Gay Marriage
Raselikat @katenoid
commented on
Gay Marriage
Raselikat @katenoid
And leave your religion at the door when it comes to law making. It doesn't belong there.
mroneill1000 @mroneill1000
commented on
Gay Marriage
mroneill1000 @mroneill1000
@katenoid best opinion on this subject so far
mroneill1000 @mroneill1000
commented on
Gay Marriage
mroneill1000 @mroneill1000
as for religion the church of England dropped their opposition of gay marriage soo... consider that
feydikan @feydikan
commented on
Gay Marriage
feydikan @feydikan
A good conversation.
To be blunt, I hate religion. I am student of history, philosophy and the dreaded art of asking questions... Three things which Religions generally dislike.... so much that I have been 'escorted' out of a church after having a discussion with a very confused priest...good times.
Religion's telling someone their sexual preferences are wrong, is no different then someone telling a Religion that what they believe is wrong. Yes, gay is not a "choice"; I agree with that; but in some cases religion is not either. What you believe in many cases is no different then what you FEEL. Both sides are guilty of wanting the same freedom they want to remove from the other. The Irony of the situation is they should both be looking for freedom from the government regulations that are binding them, rather then looking towards the government as leverage in order to get there way.
I have a problem when anyone tells me how or what I should believe. I just find it ironic that the people who bitch and complain the loudest about such things, are usually those most willing to remove the same things from others.
Equality only works if it the same for all, regardless of their beliefs. Disagreeing is OK. Trying to force your opinion or beliefs on others however has NOTHING to do with equality. That is a mob mentality, and whether is it religions in nature, or other: Neither side is right in to make any one else accept or renounce who they feel they are because of WHAT they think they are.
You don't need a ring, a piece of paper, religious acceptance or government backing to be in love with someone or make it official.
Amezuki @amezuki
commented on
Gay Marriage
Amezuki @amezuki
<i>Religion's telling someone their sexual preferences are wrong, is no different then someone telling a Religion that what they believe is wrong. Yes, gay is not a "choice"; I agree with that; but in some cases religion is not either.</i><br><br>
The only people for whom religion is arguably not a choice are children raised in a strict, sheltered religious household, and people living in theocracies. And even then, they still have as much power to rethink their beliefs and be of their own mind as any other human being in possession of free will.<br><br>
You cannot change the gender to which you are fundamentally attracted. Where you fall on the Kinsey scale may drift over time, and people who are attracted to both genders may go through times when they are more or less interested in one or the other. But who you are sexually attracted to and who you love is deeply hardwired.<br><br>
There is no hardwired, biological drive to be a Christian or a Buddhist or a Pastafarian. Unlike sexual attraction, these are human philosophical teachings which must be learned and can be unlearned.<br><br>
<i>Both sides are guilty of wanting the same freedom they want to remove from the other. The Irony of the situation is they should both be looking for freedom from the government regulations that are binding them, rather then looking towards the government as leverage in order to get there way.</i><br><br>
Nope, sorry, not buying the "both sides do it" fallacy. Not every conflict has two equal sides.<br><br>
People fighting for marriage equality aren't trying to take away anyone else's freedom--unless those others define their freedom in terms of having the "freedom" to impose their religion on someone else. For all the squawking about religious liberty that I hear from the anti-equality crowd, when asked to name any actual examples of how their religious freedom is being infringed, all they can come up with are nonsense hypotheticals ("they're going to force chuches to marry gays!" - nope, not happening), flawed arguments that reveal their lack of perspective and empathy ("if we have to stop religiously discriminating against gays, that's religious discrimination!" - hello, self-awareness?), or emotional appeals ("it sends the wrong message about morality to our children!" - so does bigotry).<br><br>
When churches no longer have blanket tax exempt status because reasons, when marriage equality advocates start calling for legal punishment of pastors who don't want to perform same-sex marriages, when Christianity is no longer considered the "default" expectation of a politician, when God is no longer invoked by default in courts of law, when religious people have to fight for their right to practice their religion in private, when people are being randomly beaten in the street because someone thought they were Christian or Catholic, and when hundreds of years of conservative tradition no longer give the force of unwritten law to Judeo-Christian practices and sensibilities over everyone else's in the United States...<br><br>
...then, and only then, will I buy that this is anything other than a dangerously false equivalency.<br><br>
<i>You don't need a ring, a piece of paper, religious acceptance or government backing to be in love with someone or make it official.</i><br><br>
You don't need a ring or religious acceptance to be in love with someone. But you most definitely <i>do</i> need a piece of paper backed by civil government to make it official. Because without that, you don't have more than a thousand <a href="http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/an-overview-of-federal-rights-and-protections-granted-to-married-couples">rights and protections</a> which are granted to couples in legal marriages recognized by the US government. And that is a matter of nothing less than equality and civil rights.
Amezuki @amezuki
commented on
Gay Marriage
Amezuki @amezuki
dupe
Amezuki @amezuki
commented on
Gay Marriage
Amezuki @amezuki
dupe
Amezuki @amezuki
commented on
Gay Marriage
Amezuki @amezuki
Dupe. WTF, forums.
Rezikai @rezikai
commented on
Gay Marriage
Rezikai @rezikai
good to see maura_breathless standing up for her own beliefs even though they may not be the majority on these forums.
Gay marriage? *shrugs* not standing up against it... not standing up for it.
Marriage itself is a long drawn out argument that I one day wish to get into going back to the prehistoric taking mates to the more recent (and imo less then respectful)- quicky-marriages/divorces like in Vegas.
Allowing opposite sex couples to marry so easily isn't something I particularly care for in its current state either, but b/c it was the norm of so long sheeple got used to it... But that doesn't make it right.
feydikan @feydikan
commented on
Gay Marriage
feydikan @feydikan
lol see this is the thing I find funny, and damn you walked right into it my friend.
I said nothing about religious dogma, but you immediately decided to lump in to that crowd due to the aspect of my position. It is after all far easier to defend a topic when you have clearly defined lines in which to drawl conclusions.
Jumping to that conclusion is the very problem I have with this entire discussion. We are not dealing with the issue, but the Extremists that turn what is generally a VERY simple problem into a complete and utter cluster fuck. They argue over the logistics of there position rather then the fact that are trying to force a third party into cornering the other doing something that they may not feel is 'right'. NO matter what side you are on the problem remains the same, and the solution is SOO fucking simple a child could see it:
You stepped in to my trap card... har har har...and took the bait I set.
THE issue here is benefits to those who are legally Married. The majority of the other BS is just posturing and rhetoric. The basic truth is that a Heterosexual couple are granted rights and benefits due to the fact their marriage grants them legal 'opportunities' that are being withheld to gays/lesbians due to the fact they can not 'legally' be married.
THIS is WRONG.
Plane, simple fact, and beyond reproach.
Religion has no standing to even comment upon this.... WHEN you can't even fact the skeletons in your own closet, you have no right to be looking into to anyone else s.... And if any religious individual wants to have a discussion on why the Government shouldn't allow it, I'd be willing to have it but I'll save you the time and simplify your hatred towards me by saying up front: You're wrong. it's a cut and dry situation: Separation of church and state, granted there is a LOT of gray areas where the line crossed as Amezuki pointed out, but that is due to the history of this nation, but this is as far as I am concerned a cut a dry situation.... the church has NO standing in this situation. I am sorry, but marriage is a ubiquitous term that has been adopted as a legal definition and is NO longer carries any religious weight with in the USA.
BUT....... that being said.....
I personally believe the government should grant a marriage licence to any one who wants one, regardless of who or what they choose to fuck. BUT at the same time they should not FORCE or allow legal challenges against churches who choose not to perform these marriages.
This would be the best solution to the problem, and how the law should be rewritten. Over time the church will adapt and change, LIKE it always has in the past,. and is EVEN now (which is ironic since if it was holy in nature it would never have to change in order to keep up with the pace of time.....)
But lets face it, this won't happen due to the extremist on both sides.
Human nature is generally against compromise; even if it is for the best.
Please login to post.