Why?

[TesticularFortitude]

I think that it is amusing that I have never met a bigot or active racist in person, but as soon as I log on to any forum, they arte fludded with these ignorant @ssholes. Fair enough, I live in Canada, where for the most part we have evolved past judging others on their race or sexual preference, but still the ratio of internet bigots to "real-life" ignorance is suprisingly lopsided. That is unless I am to make the assumption according to evidence that these racist F#ckheads dont have the balls to speak their mind publicly where they can be judged according to their actions. Its easy for me to speak under the alias of TesticularFortitude as i will rarely face the reprecussions of my opinions under such an alias. However if i believed in something like racial profiling, and i truly belived it would better our society to rid it of gays, then i would have the balls to speak my opinion in a public forum with the best opposition possible, as this is the only way to come to a truly beneficial resolution. bigots however speak under their breaths, behind closed doors, and over the internet under fake names.
who's really in the closet?

[kfrost06]

wrong forum, this is "in the news" forum

[jon77]

I think that it is amusing that I have never met a bigot or active racist in person, but as soon as I log on to any forum, they arte fludded with these ignorant @ssholes. Fair enough, I live in Canada, where for the most part we have evolved past judging others on their race or sexual preference, but still the ratio of internet bigots to "real-life" ignorance is suprisingly lopsided. That is unless I am to make the assumption according to evidence that these racist F#ckheads dont have the balls to speak their mind publicly where they can be judged according to their actions. Its easy for me to speak under the alias of TesticularFortitude as i will rarely face the reprecussions of my opinions under such an alias. However if i believed in something like racial profiling, and i truly belived it would better our society to rid it of gays, then i would have the balls to speak my opinion in a public forum with the best opposition possible, as this is the only way to come to a truly beneficial resolution. bigots however speak under their breaths, behind closed doors, and over the internet under fake names.
who's really in the closet?

Dude, who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?......

[TesticularFortitude]

sorry bout putting it in the wrong forum boys.
jon.. lol. i came to work this morning all smiles, i read a few threads in this forum and I couldnt believe what i was reading.

if someone could move the thread for me that would be great
thanx
tf

[jon77]

i came to work this morning all smiles, i read a few threads in this forum and I couldnt believe what i was reading.

Please elaborate...

[TesticularFortitude]

check some of the earlier locked threads out.
read them in their intirety and contextualize them with the other locked threads. you will find a sort of ongoing argument -

[kfrost06]

check some of the earlier locked threads out.
read them in their intirety and contextualize them with the other locked threads. you will find a sort of ongoing argument -

You mean poeple have been argueing over "gay topics" in this forum??? Well I never! j/k We have been glued to the gay topics here for awhile. I think it's great that we have been able to discus these topics and with such varied views yet it has remained civil. Don't let peoples opinions upset you, lifes to short and you will never have everyone agree.

[kfrost06]

Please elaborate...

That's funny, I like the smileys!

[RA]

I think that it is amusing that I have never met a bigot or active racist in person, but as soon as I log on to any forum, they arte fludded with these ignorant @ssholes. Fair enough, I live in Canada, where for the most part we have evolved past judging others on their race or sexual preference, but still the ratio of internet bigots to "real-life" ignorance is suprisingly lopsided. That is unless I am to make the assumption according to evidence that these racist F#ckheads dont have the balls to speak their mind publicly where they can be judged according to their actions. Its easy for me to speak under the alias of TesticularFortitude as i will rarely face the reprecussions of my opinions under such an alias. However if i believed in something like racial profiling, and i truly belived it would better our society to rid it of gays, then i would have the balls to speak my opinion in a public forum with the best opposition possible, as this is the only way to come to a truly beneficial resolution. bigots however speak under their breaths, behind closed doors, and over the internet under fake names.
who's really in the closet?

Everyones entitled to their opinion.

[TesticularFortitude]

I agree that people wont always agree, (sounds kinda funny). I just find it difficult to digest that when society as a represented whole has made so many advancements, in terms of not only science, but social aspects as well, that there are still those with such a poor concept of reality.
People who have a problem with someone because of their race or sexual preference or feel superior because of their sex are people who are holding our society back.

[TesticularFortitude]

everyone is entitled to their opinion, but at the same time should be judged on their opinions and not their race or sexual preference. It is the ability to reason that makes us (as in humans) different from all other animals. therfore it is reason that is our function as humans and it is our ability to fulfill our function which determines our worth.

[RA]

I dont disagree with the fact that we should not judge people based on race or sexual preference but people can express there deeply held religious beliefs. The problem is that sometimes it sounds offensive.

everyone is entitled to their opinion, but at the same time should be judged on their opinions and not their race or sexual preference. It is the ability to reason that makes us (as in humans) different from all other animals. therfore it is reason that is our function as humans and it is our ability to fulfill our function which determines our worth.

[TesticularFortitude]

i dont disagree with expressing your deep religious beliefs. however where is the line drawn. who defines what is considered an extremist action?
what aspects of religion are chose to be held in the highest esteem.
should a christian who commits adultery be entitled to his opinion on gay marriage. should we outlaw divorce in texas, or how about re-marriage.

[TesticularFortitude]

the problem become mob mentality being injected into society using religion as a vehicle.

[TesticularFortitude]

and roidattack
i dont mean for anything i just said to be directed towards you. no disrespect man - just venting and looking for an rational opposing argument.

[RA]

i dont disagree with expressing your deep religious beliefs. however where is the line drawn. who defines what is considered an extremist action?
what aspects of religion are chose to be held in the highest esteem.
should a christian who commits adultery be entitled to his opinion on gay marriage. should we outlaw divorce in texas, or how about re-marriage.

Thats the problem. Where is the line. Personally I dont believe in running around and trying to bash people in the name of religion. Besides, I live in a glass house so it wouldnt work

As far as gay marriage is concerned, I dont think the state or federal govt has any right to say who can or cant be married. Marriage is a religious ceremony. Given that its a religous ceremony I dont think gay marriage would be a big hit.

[RA]

No offense taken bro, I like a good discussion.

and roidattack
i dont mean for anything i just said to be directed towards you. no disrespect man - just venting and looking for an rational opposing argument.

[kfrost06]

Religion also says that you shouldn't cheat on your wife/husband but you notice that philanderers do not go out bemoaning religion and demanding they change their views. If you really believe that your religion is wrong in that area then find a new reiligion. Heck ,nowadays they custom make religions to fit your lifestyle.

[RA]

I think thats the problem. When detractors talk against religion, they talk about the people. Not about the religion itself. Who said anyone was perfect?

Religion also says that you shouldn't cheat on your wife/husband but you notice that philanderers do not go out bemoaning religion and demanding they change their views. If you really believe that your religion is wrong in that area then find a new reiligion. Heck ,nowadays they custom make religions to fit your lifestyle.

[TesticularFortitude]

Roidattack.. I agree with everything you say.
but how is it that different states or countries for that matter choose to what degree they follow religion. Being christian is different for canadians than americans? is adultery and remmarriage outlawed in the states as well? do we enforce all religiously paralleled laws equally?

[RA]

That sounds Catholic. Im Babtist, not the crazy women-cant-wear-pants Baptists...lol They dont run you out of the church for getting divorced. If your going around town committing adultery, you will be asked to leave.

I know what point your getting at though. If the church can be full of adulterers why not homosexuals? IMO, the only difference is the homosexual is more open about it.

Ill give you another IMO..The church shouldnt turn away anyone. I do believe when you go they tell you we are all sinners..so why turn away some sinners and not others? Should we not all have the chance to hear the word of God if we want it?

I actually heard a good one. My brother in law was talking to this guy and the guy said "You should go down and try this church" My brother in law started to rail about how that church was full of hypocrits and liars..the guy says "Well, they can always use one more"

Roidattack.. I agree with everything you say.
but how is it that different states or countries for that matter choose to what degree they follow religion. Being christian is different for canadians than americans? is adultery and remmarriage outlawed in the states as well? do we enforce all religiously paralleled laws equally?

[TesticularFortitude]

^^LOL

that is exactly my point. EXACTLY
that is essentially what i would like to hear an opposing view to (an educated one).
to reiterate, if the church can be full of adulterers/liars/thiefs (and those who commmit all of the cardinal sins) why not homosexuals?
is it up to the state to determine which biblical laws are important and which arent? if so doest that defeat the pupose or at least essentially undermine the word of the bible altogether ?

[kfrost06]

^^LOL

that is exactly my point. EXACTLY
that is essentially what i would like to hear an opposing view to (an educated one).
to reiterate, if the church can be full of adulterers/liars/thiefs (and those who commmit all of the cardinal sins) why not homosexuals?
is it up to the state to determine which biblical laws are important and which arent? if so doest that defeat the pupose or at least essentially undermine the word of the bible altogether ?

I am not sure what Church you are referring to but the Catholic Church does not exclude any group. We are all sinners but you have to be willing to repent, so if you do not think adultery is wrong then you are not likely to believe in Catholic doctrine. You do not get kicked out for getting divorced either however the Church takes very seriously the vow you make to God when getting married therefore it will not re-marry a person that already was married in the Church.

[TesticularFortitude]

I am not sure your position kfrost!
I am not saying that anyone gets kicked out of church for getting divorced. I am saying that religious followers of any doctrine are hypocritical if they observe and in some cases enforce particular religious laws (or their interpretations), but not others. for example, the church is against gay marriage as it is adultery. however, in texas gay marriage is not allowed, but divorce or a second marriage IS.

[kfrost06]

Since Henry VIII, many churchs allow second marriage and divorce.

[TesticularFortitude]

that is what i am sayin - it is allowed, but against the word of the Bible.
and so it is hypocritical for that to be allowed in the eyes of the followers but not gay marriage. henry the VIII had no part in the bible, and last i check it is not the word of henry the VIII that has religious fanatics becoming extremists.

[kfrost06]

Look, obviously, gay marriage is what is on your mind. You live in Canada. Gay marriage is allowed in Canada, go get married. Don't worry what America's laws are.

[TesticularFortitude]

im not gay - just looking for someone who is opposed to gay marriages with some sort of coherent and informed argument.
be that guy or go talk about protein synthesis on another thread

[kfrost06]

im not gay - just looking for someone who is opposed to gay marriages with some sort of coherent and informed argument.
be that guy or go talk about protein synthesis on another thread

understandable, here's a thread where we ALL put in our 2 cents worth...

Gay couples ask Conn. court for marriage

should find lots of good arguements for and against the idea of gay marriage. It won't take you long to find out my position(missionary is my favorite ).

[TesticularFortitude]

i still dont see you stance dude.
my position is clearly defined - why allow some deviations of biblical law (for example re-marriage) to be a common practice throughout every state, but not allow same sex marriage on the basis of it being against the bible?

[RA]

I wasnt aware that the bible prohibited a second marriage.

[TesticularFortitude]

When you marry someone it a religios ceremony bindng you to that person till death do you part - adultery is essentially going outside of that binding

[TesticularFortitude]

although i am no authority on the matter

[kfrost06]

i still dont see you stance dude.
my position is clearly defined - why allow some deviations of biblical law (for example re-marriage) to be a common practice throughout every state, but not allow same sex marriage on the basis of it being against the bible?

You are truely misguided. First same sex marriage is not banned because of the Bible. Buddist, Hindu, Jews, Muslims all prohibit same sex marriage. Even the Romans whom had many gods and were openly gay and pedophiles never allowed same sex marriage. If blaming it on the Bible allows you to justify your hatred of Christians then go ahead, you won't be the first.

[TesticularFortitude]

hatred for christians - lol
the point is not to hate - to live and let live. Romans did not treat marriage the way we do now, nor did they regard woman as equals which had much to do with them having same sex SEXUAL relations.
kfrost - i think you have demonstrated your shallow wealth of knowledge regarding the era of antiquity. and yes my good man - same sex marriage is banned because of biblical law

[kfrost06]

hatred for christians - lol
the point is not to hate - to live and let live. Romans did not treat marriage the way we do now, nor did they regard woman as equals which had much to do with them having same sex SEXUAL relations.
kfrost - i think you have demonstrated your shallow wealth of knowledge regarding the era of antiquity. and yes my good man - same sex marriage is banned because of biblical law

Perhaps you can enlighted me with your wealth of knowledge and point to a civilization or culture that had same sex marriage prior to the Bible, i.e B.C. the Egyptians, Masodonians, Aztecs, Gauls, Goths, Huns, Chinese, Japanese, anyone??? None followed the Bible and none had same sex marriage. The Egyptians had female leaders so there goes your woman treated differently arguement.

[TesticularFortitude]

what do the women leaders of egypt haver to do with the way romans regarded women - thats an odd correlation. So is the rest of your response about gauls and aztecs and what not since we cleary do not base our governmental decision process on the practices of ancient macedonia. the only binding legal document of antiquity is religious doctrine. religious doctrine so far as the state is concerned has been that of the church. the church lays its foundations on the bible. please attack the arguments head on and dont be led into tangent or tertiary discussion.

[TesticularFortitude]

and for your information, in roman antiquity, as with greek, spartan and so on, women were not considered citizens... as defined by any book i have ever read in my major (being classical civilization and philosophy) a citizen is an equal member of society with rights to the process of governmental election and decision making. women being a sub citizen clearly illustrates that they are ot equal to men.

[Tock]

Perhaps you can enlighted me with your wealth of knowledge and point to a civilization or culture that had same sex marriage prior to the Bible

American Indians had berdaches. Check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berdache

Most of these individuals had relationships with the same, opposite, or either sexes.[6] Female-bodied two-spirits usually had sexual relations or marriages with only females.[7] Partners of two-spirits did not take on any special recognition, although some believed that after having sexual relations with a two-spirit they would obtain magical abilities, given obscene nicknames by the two-spirited person which they believed held "good luck," or in the case of male partners, boosted their masculinity.

-------------------

Also, check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions

In China, in the southern province of Fujian where male love was especially cultivated, men would marry youths in elaborate ceremonies.[1] The marriages would last a number of years, at the end of which the elder partner would help the younger find a (female) wife and settle down to raise a family. Generally, this practice - though unusual even in China - was reflective of the value Chinese culture placed on the reciprocal relationship between benevolent elders teaching and guiding the obedient younger members of society.


-----------------------

Also, check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelphopoiesis :

Adelphopoiesis, or adelphopoiia from the Greek ἀδελφοποίησις, derived from ἀδελφός (adelphos) "brother" and ποιώῶ (poio) "I make", literally "brother-making" is a ceremony practiced at one time by various Christian churches to unite together two people of the same sex (normally men). It is documented by the historian John Boswell in his book Same-sex unions in pre-modern Europe, also published as The marriage of likeness. The ceremony was mainly practised by the Eastern Orthodox Church -

[Tock]

Perhaps you can enlighted me with your wealth of knowledge and point to a civilization or culture that had same sex marriage prior to the Bible

No one had hot water heaters before the Bible came along. So are we obliged to get rid of them just because the people in antiquity didn't have 'em?

I don't think so.

And just because same sex marriage wasn't common in ages past isn't a reason why we shouldn't have it today.