Posts: 6714/7006
(21-Sep-2011 at 19:21) ![]() |
Quote:
Do you really think the main concernn of the 'entire english speaking world" is keeping the purity of the english language, as opposed to having an institution not tainted by the gay community?
Quote:
The discussion is about gays and religion...
Quote:
During the Middle Ages the rich and clerics were educated
Quote:
If they are expressing what they claim are religious truths, to a faithful following, are they not religious leaders to those faithful?
Quote:
What evidence do you have he doesn't?
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. |
||
|
Posts: 2775/2825
(21-Sep-2011 at 19:31) ![]() |
Quote:
Well thats not correct, maybe if I had said .......
Quote:
The conclusion is that the word 'marriage' is already in use and same-sex arrangements will have to find a word of their own. Civil union perhaps? You are basically demanding that the entire English speaking world change their language to suit a minority of activists.
Quote:
No. The discussion is about gays and religion, so criticism of religion and it's voiewpoint is expected.
Quote:
I would say that to most people, their holy book defines the religion.
Quote:
It is actually a serious question. Does God have a physical body, which would imply he does experience sensory impulses of some sort, so love and hate and even sex may be experienced by him, or is he simply a spirit without a physical form
Quote:
I don't really care as whatever the motives, it doesn't excuse a minority attempting to force its views on the majority. The fact is that language is social and the majority view settles contested boundaries.
Quote:
The millennia long absence of any evidence that he does. When you keep looking in your garage and find no evidence of a car, the sensible conclusion is that there is no car.
![]() The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views Last edited by DHoffryn, 21-Sep-2011 at 19:33. |
||
|
Posts: 1376/1637
(22-Sep-2011 at 01:43) |
Re: Is god against homophobes
Good point and it made me think about something. Now obviously it would be wrong to force religious institiuons to change their beliefs. However what if it's the other way around. What for example if certain churches decide to acknowledge and accept gay marraige. Now if the state refuses to respect these churches decision would it violate the churches rights?
Only Vatican City can do what they like, because they make their own law. |
||
|
Posts: 6716/7006
(22-Sep-2011 at 06:45) ![]() |
Don't all states make their own laws?
If they make a law then yes, the church is obliged to follow it. The problems arise when the law is not just, or when it is resisted by most of the population - law-makers can get it wrong. When that happens, the state has plenty of mechanisms to enforce it, but very few for the citizens to get rid of it. "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. Last edited by Voice of Reason, 22-Sep-2011 at 06:48. |
||
|
Posts: 1377/1637
(22-Sep-2011 at 07:34) |
Re: Is god against homophobes
If they make a law then yes, the church is obliged to follow it. The problems arise when the law is not just, or when it is resisted by most of the population - law-makers can get it wrong. When that happens, the state has plenty of mechanisms to enforce it, but very few for the citizens to get rid of it.
Not really. Civil union satisfies justice. In fact, I think it's pretty decent to have the distinction, since there are distinctions. Same-sex and opposite-sex unions are different things. So it seems correct to call them different things under law. |
||
|
Posts: 6717/7006
(22-Sep-2011 at 08:08) ![]() |
That is pretty much my view. You don't start calling apples oranges just because a bunch orange activists demand it, and a refusal to call apples oranges does not means oranges are inferior to apples, or suggest orangephobia.
I wasn't actually thinking of same-sex unions when i typed that last post. It was more of an Althusser moment. I know you will understand. "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. |
||
|
Posts: 1378/1637
(22-Sep-2011 at 15:15) |
Re: Is god against homophobes
That is pretty much my view. You don't start calling apples oranges just because a bunch orange activists demand it, and a refusal to call apples oranges does not means oranges are inferior to apples, or suggest orangephobia.
So then, as it relates to the topic, is it unjust for a church to refuse to 'marry' same sex couples? i.e. is God (hypothetically) really against homophobes or is he just calling an apple an apple an that's the end of it? To me, it's strange to suggest that God is really against anyone. Sure, he may be closer to some, but that's not the same as being against others. |
||
|
Posts: 6720/7006
(23-Sep-2011 at 04:01) ![]() |
Hypothetically, as this God is supposed to love everyone unconditionally and forgive everybody who says "Ooops...sorry", I don't really see how he can be opposed to anything.
However, that would suggest that he is not exactly a great ally, and if you invoke the principle of 'a friend of everybody is a friend of nobody' not even much of a friend. ![]() "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. |
||
|
Posts: 1381/1637
(23-Sep-2011 at 05:09) |
Re: Is god against homophobes
However, that would suggest that he is not exactly a great ally, and if you invoke the principle of 'a friend of everybody is a friend of nobody' not even much of a friend.
![]() http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_of_God_(religion) |
||
|
Posts: 678/680
(17-Oct-2011 at 10:22) ![]() |
Re: Is god against homophobes
Get to the point: is acceptance of civil union but the rejection of gay marriage unjust?
Not really. Civil union satisfies justice. In fact, I think it's pretty decent to have the distinction, since there are distinctions. Same-sex and opposite-sex unions are different things. So it seems correct to call them different things under law. GNAR!!!! |
||
|
Posts: 6780/7006
(17-Oct-2011 at 14:57) ![]() |
One creates a same-sex couple. The other creates an opposite-sex couple. They are as different as men and women.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. |
||
|
Posts: 679/680
(19-Oct-2011 at 05:23) ![]() |
Re: Is god against homophobes
One creates a same-sex couple. The other creates an opposite-sex couple. They are as different as men and women.
Originally Posted by South Park:
Governor: I believe that I might have come up with a compromise to this whole problem that will make everyone happy! People in the gay community want the same rights as married couples, but dissenters don't want the word "marriage" corrupted. So how about we let gay people get married, but call it something else?
[everyone listens quietly] Governor: You homosexuals will have all the exact same rights as married couples, but, instead of referring to you as "married", you can be... butt buddies. [long silence] Governor: Instead of being "man and wife", you'll be... butt buddies. You won't be "betrothed", you'll be... [makes quote with his fingers] Governor: ...butt buddies. Get it? Instead of a "bride and groom", you'd be... [makes quote with his fingers again] Governor: ...butt buddies. Mr. Slave: We wanna be treated equally! Governor: You *are* equal. It's just that, instead of getting engaged, you would be... butt buddies. And everyone is happy! GNAR!!!! |
||
|
Posts: 6784/7006
(19-Oct-2011 at 08:23) ![]() |
Quote:
I'd ask you to be MORE vague, but you'd then be at risk for going off-topic.
Quote:
Same-sex couples get married for the same reasons, be they emotional or financial, as straight couples. Their joining should be called the same thing.
Quote:
So the dynamics of the couple are SO different that they need a different title, just to set them apart?
Why, exactly, are you so adamant that they start calling civil unions 'marriages? Do you actually have a sensible reason, or are you just being an activist? "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. |
||
|
Posts: 680/680
(19-Oct-2011 at 09:11) ![]() |
Re: Is god against homophobes
There is nothing vague about being able to observe that men a women are not the same. Do you need me to point out the differences?
Straw man. The reasons are irrelevant. The difference is in the nature. It is not 'just to set them apart'. It is because they are different things, and hence have a different title for exactly the same reasons that apples and oranges have different titles, or chalk and cheese. Or men and women. Why, exactly, are you so adamant that they start calling civil unions 'marriages? Do you actually have a sensible reason, or are you just being an activist? I'd venture there's less difference between hetero and homo-sexual marriages than apples and oranges, unless it's you know, it boils down to a parts thing. A sensible reason? Basic equality? That's THAT tough to understand? Do you have a sensible reason for keeping them separate but equal, or are you just being a douche? You can go ahead and define the nature and the difference now. Cheers! GNAR!!!! |
||
|
Posts: 6786/7006
(19-Oct-2011 at 09:21) ![]() |
Quote:
A sensible reason? Basic equality? That's THAT tough to understand?
Equal is not the same as 'identical'. It does not need the same name to be equal - is that THAT tough to understand? "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. |
||
|
Posts: 1203/1208
(24-Oct-2011 at 22:53) ![]() |
Re: Is god against homophobes
Civil union and marriage are already equal. Try again.
Equal is not the same as 'identical'. It does not need the same name to be equal - is that THAT tough to understand? Relevant to this topic, I would say that whether gay marriage is legitimate within any particular organised religion should be entirely at the discretion of that religion. However, so far as the state recognises lifetime commitment as a legal contract it should be absolutely equal for all parties entering into it, regardless of the gender balance of those making the commitment. I would include the name of the commitment as part of that equality. To allow some to enter into 'Marriage' while others are limited to 'Civil Union' only emphasises the difference, thus the inequality (even if just in terms of esteem), no matter how close the actual legal rights of the two institutions. How about this? No Marriage. Marriage to remain as a religious ceremony only with no legal recognition or protection by the state. The state would then recognise Civil Unions, or whatever you want to call them, as the only legal contract covering such unions. No descrimination there.. Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others. Groucho Marx http://tangenitaldrunkeness.blogspot...ac22c48044bdd8 |
||
|
Posts: 6799/7006
(25-Oct-2011 at 03:11) ![]() |
Quote:
In what jurisdiction? In most there are significant differences in the rights of those in a civil union and those in a marriage.
Quote:
I would include the name of the commitment as part of that equality. To allow some to enter into 'Marriage' while others are limited to 'Civil Union' only emphasises the difference, thus the inequality (even if just in terms of esteem), no matter how close the actual legal rights of the two institutions.
The real test will come in ten years or so, when long term statistics become available. If same-sex couples are staying together, with a lower break-up rate than marriage, then good things will be attached to the label and it will become a good brand with high value. If same-sex couples are splitting up in droves and ridicule is attached to it, it will become a joke brand with low value. The point here is that how much value is attached to the label, how good a brand it becomes, is completely in the hands of the gay community. "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest. |
||
|
Posts: 3959/3983
(25-Oct-2011 at 06:03) ![]() |
Can anyone point to where in the Bible it says that homosexuality is unnatural? I have heard this a lot, but don't ever remember reading it.
Quote:
I keep hearing this, but when I ask what they are (as earlier in this thread) all I get is a list of petty and trivial differences. Regardless of that, if they are not equal, then there is a genuine grievance and they should be made equal.
Many religions do restrict access to services as far as gays go, although the gay community are making inroads into many of these services.
Quote:
Different is not the same as unequal. Nor is the name. It is a label, and any values it carries are subjective akin to branding. At the moment, the activists are busy telling everybody that, in their opinion, a civil union is of lesser value but while that is to some extent a self-fulfilling position it is also too soon to be taken as the truth.
Religion should have the luxury of creating it's own policies, and administering it's rites as required without political pressure to change. In much the same manner, governments should be able to make political decisions without interference from representatives of a foreign power, no matter how high up he is.
Quote:
The real test will come in ten years or so, when long term statistics become available. If same-sex couples are staying together, with a lower break-up rate than marriage, then good things will be attached to the label and it will become a good brand with high value. If same-sex couples are splitting up in droves and ridicule is attached to it, it will become a joke brand with low value.
If you were correct, then marriage would be viewed with disdain and scorn, and not be so popular that some people marry 5 or 6 times in their life.
Quote:
The point here is that how much value is attached to the label, how good a brand it becomes, is completely in the hands of the gay community.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.” |
||
|
Posts: 1423/1637
(25-Oct-2011 at 06:38) |
Re: Is god against homophobes
Can anyone point to where in the Bible it says that homosexuality is unnatural? I have heard this a lot, but don't ever remember reading it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bib..._homosexuality |
||
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why did God kill my unborn children ? | Grashnak | Religious Discussions | 91 | 05-Aug-2006 22:28 |
Everyone needs JESUS! JESUS loves you! JESUS died for you! | Rose21swf | Religious Discussions | 10 | 24-Feb-2005 01:07 |
A Buddhists view on christianity | Skraz | Religious Discussions | 42 | 08-Sep-2004 13:13 |
The logic of God | Gus Mackay | Religious Discussions | 31 | 23-Aug-2004 09:11 |
Do you believe in God? | Hurleyy | Religious Discussions | 849 | 23-Jul-2003 20:11 |