Why are y'all still arguing? Just let the s play hide the sausage in the pooper and be done with it. If they want to get married and then get divorced only to let the skank of the relationship take everything then who cares? I wish they didn't let straight people get married, then maybe I would still have my car!
I think the "I'll vote as I see fit and if my side gains the most votes, it should be the law" argument lost in around 1865. It's quite clear that the vote of the majority won't (and shouldn't) always control, particularly where that vote results in arbitrary limitations on the rights of minority groups.
I stated that much myself...
As for my reasons.... they would never be broadly accepted by the forum's liberals... pfffftttt... they would first have to believe that GOD existed in order to accept that He could be a unifying influence in the home; hence preventing their failure. Obviously not all heterosexual families fall in that category. And not all 'self-proclaimed Christian' families actually live by the Christian ideals either, which would make them just as susceptible to failure.... But that's another can of worms...sexuals obviously couldn't fall in the first pool... hence the dilemma.
Here's a thought: The fact that so many posters are preoccupied with what people do in bed is precisely the root of phobia and anti-gay marriage sentiment.
If you knew what your straight friends did in bed you might not want to support their marriages either? But so what if they're into bdsm, water sports, or swinging? It's their business, and no one asks them about it before they apply for a marriage license. Some gay men like anal sex but lots don't. Some lesbians use toys, some don't. Whatever. Get over it. It's no one's business what anyone else does in bed and this should not be the basis for what civil rights (read: rights awarded by the government) are handed out. If civil rights are being offered - including marriage rights - they should be offered regardless of what people do in bed and with whom.
sexuals cannot believe that God exists? sexuals cannot believe in God? sexuals cannot be Christians? sexuals cannot believe that God could be a unifying influence in the home?I stated that much myself...
As for my reasons.... they would never be broadly accepted by the forum's liberals... pfffftttt... they would first have to believe that GOD existed in order to accept that He could be a unifying influence in the home; hence preventing their failure. Obviously not all heterosexual families fall in that category. And not all 'self-proclaimed Christian' families actually live by the Christian ideals either, which would make them just as susceptible to failure.... But that's another can of worms...
God is required for a home to not fail?
How would one codify this requirement to your satisfaction?
I need no such satisfaction; to the extent that you're responding to me, I disagree with the initial premise.
I am, however, incredulous to Phenomanul's apparent notion that gays are categorically incapable of meeting that standard.
I was just piling on with your questions.
I find it hilarious that sexuals need to prove all this while heterosexuals don't have to do squat.
I don't really care about what people do in their homes. I used to, I mean, I used to think about what females did by themselves. A lot. Anyways.
Regardless of caring or not, I do care whether or not the state cares or not. And you should too. I'm not sure when Christianity became centered on other people's sins and not your own. Probably about the first time a politician was seeking to gain or retain office.
Anyways, why is it so exceedingly hard for some to separate religious beliefs from political beliefs? (And while this topic is sex and afflicts generally the right wing, there are plenty of vestiges of religious fundamentalism which inflict the left wing in its worldview, at least in the US).
I don't think chumpy cares about winning the argument. Maybe, sometimes but not most.
I find this claim irrelevant because we all know that sexuals can already raise children, even without a marriage. Plenty of gay women have given birth to their own children. Are you planing to stop this somehow?
Right because sexuality is a choice. It is a sexual act. there is no heritage s come from or a culture.
Sure they can... BTW that comment was in reference to some of this forum's liberal members.
Sure they can... even Satan believes in GOD; that doesn't mean that he adhere's to GOD's standards. Being sinless is not a requisite for belief in GOD. Anyone can believe in Him. For that matter, and something you obviously excluded from my previous response was that I also suggested that many self-proclaimed Christians don't "walk the talk."
They would have to be convicted by the Holy Spirit that their sexual lifestyles are an abomination before GOD... Sure, no one is perfect or devoid of sin... we're all in need of GOD's forgiveness; the premise then would be whether or not a sexual individual could live with that constant duality. Constantly having to reconcile GOD's statues with the deviant desires of their heart... it simply doesn't work. I personally know three sexual individuals who have come to our church over the years.... one of them couldn't live with this dilemma, and left... the other two are happily married with partners of the opposite sex; they share their testimony of their past life by describing it as a life of sexual entrapment... always suggesting they had the choice...
Strawman based on the premise of the answer above.
But hey, I know these aren't the popular answers, in a world where people are afraid to state what they believe. Do I look down on gays? No... I have flaws of my own, and have never been in a position to judge my 'brother'. That doesn't mean I have to forcebly believe that something that goes against GOD's righteousness is 'normal'.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 12-19-2009 at 02:16 PM.
All people are accountable before GOD for their actions... we're also held accountable for our children... I didn't suggest otherwise... you simply glossed over the fact where I stated that heterosexual marriages were also far from perfect.... conveniently so, I would add...
Last edited by Phenomanul; 12-19-2009 at 12:59 AM.
I'm not trying to deny a mother the right to bear and raise her children...
But the opposite scenario with two sexual men, where obviously neither can bear children of their own... would you let them raise your children ploto? That contextual environment is kind of disturbing... even if both men are nurturing and/or well-intentioned.
So are you proposing a God test for them too before they get married?
Whatever hoops you want sexuals to jump through, you need to apply them to heterosexuals too if you don't want to be labeled a hypocrite.
You sure are judging their fitness as parents.
I know gay men who would be a much better father to my child than his/her heterosexual father is.
There are many heterosexual couples who live in disturbing environments.That contextual environment is kind of disturbing... even if both men are nurturing and/or well-intentioned.
Last edited by ploto; 12-19-2009 at 04:22 AM.
All Christians live with a duality everyday- at least those who are actually self-aware.
Rocking the Advent avatar. And this forum.
who is them? The test for marriage now is through god. To redefine it would make it a govt. process and not a religious practice.
Am I understanding you correctly? Marriage is viable through "god".
Sinning and living in sin are different.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
