Page 1 of 187 123451151101 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 4674

Thread: Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,921

    Default Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

    Homosexuality & Politics


    The penguins cannot help you.

    This is a new 'gay thread' for general discussion regarding homosexuality politically and socially. Sorry if you were sick of them, but apparently there will always be one, so we might as well make it a good one.

    There are a lot of modern issues pertaining to homosexuality in the 21st century - this isn't personal, it's debate. Try to be sensitive, and if other people aren't sensitive to you, try your best to repay it with politeness, because we don't want to remember the thread like this:
    Well I'm sorry I compared your sexuality to humping a tree.
    A Guide to the Discussion Thus Far


    As you may or may not know, there's been tons of 'gay threads' in the history of SPPF, and a lot of useful facts were learned, and a lot of problems were experienced that we can prevent. I apologize that it's so long, but you may fare better in this debate if you read it. I also hope to update it to reflect the conversation, so you don't have to read each page of the thread. Feel free to suggest additions or modifications, corrections, demand credit from me, whatever you like. I want to be accomodating.

    You have to read at least half of it to know why there's a picture of penguins up there.

        Spoiler:- A Guide to Gay Threads:


    No-Tears Easy Rules To Follow
    (These rules are actually redundant and double-enforced by Profesco's recent sticky, and in some cases triple-enforced with the actual rules of SPPF.)

    1. No straw-quoting. Straw-quoting is when you link to someone's quote, and then replace what they say with something that is meant to mock their original message and/or generally humiliate them.

    2. No defamation. Please do not use this thread to share links about what a member has done in order to discredit them or turn other members against them.

    3. No personal attacks. Please don't call someone subhuman or tell them to kill themselves.

    4. Do not use someone's family members as an example. Please don't use another member's family or friends as an example to prove something in the debate without getting permission from that member. They're not fair targets just because that member brought them into the debate.

    5. Don't post giant/bold off-topic messages. Statements emphasized with a giant font, all caps, or a style meant to catch attention that are irrelevant to the topic like "U MAD" or "SICK BRO!" should be reported as spam. Don't do this with pictures, either.

    6. Don't attack back. Don't feed trolls, don't reply to spam, don't flame people who flame, and don't break rules to get revenge on someone breaking rules.

    7. Don't badger other users. Don't bug others to stop posting about a particular subject, or to stop providing sources you don't approve, since this creates spam. Feel free to not accept sources or to not reply.

    8. Don't get off-topic. You can use this thread to talk about the way things relate to homosexuality, but don't start debating the legitimacy of those subjects. How religion relates to homosexuality is good - where that religion matters, bad. Homosexuality compared to polygamy, good. Whether polygamy is right or wrong, bad.

    Last edited by CSolarstorm; 4th February 2012 at 11:22 PM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    258

    Default

    For me, it's the same as most others. I don't care if they're gay, let them do what they want, why should I care? But... stop sticking it in my face and in the media! Like, if you don't want to be bullied for being gay, stop running around with "Gay Pride!" or "Gay 4 Life!" signs stapled on you. Like, do what you want but stop bugging me about it, I don't care what you do.



    "Whether you choose to believe or not, mystic power is and always will be there."
    - Morty

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,010

    Default

    Remarkable introduction.

    The way I see it, homosexuality is simply a preference for which there are varying degrees. Those with malleable minds and loosely defined boundaries can indeed choose to be homosexuals; I tend to think of these types of people as the flavor of the month crowd. They don't necessarily feel one way or the other but outside forces, whether positive or negative, sway their views. Then there are those whose attractions are pretty well set in stone for what ever reason. These types are often the ones who struggle. And then there are those in between.

    Either way, I don't care so long as you are happy. I've never had someone flaunt their homosexuality in my face to where I was disgusted. Uncomfortable, yes, but I did not hate them for it. I did not think poorly of them based on their life style. I was simply uncomfortable with my personal space being invaded.

    Politically I see absolutely no reason to deny homosexual couples the right to legal marriage. As stated in your introduction the religious sacrament of marriage is different than a legal marriage. So any word of God, I feel, has no place in that debate. I mean what other arguments are there against homosexuality other than religion? We've already addressed nature in the introduction here, so whats left? Unsatisfactory Family/home environments? Well to argue that you'd have to have some kind of evidence that a homosexual household is in any way worse for a child than your average heterosexual household.
    Last edited by ChedWick; 7th November 2011 at 4:34 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kutie Pie View Post
    About 97% of these women posing for pornographic pictures are held at gunpoint, and it can be anywhere. The majority of the time is by force.
    Lulz wat?

    SC: 5414 - 8627 - 7288 Platinum: 2621 - 8560 - 3249

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    'Straya
    Posts
    1,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Xtreme View Post
    For me, it's the same as most others. I don't care if they're gay, let them do what they want, why should I care? But... stop sticking it in my face and in the media! Like, if you don't want to be bullied for being gay, stop running around with "Gay Pride!" or "Gay 4 Life!" signs stapled on you. Like, do what you want but stop bugging me about it, I don't care what you do.
    Oh dear. You don't seem to know why they have parades and protest in the first place... you say 'let them do what they want', but gays are not given the same rights as heterosexuals in most countries. It is in essence no different to a law that prohibits interracial marriage, or mandates segregated water fountains.

    If you were in their situation, how would you draw attention to the predicament?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    dere in the sheets
    Posts
    8,829

    Default

    I really don't plan on joining this debate much, but that was really great introduction Sunny. But to stay on topic...


    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Xtreme View Post
    For me, it's the same as most others. I don't care if they're gay, let them do what they want, why should I care? But... stop sticking it in my face and in the media! Like, if you don't want to be bullied for being gay, stop running around with "Gay Pride!" or "Gay 4 Life!" signs stapled on you. Like, do what you want but stop bugging me about it, I don't care what you do.

    I do somewhat agree, I too am kinda of tired of seeing all the "Gay Pride" and Parades and the like everywhere. Also since i'm not gay, I don't plan to support or oppose anything that has to do with gay rights. I'd much rather foucus on the bigger problems of the world.

    Of course they can't do everything they want so they have to get the world out somehow.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jb08045 View Post
    I do somewhat agree, I too am kinda of tired of seeing all the "Gay Pride" and Parades and the like everywhere. Also since i'm not gay, I don't plan to support or oppose anything that has to do with gay rights. I'd much rather foucus on the bigger problems of the world.
    I'd say the battle for civil rights is a pretty important battle.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kutie Pie View Post
    About 97% of these women posing for pornographic pictures are held at gunpoint, and it can be anywhere. The majority of the time is by force.
    Lulz wat?

    SC: 5414 - 8627 - 7288 Platinum: 2621 - 8560 - 3249

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    258

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Oh dear. You don't seem to know why they have parades and protest in the first place... you say 'let them do what they want', but gays are not given the same rights as heterosexuals in most countries. It is in essence no different to a law that prohibits interracial marriage, or mandates segregated water fountains.

    If you were in their situation, how would you draw attention to the predicament?
    I'm not talking about their parades, I'm talking about all the news about "coming out" and all that. If someone went on the news and said "I'm straight!" they'd probably get a lawsuit for "offense to gays" or something, but if someone went on the news and said "I'm gay! I've come out of the closet!" they'd be worshipped for "revealing something so precious...", I was never comfortable with the idea of gays, not because of my religion, but I just didn't think it looked right, but now I can accept it, I just don't want to hear about it every time I turn on the TV.



    "Whether you choose to believe or not, mystic power is and always will be there."
    - Morty

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Thank you SunnyC for making a sane version of Alleviate's debate. I don't know what took the mods so long to realize that wasn't going anywhere good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Xtreme View Post
    I'm not talking about their parades, I'm talking about all the news about "coming out" and all that. If someone went on the news and said "I'm straight!" they'd probably get a lawsuit for "offense to gays" or something, but if someone went on the news and said "I'm gay! I've come out of the closet!" they'd be worshipped for "revealing something so precious...", I was never comfortable with the idea of gays, not because of my religion, but I just didn't think it looked right, but now I can accept it, I just don't want to hear about it every time I turn on the TV.
    Yeah, those gays... They're always getting offended by straight people being straight, and... Wait. What are you talking about? Straight people don't need to come out of the closet. They are expected to be straight, because most people are straight. People don't discriminate against straight people.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Amid vast pastures.
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Xtreme View Post
    I'm not talking about their parades, I'm talking about all the news about "coming out" and all that. If someone went on the news and said "I'm straight!" they'd probably get a lawsuit for "offense to gays" or something, but if someone went on the news and said "I'm gay! I've come out of the closet!" they'd be worshipped for "revealing something so precious...", I was never comfortable with the idea of gays, not because of my religion, but I just didn't think it looked right, but now I can accept it, I just don't want to hear about it every time I turn on the TV.
    Don't be stupid. Heterosexuals don't live in a society where their sexuality is stigmatized and they never will. (Unless gay people take over the earth and repress them or something) It's also funny how you claim to accept them, but it bothers you to hear about them on TV? Why does it bother you? What's the big deal? Will the rainbow signs that people are holding on TV come get you? If it bothers you that much you need to do some serious self examining.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    'Straya
    Posts
    1,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Xtreme View Post
    I'm not talking about their parades, I'm talking about all the news about "coming out" and all that.
    I've never heard of people coming out and making the news for it, unless you're talking about awful trash media and gossip magazines. In that case, just look away. I agree those sorts of shows/magazines are dreadful but gays aren't the ones to blame, the airheaded stay-at-home mothers who consume them are.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    686

    Default

    Wow, SunnyC. Five stars for the intro.

    I just have one question on the matter, and since its a person to person idea it should be an easy one; why is that I hear pro gay marriage arguments use the straight divorce rate (Currently a whopping 50% in the States, as I'm sure we all know by now) as a reason they should receive the option, when gays are just as flawed and human as straights, and just as capable of bad choices and expectations? It seems like a needless attack.


    ^ Never underestimate the ability of 1 Megabyte to bring out every emotion imaginable.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinsirius View Post
    Wow, SunnyC. Five stars for the intro.

    I just have one question on the matter, and since its a person to person idea it should be an easy one; why is that I hear pro gay marriage arguments use the straight divorce rate (Currently a whopping 50% in the States, as I'm sure we all know by now) as a reason they should receive the option, when gays are just as flawed and human as straights, and just as capable of bad choices and expectations? It seems like a needless attack.
    Perhaps it has something to do with the theory that gay couples value marriage more, because they aren't allowed to do it.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    585

    Default

    Just for the sake of argument, I'm going to play the devil's advocate here, (I hope this is allowed) simply because I would like to see the opposing arguments and intelligent discussion surrounding the arguments I put forward.

    Commonly, same-sex marriage opponents will argue that:-

    If gay couples wish to marry on the grounds that it's 'equal,' then what is stopping a polygamist from claiming that their marriage is 'equal' and deserving of the same recognition? (Keep in mind, I'm referring only to polygamy here; not paedophilic or zoophilic marriages.) Mormons, for example, sanction such relationships and would recognise them within their own circles. Technically, all parties in a polygamous relationship can consent and therefore, from a same-sex marriage advocate's point of view, this would warrant the acceptance of plural marriages as well. What evidence is there to suggest that polygamous marriages are unlikely to result from the legalisation of same-sex marriage?

    Would anyone care to respond to this?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Inna House... With Cable!!!
    Posts
    3,821

    Default

    I'll be honest when someone "comes out" my normal reaction is, "So?" I don't care what anyone's sexual orientation is(with a few exceptions). So by "outing" oneself, it neither helps nor hinders a political agenda in my eyes.

    So true!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    794

    Default

    I'm just going to watch this turn into pointlessness again.
    Fact: All fanbases are unpleasable, deal with it.

    Pokemon Red Team: Corona LV.53 Garland LV.44 Salt LV.47 Rime LV.48 Blitz LV.55 Buckle LV. 46 Badges: 8, Elite Four defeated.

    Pokemon Crystal Team: Flower LV.62 Torrent LV.61 Echo LV.58 Shade LV. 57 Vortex LV.60 Brand LV. 60Badges: 16, Elite Four defeated, Red defeated

    Ranked 5,823rd place in the VGC 2011 Autumn Friendly Tourney

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk View Post
    Just for the sake of argument, I'm going to play the devil's advocate here, (I hope this is allowed) simply because I would like to see the opposing arguments and intelligent discussion surrounding the arguments I put forward.

    Commonly, same-sex marriage opponents will argue that:-

    If gay couples wish to marry on the grounds that it's 'equal,' then what is stopping a polygamist from claiming that their marriage is 'equal' and deserving of the same recognition? (Keep in mind, I'm referring only to polygamy here; not paedophilic or zoophilic marriages.) Mormons, for example, sanction such relationships and would recognise them within their own circles. Technically, all parties in a polygamous relationship can consent and therefore, from a same-sex marriage advocate's point of view, this would warrant the acceptance of plural marriages as well. What evidence is there to suggest that polygamous marriages are unlikely to result from the legalisation of same-sex marriage?

    Would anyone care to respond to this?
    I have no problem accepting polygamous marriages.

    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    I've never heard of people coming out and making the news for it, unless you're talking about awful trash media and gossip magazines. In that case, just look away. I agree those sorts of shows/magazines are dreadful but gays aren't the ones to blame, the airheaded stay-at-home mothers who consume them are.
    I rarely see the actual news on tv but I do check out a lot of online news sources and I see more coming outs of celebrities and politicians than I care to remember.

    Quote Originally Posted by Malanu View Post
    I'll be honest when someone "comes out" my normal reaction is, "So?" I don't care what anyone's sexual orientation is(with a few exceptions). So by "outing" oneself, it neither helps nor hinders a political agenda in my eyes.
    I feel about the same. I get why some may do it; they feel they're an idol and by coming gout they create a bit of a comfort zone for others who may look up to them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Demonsead View Post
    I'm just going to watch this turn into pointlessness again.
    Can't say pointless responses from people like you really help out.
    Last edited by ChedWick; 7th November 2011 at 8:14 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kutie Pie View Post
    About 97% of these women posing for pornographic pictures are held at gunpoint, and it can be anywhere. The majority of the time is by force.
    Lulz wat?

    SC: 5414 - 8627 - 7288 Platinum: 2621 - 8560 - 3249

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk View Post
    Commonly, same-sex marriage opponents will argue that:-

    If gay couples wish to marry on the grounds that it's 'equal,' then what is stopping a polygamist from claiming that their marriage is 'equal' and deserving of the same recognition? (Keep in mind, I'm referring only to polygamy here; not paedophilic or zoophilic marriages.) Mormons, for example, sanction such relationships and would recognise them within their own circles. Technically, all parties in a polygamous relationship can consent and therefore, from a same-sex marriage advocate's point of view, this would warrant the acceptance of plural marriages as well. What evidence is there to suggest that polygamous marriages are unlikely to result from the legalisation of same-sex marriage?

    Would anyone care to respond to this?
    Unless someone is being forced into the relationship, then I don't see the problem with either. Call me when abuse and rape enter the equation.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Where Ever You Are
    Posts
    1,879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Xtreme View Post
    For me, it's the same as most others. I don't care if they're gay, let them do what they want, why should I care? But... stop sticking it in my face and in the media! Like, if you don't want to be bullied for being gay, stop running around with "Gay Pride!" or "Gay 4 Life!" signs stapled on you. Like, do what you want but stop bugging me about it, I don't care what you do.
    I want to focus on the media portion of this statement. When you say media, exactly what do you mean? Media encompasses a variety of things (TV, movies, video games, and music for example). Including gay people in these different mediums is about one of two things: 1.) Money or 2.) Appealing to/representing a wider audience. Including LGBT characters in these different forms is another way to not only bring light to LGBT specific issues, but to also appeal to a different group of people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Xtreme View Post
    I'm not talking about their parades, I'm talking about all the news about "coming out" and all that. If someone went on the news and said "I'm straight!" they'd probably get a lawsuit for "offense to gays" or something, but if someone went on the news and said "I'm gay! I've come out of the closet!" they'd be worshipped for "revealing something so precious...", I was never comfortable with the idea of gays, not because of my religion, but I just didn't think it looked right, but now I can accept it, I just don't want to hear about it every time I turn on the TV.
    You don't hear about it everytime you turn on the TV. Honestly, if you look at famous people who come out, there's usually some sort of context that makes said coming out "scandalous." Like Ricky Martin for example: he denied, denied, and then kind of denied for years and then finally came out and it was that past denial that made his story "interesting."

    There are tons of famous people that publicly come out of the closet however you really never hear about them because, other than the fact that they're famous, there isn't anything spectacular or interesting about their story. If there is a wider context to their coming out, then it makes the news.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinsirius View Post
    I just have one question on the matter, and since its a person to person idea it should be an easy one; why is that I hear pro gay marriage arguments use the straight divorce rate (Currently a whopping 50% in the States, as I'm sure we all know by now) as a reason they should receive the option, when gays are just as flawed and human as straights, and just as capable of bad choices and expectations? It seems like a needless attack.
    I assume it is most likely to discredit the argument that gays will ruin the sanctity of marriage, as divorce has already plagued 50% of marriages. On the one hand, it is a valid thought to propose that gays could ruin marriage or whatever, but on the other hand using the mistakes of others does not necessarily make you better, which is why that argument (50% of straight marriages end in divorce) is a bad one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk View Post
    If gay couples wish to marry on the grounds that it's 'equal,' then what is stopping a polygamist from claiming that their marriage is 'equal' and deserving of the same recognition? (Keep in mind, I'm referring only to polygamy here; not paedophilic or zoophilic marriages.) Mormons, for example, sanction such relationships and would recognise them within their own circles. Technically, all parties in a polygamous relationship can consent and therefore, from a same-sex marriage advocate's point of view, this would warrant the acceptance of plural marriages as well. What evidence is there to suggest that polygamous marriages are unlikely to result from the legalisation of same-sex marriage?
    There is no evidence because, as you so kindly pointed out, there are really no legal restrictions on polygamous marriage. The only reason it isn't allowed is because of personal or religious reasons, or of course maybe it has something to do with the paperwork involved in marriage and taxes and all that which I would bet our government is probably too lazy to figure out.

    Plural marriages create no harm to anyone innocent party outside of the consenting adults, therefore the only reasons to be against polygamy stem from personal, religious, or political roots.

    I hope that came out clearly. My biggest problem in these debates is that sometimes my point is lost in my ramblings...

    Quote Originally Posted by Demonsead View Post
    I'm just going to watch this turn into pointlessness again.
    Thank you for pointlessly helping turn this into pointlessness with that pointless post.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyC View Post
    It was recently pointed out in mattj's Bible thread that Leviticus prohibits sexuality by saying "thou shalt not lie with a man as you would a woman", or the law states that you'll be stoned to death. According to mattj, Jesus Christ reversed the death penalty for homosexuality along with other 'sexual deviancies' when he rescues the prostitute saying 'let he without sin cast the first stone', but not the decision that homosexuality was a sin. Jesus didn't explicitly say, 'stop killing gay people', this is just a reasonable (your mileage may vary) interpretation of his actions.
    That Jesus quote has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality. Jesus said it to stop people from stoning an adulteress, because it was hypocritical for them to kill her but not her lover as well. The quote has other interpretations. Perhaps Jesus was saying that we should never execute others ever. Perhaps Jesus wanted to cast the first stone himself, because he was without sin. I don't know how anyone can attribute the quote to homosexuality.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fused View Post
    I assume it is most likely to discredit the argument that gays will ruin the sanctity of marriage, as divorce has already plagued 50% of marriages. On the one hand, it is a valid thought to propose that gays could ruin marriage or whatever, but on the other hand using the mistakes of others does not necessarily make you better, which is why that argument (50% of straight marriages end in divorce) is a bad one.
    The argument even then isn't suppose to whitewash gay marriage but is one of the many examples of double standards employed by those against gay marriages. And really, hypocritical arguments suggest that the person in question doesn't have a legitamite gripe against gay marriage, but is trying to hide the fact that they are bigots through excuses.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Amid vast pastures.
    Posts
    81

    Default

    I always thought that the retort used by gays that divorce ruins the sanctity of marriage more than gay nuptials a poor one. Divorce doesn't affect the sanctity of marriage at all. What does divorce even have to do with the sanctity of marriage as an institution at all? It may ruin the sanctity of your invidual marriage, but hardly says anything about the institution itself.

    However, from a Christian's point of view, it would violate the sanctity of marrage because in their view, your redefining what marriage is in the first place.

    I'm gay, but come up with a better argument. For realz.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gergovia View Post
    However, from a Christian's point of view, it would violate the sanctity of marrage because in their view, your redefining what marriage is in the first place.
    It's a good thing that marriage isn't exclusively owned by Christianity.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gergovia View Post
    I always thought that the retort used by gays that divorce ruins the sanctity of marriage more than gay nuptials a poor one. Divorce doesn't affect the sanctity of marriage at all. What does divorce even have to do with the sanctity of marriage as an institution at all? It may ruin the sanctity of your individual marriage, but hardly says anything about the institution itself.
    What I was going to say; something built on a high ideal (That isn't exactly unrealized- how many of us know multiple couples who made it past the first seven years? I sure do.) isn't inherently ruined because some instances don't work out, particularly when there are clear patterns as to why.


    ^ Never underestimate the ability of 1 Megabyte to bring out every emotion imaginable.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    That Jesus quote has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality. Jesus said it to stop people from stoning an adulteress, because it was hypocritical for them to kill her but not her lover as well. The quote has other interpretations. Perhaps Jesus was saying that we should never execute others ever. Perhaps Jesus wanted to cast the first stone himself, because he was without sin. I don't know how anyone can attribute the quote to homosexuality.
    Go reread the passage and tell me if you think I made it better. I was of course talking about mattj's assertion in his thread, but I added a bit more of a critical tone. So far his is the best counter to the Leviticus argument, and everything needs to be balanced in the guide.

    Thank you to everyone for giving me so many nice complements about the thread!

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Soviet Canuckistan
    Posts
    1,013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gergovia View Post
    I always thought that the retort used by gays that divorce ruins the sanctity of marriage more than gay nuptials a poor one. Divorce doesn't affect the sanctity of marriage at all. What does divorce even have to do with the sanctity of marriage as an institution at all? It may ruin the sanctity of your individual marriage, but hardly says anything about the institution itself.
    I always interpreted the argument to mean that we allow people to marry and divorce at the drop of a hat, but ignore those who genuinely love their partner. Look at the whole Kim Kardashian thing as an example - we let her have a big lavish ceremony so she can get married only to divorce the guy like five minutes later in what was almost certainly just a publicity stunt, but when two people who happen to have the same genitalia genuinely love each other and want to be together, all of a sudden that's just going too far.
    If we accept your premise that divorce ruins the sanctity of an individual's marriage (and I personally do, it's a lot more reasonable than saying all marriage is worthless because of the divorce rate), then we now have to ask why allowing gays to get married would destroy the sanctity of marriage as a whole, or even how it would destroy the sanctity of your individual marriage. I could also preemptively get into the fact that the Bible condemns divorce just as much if not moreso than homosexuality, but I'd really rather not talk about the Bible unless/until someone else brings it up.



    John Locke ruins everything.

    I have started a blog out of boredom. Look at it here if you're as bored as I was when I made it.

Page 1 of 187 123451151101 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •