4 down, 46 to go

[sunspotiens]

Always thought the root of the problem was with it being called "marriage" and thought "civil unions" was a way to move past that hang up.

Props to the four states forward thinking enough to go ahead and get this passed...Far greater issues that are deserving of our attention than trying to shyt on a couple's happiness.

If marriage is really that sacred why don't they create legislation that bans divorce to even it out a little bit.

[nick]

for the people who believe its a religious and god said no no....what about slavery?

http://godisimaginary.com/i13.htm

[fsupenguin]

for the people who believe its a religious and god said no no....what about slavery?

http://godisimaginary.com/i13.htm

Well as long as you think you are the one putting God on trial and fail realize that we answer to him and not the other way around there is really nothing to say to you. All this article demonstrates is the writers inability to research and compare the differences in culture and period in history.

[fsupenguin]

I suppose we have different opinions of what affects us then. When a nation makes a move to not just allow but embrace this it does and will affect the coming generations. If you believe as I do that marriage is the union of a man and woman under God becoming one with the purpose of working together as a team to reach others for Him, and that we are now talking about calling two men or two woman who chose to live a life in direct conflict with the word of this God the same thing. You should be able to see why it is an issue to some. I don't hate them for it, I have nothing but love and very deep concern for there souls, but I will not support the promotion of this lifestyle any more than I would going against the 10 commandments.

Where does God say this is in direct conflict with his intentions for marriage?

When it referred to as an abomination in both the old and new testament I think we should kinda get the picture.

[dakshdar]

When it referred to as an abomination in both the old and new testament I think we should kinda get the picture.

But see, there is some wacky stuff in the Bible. Going by what the old and new testament say would make living in today's society crazy.

Just as examples:

Anyone want to own slaves? Leviticus 25:44-46 says that is ok, as long as you get your slaves from neighboring countries or foreigners that travel within your borders. And you can pass them on to your children in your will!

Anyone here with a wife or girlfriend better avoid touching them when they're on their period. Leviticus 15:19-24 says that if you do so you need to wash immediately, and even then you'll still be unclean for seven days. You also can't sit anywhere they've sat, or lie anywhere they've been. Better just kick them out of the house during that time of the month.

Do we have some farmers in the house? Make sure you're only planting one crop per field because Leviticus 19:19 says so.

And don't anyone be eating pork (Leviticus 11:6-8) or shellfish (Leviticus 11:10). The Bible says it is wrong!

And while we're at it, we should all be letting the hair of our beards grow long as well as the hair at our temples because Leviticus 19:27 says we shouldn't be trimming it.

If anyone you know ever suggests worshiping a god other than the "one true catholic god" they should be put to death immediately according to Deuteronomy 13:6-10.

Anyone here recently married or planning to get married soon? Deuteronomy 24:5 says you get a year off from all duties to hang out with her. I can't think of a faster way to divorce court.

And by far my favorite:

Anyone here work on Sundays? This is punishable by DEATH according to Exodus 35:2. This is excruciatingly explicit. No questions asked. They must die!

[shel311]

for the people who believe its a religious and god said no no....what about slavery?

http://godisimaginary.com/i13.htm

Well as long as you think you are the one putting God on trial and fail realize that we answer to him and not the other way around there is really nothing to say to you. All this article demonstrates is the writers inability to research and compare the differences in culture and period in history.

I think Nick made a VERY good point, personally.

I just spent a little bit of time reading about what the bible says about slavery and the interpretations of it, and nowhere does the bible condemn slaverly, NOWHERE. All it says is the bible gives way to treat the slaves, but at no point says people shouldn't have slaves.

So, again, we're down to people picking and choosing which parts of the bible they want to believe and which parts they want to ignore. That's what I get out of it. Oh, and this may not pertain to you, but then there's the whole premarital sex thing I referred to as well, lol.

[Hoos]

I fully and 100% support Hoo's right to marry and have every civil liberty with the partner of his choosing as much as the rest of us.

You fuck!

Let them get married if they want. I’m pretty much over giving a shit about that kind of stuff. Whatever makes you happy is a good thing.

As for the bible bumpers, I love all of you. Especially those that pick and choose which rules to follow. Is there a minimum amount of rules that you need to follow to be a good person? Or, are breaking those rules weighted? Gay marriage -6 points, premarital sex -1, banging a married chick -2. Oh, the hypocrisy of it all!

[shel311]

Hoos is making the same exact points as I have.

God help me.

[Doodee]

What about an intersexual? A Hermaphrodite?

How does this apply to them? Are they just SOL? Are they justified in marrying either a man or a woman, or completely wrong for doing either? God created them too. What should they do? And before we dismiss that as some loophole, really know that those people exist and struggle with the answer.

A very faithful homosexual man asked Mr. Rogers once (who was a presbyterian minister) "Does God hate me for being a homosexual?" and Mr. Rogers responded "God loves you just the way you are." I'm inclined to agree.

If we're worried about "sin", we should all assume that we're sinning one way or another, whether intentionally or by omission. We all choose to live a certain way, with or without spiritual interest and guidance. The government has given us the choice to make certain decisions that may have been seen as sinful before, and I think this is one they should give as well that causes no or minimal physical and/or calculable harm.

I think it's ok for someone to see it as something opposed to God's design, I get that, that's personal belief of what God is like. But gradually, with more and more gay people not fearing the stigma and being open about it, I believe it will become less of an issue in the country. If you don't know or haven't talked to a gay person about this, you probably should. There are a lot of very faithful gay people in the world. The church should be able to continue disagreeing with gay marriage and even refuse to marry someone in the church if they want, but I don't think it should be surprised or too upset when states allow it.

I think nature will always favor the man/woman relationship as a part of our evolution, so I don't think it's something to fear. And God if you believe in him will take care of the judgment if there is any necessary.

[OracleHCR]

The answer to your convoluted question is because it is the vast majority of americans who are against it. That's only if you go by voting records and every poll that has been done.

I would say thats true mainly because until recently voting was done primarily by a different generation...

On the whole my generation and younger are more tolerant and less concerned about shit like this

That's not entirely true. Consider this past election. I think it was up to a vote in 5 states and in every state it was turned down by voters. So all the young people that came out and voted for our current president voted against it. The only states that have legalized same sex marriages are states where the state has overlooked what the popular vote said and decided big brother knew what was best. If you are okay with government doing this then more power to you.
It isn't really a big concern of mine but I was answering Nick's question.

[dakshdar]

The answer to your convoluted question is because it is the vast majority of americans who are against it. That's only if you go by voting records and every poll that has been done.

I would say thats true mainly because until recently voting was done primarily by a different generation...

On the whole my generation and younger are more tolerant and less concerned about shit like this

That's not entirely true. Consider this past election. I think it was up to a vote in 5 states and in every state it was turned down by voters. So all the young people that came out and voted for our current president voted against it. The only states that have legalized same sex marriages are states where the state has overlooked what the popular vote said and decided big brother knew what was best. If you are okay with government doing this then more power to you.
It isn't really a big concern of mine but I was answering Nick's question.

I think if you check the margin of victory in all the states it was voted down in, and compare that to what it was in the past, you would probably see that it is getting slimmer and slimmer. I don't have the time to check it right now, but my gut instinct is that you would see this trend for the very reasons other people have noted.

[jsence2]

dakshdar,

Can you provide us with some "wacky" things that AREN'T from the writings of Moses? Jesus refuted many of the things that Moses wrote, and seeing as Moses lived thousands of years ago, things have changed quite drastically WORLD-WIDE from that point.

[shel311]

and seeing as Moses lived thousands of years ago, things have changed quite drastically WORLD-WIDE from that point.

EXACTLY!!!!

Like same sex relationships, the number of people accepting same sex relationships has changed DRASTICALLY, hasn't it?

[dakshdar]

I've been thinking and came up with a different viewpoint:

Perhaps the condemnation of same-sex relations was done at the time of the writing of the Bible due to the fact that the people within that group/religion needed to increase their population and the strength of their particular group within the world. Same-sex relations don't produce offspring and therefore are detrimental to spreading the religion, increasing the potential physical might of the group, and providing for general size in numbers. This can be considered protection of the homeland, the best interest survival of their way of life, whatever.

In today's society no religion needs to increase its size in such a way as to protect itself from other groups. No major religion today is going to disappear off the face of the Earth, nor is any religion so concentrated within one region that it would be wiped out by military action. In today's society, the purpose of creating offspring within a religion is no longer about survival and continuation.

By that logic, I would state that in today's world the fact that same-sex relations produce no offspring is not a valid argument against them.

Granted, this is just my logic, but considering things like "don't eat pork" were created back in the day since it was potentially dangerous to people's health, perhaps the "don't be homosexual" was also just part of protecting the health of the community by promoting increased numbers of partnerships that produced offspring. Today, just as we realize the "don't eat pork" is clearly outdated, perhaps we should realize the "don't be homosexual" is as well.

[fsupenguin]

Wow. Do you not understand the difference in cultures and periods in history? Slavery in many cultures was an alternative to spending time in jail, or what happened to a nations people that had been defeated in war by another. The concept of what slavery has been in America with just flat out stealing a people from there homeland for no other reason than because we could is our own invention. We not at war with these nations that we took the slaves from, we simply stole them. To compare what the bible says on this topic to this day and age is the same logic people used for many many years to justify it. This could not be any simpler. As for saying Jesus refuted the teachings of Moses, well you need to go read the New Testament cover to cover before you say something like that. Jesus did not come to abolish these laws and teachings set down in the Old Testament times, but to fulfill them. His coming and sacrifice was to make a new way for us to know and commune with our Father by taking our punishment for our sins. The main issue in all of this is how we as a nation, or even world these days are asking the question what's wrong with it? When the first and more important question needs to be what is right with it? This can apply to most anything.

[shel311]

When the first and more important question needs to be what is right with it?

It makes the same sex couples in question happy???

That is an easy question to answer, and it's VERY simple. It makes them happy. So let them be happy.

I mean, do you agree with EVERY single thing that is written in teh bible?

[Hoos]

The concept of what slavery has been in America with just flat out stealing a people from there homeland for no other reason than because we could is our own invention.

America invented stealing slaves from their homeland????

[jsence2]

and seeing as Moses lived thousands of years ago, things have changed quite drastically WORLD-WIDE from that point.

EXACTLY!!!!

Like same sex relationships, the number of people accepting same sex relationships has changed DRASTICALLY, hasn't it?

Moses lived appx 1350 years before Jesus Christ was sent to walk this Earth. The teachings of Jesus trump all that come before. Both Jesus and Paul after him condemn homosexuality. These writings/teachings were as recent as appx 200 AD.

Slavery was never condemned in the Bible. However, God never stated that is was necessary. Man abolished slavery. God has condemned homosexuality. It's apples and oranges.

[jsence2]

I've been thinking and came up with a different viewpoint:

Perhaps the condemnation of same-sex relations was done at the time of the writing of the Bible due to the fact that the people within that group/religion needed to increase their population and the strength of their particular group within the world. Same-sex relations don't produce offspring and therefore are detrimental to spreading the religion, increasing the potential physical might of the group, and providing for general size in numbers. This can be considered protection of the homeland, the best interest survival of their way of life, whatever.

In today's society no religion needs to increase its size in such a way as to protect itself from other groups. No major religion today is going to disappear off the face of the Earth, nor is any religion so concentrated within one region that it would be wiped out by military action. In today's society, the purpose of creating offspring within a religion is no longer about survival and continuation.

By that logic, I would state that in today's world the fact that same-sex relations produce no offspring is not a valid argument against them.

Granted, this is just my logic, but considering things like "don't eat pork" were created back in the day since it was potentially dangerous to people's health, perhaps the "don't be homosexual" was also just part of protecting the health of the community by promoting increased numbers of partnerships that produced offspring. Today, just as we realize the "don't eat pork" is clearly outdated, perhaps we should realize the "don't be homosexual" is as well.

This would hold some water if not for the fact that God created woman as a companion to man. He created woman so that man would have someone with whom to share a life with. If He had wanted a man to be with a man, He would have made it to where men could procreate together.

The pork thing had to do with God condemning anything that was dirty (such as being forbidden to have sex with a menstruating woman). This is only seen in the Old Testament. If you see it repeated in the New Testament, it's something to definitely heed. Homosexuality was; pigs were not.

[fsupenguin]

The concept of what slavery has been in America with just flat out stealing a people from there homeland for no other reason than because we could is our own invention.

America invented stealing slaves from their homeland????

Most nations took slaves from nations they were at war with or had conquered or were people in debt that were then "owned" by there creditors. What was done here, and in parts of Europe was different as we were not at war with these people. We stole them cause we had more firepower and there was little they could do about it. What was done here, and what was done in biblical times are not even close to the same.

When the first and more important question needs to be what is right with it?

It makes the same sex couples in question happy???

That is an easy question to answer, and it's VERY simple. It makes them happy. So let them be happy.

I mean, do you agree with EVERY single thing that is written in teh bible?

I do, I believe it is the divinely inspired word of the one true living God.