KSG_Standard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Can someone please show me where this RIGHT to marriage exists? Which document talks about this "right"? Who grants this "right"? Just askin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Well it is a country based on judaeo-christen values. Like it or not most of us believe in the bible. I don't agree we are a nation based on Judaeo-christen values. These values / laws are basically the same the world over. The basic tenets of which are common law within every culture though out history. It might not be written down, but stealing your fellow chimps banana will result in getting hit with a stick. So far as specifics to Christianity. Out of the Big 10 commandments, I think we only observe 3 of them as common law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Just pray the sin away and it never happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I don't agree we are a nation based on Judaeo-christen values. These values / laws are basically the same the world over. The basic tenets of which are common law within every culture though out history. It might not be written down' date=' but stealing your fellow chimps banana will result in getting hit with a stick. So far as specifics to Christianity. Out of the Big 10 commandments, I think we only observe 3 of them as common law. [/quote'] Brilliantly stupid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djroge1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Can someone please show me where this RIGHT to marriage exists? Which document talks about this "right"? Who grants this "right"? Just askin' Easy boy, that's not how a liberal talks is it? c'mon can't we all just get along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Brilliantly stupid! You got my attention. 3 days of being mostly irrelevant has gotten your nerves frayed. How about one of those 3 page Copy/pastes to straighten me out. Then you can be totally irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 You got my attention. 3 days of being mostly irrelevant has gotten your nerves frayed. How about one of those 3 page Copy/pastes to straighten me out. Then you can be totally irrelevant. My nerves are fine union boy, how are yours? It was fun being a lib, you just post what you FEEL and no one calls you on it, no logic required, no facts required, just feelings, it was beautiful! I see why you like it so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicked1 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Well it is a country based on judaeo-christen values. Like it or not most of us believe in the bible. Or maybe it's based on Buddhist values. Buddhism also condemns things like murder and robbery. If our founding fathers wanted to make this a Christian country, all they had to do was write it into the Constitution. Not killing or stealing or sleeping with your neighbor's wife only makes good sense if you want to actually survive in a social environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FennRx Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 i think its naive to say this country wasnt founded on judeo-christian values. that doesnt mean we were founded as a christian nation. and yes homz, many christians values are common to other belief systems, but the Founding Fathers didnt have Hinduism in mind because they werent Hindu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 i think its naive to say this country wasnt founded on judeo-christian values. that doesnt mean we were founded as a christian nation. and yes homz' date=' many christians values are common to other belief systems, but the Founding Fathers didnt have Hinduism in mind because they werent Hindu.[/quote'] Our history is replete with examples, quotes from the main source, of what our founding fathers believed in. Many of those examples demonstrate a fundamental truth about their faith. This country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs. Look it up. The problem today is that it's real easy to say "this country wasn't founded on judeo-christian" principles, but your doing it out of ignorance. The recorded history of our country is filled with examples. Those examples have been posted on this forum before. Look them up for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 The values this country was founded on predated the new testament by several hundreds of years. My ancestors in ancient Greece put them into practice before Jesus was a twinkle in Joseph's eye. Our founding fathers were well versed in ancient writings other than the bible. Don't you find it even a little arrogant to claim biblical exclusivity on these values? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 The values this country was founded on predated the new testament by several hundreds of years. My ancestors in ancient Greece put them into practice before Jesus was a twinkle in Joseph's eye. Our founding fathers were well versed in ancient writings other than the bible. Don't you find it even a little arrogant to claim biblical exclusivity on these values? I am not arrogant in any way. No where did I state the exclusivity of a biblical foundation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmngretsch14 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 This country was founded by people who, for the most part, held Judeo-Christian beliefs--yes. But these same men made it clear that as long as someone else's beliefs, and actions do not infringe on the rights of their fellow Americans they should remain perfectly legal. If homosexuals would like to marry in the eyes of the church, and be afforded the rights marriage grants, then they should have the right. As long as there is a judge or priest willing to conduct the matter then it is entirely legal as they are practicing their beliefs without infringing on the rights of others. just my .02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmngretsch14 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 And another thought, if homosexuals can't marry because their right to do so would stand against the Judeo-Christian foundation of our society then wouldn't it stand to reason the government wouldn't recognize Hindu marriages, Islamic marriages etc. Well they do, so then wouldn't it stand to reason that if a Church believed in the rights of homosexuals to marry their marriages would be just as legally legitimate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 Your argument is flawed in one simple premise that all nationalities and societies have traditionally recognized a union to be between a man and a woman—sometimes a man and several women. It's obvious the reason why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 And another thought' date=' if homosexuals can't marry because their right to do so would stand against the Judeo-Christian foundation of our society then wouldn't it stand to reason the government wouldn't recognize Hindu marriages, Islamic marriages etc. Well they do, so then wouldn't it stand to reason that if a Church believed in the rights of homosexuals to marry their marriages would be just as legally legitimate[/quote'] Marriage, the word and the institution, have been defined for centuries as being between 1 man and 1 woman. Gay marriage not only requires changing the definition of the word, which was done by Merriam-Websters and others, within the past couple of years, with ZERO debate. It also requires changing centuries of tradition, which won't happen very fast. Can those of you that think gay marriage is okay, just accept that there are millions of other people that don't think it's okay? Who's right? Who's wrong? It's all about perspective...People that don't believe it's okay are not evil, people that believe it is okay are not evil either. My .02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmngretsch14 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Have you ever remotely studied Anthropology Californiaman? Because if you had you'd have a bit to learn about definitions of marriage. The anthropological definition of marriage is such " A more or less stable union, usually between two people, and who are likely, but not necessarily, to be co-resident, sexually involved with each other, and procreative with one another" Let's look at some other forms of marriage that are common around the world. Polygamy- Several people in one marriage, this form of marriage has been idealized by many societies for millenia, and is detailed in the bible, yet somewhat frowned upon here. It should be perfectly legal. In Tibet there is a society where brothers marry the same woman, it functions to control population growth, minimize the seperation of inherited property and allow for a more productive family unit. The Nandi people of modern Kenya have been around for thousands of years. The Nandi have a practice of Woman-Woman marriage, which generally has nothing to do with sexual preference but serves a social function of providing a family unit for women without male husbands. Don't make such claims without knowledge of what you speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmngretsch14 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 KSG that is one of the most reasonable statements I've seen you make. Perhaps that time as a fake liberal helped you to realize the value of perspective, that people all over have logical reasons (based on their own experiences and understandings) which lead them to their beliefs and positions. What I propose is that we remember is that this is The United States of America. In my America this is a government for the people, of the people, and by the people. There are people all across the board with different beliefs that are just as legitimate as anybody elses beliefs, because they all have equal amounts of proof(I suppose that's nihilism seeping in). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 My issue is not a matter of whether you think it to be right or wrong. My issue is why do you care? Why does anyone care. How does a gay couple being in love and getting married somehow diminish your position in the world in any way. So if it causes no harm and there are people who wish to have the same rights that spouses have then what's the issue. Seems to me that from a public health position it would be advantageous too. Married couples are less promiscuous then singles are. That means less of a chance of contracting an STD. So if you agree with the above statement that gay marriage doesn't hurt you than what can be the reason for your desire to block gays from marriage. I would presume it is either hatred (bigots), or a religious notion. Since we live in society that has mandated by law that the government is not to be endorsing a religion it would be unconstitutional if the latter reason is the basis for banning gay marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 Have you ever remotely studied Anthropology Californiaman? Because if you had you'd have a bit to learn about definitions of marriage. The anthropological definition of marriage is such " A more or less stable union' date=' usually between two people, and who are likely, but not necessarily, to be co-resident, sexually involved with each other, and procreative with one another" Let's look at some other forms of marriage that are common around the world. Polygamy- Several people in one marriage, this form of marriage has been idealized by many societies for millenia, and is detailed in the bible, yet somewhat frowned upon here. It should be perfectly legal. In Tibet there is a society where brothers marry the same woman, it functions to control population growth, minimize the seperation of inherited property and allow for a more productive family unit. The Nandi people of modern Kenya have been around for thousands of years. The Nandi have a practice of Woman-Woman marriage, which generally has nothing to do with sexual preference but serves a social function of providing a family unit for women without male husbands. Don't make such claims without knowledge of what you speak.[/quote'] Well of course I did. It was required for my Bachelors Degree. But hey, I'm all for your anything goes relationship with whoever or whatever you want to sleep with, just don't expect me to think it's OK. I disagree with it. Priests shouldn't molest Alter Boys. Men shouldn't sleep with men. Women shouldn't sleep with women. A man should have but one wife. A man who sleeps with a sheep should be executed and the animal killed. They actually did that in America at one time. They caught a boy buggering a sheep. Killed him and the entire heard. It's right there in Cities in the Wilderness a book by I believe Daniel J. Boorstiene. Just saying. It's all wrong. and by the way, those Tibetans are so enlightened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmngretsch14 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 And I'll keep rambling--Why does tradition need to dictate our current laws and beliefs. For thousands of years cultures all over the world did not find slavery morally reprehensible, but we overthrew the traditional acceptance of slavery because of our beliefs in humanitarian equality, I'm sure Jesus digs the whole live and let live thing, and if Christianity doesn't like Gay Marriage they shouldn't be able to stop other religious groups from permitting it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmngretsch14 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 And I'll keep rambling--Why does tradition need to dictate our current laws and beliefs. For thousands of years cultures all over the world did not find slavery morally reprehensible, but we overthrew the traditional acceptance of slavery because of our beliefs in humanitarian equality, I'm sure Jesus digs the whole live and let live thing, and if Christianity doesn't like Gay Marriage they shouldn't be able to stop other religious groups from permitting it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 And I'll keep rambling--Why does tradition need to dictate our current laws and beliefs. For thousands of years cultures all over the world did not find slavery morally reprehensible' date=' but we overthrew the traditional acceptance of slavery because of our beliefs in humanitarian equality, I'm sure Jesus digs the whole live and let live thing, and if Christianity doesn't like Gay Marriage they shouldn't be able to stop other religious groups from permitting it[/quote'] It's not just about the Christians. It's about a standard that has been practiced and recognized for thousands of years. Keep up the good fight. Remember it's about gays having the same rights as everybody else. Equal opportunity under the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 It's not that simple Homz, Believing marriage to be between a man and a woman is also a Western historical perspective with nothing to do with religion or bigotry. I would turn question around and ask, if your not gay, why does it matter so much to you? Will your marriage be helped or hurt by supporting gay marriage? I don't believe that there is ANY document that makes a claim that ANYBODY has a RIGHT to get married...it's certainly not an explicit right...is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Well of course I did. It was required for my Bachelors Degree. But hey' date=' I'm all for your anything goes relationship with whoever or whatever you want to sleep with, just don't expect me to think it's OK. I disagree with it. Priests shouldn't molest Alter Boys. [b']Men shouldn't sleep with men.[/b] Women shouldn't sleep with women. A man should have but one wife. A man who sleeps with a sheep should be executed and the animal killed. They actually did that in America at one time. They caught a boy buggering a sheep. Killed him and the entire heard. It's right there in Cities in the Wilderness a book by I believe Daniel J. Boorstiene. Just saying. It's all wrong. and by the way, those Tibetans are so enlightened. Do you realize in your list you have mixed gay sex with other activities that are illegal. This misrepresentation of sexual behaviors is commonly considered bigotry. What is it, really. Do you think you just got a check mark in the list of good activities compiled in Heaven by ST. Peter. Is it to hard to understand that those kinds of things simply make some people feel bad. Why not simply say I hate gay people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.