Thought on homosexuality and same sex marriage

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Laharl

It's NOT about the word, it's about the legal benefits. You see, civil unions do NOTHING, while marriage has many, many legal benefits. *Shrug* That's my point.
No legal benefits = No point in it existing.

Is that fair?
 

minny

6 years and going strong!
Joined
Jun 4, 2003
Messages
1,309
Reaction score
0
Location
Somewhere In Asia
I want a gay to tell me why it is so important to get married. They say it isnt becasue of money then what is it? They say its love, but if that is true then you should be able to love without getting married. I just find it really stupid and hypocritical.
 
L

Laharl

You have a gay right here telling you why. It's about the legal benefits, Minny. I've had to repeat that many times already. So here we go.

LEGAL BENEFITS - LEGAL BENEFITS - LEGAL BENEFITS

It is ALL about the legal benefits, and lack there-of in civil unions.
___________
That's my story and I stand by it.
 

B~E

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2003
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
3
Location
Montreal, in a ghost town.
Website
Visit site
Kuzmich said:
gay marriage is completely absurd if you talking about going to church and declaring your marriage as to be aproved by God. Bible opposes homosexuality, it is prosecuted by bible. So if there is a God he would never aproove of such a thing as gay marriage.
That was the base for my opposition to gay marriage, and it remained the only one as of yet.
Is it me or this argument wasn't flawed so far ?
 

Lights

Member!
Joined
Nov 12, 2003
Messages
898
Reaction score
1
Location
Beyond Religion and Science
Website
Visit site
Even if Civil Unions were given the same legal benefits as marriage, that would still be unacceptable. Doesn't that sound an awful lot like the "separate but equal' days of old? It is nothing more than prejudice and hate. There is NO reason beyond religious beliefs that homosexuals aren't allowed to marry. This amendment shouldn't have made it past block one.
 

Kuzmich

Member!
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Messages
3,160
Reaction score
0
Location
Russia, Moscow
Website
Visit site
The only reason why marriage exests is because of those religious beliefs, basically its like you can't marry in the church of satan or whatever if people in that church don't consider you one of them.
 

Lights

Member!
Joined
Nov 12, 2003
Messages
898
Reaction score
1
Location
Beyond Religion and Science
Website
Visit site
Marriage, while perhaps coming from religious roots, has become much more than that because of the legal benefits coming with it. You are married by Law now, not by the Church.
 

B~E

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2003
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
3
Location
Montreal, in a ghost town.
Website
Visit site
Lights said:
Marriage, while perhaps coming from religious roots, has become much more than that because of the legal benefits coming with it. You are married by Law now, not by the Church.
So because there is numerous legal benefit comming out of marriage, this alone should justify the removal of the caracter of religion ? Why is that ?

How about we give the civil union all the legal benefits that religious marriage enjoy, insteed of divesting the century old sacred and religious significance of marriage for the sake of a minority lifestyle ? That way, gays will have their precious benefits, and religious marriage will preserve its significance and credibility.
 

Kuzmich

Member!
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Messages
3,160
Reaction score
0
Location
Russia, Moscow
Website
Visit site
Lights said:
Marriage, while perhaps coming from religious roots, has become much more than that because of the legal benefits coming with it. You are married by Law now, not by the Church.
No, you sign a paper stating that you are married by law. You go to church in order to get married by church.
 

Zmoney

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2002
Messages
3,120
Reaction score
1
Location
Tonawanda BAby
Men MArry Women not men.
 

amrtin77

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2002
Messages
2,750
Reaction score
0
Location
United States
Website
Visit site
Black~Enthusiasm said:
So because there is numerous legal benefit comming out of marriage, this alone should justify the removal of the caracter of religion ? Why is that ?
you know exactly why, dont act as if you dont. ive said it at least 3 times in this thread. the state is SECULAR, they cannot use religion as a reason for any law. 14th amendment i believe?


marraige is no longer a religious institution. sure, if you want to be married by a church you can, and if they dont want to marry you they dont have to. but the state must allow any two adults to get married, and cannot use religious beliefs to sway their decisions.


no one is forcing the church to do ANYTHING at all. dont even attempt to say this is unfair to the church. the church doesnt have to marry anyone they dont want to marry.
 

Tipsy

Respected Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2003
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
2
Location
Washington D.C
Homosexual desires are NOT in themselves sinful. People have a wide variety of sinful desires over which they have little direct control, but these do not become sinful until a person acts upon them, either by acting out the desire or by encouraging the desire and deliberately engaging in fantasies about acting it out. People that have homosexual desires are just like people tempted by wrong heterosexual desires. They are not sinning until they act upon those desires in some manner.

Allowing gay marriages is an insult to marriage. You are saying that people who perform sex in a disgusting and perverted manner, who wallow in filth, can have a union that is equivalent to marriage. By definition, sex is used to be procreative AND to show true love between a marred couple. There is an and there, not an or. If this sounds harsh it is only because it is stating the truth.

All civil rights must be subject to moral judgement. No one has a right to immorality. Morals are not subjective. True moral judgements are facts, not opinions. Too many people are confused by a the so-called separation of church and state that does not, and should not, exist. All civil law and civil rights must be subject to morality. Otherwise, we will life in total chaos.

Another quote:
"The natural sex partner for a man is a woman, and the natural sex partner for a woman is a man. Thus, people have the corresponding intuition concerning homosexuality that they do about bestiality—that it is wrong because it is unnatural. "

And one more quote:
"Many homosexuals argue that they have not chosen their condition, but that they were born that way, making homosexual behavior natural for them.

But because something was not chosen does not mean it was inborn. Some desires are acquired or strengthened by habituation and conditioning instead of by conscious choice. For example, no one chooses to be an alcoholic, but one can become habituated to alcohol. Just as one can acquire alcoholic desires (by repeatedly becoming intoxicated) without consciously choosing them, so one may acquire homosexual desires (by engaging in homosexual fantasies or behavior) without consciously choosing them.

Since sexual desire is subject to a high degree of cognitive conditioning in humans (there is no biological reason why we find certain scents, forms of dress, or forms of underwear sexually stimulating), it would be most unusual if homosexual desires were not subject to a similar degree of cognitive conditioning.

Even if there is a genetic predisposition toward homosexuality (and studies on this point are inconclusive), the behavior remains unnatural because homosexuality is still not part of the natural design of humanity. It does not make homosexual behavior acceptable; other behaviors are not rendered acceptable simply because there may be a genetic predisposition toward them."

I guess it's just another way that religion has begun to change over the years, and some things that used to be considered very wrong are gradually accepted.
Religion isn't changing, we are.

So because alot of people decide to use thier right hand, suddenly those who use thier left hand have a defect? What does that make people who can use both? Are they half defective, or just a little less defective?
This just has to do with the genetics of dominant and recessive traits, it is not a defect, being left handed is just the recessive trait.

counter-productive to you. Know what I think, 6 billion or whatever crazy number of people on planet earth is obviously, how can i put it... TO ****ING MUCH. What is more screaming mouths in this world? There is no use for the thousands of unemployed people, thousands of starving. they do not work, they do not eat they take up space.

homosexuality? maybe its natures way of telling us, to QUIT HAVING SO MANY ****ING CHILDREN.
Homosexuality has existed even before Christianity or Judiasm for that matter. If it is nature's way of saying stop having so many children why has it been practiced by various people since the population human life on earth was rather small.
Also, does too many people on the earth give us the right to act immoral. Just because you think there are too many humans doesn't mean you can just go killing them (not implying gay marriage is murder or anything, it is just an example).

So if they can control themselves, we have no problems. we shall expect them to never do what they are biologicaly told to do, but instead everyone who we deem "right" can do whatever we feel that some god says is only right
Once again, if you feel the urge to kill someone does that give you the right to kill them?

God an unknown number of gays and lesbians cannot have equal rights everyone else can. Even though everyone is "created equal"
You should be respectful to all people, as I stated before, it is not a sin to be homosexual, it is a sin to act on your homosexual desires.

Then when you look back, to say Greece where it was common for men and women to be homosexual and bisexual. Where in certian areas you were encouraged to be a homosexual, having sex with women only to reproduce. Yet Homosexuality is a defect, and all these people, even the famous names who created the most famous paintings and sculptures during the Renaissance are all defective.
Everybody commits sins, if you can point out a single person in the entire history of the world that has never committed a sin than please tell me one. Al humans are flawed because they listen to their immoral desires and sin from them.
Note: Any person other than Mary + Jesus.

The Bible is not Gods book. the Bible was written by man, it is nothing more than a book of fairy tales and myths. The Bible was printed, and everthing relating to it in "the name of God" is nothing more than the catholic church testing its powers on the teeming masses. the pathetic religious idiots who beleive what they are told. who writes history for you to read?
The bible was written through infallibility in the church's sense. If you do not understand it then look it up. I have posted in other posts that the bible needs to be understood, not read literally, go read what i've posted here:
"http://www.battleforums.com/showthread.php?t=81288"

You know, Black~Enthusiasm, there are far too many people on this planet. FAR too many. And heterosexuals are just having more and more children. Is this a problem? Yes it is. If this keeps up heterosexuals will bring the human race to it's knees, or if it isn't already completely wipe it out.

Secondly, AIDS and other stds are spread a lot by heterosexuals and unprotected. Gay guys are FAR more likely to use protection than str8 guys are, and are therefore safer even especially since str8 guys have the added threat of pregnancy.
Does this give us the right to act immorally?

Marriage is a sacrid thing but divorce is allowed. You're sposed to spend the rest of your life with that person.
Divorce is taught against.

You do realize that there are about a billion types of Christianity, right?
I believe he was refering to the major sects of each, for there are many sects of each of those, not just Christianity.

wrong. i can argue that marraige is NOT a religious institution. why is it not religious? it is a government controlled program, and the government is, and should stay SECULAR.

marraige may have started off as a religious thing, but now that the government has adoptedit it must STAY secular.
Marriage is still a religious institution, if your marriage is not blessed by the church then your marriage is not morally valid.
 

Tipsy

Respected Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2003
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
2
Location
Washington D.C
Note: Ran out of space in previous post.

Now why again can they not be privileged to these? The government does not control the bedroom between two legal, consenting adults.
Just because the government believes gay marriage should be banned it doesn not agree with the church on 100% of the teaching about gay marriage.

It isnt about the benefits, not totally. It is about discrimination and prejudice. They are no different, they have every right to a legal marriage and not just a civil union. How is this different than the school segregation of the past
You (as in everyone, not specifically you) should not be prejudice against gays because everybody sins and this is no different. It may be wrong, but it is not any reason to be prejudice.

I've decided long ago that women can not truely understand men. Thus making heterosexuality a minor sham in many, many ways. Can any of you prove otherwise? It would be really quite hard to do.
Responsibility is more important than understanding of the opposite sex in marriage.

Maybe you should actually do a little research on gay guy -> straight girl relationships before you accuse me of that, mkay B~E? It'll make you look a little less silly.
He is actually closer to being right than you are, so take your own advice.

stop argueing over a ****ing word. marrige, civil union, who the hell cares? it's about the ****ing marrige benefits, the sharing of finances, the liabilities, the living will issues, insurance, legal rights, god damn the list goes on. But since you can't be married legally if you are gay, you cant do any of the shit above even if you are in a "civil union". I hate when this shit goes into "OMG ARE GAYS THAT WAY AT CONCEPTION OR DO THEY JUST WAKE UP ONE DAY AND SAY 'OMG I GET HORNY FROM THE SAME SEX!'?" because that is not the point of the argument. The question is should we be wasting perfectly good parchment and ink on an amendment that is immoral and completely retarded in the first place? I mean why not make an amendment banning gay fantasies? OMG! YOU THOUGHT ABOUT BEING GAY DEATH ROW 4U!
Obviously by this thread it shows that many people even here at battle forums care. For me marriage is about a union between me, a wife, and God, than the marriage benefits.

Marriage, while perhaps coming from religious roots, has become much more than that because of the legal benefits coming with it. You are married by Law now, not by the Church.
By the church's teachings marriage is the same as it has always been, today's societies just try to manipulate the word.
 

The_Raven7

Member!
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
Website
www.ytmnd.com
Allowing gay marriages is an insult to marriage. You are saying that people who perform sex in a disgusting and perverted manner, who wallow in filth, can have a union that is equivalent to marriage. By definition, sex is used to be procreative AND to show true love between a marred couple. There is an and there, not an or. If this sounds harsh it is only because it is stating the truth.
All civil rights must be subject to moral judgement. No one has a right to immorality. Morals are not subjective. True moral judgements are facts, not opinions. Too many people are confused by a the so-called separation of church and state that does not, and should not, exist. All civil law and civil rights must be subject to morality. Otherwise, we will life in total chaos.
Guess what? Religion is an opinion, not a fact. If it was a fact we would have to take all of the world's religions and merge them into one and use the combined morals. Guess what? "sex in a disgusting and perverted manner" is also an opinion. Also how is it an "insult to marrige" when GAYS HAVE MORE SUCCESSFUL LOVE LIVES THAN MOST STRAIGHT PEOPLE! That is a proven fact that I didn't get out of a religious text. I also love how it's disgusting and perverted when most gays (even the butch ones, male and female) have been studied to have a higher inclination to bathing than most straight active people (and of course lazy people are usually dirty by default...)

Also, by no means do you have the right to tell us what morals are, when you just finish telling us your "opinions" on how disgusting and perverted it is. The puritan streak in this country needs to be wiped off with a huge, soggy, possibly with "gay ejaculation", asswipe.
 

Lights

Member!
Joined
Nov 12, 2003
Messages
898
Reaction score
1
Location
Beyond Religion and Science
Website
Visit site
Allowing gay marriages is an insult to marriage. You are saying that people who perform sex in a disgusting and perverted manner, who wallow in filth, can have a union that is equivalent to marriage. By definition, sex is used to be procreative AND to show true love between a marred couple. There is an and there, not an or. If this sounds harsh it is only because it is stating the truth.

What? What truth are you talking about? Sex and marriage are different things, and one must not be married to have sexual relations. Likewise, one can be married without having sexual relations. Who are you to tell someone that their sexual preferences are 'disgusting' and 'perverted'? That, my friend, is something called "opinion." Being so, please keep yourself from doing it. However, keep that opinion within your weekly Bible Study and away from the Court of Law.

Disallowing two persons marriage based on the fact a religious belief deems is 'disgusting' is hilarious. My religious belief is that two obese persons enaging in sexual intercourse is disgusting. Lets ban them from marrying to protect that sanctity of marriage! Sound harsh? Well, that is exactly what you are saying. If you want to disallow homosexual couples from attending your church, than do so. You cannot disallow them from living and marrying in this country. For the reason of something called "liberty."


If you want to ban gay marriages because your religion opposes it, what about non-believers? Should they be allowed to marry? Surely their lifestyles are ultimately as 'disgusting and perverted' as a homosexual's. It isn't about the religion anymore. You are married by law. Most marriages these days couldn't give two shits about Christianity, and that is no basis to ban them.
 

B~E

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2003
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
3
Location
Montreal, in a ghost town.
Website
Visit site
amrtin77 said:
you know exactly why, dont act as if you dont. ive said it at least 3 times in this thread. the state is SECULAR, they cannot use religion as a reason for any law. 14th amendment i believe?


.

But what wrong does it do if a religious institution give legal benefits to its user ? Sure, it contradict the 14th amendment, but its doesn't do anything wrong it itself.
 

amrtin77

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2002
Messages
2,750
Reaction score
0
Location
United States
Website
Visit site
yes it does because your not only married by the church. i dont give a **** if a church gives you 100 dollars to get married. BUT WHEN THE GOVERNMENT GIVES BENIFITS LIKE TAX CUTS FOR MARRIED COUPLES, YOU MUST BE SECULAR ABOUT IT.

BE, your a smart guy, i know you understand what im saying. why do you continue to say that religion should be allowed into the way our government runs?


and tipsy, no one gives a **** about what the church has to say. im not christian. nor do i follow any specific religion. there goes your whole argument.
 

amrtin77

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2002
Messages
2,750
Reaction score
0
Location
United States
Website
Visit site
the government cannot give a religious institution more say in deciding laws than anyone else. you cannot create laws because of a religion, because what if everyone doesnt believe in that religion? they should just suck it up and live with a law based on a religion that has no backing, just because? thats stupid. we have the freedom of religion and no religion should be forced on anyone by the government. thats why.
 

B~E

BattleForums Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2003
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
3
Location
Montreal, in a ghost town.
Website
Visit site
amrtin77 said:
the government cannot give a religious institution more say in deciding laws than anyone else. you cannot create laws because of a religion, because what if everyone doesnt believe in that religion? they should just suck it up and live with a law based on a religion that has no backing, just because? thats stupid. we have the freedom of religion and no religion should be forced on anyone by the government. thats why.
But there are other alternativ to christian marriage, its not like its the official one. You have civil marriage, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top