Immorality of Homosexuality

Here we go again... No one is forcing Churches to do ANYTHING. Here's something you fundy-mentalists need to understand. Churches DONT MARRY PEOPLE! Any church in America can "marry" any two people together and it doesn't mean a damn thing as far as the State is concerned.Marriage is only through a license from the State.Here's some examples:Couple w/ license married by an atheist Judge = Married.
Couple w/o license married by the Pope = Not Married.Allowing gay marriage is allowing free consenting adults to enter into a contract with one another.If your church doesn't want to preform a ceramony - NO ONE CARES! This is so blatantly false as to be laughable.If you justify bigotry against homosexuals because "the Bible says so" then you must also accept slavery and all the other crap that comes with it.You can't justify your bigotry by cherry picking the parts you want. If the Bible makes it okay for you to be a close minded bigot, then be a close minded bigot AGAINST ALL the people the Bible puts down. If by "condemn" you mean "observe" then yes.So far, the sum total of your argument for restricting the rights of 10% of the American population is that it says it's bad in a book. But you refuse to accept the other things in the book. It's no surprise that we generally disregard what you people have to say. Of course it is, because there is absolutely no foundation for fundamentalists to charge into people's bedrooms and start dictating who can do what with whom.by the way, haven't you noticed that ALL the leaders who are so feverently anti-gay are always revealed to be gay themselves? doesn't that raise warning bells with you?

Well, if they don't like the parade, don't go to it. And no one is saying that their church has to perform Gay Marriages. If their church wants to be a place of bigotry, that is their right.By the way, ask your padre what you have to get before you can get married? Hint, it is a license. From the State. Not from some church.And guess what? You don't even have to get married in a Church.Marriage is a legal contract.Little Homophobe Chapel don't like gay marriages? The Little Homophobe Chapel shouldn't perform same sex marriages.And as to whether or not homosexuality is immoral, sorry Charley. That too is none of your business.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

nemesis_juggernaut writes:

quote:

---

As an absolutist, I say, yes. But you, as a relativist, must say only insofar as it subjectively serves some sort of pragmatic purpose-- but in the final analysis, no, there is no actual right or wrong.

---

Incorrect. We do this all the time.The rules of Monopoly are completely man-made and arbitrary. In fact, they even vary from house to house and game to game. A common variant is that all money collected from Chance and Community Chest cards is placed under Free Parking. Anybody who lands on Free Parking gets whatever money is there.This rule has become so popular that it is now included in the box set as a variant.So even though these rules are completely arbitrary, subjective, and relative, they still exist. Break them and you will be punished.The idea that subjective, relative morality doesn't include a sense of right and wrong is trivially shown to be false.Everybody is a moral relativist. Everyone.

quote:

---

Is it morally wrong for me to think that homosexuality is morally wrong? If yes, why? If not, why?

---

Yes, because homosexuality is equivalent to heterosexuality and you do not find heterosexuality to be wrong. There is nothing that homosexuals do that heterosexuals don't.Therefore, it is up to you to justify why you think that equivalent things are to be treated differently.

---

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.

NO no, Tazz. Patience and TIME. I dont hav a lot of either to read a long article such as that on that particular subject, but it sounds reasonable and logical, so i'll take it mostly as Factual.

---

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

Personally, I couldn't care less what you "think" about the morallity of homosexuality if those thoughts do not lead to action.You can think that peanut butter is an afront to God, but so long as you don't try to punish people who eat peanut butter, you are more than welcome to hold this belief. It's one of the things that makes America great.However, as soon as you start trying to pass an ammendment to limit the rights of peanut butter eaters, you step over the line.Just because you believe that two concenting adults should not be able to do what they want with their bodies in the privacy of their own homes, does not mean that you get to pass laws about it.Think what you want, and mind your own business.

Just a quick note. There's an estimate that 10% of the population is left handed. I am left handed. But I have not had the "Department of Statistics" come and ask me about it.You take a sample size of a given population, perferably a large sample, perferably from several different locations, then you apply that sample to the population as a whole.I will grant you that in an issue like homosexuality there is a probability for under-reporting. That is, people who are gay or bi claiming to be straight and thus throwing off the count.

Not yet. Nore synagogues or Mosques, but you'll never bring those up on this topic. Always the churches... Like your OP. Oh the Bibe does have slavery rules and regulations for both slaves and slave masters, both Old and New Testament. It also has harsh words for slave traders as well, even going as far as proclaiming it not sound to true doctrine and even predicting end time judgement for such as these (1 Timothy 1:8-11, Rev 18:1-13), but of course I wont hear those passages from the likes of you anytime soon, and you'll simply ignore passages about the fulfillment of the law or following the whole torah in terms of civil and ceremonial laws (Matt 5:17-20, John 8:1-11, Acts 15:5, 19-21, 28-29,) and show you've never had any cllege course in these here subjects. Gotta be nit pick! Just and observation...(and this is off topic anyway. Read forum guidelines!!) Well, it's not an observation that most atheists are self righteous jerks, but the truth. Wanna keep mud slinging?Edited by LudoRephaim, : No reason given.

---

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

look, if you want to convince someone who differs from you that you are correct, thrash talk isn't going to help but hurt your cause. And its a dead cause; your not going to convince but a few over whether homosexuality is morally wrong or not, no matter how hard you try. And despite the heatedness, it's not that good of a topic try something new. Whattabout steroid use and sports entertainment? wrong or right to use steroids?? Homosexuality and morals has been done to death. The Bigfoot thread was excellent.trust me, you and i lost at the moment we first posted about this.

---

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

The implication here being that I'm a bigot for NOT including other religeons in my REPLY to your statement which DIDNT INCLUDE THE OTHER RELIGEONS.Nice try. If you make a statement about cheese and I reply about cheese, you don't get to say that I'm biased for leaving out hotdogs.Further, I notice you DIDNT ADDRESS THE POINT. No one is forcing ANY religeous institutions to perform ANY marriages. Why? Because those institutions are COMPLETELY irrelevant when it comes to marriage. They simply are not a part of the equation at all. Come on, you and I both know that the RIGHT has a strangle hold on RIGHTeousness. It's IN the word!BTW, I like how you simply disregard my original post without grasping the point of the post at all.If the ONLY basis for taking actions against homosexuality is the Bible, and you want that to be sufficient justifications to change the laws of the land, then I want to know why you would not likewise take action against all other things the Bible condemns.Cutting of beards, touching of pigs, etc. etc. etc.Are we to go back to the bronze age and start burning cattle in the Cathedrals of our major cities so that God can be pleased by the smoke?Guess what? Society (some of us anyway) progresses forward. We disregard the ridiculous bigotry and superstitions of the past.If you and your kind can't manage to do so, please at least have the decency to keep your self imposed ignorance to yourself and not try to force it on the rest of the nation.Further, why haven't you address the fact that the leaders of your cause all turn out to be either homosexuals or the parents of homosexuals?

quote:

---

They dont want their children to be taught by their school teacher that it is okay to be gay or bisexual and therefore give into urges in that area of sexuality. They dont want that kind of "tolerance" forced down their throats, nor their children's throats. They dont want gay parades in their towns and gay marraiges in their Churches and synagogues and mosques. They are not going to have it, and you and all the other lefts, gays and atheists and politicians are not going to force it on them.

---

Because the foundation for it is real, but religious. Christianity isn't the only religion that goes against the mixing of the races; Muslims and some groups within Judaism do too. They dont want their children to be taught by their school teacher that it is okay to marry someone of a different race or a mixed race person and therefore give into urges in that area of sexuality. They dont want that kind of "tolerance" forced down their throats, nor their children's throats. They dont want racially-mixed people in their towns and mixed race marriages in their Churches and synagogues and mosques. They are not going to have it, and you and all the other lefts, gays and atheists and politicians and nigger/wetback/towelhead/hooknose/mick/wop/hunky/cracker-lovers are not going to force it on them.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Well, I dunno, I think a lot of women want to marry someone "hunky"

quote:

---

Well, I dunno, I think a lot of women want to marry someone "hunky"

---

"Hunky", the way I meant it.

Guess what, buster? From Page Not Found - Axcess News.In 1967, when Loving came before the Supreme Court, 16 states still had miscegenation laws on the books.A third of the country!These laws regulated sexual relations between the "races" too.Sound familiar?I got news for you, buddy.
You, and your kind, ain't got no say in who parades, nor where they parade. And someday, someday sooner than you think, you, and your kind, ain't gonna have no say in gay marriage neither!

Just in case...You are actually quoting a quote box within Nator post. Dunno if it was an oversight, just wanted to make it clear the quote you are responding to is something which Nator was also objecting to and that Nator is not a member of the "you, and your kind"

Yeeps!
Sorry nator!