Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Condemn gay marriage, or just gay rape?
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 31 of 573 (489973)
12-01-2008 3:16 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Peg
12-01-2008 2:26 AM


Re: Fact over Fantasy
Peg writes:
for arguments sake, im going to conceed to your greater wisdom in this area
Not wisdom, only a bit of knowledge gathered from time and books. I do not take pride in hurting anyone's feelings in having to correct their misconceptions but my dedication to the truth is not negotiable.
Also, as Nosy Ned stated, everyone is wrong sometimes including me, it is how one deals with it that shows their character. By essentially admitting you have been at least partially wrong, you have passed a test that all too many can't.
It is not about you, it is about truth. When anyone makes a statement as fact that can easily be refuted, that simply means they need to do their homework a bit more then they may be used to when dealing with this forum.
Also a bit of unsolicited advice, stay away from my other hangout dreamcatcher until you earn your chops here, they are merciless when dealing with those who claim to infallibly know their Bible or their Christianity, but like here, you will learn more than you could have ever imagined.
Live, learn, master.
Edited by anglagard, : i made a mistake, in proper English grammar, as usual

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Peg, posted 12-01-2008 2:26 AM Peg has not replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 32 of 573 (489975)
12-01-2008 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by AlphaOmegakid
11-30-2008 9:32 PM


Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're the one who said that one purpose of marriage is to "multiply and fill the earth", right? In fact, it seems as if that's your main point. Only sex within marriage is allowed, extra-marital sex being sinful. If one is to not sin, one can only have sex within marriage, meaning that marriage is the only way to "multiply and fill the earth".
My point, then, is that if this can be done outside of marriage, marriage must have another purpose, right? Otherwise it is useless.
No strawman there. My next two questions were essentially rhetoricals, meant to get the point across that reproduction happens without marriage. Not comments on the state of society (and personally, I don't think out-of-wedlock pregnancies and bastards are a minus on society, but then, that's technically what one of my cousins is).
Or for that matter, why would you, or anyone else want to legislate this control on them?
Tax revenue? If they want marriage, I see no reason why they can't have it.
Sex only within marriage by both partners guarantees no STD's. This includes virginity before marriage.
Now you're catching on. Before your claim was a little vague, as if marriage was an immunization program.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 11-30-2008 9:32 PM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 33 of 573 (489981)
12-01-2008 6:26 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by AlphaOmegakid
11-30-2008 9:32 PM


I guess you don't understand the difference between oral herpes (HSV-1) and genital herpes (HSV-2). Genial herpes is considered an STD. HSV-1 is not.
I guess you certainly don't. I hope to god you have never taught a sex ed class You may want to go learn some facts about the birds and the bees... and about why you should NEVER engage in oral sexual activity if you have any hint of HSV-1.
Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 11-30-2008 9:32 PM AlphaOmegakid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-01-2008 7:58 AM cavediver has not replied

AlphaOmegakid
Member (Idle past 2876 days)
Posts: 564
From: The city of God
Joined: 06-25-2008


Message 34 of 573 (489987)
12-01-2008 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by cavediver
12-01-2008 6:26 AM


I guess you certainly don't. I hope to god you have never taught a sex ed class
Your hope is reality, but who is this god you are hoping toward? I stand corrected. It's been a long time since sex ed for me. And I've been faithfully married since 19, so I don't have a need to keep up with current STD info. That certainly wasn't the info back in the 70's.
However, genital herpes is usually HSV-2 as you know. And again sex only within marriage is advantageous in regards to the spread of this disease. So my main point, that God's laws are advantageous for man, remains the same.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by cavediver, posted 12-01-2008 6:26 AM cavediver has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 35 of 573 (490000)
12-01-2008 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by AlphaOmegakid
11-30-2008 9:32 PM


I guess you don't understand the difference between oral herpes (HSV-1) and genital herpes (HSV-2). Genial herpes is considered
an STD. HSV-1 is not.
Um, no.
The type 1 and 2 identifiers were just given and categorized based on where they were discovered but the two viruses are virtually (if not actually) indistinguishable. You can just as easily get type 2 orally and it would likely be diagnosed as type 1.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 11-30-2008 9:32 PM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 36 of 573 (490312)
12-03-2008 6:02 PM


What about the main issue ?
Does the herpes virus issue become a decisive one in regards to legitimacy of homosexual marriage ?
Does the matter hang on this detail?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 37 of 573 (490488)
12-05-2008 2:08 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Peg
12-01-2008 2:26 AM


Peg writes:
quote:
and hopefully they find a nice gay name for their unions so we can differentiate between hetrosexual marriage and homosexual marriage
Fosdick, is that you?
What part of "separate but equal" being unconstitutional are you having trouble with?
Look, if you want to differentiate your special friendship from the contract of marriage which is a fundamental right that cannot be abridged to citizens, then it is your responsibility to come up with it. Of course, it won't have any legal meaning due to that "separate but equal" being unconstitutional thing and all, but you can call your special friendship whatever you want.
The rest of the world who speaks English will continue to use the word "marriage," the contract law will continue to use the term "marriage," and nobody will be confused as to what is meant.
Question: What is it you think gay people do that straight people don't such that there is any way to distinguish them other than the trivial aspect of the sex of the participants?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Peg, posted 12-01-2008 2:26 AM Peg has not replied

archaeologist
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 573 (576422)
08-24-2010 4:36 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by jt
11-29-2008 1:53 PM


though i do not think or believe that gay marriage is a threat to hetrosexual marriage, i do not agree with the homosexual thought that they have a 'right' to marry.
they gave up all rights to the benefits that normal couples enjoy when they chose to be abnormal and live that way. i do not think that gays should be allowed to adopt or raise children as well as such are the product of a normal life style.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jt, posted 11-29-2008 1:53 PM jt has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by bluescat48, posted 08-24-2010 12:34 PM archaeologist has not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 39 of 573 (576535)
08-24-2010 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by archaeologist
08-24-2010 4:36 AM


they gave up all rights to the benefits that normal couples enjoy when they chose to be abnormal and live that way
Chose? Give me some evidence that a gay person "chose" that lifestyle. Why is it "abnormal"? Is it because your book of myths calls it an abomination?
i do not agree with the homosexual thought that they have a 'right' to marry.
So you have an opinion, so what? Who are you, God?
You sure sound like you think you are. You appear to claim "I am right in everything I say, what you say is pure garbage."
To paraphrase an anonymous quote, "Opinions are like assholes, everyone has at least one, but in some cases, the crap comes out of both".

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by archaeologist, posted 08-24-2010 4:36 AM archaeologist has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Minnemooseus, posted 09-20-2010 12:59 PM bluescat48 has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 40 of 573 (582188)
09-20-2010 8:07 AM


I think the issue of the Bible's view of gay marriage should be clear.
When Jesus Christ refered to marriage in Mark 10:6-8 He used "male and female" from Genesis 1:27 and linked it with this from Genesis 2:24,25:
"For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife; And the two shall be one flesh. Therefore what God has yoked together, let man not separate."
Christ could not have meant a man shall be joined to his male "wife" because his comment's context is the creation of "male and female."
It is doubtful that His exposition of Genesis 1 and 2 could mean woman should be joined in marriage to another woman.
What God has yoked together is the union of a man with a woman.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by frako, posted 09-20-2010 8:17 AM jaywill has replied

frako
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 41 of 573 (582189)
09-20-2010 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by jaywill
09-20-2010 8:07 AM


Condemn gay marriage, or just gay rape?
lol only if the guy was in an urban area when he got raped if that was the case the guy that GOT raped should be stoned to deth like the bible says
lol about 5% of animals are gay they cant help it and gay people cant help it its how they where "made" or to put it in scientific therms their gens make them view the same sex gender as your gens make you view the opposite sex gender. to put it in theist therms god made them that way and its not up to you to question god

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by jaywill, posted 09-20-2010 8:07 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by jaywill, posted 09-20-2010 10:13 AM frako has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 42 of 573 (582198)
09-20-2010 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by frako
09-20-2010 8:17 AM


I see two common missapplications of Christian theology to defend homosexuality.
lol only if the guy was in an urban area when he got raped if that was the case the guy that GOT raped should be stoned to deth like the bible says
The first is very common. The gay apologist seeks show the unreasonableness of negating homosexuality by attaching a modern day death penalty of stoning to it.
I cannot speak for any other religion like Islam. But for the follower of New Testament Christian faith there is no obbligation to stone to death ANYONE.
The insinuation "Then you must stone to death gay people" does not touch the Christian at all. And I at least am not a political activist trying to establish a theocracy.
Now to the second concept:
lol about 5% of animals are gay they cant help it and gay people cant help it its how they where "made" or to put it in scientific therms their gens make them view the same sex gender as your gens make you view the opposite sex gender. to put it in theist therms god made them that way and its not up to you to question god
The matter of "I cannot help this because I was born this way" may also be appplied to stealing, lying, gossip, fornication, pickpocketing, bullying, extortioning, backbitting, embezzelment, adultery, drunkenness, gluttony ... etc.
There is no question that in man's fallen nature we are born with the propensity to do many many things transgressing the law of God. We are born into sin. And this is why we need the divine life of Christ implanted into our being from the new birth.
So in the Christian theology it is a moot point that one was born with this or that sinful tendency.
And we are not asked by the Gospel to overcome on our own will power for God knows that we are unable to overcome the sin nature.
So we need the indwelling of Christ as well as the redemption of Christ from the guilt of our sinning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by frako, posted 09-20-2010 8:17 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by frako, posted 09-20-2010 10:31 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 44 by subbie, posted 09-20-2010 10:34 AM jaywill has replied

frako
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 43 of 573 (582202)
09-20-2010 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by jaywill
09-20-2010 10:13 AM


The first is very common. The gay apologist seeks show the unreasonableness of negating homosexuality by attaching a modern day death penalty of stoning to it.
I cannot speak for any other religion like Islam. But for the follower of New Testament Christian faith there is no obbligation to stone to death ANYONE.
The insinuation "Then you must stone to death gay people" does not touch the Christian at all. And I at least am not a political activist trying to establish a theocracy.
Now to the second concept:
so no stoning only pestering them telling them its a sin and deniing them the right to get married is the norm of a modern christian
The matter of "I cannot help this because I was born this way" may also be appplied to stealing, lying, gossip, fornication, pickpocketing, bullying, extortioning, backbitting, embezzelment, adultery, drunkenness, gluttony ... etc.
There is no question that in man's fallen nature we are born with the propensity to do many many things transgressing the law of God. We are born into sin. And this is why we need the divine life of Christ implanted into our being from the new birth.
So in the Christian theology it is a moot point that one was born with this or that sinful tendency.
And we are not asked by the Gospel to overcome on our own will power for God knows that we are unable to overcome the sin nature.
So we need the indwelling of Christ as well as the redemption of Christ from the guilt of our sinning.
so is should have taken my gay dog to the church and make him repent his gay ways
you dont get it do you for a gay man the notion of having sex whit a woman is the same as the notion you have of sex whit a man it dose not compute in their brain
what do you think your christ would say if he met a gay cuple
a you 2 are dammed forever to burn in hell
b love is a beautiful thing
Edited by frako, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by jaywill, posted 09-20-2010 10:13 AM jaywill has not replied

subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 44 of 573 (582203)
09-20-2010 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by jaywill
09-20-2010 10:13 AM


The matter of "I cannot help this because I was born this way" may also be appplied to stealing, lying, gossip, fornication, pickpocketing, bullying, extortioning, backbitting, embezzelment, adultery, drunkenness, gluttony ... etc.
First, no it can't.
Second, even if it could, that hardly makes them equivalent. What do all of your examples have in common that homosexuality doesn't? They all hurt someone else. Nobody else is affected in the least by someone being a homosexual.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by jaywill, posted 09-20-2010 10:13 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 09-20-2010 10:47 AM subbie has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 45 of 573 (582205)
09-20-2010 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by subbie
09-20-2010 10:34 AM


First, no it can't.
Second, even if it could, that hardly makes them equivalent. What do all of your examples have in common that homosexuality doesn't? They all hurt someone else. Nobody else is affected in the least by someone being a homosexual.
Not only can I make the argument that I ought to be able to steal because I was born with this strong tendency to do so.
I also can rationalize that my stealing hurts no one so it is not wrong.
Sure, I can. In fact many times stealing happens with the rational that the person from who you are stealing REALLY doesn't need it. Or you need it much more.
So both rationals can be made. That does not change the moral wrong of the stealing.
It is better to come to the Savior confessing that you have this weakness that you cannot overcome and seek Him for salvation.
The same would be true of homosexuality. I do not think it is helpful to be "sin centered". Our attention and focus for salvation should be on the Savior Christ.
Focusing on the particular entrapping sinful behavior may tempt a man to try to free himself or justify himself.
In the former case he pulls and pulls on the tight knot and it only gets tighter.
In the latter case he reasons that since he cannot overcome he has to learn to live with his sin and justify it. A further step from justifying it is to revel in it with pride and exalt others who revel in it.
The way to freedom from the enjoyment of sinning is to enjoy Christ instead. The enjoyment of the indwelling Savior once He has come into your heart must replace the enjoyment of sinning.
The enjoyment of the indwelling of God overpowers the enjoyment of the sinning.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by subbie, posted 09-20-2010 10:34 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by subbie, posted 09-20-2010 10:54 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 48 by frako, posted 09-20-2010 11:39 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 49 by ringo, posted 09-20-2010 11:53 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 50 by hooah212002, posted 09-20-2010 12:29 PM jaywill has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024