CA Prop. 8 shot down

  • Thread starter Thread starter WinterBorn
  • Start date Start date
Alias said:
I disagree. No respect for queers. No one should be mistreated, but no respect for sexual deviants. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Show respect for Christians. Call it whatever you want to call it, but don't call it marriage.
Click to expand...

So it is strictly about the Christian religion? Fine, then no gov't benefits at all for any marriage.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So Christian women are not allowed to divorce.
1 Corinthians, Chapter 7:10
But unto the married I give charge, [yea] not I, but the Lord, That the wife depart not from her husband

And Christian men are not allowed to divorce.
Mark, Chapter 10:11
And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her:

Is the following adhered to, by Christians:
The New Testament associates remarriage after divorce and adultery. Marriage is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman. Divorce does not break the bond, so remarriage is viewed as adultery except in cases where unfaithfulness was the reason for the divorce (Matt. 5:32; Mark 10:11-12). The marriage bond is broken by death (Rom. 7:3; 1 Cor. 7:39).


The Old Testament support pologamy; because the New Testament upheld it also.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"


Now unless if you've got something to show that Christians still follow all the teachings of the New Testament, regarding marriage, then your presentation is false.
Click to expand...

Yes, Christians get divorced every day and remarry. Jesus said you can divorce if there is adultery. You have shown nothing that is against that. As far as polygamy, that is not Christian and never condoned in the New Testament.

Remember, the church is not in the Old Testament. The scripture in Mark is when the law was still in force. The New Testament doesn't begin until after the law dies on the cross and after the resurrection.
 
WinterBorn said:
And that is fine. I have no problem with a religion refusing to recognize gay marriage. But that is not what we are discussing here. All the straight couples that were married by a Justice of the Peace still get the gov't benefits.

The government cannot deny gays the right to marry based solely on your faith or mine.
Click to expand...

Funny, not all "Christians" think it is sinful.
 
Onceler said:
Really? You sat down, and weighed the pro's & cons of being attracted to one sex or the other, and made the conscious choice to be attracted to girls?

I'll answer - no, you didn't. And I think you know you didn't.

Haters gonna hate.....
Click to expand...

No, I never sat down and analyzed it. I saw a picture of a naked woman and immediately got a hard on and felt funny all over. I was about 9. I don't know how you equate that to "hate". What time did you start drinking today?
 
Alias said:
Nope. Companionship AND children....."God said to Adam and Eve, Be fruitful and multiply". God didn't say to Adam and Steve..."Be Fruity and a gadfly".
Click to expand...

First of all, I hope you understand that the gov't cannot base its laws or who gets benefits solely on the Holy Bible.

Second of all, the story of Adam and Eve, while beautiful, cannot be used in this argument. First, because it is a story and not the actual, physical truth. And second, because they were not even the only people in the biblical story at the time. Even the bible does not claim that everyone is descended from Adam and Eve.
 
WinterBorn said:
While their sexual acts may be what you focus on, the fact is that they have long term, loving relationships that should be granted the same benefits as those of straight couples.
Click to expand...

Any two consenting adults can "have long term, loving relationships that should be granted the same benefits as those of straight couples". Nothing special about being homosexual that would justify such special treatment.
Breeding pairs of birds can "have long term, loving relationships". But the purpose of building the nest is so that when a fertilized egg drops from the female, it doesnt fall to the ground and break. Human civilization, culture, tradition, religion and law has encouraged and subsidized this nest building process.

Now I dont deny, that doing the same for the two gay penguins who have built a nest and now sitting upon an egg shaped rock, doing their best to mimick their heterosexual counterparts, no doubt in some pathetic attempt to gain acceptance from the other penguins, might indeed help the gay penguins feel more adequate as they sit upon their rock. But the same arguments would apply to the two older bachelors who are tired of the yearly routine of putting out more offspring, even though they have no desire to mimick heterosexuals. Or the single widowed female and her widowed mother who have joined together to raise their offspring and also with no desire to mimick heterosexuals, but instead to provide and care for their children/grandchildren.

The desire to ape heterosexual couples doesnt create a right to marriage.
 
WinterBorn said:
You asked about sexual arousal, not about fertility. They are not the same thing.

You claimed you got a hardon from looking at a magazine when you were 9 years old. Had you gone thru puberty so early?
Click to expand...

Is it biologically possible for me to impregnate a woman at age 9?
 
Alias said:
This comes from the queer who calls Black republicans "Uncle Toms" and "Sellouts".
Click to expand...


Queer? Your mama and daddy were "queer". Black Republicans are , indeed, "sellouts" and "Uncle Toms and Aunt Susies". What else could they be? The Republican platform is geared to favor "whites" and if you want to be more specific, "conservative white males". Given that, any black that aligns him or herself to a platform which views him or her as a second or third class citizen is a abject fool. But as much as Republicans hate on gays, gay Republicans keep falling out of closets and bathrooms, and interviewing Bush's press secretary. Such hypocrisy shouldn't go unnoticed or unrewarded.
 
dixon76710 said:
Any two consenting adults can "have long term, loving relationships that should be granted the same benefits as those of straight couples". Nothing special about being homosexual that would justify such special treatment.
Breeding pairs of birds can "have long term, loving relationships". But the purpose of building the nest is so that when a fertilized egg drops from the female, it doesnt fall to the ground and break. Human civilization, culture, tradition, religion and law has encouraged and subsidized this nest building process.

Now I dont deny, that doing the same for the two gay penguins who have built a nest and now sitting upon an egg shaped rock, doing their best to mimick their heterosexual counterparts, no doubt in some pathetic attempt to gain acceptance from the other penguins, might indeed help the gay penguins feel more adequate as they sit upon their rock. But the same arguments would apply to the two older bachelors who are tired of the yearly routine of putting out more offspring, even though they have no desire to mimick heterosexuals. Or the single widowed female and her widowed mother who have joined together to raise their offspring and also with no desire to mimick heterosexuals, but instead to provide and care for their children/grandchildren.

The desire to ape heterosexual couples doesnt create a right to marriage.
Click to expand...

The fact that the are human individuals with rights does though. They just want to be people withe right to live the way they choose, not based upon anyone else's religious beliefs.
 
poet said:
Queer? Your mama and daddy were "queer". Black Republicans are , indeed, "sellouts" and "Uncle Toms and Aunt Susies". What else could they be? The Republican platform is geared to favor "whites" and if you want to be more specific, "conservative white males". Given that, any black that aligns him or herself to a platform which views him or her as a second or third class citizen is a abject fool. But as much as Republicans hate on gays, gay Republicans keep falling out of closets and bathrooms, and interviewing Bush's press secretary. Such hypocrisy shouldn't go unnoticed or unrewarded.
Click to expand...

And some of you idiots think I'm weird. LOL.
 
Alias said:
Yes, Christians get divorced every day and remarry. Jesus said you can divorce if there is adultery. You have shown nothing that is against that. As far as polygamy, that is not Christian and never condoned in the New Testament.

Remember, the church is not in the Old Testament. The scripture in Mark is when the law was still in force. The New Testament doesn't begin until after the law dies on the cross and after the resurrection.
Click to expand...

Are you attempting to say that all Christian divorces are because of adultry??
You really might want to rethink the stand you're taking on this one.

As to the difference between the OT and the NT, it would seem that you are ignoring Matthew 5:17-18.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished."
 
Alias said:
Is it biologically possible for me to impregnate a woman at age 9?
Click to expand...

Perhaps not...but it's totally irresponsible of your parents allowing you to be in such a position, in the first damn place. Always talking about the irresponsibility of blacks....having children out of wedlock, unwed mothers, and baby daddies, and here you are posturing and being defiant, in defense of the height of precociousness and irresponsibility. How about you being "horse-whipped" for even suggesting such?
 
Alias said:
I am not rigid on the term "Choose". It can be developed through environmental or upbringing or any number of factors. Sometimes people get confused. The reason people are more accepting of queers today is through societal pressure. We have been bombarded with pressure to accept homosexuality as normal, rather than being persuaded through intelligent research and science. It's basically been a media brainwashing in the last 40 years. Nothing more.
Click to expand...

Homosexuality has existed, in every culture, for all of recorded history. And yet you claim all of them chose to be gay or were raised badly and ended up that way?

I am straight and my sister is gay. Same parents, same home life, same social pressures ect ect.
 
Alias said:
I never said I had a right to be unoffended. I do have the right to determine who teaches my children.
Click to expand...

You have the right to decide where your kids go to school or to homeschool them.

But you do not have the right to decide that gays cannot teach.
 
Alias said:
Nope. I pay my taxes for their education. I will work against the queer lobby as a free American.
Click to expand...

And the education that you pay for with your taxes is available to you. What is NOT available to you is to decide who can and who cannot have a career as a teacher based on your own ignorance or bigotry.
 
Alias said:
And some of you idiots think I'm weird. LOL.
Click to expand...

No stupid bitch. Most of my facebook friends (and at last count I had 1342), think like me, or else I wouldn't consider them friends. It's conventional wisdom. I rail against the Republican mindset on Rick Perry's facebook page, in various right wing organizations on facebook. Herman Cain, Allen West, Apostle Claver, are but a few examples of house negroes, toting Massa's water, singing his songs, and speaking his platform, as if it were their own. Cain is now history, West district has been re-configured to favor Democrats, and Apostle Claver is a modern-day Stephin Fetchit, from Houston. Any questions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top