medieval ages anymore; the golden age of Catholicism is through. It is not realistic to expect people to wait for marriage to have sex. Hey, if you want to, that's your decision, but the Catholic chuch shouldn't look down on those who do not. There are many aspects to marriage, and sexual compatibility is important. People should reproduce as much as they can? Really, why? So that they can add to the overpopulation? Add to the poverty? There are TOO MANY PEOPLE as it is. Poverty is rampant. To tell people to reproduce as much as they can is not only stupid, it is reckless and irresponsible. Your views of the history of marriage are also completely wrong. Marriage was not created for society or for family. That is such a new, modern concept. Back in the day, marriages were for political gain, monetary gain, or simply because women had no other options. What were women going to do, go to school? Yeah right. All that they COULD do was hope to marry some rich 50 year old business man who would provide for them. Royalty married other royalty to strengthen political ties between countries. Anyways, marriage today is not some precious, holy thing. Look at the divorce rate. Look at the fact that people like Britney Spears get married in Vegas for a day just for a laugh. Yeah, wow, what a sanctimonious thing marriage is. Thank god the gays aren't ruining it!! *Rolls eyes*