lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Homosexuality & Same-Sex Marriage
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 08-04-2006, 08:37 PM   #121
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by halo92
Resectivly speacking are you gay? i'm certainly not
Strange how everyone who bashes gays has to underline at the start that they certainly aren't gay. Hmmm.

I'm not black so i don't support equal rights for black people. ANd assuming your religion is christianity then you shouldn't be allowing women out of the house with their head uncovered either.. or letting them speak in church. but then i'm not christian, so i don't support your right to get married either.

Quote:
and my religion has a lot to do with my beliefs
But what do your beliefs have to do with the lives of non-believers?
Are athiests allowed to get married? Yes. Are muslims allowed to get married? Yes. Why should christian law apply to non-christians?



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-04-2006, 10:29 PM   #122
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by halo92
Resectivly speacking are you gay? i'm certainly not so i don't support them and my religion has a lot to do with my beliefs
Reminds me of the anti-black rights junk back in the 40's-70's.

I remember one of the most popular in regards to interracial marriage had something to do with tying two different colored oxen to the same yoke being bad and blasphemous. Or some other such nonsense.

Basically, religion has no place in affairs of social structure unless in a religious social setting. And as far as I can remember, America isn't to have a nationally established religion, since the idea was it is the land of the free. You can practice your faith without anyone telling you otherwise.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-05-2006, 12:26 AM   #123
Tyrion
nothing is real
 
Tyrion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: no one I think is in my tree, I mean it must be high or low
Posts: 6,917
LF Jester Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by halo92
Resectivly speacking are you gay? i'm certainly not so i don't support them and my religion has a lot to do with my beliefs
Come to think of it, most within this thread are heterosexual(myself included). So it's not really that we are homosexuals looking out for ourselves, but just that we just have some rational sense.



Tyrion is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-05-2006, 01:45 AM   #124
Halo_92
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,068
this is another reason if you lived back in th 1500 hundreds you would almost never hear of a gay person and if you did you would've been appauled.
That just shows that this generation has been morally declining.
Halo_92 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-05-2006, 01:46 AM   #125
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by halo92
this is another reason if you lived back in th 1500 hundreds you would almost never hear of a gay person and if you did you would've been appauled.
That just shows that this generation has been morally declining.
YUP.

Because burning witches at the stake = MORAL FAMILY VALUES!
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-05-2006, 01:47 AM   #126
Halo_92
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,068
yes it does my friend and you agree becuase your avatar is nodding
Halo_92 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-05-2006, 02:07 AM   #127
Tyrion
nothing is real
 
Tyrion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: no one I think is in my tree, I mean it must be high or low
Posts: 6,917
LF Jester Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by halo92
this is another reason if you lived back in th 1500 hundreds you would almost never hear of a gay person and if you did you would've been appauled.
That just shows that this generation has been morally declining.
In the 1500's:

No democracy or power of the people, very little freedom of religion(around the same time as the protestants, mind you), absolutely horrid levels of health and education. Coincidentily, in the 1500's the Renaissance was in full swing, which focused on classical antiquity such as Rome which was known for it's decadence and yes, homosexuality.

Now, compare this to the modern era:

Unprecedented levels of freedom; health, technology, education, ect. are at all time highs and marvels are created on an annual basis. We, particularly in the democratic societies and not the theocracies, enjoy life much more than any of our ancestors ever did. We're concerned for the well being of even our most embittered enemies, while those from the 1500's would hardly blink at the thought of mass tortures.

If you ask me, I sure do like the "moral decline" of today.



Tyrion is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-05-2006, 02:24 AM   #128
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
More rhetoric and rant, but still no logical reason to disallow same-sex marriage.

Because it bothers you, is not a valid reason.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-05-2006, 10:42 AM   #129
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
this is another reason if you lived back in th 1500 hundreds you would almost never hear of a gay person and if you did you would've been appauled.
That just shows that this generation has been morally declining.
That'd imply that homosexuality is wrong. And seeing you haven't convinced me it's wrong, I cannot buy that.

There is a "moral decline" in some areas (how many Americans thought torture was right six years ago? Today, on the other hand, there's a ton of Neo-cons defending America and Israel's right to torture prisoners).

But homoseuxality? Not a sign of moral decline. Moral advancement, if you ask me.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-06-2006, 11:58 AM   #130
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
That'd imply that homosexuality is wrong. And seeing you haven't convinced me it's wrong, I cannot buy that.
It is not "wrong". Nor is it "right". Once again I feel that it is important to point out that while people should be allowed to place their genitals anywhere they wish, (provided it's with the legal consent of any other relevant parties,) they should not be lauded for doing so. It is not a "good" thing that they wish to engage in rumpy pumpy of a risky, not-intended-by-manufacturer nature. It may not be a very bad thing either, but it is not something to rejoice about.

I do personally believe that there are better ways to spend one's time than campaigning for the right to marry your sports bag, but each to their own. Marriage in general should be outlawed, in particular the secular recognition of marriage. It is a quasi-religious and superstitious tool of state sanctioned financial injustice. BAN IT I SAY!


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-08-2006, 02:44 PM   #131
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
no offence to halo92, and maybe i'm wring, but he appears to be simply trolling to get a response. Unless he actually puts together a post with any sort of coherent argument, backup for his (brainwashed) opinions or anything else senate worthy, its probably best just to ignore him, or humour him.

It sounds to me like he's a little repressed and afraid to come out because he's been brainwashed into thinking these new urges he feels are wrong..

..though of course maybe he'll prove me wrong with a well thought out, coherent post with rational argments: the stage is yours..



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)

Last edited by toms; 08-08-2006 at 02:56 PM.
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-09-2006, 10:38 PM   #132
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
There is alot of outrage on the right regarding homosexual marriage since it was brought to the forefront by activist judges, not the people.

My opposition to same sex marriage is more based on the semantics of 'marriage'.

It's also surprising that the secular left would push for representation in a historicaly religious institution. Why not something new?

I guess I could see someone coming out of the Anglican church with concerns ....

I wonder what happened to the 80's homosexuals who scoffed at marriage as some type of 'breeder' institution?

I'm all for civil unions and equal rights for everyone. Some object to the term 'Civil Unions' and I don't see why the left in all their creativity couldn't come up with a better name.

Frankly the word marriage makes me shiver... but that could be for other reasons. : )
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-10-2006, 01:46 PM   #133
sockerbit89
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 30
Ah marriage another wonderful sideeffect we have to thank religion for.

To love another person of the same sex is not unatural. To deny oneself to love is unatural. Marriage is unnatural.

This whole debate is unnatural. If a country is a democrazy than it's laws should oblidge to all. Give me a reason why not homosexuals should be able to marry. If the specific religion forbids it than i say **** religion call it whatever you want. Personaly i wouldn't want to be married under a religion that sees me as less worth.
sockerbit89 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-10-2006, 03:46 PM   #134
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Ah marriage another wonderful sideeffect we have to thank religion for.
Actually, I believe marriage pre-dates not only religion, but also ancient mythology.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-10-2006, 04:00 PM   #135
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
The evidence that marriage is independent of religion comes two-fold: 1) monogamy is present in many other animals besides humans, including primates, which dedicate their lives to a single mate; 2) marriage is a human construct that exists independent of religions in various societies and is consistently present cross-culturally where religious beliefs vary drastically.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-10-2006, 06:27 PM   #136
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
[It sounds to me like he's a little repressed and afraid to come out because he's been brainwashed into thinking these new urges he feels are wrong..
And it's not exactly easy to debate in an enviornment where 99% of the participants are liberals/left-wingers. We badly need more Conservatives in here.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-12-2006, 08:04 AM   #137
sockerbit89
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker
The evidence that marriage is independent of religion comes two-fold: 1) monogamy is present in many other animals besides humans, including primates, which dedicate their lives to a single mate; 2) marriage is a human construct that exists independent of religions in various societies and is consistently present cross-culturally where religious beliefs vary drastically.
Ah yes, I meant the whole church, priest, til death do us part thing. Hmm never heard that with primates it's quite extrodinary. Although the whole debate that many conservatives claim is wrong is as i understand it mostly about homo-marriage in christianity. (I believe?)
sockerbit89 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-12-2006, 01:42 PM   #138
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagobahn Eagle
And it's not exactly easy to debate in an enviornment where 99% of the participants are liberals/left-wingers. We badly need more Conservatives in here.
I'm actually not a liberal or a lefty. I'm more conservative than most people here would think... we just don't seem to discuss socialism vs. capitalism here.
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-13-2006, 12:42 PM   #139
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
Marriage itself is a strange concept, from a purely religious standpoint.

I can understand why SOCIETIES and GOVERMENTS might want the institution of marriage. It makes societys more stable and predictable. But, if there is a god sat up ther watching all this, why on earth would he give a stuff whether the two people, in love, living happily together, having sex, with kids, went to a church and went through a weird ceremony or not. I can't think of a single reason why he would care either way.



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-15-2006, 12:08 AM   #140
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagobahn Eagle
And it's not exactly easy to debate in an enviornment where 99% of the participants are liberals/left-wingers. We badly need more Conservatives in here.
Amen to that.



Is any body for some type of civil union? It's sad that there was a voter backlash against it in some states, that usually happens when you circumvent the people on such matters.
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-15-2006, 08:31 AM   #141
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
I thought there was a voter backlash because a load of evangelical priest whipped up their congregations to protest against it?

I have no problem with civil marriages for gay people. I just think ALL marriages should be equal and civil.. and then if individuals want to add religious "extras" to their civil marriage, fine.



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-15-2006, 02:45 PM   #142
edlib
Close to the Edge
 
edlib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Boston, MA., USA
Posts: 9,435
Current Game: DiRT 3; Forza 4
Hot Topic Starter 10 year veteran! Forum Veteran 
As long as the legal definitions of the rights afforded by those who are deemed to be "Married" as opposed to being in a "Civil Union" are exactly the same in official State and Federal statutes, then who really cares what you call it?

If a civil union is somehow afforded less rights than their married counterparts though, then it seems to me the state that is encouraging and sanctioning discrimination.
If the state is to support long-term, committed, monogamous relationships with an official sanction of some sort, then can you call it fair to have 2 neighbors living side-by-side with a completely set of rights regarding their relationships just because one household has a matching set of genders instead of a mixed-pair?

However; if a civil union is exactly the same in every way (from the State's point of view legally) then why not call it "Marriage"? Y'Know: if it quacks like a duck...

But if calling it something different makes it an easier sell to the public (kinda like stretching out a the trunk of mid-size sedan, putting a hatchback on it, and naming it a "compact SUV"... instead of it's traditional name, a "station-wagon" or "minivan" just so you can move more of them among the snobbish soccer-mom set) then go for it!

But seems like a silly use of semantics to me...


Native XWA.Netter (Nutter?)
edlib is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-12-2006, 09:59 PM   #143
Nedak
Beelzebozo
 
Nedak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,836
LucasCast Jingle Composer Forum Veteran Hot Topic Starter 
Hey, Sorry to pop in but I just wanted to comment on one of Saberist's comment.
Quote:
According to Christianity, it's exactly right that gays burn in hell.
Homosexuals are born, or developed at a young age the feeling of being sexually attracted of their own sex. If god does exist, and he indeed made all of us then it would be very hypocritical and morally wrong for him to create a Man or Woman that was gay, and send them to hell for being gay.
Nedak is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-12-2006, 10:23 PM   #144
Kurgan
Headhunter
 
Kurgan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1997
Location: The Dawn of Time
Posts: 18,322
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! 
The Christian would argue that despite what problems we may be born with, we always have the choice of what to do with them. So they would say God wouldn't send them to hell for BEING gay, only for having gay sex (which they chose to do), which is sinful.

Not all Christians believe that being gay is a "lifestyle choice," but most would agree that doing the nasty with somebody is something you do in fact choose, just like taking a drink or getting behind the wheel. Being addicted to something or poorly informed may lessen your responsibility, but not eliminate it.

Of course some (very liberal) Christians would say that gay sex is not sinful at all... and sexual sins, if they even exist, are limited to anything non-consensual (which would include with non-human animals and children) and possibly incest.


Download JK2 maps for JA Server|BOOT CAMP!|Strategic Academy|
(JA Server: 108.178.55.189:29070)


"The Concussion Rifle is the weapon of a Jedi Knight Player, an elegant weapon, from a more civilized community." - Kyle Katarn
Kurgan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-12-2006, 10:36 PM   #145
Davinq
I wear a fez now
 
Davinq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Aotearoa
Posts: 2,442
Current Game: Portal
Quote:
Originally Posted by han sala
Hey, Sorry to pop in but I just wanted to comment on one of Saberist's comment.


Homosexuals are born, or developed at a young age the feeling of being sexually attracted of their own sex. If god does exist, and he indeed made all of us then it would be very hypocritical and morally wrong for him to create a Man or Woman that was gay, and send them to hell for being gay.
My point exactly, han sala!

...even though I haven't posted before on this thread...

Adding on to that, if homoosexuality = bad, I present this query:

If being gay is so evil, then why did God create it? We certainly didn't, because, as has been said, love in any form is a part of nature.

Davinq is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-12-2006, 10:40 PM   #146
Kurgan
Headhunter
 
Kurgan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1997
Location: The Dawn of Time
Posts: 18,322
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! 
Well, are all sexual desires natural and normal though? Some people are seemingly born with an attraction to pre-pubescent children. Others have a desire to rape people or harm them or be harmed (sado-masochism). Others absolutely hate everything to do with sex. Some like to have lots and lots of partners with no attachments.

Do we privilege those too just because they seem to be something people are born with (or develope early on)?

So saying that homosexuality must be good simply because it is "natural" does not follow (the opposite of the also invalid argument that homosexuality is wrong BECAUSE it is "unnatural").


Download JK2 maps for JA Server|BOOT CAMP!|Strategic Academy|
(JA Server: 108.178.55.189:29070)


"The Concussion Rifle is the weapon of a Jedi Knight Player, an elegant weapon, from a more civilized community." - Kyle Katarn
Kurgan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-13-2006, 12:38 AM   #147
Nedak
Beelzebozo
 
Nedak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,836
LucasCast Jingle Composer Forum Veteran Hot Topic Starter 
^Whether it is natural or unnatural it is their choice and we should respect it. It is not going to help if we argue about if it is right or wrong.
We should just worry about ourselves, and worry less about those around us.
If people chose to partake in gay sex let them do it. Don't worry about the sexual orientation of your coworkers, or friends and family. If they are a good person and does good to the community that should be all that matters.
If a Homosexual person gets married it should not affect us if they choose to do so.
What is marriage anyway these days?
Most straight couples get married, and divorce in a matter of time anyways!
Nedak is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-13-2006, 04:27 AM   #148
CapNColostomy
Custom User Title
 
CapNColostomy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Across your face.
Posts: 2,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davin Qe-Kora
If being gay is so evil, then why did God create it? We certainly didn't, because, as has been said, love in any form is a part of nature.
Of course man created gay sex amongst their own species. To say otherwise is rediculous. Are you actually implying that God created gay sex? Oh...so that's where he went on the seventh day. Also, what does love being a part of nature, and man not creating gay sex have to do with one another or the price of tea in China?


CapNColostomy is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-13-2006, 11:23 PM   #149
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Quote:
Originally Posted by han sala
Homosexuals are born, or developed at a young age the feeling of being sexually attracted of their own sex. If god does exist, and he indeed made all of us then it would be very hypocritical and morally wrong for him to create a Man or Woman that was gay, and send them to hell for being gay.
I don't think God sat around and decided one day "You know, I hate homosexuality after all, and I feel like making Joe Gay-guy burn in Hell. Only married people and singles who didn't screw around can get through the pearly gates."

When you look at a number of the rules in the Bible (and I imagine in other religious texts) about marriage/sex, there's usually some better reason than 'God just decided to arbitrarily hate gays today'. I'm going to look at the health ramifications. And bear with me....

I'll give you the "Jae's entered teaching History of Medicine mode" warning, and believe me, I'm keeping it brief....
There's some debate about _the_ first antibiotic, but Penicillin is usually considered the first to come into widespread use. It was 'discovered' in 1929 and didn't come into widespread use until 1942.
Anesthesia for surgery didn't happen until 1846 when ether was used for the first time during a surgical procedure.
Pasteur didn't develop the germ theory of disease til 1865
Antiseptic technique in surgery wasn't discovered until 1867 by Lister
DNA fingerprinting was first used only in 1989.
Some current stats from the WHO show that developed regions of the world have lower infant mortality rates.

I'm saying all that because modern medicine and surgery didn't really come into being until the last 150 years. The oldest antibiotics are only about 70 years old. DNA testing for paternity is only 17 years old. Infant mortality drops as wealth increases.

OK, what's the point?
Mind you, I'm speaking entirely in generalities. I wouldn't be surprised if there's some scholarly articles on this subject that are likely more articulate and better researched, but I just haven't looked around for them at this point.

In a pre-modern medicine society (which was most of history until the last 100 years or so), monogamous relations in a married setting were less likely to cause/spread STDs, which couldn't be successfully treated until antibiotics were invented. Single mothers are more likely to be impoverished both then and now, and poverty increases infant mortality. So, being married may have helped enhance both child and maternal survival. Currently in undeveloped countries, infant/early child mortality rates approach 16% of live births, I would be surprised if it was much lower in the pre-modern medicine world, because without anesthesia and c-sections for complicated births, and various medications and prenatal/antenatal/postnatal care, women and babies died in childbirth a lot more often than they do today.
Anal intercourse carries some health risks that other types of relations don't have (Medline will probably have more technical details). The risk of problems may be low, but since bacterial infections could kill much more frequently prior to anti-infectives, it was probably more significant a risk then we would recognize now. The prohibition against gay relations may have resulted from this, in addition to the fact that they don't produce children.
Inbreeding increases risks of some genetic conditions, and child sexual abuse has psychological and physical effects. Sexual abuse of younger children can cause enough internal damage to cause infertility, infection, and death, though death is very rare in modern times. Taboos on incest likely developed because of this.
Without DNA testing, there was no good way to ensure paternity--a monogamous relationship ensures that.
This isn't even addressing some of the health benefits from marriage and the advantages for children of being in a 2-parent household--that'd make this a lot longer....

Religious taboos weren't necessarily put in place for arbitrary reasons to cramp someone's fun. There may be legitimate medical, scientific, and psychological reasons for the prohibitions. We're just starting to learn in the medical/scientific realm why some of those laws/rules were put into place. I don't think we've fully explored some of those aspects completely enough to just toss them out the window because they happen to have the tag of 'religion' attached to them.

And I'm not making a diatribe against gay unions/nom du jour--we should just make sure to study any potential consequences/benefits carefully. Just like we should with marriage, too, for that matter.

And I've rambled long enough....


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.


Last edited by Jae Onasi; 09-13-2006 at 11:36 PM.
Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-13-2006, 11:31 PM   #150
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Technically, marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Should homsexuals be allowed to live together and do what straight couples should do? Yes. Should they be allowed a ceremony that states their union? Yes. Should it be called marriage? No, since technically it isn't.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-14-2006, 06:47 AM   #151
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Technically, marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Should homsexuals be allowed to live together and do what straight couples should do? Yes. Should they be allowed a ceremony that states their union? Yes. Should it be called marriage? No, since technically it isn't.
"Technically", that's been changing over time. The ancient Greeks and Romans allowed homosexual marriage, as far as I know. Then the Christians came along and condemned it.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-14-2006, 01:19 PM   #152
CapNColostomy
Custom User Title
 
CapNColostomy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Across your face.
Posts: 2,497
"Technically", not outlawing consensual sex between men (what the greeks and romans did) and allowing homosexual marriage (what the greeks and romans didn't do) aren't the same thing.


CapNColostomy is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-14-2006, 09:22 PM   #153
The Source
Rest In Peace
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,304
Contest winner - Modding 
Truthfully, I think this is more about a group of people who want others to accept their sexuality. I don't buy into the idea that they want to get married for the sake of marriage. I am a Christian by birth right, so I am going to try to keep this unbias as possible. I am certain to fail. Marriage 'The Religious' bond between man and women is sacred to religion, and God was very clear on how he wants people to behave. Marriage 'The Government' version of the bond is non-religious in nature, so anyone who doesn't have a religion can get hitched.

It is not God's way to shut a door on anyone. It is upto the person thenselves to find salvation. I have a problem when I hear, "We have evolved beyond the Bible." I find that as a foolish statement. We have not evolved far enough, and the Bible is light years ahead of mankind on several issues.

When it comes to the 'Homosexuality & Same-Sex Marriage' issue, I will fall back upon my faith for answers. God will not close a door to these people, for they are still his people. The problem is vice-versa, they have closed the door on God. When they are ready, God's door will be open. All they have to do is ask and listen.

I don't accept their sexual acts, but I do accept them as a humanbeing. They don't deserve to be married by a priest, for they turned their back on God. They do deserve a chance to learn from Sodom.



R.I.P. to 'The Source' and 'MacCorp'
2004-2008
The Source is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-14-2006, 11:58 PM   #154
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
I'm sure you'd expect that I would disagree about your statement that the bible is "light years ahead of man," since it was written by a bunch of superstitious, Bronze Age nomads bent on killing each other over their ethnic feuds (see Samuel, Exodus, etc).

But I will defend you right to have your opinion of homosexuality and its incompatibility with your religious beliefs to the end.

If you don't like homosexuality and same-sex marriage, don't bump uglies with or marry a member of your own gender. I don't even need religious superstition, and I chose quite easily to marry the opposite sex. But I wouldn't presume to limit the freedom of two other people in love, even if they were the same gender.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-15-2006, 07:59 AM   #155
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacLeodGR
Marriage 'The Religious' bond between man and women is sacred to religion, and God was very clear on how he wants people to behave. Marriage 'The Government' version of the bond is non-religious in nature, so anyone who doesn't have a religion can get hitched.
Exactly. Which is why its sooo stupid for people like george bush to try and stop GOVERNMENT homosexual marriage based on THEIR religious views. Government marriage should be open to anyone, whatever their race, creed, religion, eye colour, finances or orientation.

-

(OT but: Given your belief tht the bible is lightyears ahead of us, and we can't outgrow it, then i assume you believe that rape victims should be stoned or forced to marry their attackers and adulterers should be put to death. Though of course only christian ones.)



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-15-2006, 06:24 PM   #156
The Source
Rest In Peace
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,304
Contest winner - Modding 
Quote:
Originally Posted by toms
Exactly. Which is why its sooo stupid for people like george bush to try and stop GOVERNMENT homosexual marriage based on THEIR religious views. Government marriage should be open to anyone, whatever their race, creed, religion, eye colour, finances or orientation.
If the 'Government' version of marriage is based upon 'Religion's' version, I can see how this would be an issue. Only 2% of the US population is homosexual. 98% of the people don't support the issue.



R.I.P. to 'The Source' and 'MacCorp'
2004-2008
The Source is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-15-2006, 07:50 PM   #157
90SK
Universal Figment
 
90SK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Somewhere...
Posts: 4,383
Current Game: Tetris
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacLeodGR
If the 'Government' version of marriage is based upon 'Religion's' version, I can see how this would be an issue. Only 2% of the US population is homosexual. 98% of the people don't support the issue.
That isn't true. You don't have to be homosexual to support the issue.
90SK is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-15-2006, 10:24 PM   #158
Nedak
Beelzebozo
 
Nedak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,836
LucasCast Jingle Composer Forum Veteran Hot Topic Starter 
Quote:
Only 2% of the US population is homosexual. 98% of the people don't support the issue.
Are you saying that only homosexuals support Gay Marrage?
Nedak is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-15-2006, 10:37 PM   #159
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacLeodGR
Only 2% of the US population is homosexual. 98% of the people don't support the issue.
Ever heard of the logical fallacy known as the non-sequitur?


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-16-2006, 07:53 AM   #160
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Only 2% of the US population is homosexual.
10%, according to a 1948 figure by Kinsey.


Last edited by Dagobahn Eagle; 09-16-2006 at 09:00 AM.
Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > Homosexuality & Same-Sex Marriage

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:10 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.