PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Gay Rights Debates
     Gay Marriage

Topic Jump
Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
admin

|      |       Report Post



Administrator
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

Do you support legalized Gay Marriage? 

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/gay_marriage.HTM

(Edited by %1034118689%.)
 


Posts: 31 | Posted: 4:26 PM on May 1, 2002 | IP
maria

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Mariage is for people who believe in God.  If you don't believe in god, why get married.  If you do, then you know that having sexual acts with the same sex is a sin and marriage to the same sex is not prohibited in the bible.  There are other ways of being committed to someone besides marraige.


-------
DSR
 


Posts: 12 | Posted: 06:32 AM on June 13, 2002 | IP
holsbeke

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

NO


-------
Patricia Holsbeke
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 9:02 PM on June 22, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

who gets to define what marriage is? I say it's in the eye of the beholder, and nobody, certainly not religious extremists, have the right to restrict it to themselves.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:20 PM on August 14, 2002 | IP
Day_Am_STR8

|      |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Personally - I rather see more people sitting and eating manure instead of doing same sex incounters.

After all it should be MORE acceptable . . .   Consider that more flies and other insects do that than ALL living things that are involved in same sex sexual acts!

If you want to be compared to a dog that does other same sex dogs - then move to the pound!




-------
Pro 23:9 Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of thy words.
 


Posts: 20 | Posted: 09:26 AM on August 20, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

What are you talking about? Since when did "normalcy" become a prerequisite to enjoying civil rights. It is wholly irrelevant how many people do a certain action, if they are in the US, they deserve equal protection under law. It's that simple.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 11:15 AM on August 20, 2002 | IP
Lost

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If they wanna get married, fine. I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to. They have the same rights anyone else does.
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 9:47 PM on September 7, 2002 | IP
tsmith2771

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Depends on what way you view marriage.  If you see it as a bond between someone under god then no, it isn't right.  If you see it as a piece of paper from a court house, then whatever.


-------
"I have no interest in making blacks equal to whites, they are of a lesser quality and this I am sure of." -Abraham Lincoln
"You don't win a war by dying for your country, you win a war by making the other person die for theirs." -General George Patton
 


Posts: 372 | Posted: 01:19 AM on September 9, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So you are saying that the bible catagorically denies a whole set of people the ability to bond under God? Somehow I doubt that's what God had in mind.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 2:56 PM on September 9, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Personally, id rather see people eating manure than two men getting it on.  But if they want to do that, its their choice.  Not every one beelieves in god, and marriage is not just a christian thing.  I have been to two wiccan marriages, and no one who went was christian.  Does this mean god thinks wiccan people are christian too?  No, of course not.  Gays are not aliens, they are humans who are happy the way they are.  Marriage is just another way of saying, "I wanna be with you forever."  Can i not say the same thing?  Gay marriage is something that should always be allowed.  Saying it shouldnt be a a bias.  A major one.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 3:58 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

People also take christianity too seriously.  We shouldnt have to swear on the bible, or have 'in god we trust' on our coins, or even have 'one nation under god' in the pledge.  Seperation of church and state, hello???  Since when was christianity the basis of our governement?  It never was, or at least should have been.  What if satan is really 'god' and god is satan, just fmore popular?  Then all you christians are going to hell!! no offense... but still, religion is nothing that can be proven, as anything else.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 4:00 PM on September 24, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I believe the Bill of Rights stated that we should all be equal.  This should also be true of gays and lesbians.  With over eight bi-sexual friends myself, I can say they are people, just like you.  They may be different than you, but they still deserve the rights all people in America SHOULD enjoy, such as marriage.  Do you really think gay/lesbian people are incapable of love?  Do you think they are so different that they could not be faithful and therefore cannot marry?  If you believe any of this, religion must be clouding your mind.  It's a sad thing when intelligence is obscured by prejudice.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 08:54 AM on September 25, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I agree.  The bill of rights says free for all.  Gays should have their own freedoms as well.  They are not terrorists, or evil devils, they are humans trying to live their lives!  Not all people are christian, thus gay marriage should be allowed!!!


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 08:55 AM on September 25, 2002 | IP
tsmith2771

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

Allowed, but not in a christian church.


-------
"I have no interest in making blacks equal to whites, they are of a lesser quality and this I am sure of." -Abraham Lincoln
"You don't win a war by dying for your country, you win a war by making the other person die for theirs." -General George Patton
 


Posts: 372 | Posted: 6:51 PM on September 25, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

the burden of proof is on opponents to gay adoption/marriage/homosexuality in general. american society is founded on the notion of negative liberty (as posited by John Locke), which states basically that the limits of one person's freedoms is only defined by how those freedoms infringe (or not) on other peoples' freedoms. gays to not have to justify what they want or do; conservatives must give good reasons why they should not be allowed to. religion is not a suitable basis for such a reason, because religious doctrine does not direct law in america (so sayeth the separation of church and state). beyond that, there is no scientific (social, physiological, or otherwise) evidence that supports any claim that there is anything wrong with homosexuality, including gays rights to adoption and marriage. when it comes down to it, one always finds conservatives' arguments are predicated not on any logical thought process, but rather on prejudice (disgust, fear, discomfort, whatever). It always comes back to that. All of their logic is specious. they start with a prejudice, and then just search for arguments that superficially support it. that is no way to pursue truth, or a path towards a better society.

So...in reference to marriage specifically, marriage is actually not a bond under God (not necessarily anyways, and certainly not for atheists/agnostics). Rather it is a legal contract recognized by the American courts. Since the judicial process should be separate from religious doctrine, why should a religious position have any bearing on that civil process? Besides, not all religions even oppose gay marriage or homosexuality in general. When the Mormon Church tried to represent all of religion against the gay activists in Hawaii, a Buddhist sect stepped in and reminded them it has more members then them in Hawaii, and has no problem with same-sex marriage.

Finally, the notion that it is unnatural is fallacious. Roughly 1/3 of known species in the world exhibit gay/bisexual behavior, including same-sex coupling for life. Ask an animal behaviorist.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 05:48 AM on September 26, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

but gays are people.  They wanna live their lives together.  Let them, be they christian, agnostic or atheist.  Are they not contributers to our government?  they work, dont they?  THEY ARE JUST PEOPLE!!!


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 10:30 AM on September 26, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

It seems to me that the original idea of marriage was based on giving people an environment where they could have and raise kids, and hopefuly, in times of past, many kids. In present times, marriage is often between people who are physical incapable of child-bearing, people too old to have children, and people who for various reason, don't want to. If we allow these people to marry, why should we not allow homosexuals and bisexuals to marry? The other common purposes of marriage, such as being with someone you can love and trust, still apply to them.

Also, regardless of whether our country thinks it's ethical or not, based on the fundamentals of this country, we must allow it. Either allow it, or change what this country is based on.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:23 PM on September 26, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Exactly.  People are the same, they're just people.  No one should judge you on how you are.  Its the same thing as your best friend not letting you join his club.  It's UNFAIR.  Perhaps life isnt fair, but it should be equal for everyone.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 09:02 AM on September 27, 2002 | IP
mrmazet

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

What you, I, or anyone else thinks or what gay sex looks like is completely irrelivent! It's a matter of rights. And to some, an issue of ethics.
 


Posts: 122 | Posted: 8:33 PM on October 7, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I personally do not wanna think of such things.  But, wouldn't you want to see that if you were gay?  You probably would.  Gay people have every right to have gay man sex if they want.  Its their decision to be gay, as it is for a parent to let a child go to a field trip.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 7:37 PM on October 16, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

this is so simple i cant believe no one thought of it earlier...marriage is defined as a union between a man and a women...therefore gays can not be married per say but rather just      i dont know together i guess...its that simple...yall think to hard.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:00 PM on October 17, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I'm sorry, who defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman??? You think too little. That is a statement predicated on religious belief. That is not a logical argument at all. Definitions change. It's called progress. Try to think of an argument against gay marriage, and then post it. Thanks, come again.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 12:15 PM on October 17, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

no that is what the word means use a dictionary and you will see that for yourslef and since i didnt write the dictionary (people with really good degrees did) you cant say that i think so litlle....but that is what a supreme court judge would probaly rule since the word is defined as a union between a man and a women and the word only means what it is defined as or else it is slang and legal documents do not use slang
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 03:20 AM on October 18, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So because the dictionary has this definition, we should limit the civil rights of an entire category of people. What is more important to you, preserving a defintion just cause that's what's written now, or promoting happiness and liberty to all American citizens? Who cares if people who wrote the dictionary have high degrees?? You have a brain, use it? What are your priorities???


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 05:59 AM on October 18, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

also, from a legal perspective, marriage is whatever the states define it as. So it is absolutely legit for people to lobby the states to change there definition of marriage, or at least allow for an equivelant for gays with another name (VT's "civil unions").


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 1:24 PM on October 18, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

homosexuality is not a sin nor is it imoaral.  please fully ex0plore

http://www.ufmcc.com/notsin/notsin.htm
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 09:31 AM on October 28, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I checked out that website. I am gay, and I didn't even find it that compelling. Just a random guy giving his own totally random unsubstantiated opinion. Nice idea behind it, but he doesn't address a single real challenge to the legitimacy of homosexuality. why i see it, major arguments vs. homosexuality NOT directly linked to religion are 1. it is unnatural (as in not part of evolutionary process), 2. it degrades traditional social values, 3. it can potentially harm children if they are raised in that environment (i.e. have a gay parent), 4. gay are mean ol' child molesters, 5. it is a psychiatric illness, 6. it is yucky. My answers are: 1. evolution refers to a species/group, not individuals, so just because gays don't procreate doesn't mean they are not integral to the evolution of the species, plus almost half of all recorded species in the world exhibit homosexual behavior, and do we really need more babies anyways?? hello overpoulation 2. what traditional social values? like a 50% plus divorce rate among heterosexual marriages?? anyway, lots of of things that are traditional should be thrown out. being an old institution does not imbue that insitution with eternal value (hello slavery!!), 3. studies show no difference b/n children of straights or gays, except that children of gays are more likely to EXPERIMENT sexually, which does not mean that are made gay, it means they don't see any taboo about being open to new things (but statistically are not more likely to longterm identify with homosexual orientation), 4. most sexual offenders are straight males, and even most sexual offenders of small boys are men in a heterosexual relationship with that boy's mother or sister, plus there is more to the difference b/n homosexuality as an orientation and pedophilia as a disease than just the liberal-minded conspiracy. pedophilia is a psychological illness with clinically diagnosed symptoms related to it besides just the desire to pet little kids (oh wait, I remember, psychiatrists are all just gay jewish liberal scum, and the catholic right are all experts on the human brain...), 5. i already freaking covered that, but one other thing, higher rates of depression among gays is not an indicator that it is an illness, but could just as easily be a result of social pressure during the already naturally tense time of sexual self-identification during adolescence, and finally my favorite, 6. who the heck cares if you think it's yucky??? civil freedoms are not determined by one group's aesthetic preference. and to those people who say, 'what people do in their own bedroom is their business' and think that makes them a liberal, think again! straights don't keep it in the bedroom! why should they be able to kiss in the park but we can't, because, alas, some dad might have to explain that to his kid?! apparently, wearing a rainbow necklace, or marching in a parade, is "getting in your face". i just want the world to grow up.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 10:23 AM on October 28, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

This website made me sick!  This guy has no clue what he is talking about whatsoever!  I hope no one bought these lies.

First of all he says that homosexuals are rejected by the christain church --wrong!! We believe homosexuality is wrong, but the christain church reaches out to gays! not reject them! I have personally worked at a church reaching out to gays living in a poor community, not preaching, not condeming, just painting fences and pulling weeds and letting our actions speak.

Second of all he says that homosexuality is not a sin, lol.  You might also notice that this guy didnt once put scripture in his artical, maybe because he kept, I dunno, finding stuff like ...

"Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin." - Leviticus 18:22

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders" -1 Corinthians 6:9


This person wants to make the church to conform to his modern ideals.  He lies expecting people not look into it and take his word for it.  But God says "I am the Lord, and I do not change"

God clearly says that homosexuality is a sin, he clearly says that he doesnt change his mind, this guy is clearly dead wrong.


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 9:31 PM on October 28, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

you may think that homosexuality is wrong, sakata, but where in the Bible does it say "only people that believe in me can get married"?  people that don't believe in God get married on a daily basis.  if there is no belief in God then there is no such thing as sin to that particular person (sin is a religious thing).  homosexuality would not be a sin.  they should be allowed to get married if they so desire.    


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 2:44 PM on October 29, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sakata states: "Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin." - Leviticus 18:22
Im reading from the text right now, it actually says "thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination." slightly less harsh.

Sakata states: "But God says "I am the Lord, and I do not change""
I refer you to that really funny post in some forum talking about what that statement would really mean if true. How much would it cost to sell my daughter into slavery again?


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 2:48 PM on October 29, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

very sublte sense of humor and very nice point dsa.  i very much agree


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 2:53 PM on October 29, 2002 | IP
Prometheus

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Being new here I probably shouldn't say this, but it is truly amazing to me that some people quote the bible and then act as if that should be accepted as proof that what they argue is true because it says so in the bible.

Neither religious belief or any sacred text can serve as valid logical proof.  This is because their assumed truths have not been proven.  Just because one feels something is true in their heart of hearts does not make it true logically.  Saying something is true because it is within any sacred text is as valid logically as saying something is true because you want to believe it.

The way most people defend using scriptures as a source of proof is to say that it is unerring because of divine authorship or inspiration.  This idea depends upon proving that a divine being exists and then that the divine being caused the writing of the document.  For both of these arguments the scripture in question itself can not be used as proof because that is circular reasoning and logically invalid.

Can you prove, with reasoning not based on religious experience or holy scripture, that God exists?  And if you can do that, then can it be proven that a certain holy scripture and religion is divinely influenced and thus serves as a source of truth?  Until you can logically answer yes to both of these question no religious experience or sacred text can serve as logical proof of anything.  


-------
"There are seven sins in the world: Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience, Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, and politics without principle." --Mahatma Gandhi
 


Posts: 22 | Posted: 09:11 AM on October 30, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am not saying that, because it is my religon, everyone should have to live by it, we have free choice, but this artical was trying to say that there is no problem with homosexuality, that is what I proved false.
and to what you said dsa, I know that one was from the old testiment, thats why I added one from the new testiment as well.  As for God being unchanging, he is.  We would still have to live by the rules of the old testiment and pay sacrafices and rituals for or sins if Jesus had not come and been the ultimate sacrafice.
Think of it like this, say everytime you sinned you went a in debt a little.  Now, the people that lived before Jesus had to make sacrafices and do certain customs to pay back this debt of their sin.  But when Jesus came and died as the ultimate sacrafice, we have only to ask God, and he will put the money in to get us out of debt through Jesus.  So you see, God did not change, a price still has to be paid for our sin, but fortunate for us, Jesus will pay it for us if we ask him.

(Edited by Sakata 11/1/2002 at 11:45 PM).


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 11:44 PM on November 1, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sakata:  You didn't prove anything false.  All you did was quote the bible which is not proof of anything.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 04:59 AM on November 2, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am arguing weather homosexuality is a sin, so obeviously if you dont believe in the bible this doesnt apply.  This artical is saying you can be a good christain and practice homosexuality, which is a lie, and in quoting the bible, I proved it was a lie.


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 2:49 PM on November 2, 2002 | IP
mrmazet

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Sakata at 11:44 PM on November 1, 2002 :
I am not saying that, because it is my religon, everyone should have to live by it, we have free choice, but this artical was trying to say that there is no problem with homosexuality, that is what I proved false.
and to what you said dsa, I know that one was from the old testiment, thats why I added one from the new testiment as well.  As for God being unchanging, he is.  We would still have to live by the rules of the old testiment and pay sacrafices and rituals for or sins if Jesus had not come and been the ultimate sacrafice.
Think of it like this, say everytime you sinned you went a in debt a little.  Now, the people that lived before Jesus had to make sacrafices and do certain customs to pay back this debt of their sin.  But when Jesus came and died as the ultimate sacrafice, we have only to ask God, and he will put the money in to get us out of debt through Jesus.  So you see, God did not change, a price still has to be paid for our sin, but fortunate for us, Jesus will pay it for us if we ask him.


Wait, that's not changing?

If I own a store, and my return policy is that you just have to bring it back and I take it, later becomes you bringing it back and filling out a short form and me taking it, then would that not be my return policy changing?

How about for something in comparison with the dietary laws of staying koshar being omited with the forming of Christianity:

If I stopped taking returns at all, how would I be able to claim I didn't change my store's policies?
 


Posts: 122 | Posted: 9:17 PM on November 2, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sakata: should gays in America be allowed by law to be married with all the economic and political benefits that come with that?
Yes or No?
should gays in America be allowed by law to adopt children?
Yes or No?
If your only response is religious (which it has been so far), and you agree not every one in America believes in your religious beliefs, what then?
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 08:36 AM on November 3, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That last one was me. I am back kids!!!! My internet has been REALLY slow, cause I live in china right now. so hopefully i will be able to write more often again.


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 08:41 AM on November 3, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Every side of the debate is a good one... I have a debate tomorrow in school and my assignment is pro for homosexual marriages to be recognized in all 50 states... Now I have a big problem with this because I have always been anti-gay.  I see your points, everybodies, and all this will no doubt help me in my debate tomorrow but I still have one question:

If being gay was ok and meant to be, or an acceptable course to take by whoever created life,  then why does it take a man and a woman to reproduce?  If everybody turned homo sexual than the natural way of life, (I'm not bringing religion into this) would fail to continue.  It wasn't until recently that artifical fertilization, or artificial insimination (sorry I forget the correct term) and then planting it into a female was possible.. So say everybody went gay thousands of years ago, life would not exist, humanity would all die off.  Now if your going to mess with the natural way of life and change things and practice being a 'god' by sperm banks and such, somehow I don't see how we were meant to do such things.

I hope somebody can see some sense in this, and once again, no I'm not bringing religion into this.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:02 PM on November 3, 2002 | IP
madbilly

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i see since in it guest...after all it is adam and eve not adam and steve....lol


-------
my name is madbilly....what did you expect me to be happy when my name says Mad in it...
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 11:59 PM on November 3, 2002 | IP
Prometheus

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

We keep hearing that homosexuality is a sin because it "says so in the Bible".  The implication is that prejudice has nothing to do with this intepretation; there it is in black and white.  But the truth is that anti-gay interpretations come from a prejudice from an anti-gay society.

In Colossians 3:22 is says "slaves in all things submit to those who are your earthly master."  In 1 Peter 2:18 it says "slaves submit to your masters, not only those who are good and gentle, but also the perverse ones".  These passages not only condone slavery, but command slaves to be obedient to their masters.  If you take these verses at face value, all black slaves that ran away from their masters violated biblical commands.

Romans 13 clearly says that resistance to governing authority is equivalent to rebellion against God.  Does that mean that the founders of the United States sinned by rebelling against Britain (a governing authority).

Can't we all see the hyppcrisy here?  Passages that anti-gay christians don't want to take literally, they don't take literally, ones that they want to take literally they do.  They pick and choose which parts of the bible should be taken literally and which ones should not.  Or they claim the bible is being taken out of context when it doesn't support their narrow views of the world

The idea that religion exists in a bubble and is isolated from social forces and doesn't ever change is a dangerous myth.  As we see with passages that concern slavery, as social forces change, the way that certain bible verses are understood eventually changes or passes away into obscurity.  It will be the same way with homosexuality, the only question is how long will it take.


-------
"There are seven sins in the world: Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience, Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, and politics without principle." --Mahatma Gandhi
 


Posts: 22 | Posted: 04:14 AM on November 4, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

This is for the Guest:
Your argument is essentially the evolution argument. 1. i've already said it, but animal behaviorists observe almost half of all known species display homosexual behavior, and not just being too dumb or horny to distinguish, but even life-long same sex coupling. so is that huge number unnatural? 2. evolution refers to a species, not an individual. an individual in a species does not need to reproduce to have an impact on evolution. 3. by your argument, it must also be bad to be barren, or impotent, because those people can also not reproduce. 4. you cannot judge one person's behavior based on a judgement about what might happen if everyone mimicked it (I am referring here to your statement that alas what would happen if EVERYONE became gay). for example, we say it would be real bad if everyone in the world became a writer (who would cook, who would build, who would drive the taxis), but surely we do not condemn one writer for that outlandish possibility. 5. what would be worse for the future of humanity's development, considering today's massive population problem, more people being gay and not reproducing, or evenpeople being straight and reproducing. 6. finally, you keep saying you're not bringing religion into it, but you started with "whoever created life" and end with "Now if your going to mess with the natural way of life and change things and practice being a 'god' by sperm banks and such, somehow I don't see how we were meant to do such things." What are you referring to in these two moments if not religion? evolution was never meant to be seen as a "purpose" or something we are "moving towards". it is simply observed phenomenon of natural selection. there is no unnatural. there is no moral judgement to be made on evolution.
 


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 06:34 AM on November 4, 2002 | IP
mrmazet

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

*clap clap*
 


Posts: 122 | Posted: 08:08 AM on November 4, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

ditto on the applause. that was awesome alex.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 4:41 PM on November 4, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

He makes a good point, but just because some people want to be homosexual doesnt make it okay, just as some people want to molest children doesnt make it okay...

I am going to try to cover everyone's arguement here so bear with me...


first to mr:

I guess I didnt choose the right analogy, let me try again.  Say (ok I know this is really cheezy) you are standing before God and there is a jar, and everytime you sin you have to put a coin in the jar, but when Jesus came and died, he comes and stands with us by the jar, and when we sin, we just tell him and he puts a coin in the jar for us, God isnt changing his ways, you still need to put a coin in the jar.  Its kinda hard to understand, it gets into the trinity and stuff.

Dsa:
No
Definatly No
My answers are based on my religion, but I know this is the one true way, I would die for that belief, and I would live for it too, and so I will live supporting a country that upholds this wether others agree or not.  If I upheld different would it not make me a hypocrite?
I dont care if I offend people in standing for what is right, I dont not live for this life but for the next, when I die I want to know I did all I could to restore this world back to the Father.

Pro:
Ah, I have seen this arguement many times first of all the slave one, I believe this is in refrence to your employer, for example I dont know what version you have but 1 Peter 2:18 says "Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward." it is same in Colossians 3:22, It means for you to be a good, faithful worker it whatever you do (a "servant" when these were written was a job, not a slave position)

As for not rebelling against a government, it is saying that if you disobay the laws of the land, you will be punished accorningly, but it also says it is right to rebel agaist an unjust law, so it takes the wisdom that God gives to discern which way is right.  

Stop making up lies about Christianity because you do not understand.  Catholics trust the word of the Pope to tell them what God wants, I believe they will accept homosexuality and abortion in time, but Christains lean solely on the infallable word of God.
"Fools have no interest in understanding; they only want to air their own opinions." -Proverbs 18:2 , how truly this rings.




-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 11:36 PM on November 4, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

just a question, sakata.  you take all the parts (mostly O.T. quotes) in the Bible about homosexuality literally, but you interpret the part about slaves and masters to mean employees and employers?  if everything in the Bible is literal, then aren't you changing the unchangeable with that inference?  


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 12:28 AM on November 5, 2002 | IP
AlexanderTheGreat

|     |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

hey check out www.story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20021104/sc_nm/science_sheep_dc_1
about the gay sheep study.
people always told me I had a smaller than average brain!!!


-------
Alex
 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 01:36 AM on November 5, 2002 | IP
Prometheus

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sakata:  I love the way you change the literal meaning of the verses to make  them fit your narrow view of the world.  I could quote at least a hundred other verses that you would not take literally but would give your definition of what you thought it meant.   Your saying "(a 'servant' when these were written was a job, not a slave position)" is laughable.  There were few free servants, most were slaves.

Then you go onto say "Stop making up lies about Christianity because you do not understand".  Wow lets hear from Saint Sakata, from God directly to the prophet Sakata, the gospel according to Sakata.  I probably understand Christianity as well as you do, I just happen to not be a fundamentalist, which to me is a personality disorder not a religion.

The main question that you did not answer is: how do you determine which verses to take literally and which verses to not take literally?
As your post above shows you don't take all of them literally, but change them to your own views of what you want them to mean.

Your other quote "Fools have no interest in understanding; they only want to air their own opinions." applies perfectly to you.  You are the sole arbitrator of what is true and correct in the bible you think.  My what delusions of grandeur you have.  Or is that because you you have such grave doubts about yourself,that you are unable to allow yourself to even contemplate that you may be wrong in your understanding of Christianity.  I am not wise enough to know for certain what everything in the bible means; but I am smart enough to know that you don't know either.  Will your fragile ego let you admit even that possibility?


-------
"There are seven sins in the world: Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience, Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, and politics without principle." --Mahatma Gandhi
 


Posts: 22 | Posted: 07:20 AM on November 5, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

basically, im going to do something that no one in the history of this forum has ever attempted. try to relate the current argument back to the actual forum topic (gay marriage).

Sakata: This is about whether Gays should be allowed to marry in a secular, civil ceremony, thus gaining all the rights that a marriage entails under law. For your argument to hold true (that we shouldn't support anything that turns people away from God), we also need to overturn the 1st amendment, b/c those bad old establishment and free exercise clauses prevent the Govt from making us all good christians. This isn't about whether homosexuality is right or wrong, because no one can take away your right to believe what you will on homosexuality. What this debate is about is whether a secular state has the right to take away a secular oppurtunity to a group of people b/c those people are violating the religious sensibilites of another group (but not preventing them from expressing those sensibilities). For you to say that, yes the govt. can take away that oppertunity means also saying the govt can take away the first amendment as well. This debate isn't about the inherrant morality or immorality of homosexuality. It is about secular state policy, and whether we allow it to be dictated by one religious opinion.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 11:32 AM on November 5, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

by gum, dsa!  i think you've got something there!  it seems that in most if not all of the debates everything always goes back to morality or religion.  in this particular debate, morality and religion have no effect on the question or answer at hand.  it is simply about *secular* state rights.  if you take away moral and religious issues then there is nothing that should prevent homosexual marriages in our society.  especially seeing as (whether you want to believe it or not, or whether you choose to accept it or not) our country's govt. is supposed to be very much free from religious morals.  with that in mind,  gay marriages should be perfectly legal


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 12:35 PM on November 5, 2002 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]

Topic Jump
Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.